Types of educational discussion. Rules for conducting discussion Purpose of educational discussion

Among modern didactic searches, educational discussion has one of the prominent places. It is dialogical in its very essence - both as a form of organizing learning and as a way of working with content educational material. Its use helps develop critical thinking and introduce young citizens to culture democratic society. The “collateral result” of educational discussion is extremely significant – the formation of a communicative and discussion culture. In Russia, school practice turns to discussion not only as a form of organizing teaching and a way of working with the subject content of educational material, but also as an independent subject of study. In the programs of the Ministry of Education (1994), discussion - as a method of discussing and resolving controversial issues, as well as the rules for its conduct - are also included as a subject of study. Further we will see that the teacher’s appeal to discussion as a way of his work also presupposes a parallel series - direct teaching of discussion procedures.

The experience of educational discussions has accumulated in world pedagogy, starting from the first decades of the 20th century, in the pedagogical search of supporters of the “new education”. For last decades the discussion is becoming more and more stable integral part pedagogical research in a number of countries. In socialist pedagogy, the use of discussion for natural reasons was not the subject of intensive development; This type of activity in teaching began to be mentioned in the 80s. with the caveat that the teacher must ensure the maturity of the students. In Soviet and Russian pedagogy, the use of discussion in teaching was studied and practically developed in the context of psychological research educational activities, the dialogic construction of the content and course of learning at the school of “dialogue of cultures” was indirectly touched upon as one of the aspects of pedagogical communication. Now discussion is recognized as one of the most important forms educational activities, stimulating student initiative and the development of reflective thinking. In traditional Russian categorical didactics, discussion was considered as one of the possible forms of learning 81, but was not specifically developed as a pedagogical tools teachers. Despite the deep psychological analysis of the possibilities of dialogue interaction in teaching 82 , in Russian pedagogy discussion as a way of building educational process, the way a teacher works is not yet sufficiently developed.

Meanwhile, turning to the discussion, it would be unrealistic for the teacher to expect that everything will work out by itself. Experience indicates a slippage into the usual picture of classroom management, not always noticeable to the teacher himself, an underlying fear that a lively discussion with the potential for disorder inherent in it can lead the educational process out of control. In other words, many teachers actually replace children's self-organization with direct control. The desire to “compress” the discussion, to make it “more compact,” often leads to a kind of degeneration of the discussion into an exchange of questions and answers between the teacher and students.

In modern schools in many countries, the discussion is well known, but the degree of its prevalence and teachers’ guidelines for its application are different. In the conditions of the socialist Polish school of the 80s. the famous Polish didactician V. Okon wrote: “The use of the discussion method is recommended in the case when students have a significant degree of maturity and independence in acquiring knowledge and formulating problems, in selecting and clearly presenting their own arguments, in substantive preparation for the topic of discussion.” However, how will students achieve a significant degree of maturity and independence and other qualities necessary to fully participate in discussion? Does the teacher need to wait for these qualities to mature or can they be formed? The answer to these somewhat rhetorical questions, from our point of view, may be to pose another, instrumental question: How make discussion a tool for building a developing educational process, how to stimulate independence in searching for information, the ability to select and present an argument, prepare to participate in a discussion, etc.? In search of answers to these important questions, we turn to developments that, over the years, have made the discussion an enduring part of both mass schooling and educational research.

0

1.2 Educational discussion how effective method speaking training

The widespread introduction of group discussion into the educational process gives a new impetus to problem-based learning, which is based on the fact that mastering program material will be more effective if students not only receive ready-made knowledge from the teacher, from textbooks, but “extract” it by solving cognitive problems.

Discussion is a form of lesson that is designed to identify the existing diversity of participants’ points of view on any problem and, if necessary, conduct a comprehensive analysis of each of them, and then form each student’s own view on a particular historical problem. In any case, the discussion session must include characteristic feature- a conflict in which each participant defends his position.

During the discussion, students develop specific skills and abilities. The situation of controversy forces them to formulate their thoughts as accurately as possible, using concepts and terms correctly for this purpose. Students master the techniques of evidence-based debate, care about the validity of their proposals and approaches to solutions.

The discussion allows us to actualize the moral problems underlying scientific knowledge, show their importance for modern times. It gives students the opportunity to feel the issues that have been dealt with in different historical eras the best minds of humanity.

The main features of an educational discussion are that it is a purposeful and orderly exchange of ideas, judgments, and opinions in a group for the sake of searching for truth, and each of those present participates in their own way in organizing this exchange of ideas.

TO characteristic features educational discussion M.V. Clarin includes the following.

1. Educational discussion is dialogical in its very essence - both as a form of organizing learning and as a way of working with the content of educational material.

2. Discussion is one of the most important forms of educational activity, stimulating students’ initiative and the development of reflective thinking.

3. The use of discussion is recommended when students have a significant degree of maturity and independence in acquiring knowledge and formulating problems, in selecting and clearly presenting their own arguments, in substantive preparation for the topic of discussion.

4. Interaction in an educational discussion is based not simply on alternating statements, questions and answers, but on meaningfully directed self-organization of participants - that is, students turning to each other for an in-depth and comprehensive discussion of the ideas, points of view, and problems themselves.

5. The essential feature of an educational discussion is the dialogical position of the teacher, which is realized in the special organizational efforts undertaken by him, sets the tone for the discussion, and compliance with its rules by all participants.

6. At the beginning of the use of educational discussion, the efforts of teachers are focused on the formation of discussion procedures. Subsequently, the teacher’s focus is not only on identifying different points of view, positions, methods of argumentation, correlating them and drawing up a more comprehensive and multifaceted vision of phenomena, but also comparing interpretations of complex phenomena, going beyond the immediate situation, and searching for personal meanings. The more students learn to think in terms of contrastive comparisons, the greater their creative potential becomes.

7. Educational discussion is inferior to presentation in terms of the effectiveness of information transfer, but is highly effective for consolidating information, creative comprehension of the studied material and the formation of value orientations.

The understanding of this method of learning includes the following features:

– the work of a group of people, usually acting as leaders and participants;

– appropriate organization of place, time and work;

– the process of communication, which occurs as interaction between participants;

– focus on achieving educational goals.

The purposefulness of the discussion is not subordination to its tasks, which are clear and important only to the teacher, but a clear desire for each student to search for new knowledge-assessment, knowledge-guide for subsequent independent work.

Among the factors for in-depth assimilation of the material during the discussion, the following are mentioned:

- information exchange;

– encouraging different approaches to the same subject or phenomenon;

– coexistence of different, divergent opinions and assumptions;

– the ability to criticize and reject any of the opinions expressed;

– encouraging participants to seek group agreement.

At an advanced stage of training, such classes alternate with regular classes, and from a substantive point of view, discussions, as a rule, summarize the material of several microcycles. At the same time, discussion forms of learning also have autonomous value and can be successfully used in regular, traditional educational courses. It is only important to maintain the same principle of their inclusion in the training course: discussion classes should also alternate from time to time with regular classes, while maintaining their qualitative specificity. This specificity lies, first of all, in the lack of “training” in the very procedure of their implementation. At the same time, they continue to perform the function of summarizing the previous stages of passing the educational material.

How often should such activities be included in the curriculum? The answer to this question is not so much quantitative as qualitative. Classes in the form of discussions achieve their greatest effectiveness when they are presented in a complete cycle in the training course. This approach makes it possible to see the very positive dynamics in the development of communication skills discussed above. Of course, the number of discussions during the course may be different, and this depends both on its duration and on the characteristics of a particular group. So, in particular, the cycle may include not one, but two group discussions. The only thing to avoid when planning a series of lessons is repeating the same form of discussion over and over again. In this case, discussions, designed each time to be an original addition to the training course, lose their attractive novelty and turn into just another routine.

The next question is the duration of the discussion. The duration of such an activity, of course, can vary depending on a number of factors. Firstly, it is determined by the genre of discussion itself. For example, a panel discussion usually takes much longer than a role-playing game due to the purely structural features of its conduct. In general, the relationship here looks like this; The duration of the discussion is inversely proportional to the degree of regulation of the discussion. Secondly, the time depends on the breadth of the topic of discussion. With some reservations, we can assume that in this regard, in the sequence of classes we have adopted, the duration of the discussion increases from the first form to the last. For example, a role-playing game, which by definition involves an element of dramatization, is usually dedicated to a specific case. The “volume” of discussion in this case naturally limited to a specific situation. For forms such as group and panel discussions, much broader topics are usually selected, which necessarily expands the time frame.

The third factor is related to the willingness of the students themselves to discuss. Moreover, here it is necessary to take into account not only, and perhaps not so much the level of their language training, but the psychological “appearance” of the group as a whole. This refers to the current mood of students for discussion as such: a more or less expressed need to discuss specific problems; the degree of reflexivity characteristic of a given group; greater or lesser emotional response to current life problems; finally, the general intellectual and cultural level of the students.

The external (instructional) goal is to develop the skills necessary to successfully participate in discussion. IN in this case The list of relevant skills appears to be the most complete. These are the skills:

– identify and formulate the problem;

– give reasons for your statements;

– listen and hear partners;

– correlate your statement with previous statements;

– stick to the topic of discussion in order to come to a solution to the problem;

– be tolerant of other opinions (i.e. be tolerant);

– express your attitude to other opinions in the form of a meaningful analysis, and not in the form of a general assessment of them, and, especially, not in the form of an assessment of the participants themselves;

– express your own position, and not just provide information (in particular, use introductory words to indicate your communicative intentions);

– address the participants in the discussion and address your words to them, and not to the space.

Let's consider three forms of preparing and conducting discussions:

1) role-playing game;

2) “round table”;

3) philosophical cafe

Let's consider the first form of discussion - role-playing game.

A role-playing game is an entertainment game, a type of dramatic action in which the participants act within the framework of their chosen roles, guided by the nature of their role and the internal logic of the action environment, together they create or follow an already created plot. The actions of the game participants are considered successful or not in accordance with the accepted rules. Players are free to improvise within the chosen rules, determining the direction and outcome of the game.

Thus, the game process itself is a simulation of a particular situation by a group of people.

The main feature of a role-playing game is the roles that are given to the participants and which they will have to play in the course of solving a certain problem.

As in other forms of discussions, the game situation should be based on a certain problem, around the solution of which the game actions of the participants unfold. Practice shows that the more “problematic” potential the game material has, the more lively and interesting the whole action is.

In principle, a role-playing game can be built both on material related to the realities of the country of the language being studied, and on material related to the realities of the native country. The choice depends, first of all, on the goals pursued by the teacher. If, for example, you want to focus on the cultural aspects of a previously studied topic, then it makes sense to build the game on the material of other people's realities. This choice also provides an opportunity to practice using speech clichés characteristic of the relevant cultural context.

Building a game based on native realities has another advantage. In this case, it is easier to provide space for the development of meaning-making processes, since the discussion of problems native culture“by definition” is filled with great personal meaning for the participant. The point is not even that broad social problems from the life of one’s native country necessarily turn out to be more pressing. It’s just that when discussing native realities, there is always the opportunity to appeal to the own life experiences of the participants in the game.

Clarity in setting an internal goal is very important. External, or educational, goals are determined by what we are playing for in terms of educational effect. Among external goals, three subgroups can be distinguished.

Firstly, role-playing is usually carried out as a final lesson after completing any part of the training course (material). Consequently, the first goal is to implement in a communication situation the language skills on a given topic acquired over the previous period. Here we pay tribute to the purely “linguistic” side of the matter. But there would be no point in developing a system of discussion classes and writing a whole manual on this topic if everything was limited to these goals.

The second subgroup of external goals is related to the communication skills that we want to develop in our students.

What specific communication skills and corresponding skills are updated in the role-playing game? Let's name at least some of them:

– the ability to convey not just information, but also a position;

– ability to argue your point of view;

– ability to persuade and convince;

– the ability to respond to cues and, in particular, to competently provide interpersonal feedback;

– the ability to parry remarks (which is necessary for conducting polemics);

– ability to engage in conversation;

– ability to complete a speech.

In fact, this list covers three phases of communication:

1) making contact;

2) maintaining contact;

3) leaving contact.

It is clear that all three of these phases are present in any type of discussion, and in this sense the skills corresponding to them are universal. It is difficult to master everything at once, so depending on the level of training of the group and the type of discussion, you can emphasize certain skills in each specific case.

The structure of the role-playing game is divided into three stages:

1) Preamble

2) Organization of learning space

3) Game ending

The preamble is a short introductory speech by the teacher that precedes the game. This includes summary the situation of the game, the general cultural and/or social context and a statement of the internal (substantive) purpose of the game.

Along with the preamble, the procedure for conducting a role-playing game includes such an item as organizing the learning space. The need to introduce this point is due to the fact that the spatial location of communication participants is one of the factors influencing the effectiveness of communication.

The next, third, stage of the game is the final. As for the content of the ending, it is determined by the content of the game. These can be literally a few words that sum up the plot and, most importantly, indicate the end of the game action. Here it is important to “close” the game plot and thereby give the participants the opportunity to “exit” their game role.

We list several conditions indicating the need for the final to occur:

1) all students spoke;

2) the content of the role has been exhausted;

3) the meaningful goal of the game has been achieved;

4) class time is running out.

The next type of discussion is a round table. IN modern meaning the expression round table has been used since the 20th century as the name of one of the ways to organize a discussion of a certain issue; This method is characterized by the fact that:

– the purpose of the discussion is to summarize ideas and opinions regarding the problem under discussion;

– all round table participants act as proponents (must express an opinion on the issue being discussed, and not on the opinions of other participants); the lack of a set of several roles is not typical for all round tables;

– all participants in the discussion have equal rights; no one has the right to dictate their will and decisions.

This discussion model, based on agreements, produces results as results, which, in turn, are new agreements. During round tables, original solutions and ideas are born quite rarely. Moreover, the round table often plays more of an information and propaganda role rather than serving as a tool for developing specific solutions.

The Round Table occupies an intermediate position between role-playing game and an imitation game. On the one hand, when discussing a problem in the form of a round table, the participants also receive a certain role. Consequently, they do not speak on behalf of themselves personally. On the other hand, roles are not equipped with role cards prescribing one or another specific position. Therefore, it cannot be said that the participant's behavior is predetermined by the role he receives.

Then what determines the position of a round table participant?

The answer to this question lies in the very nature of the roles used in the round table. Each participant receives the role of a representative of either a department or public organization, or some professional group (for example, “scientist, specialist in the relevant field”), or some social group(for example, “unemployed” or “housewife”). Thus, the position of a participant in discussing a problem is determined not simply by his personal point of view, but by the interests of the organization or group that he represents at the round table.

The question of what kind of roles are used in this type of discussion is closely related to the question of what kind of problems are brought up for discussion in the form of a “round table”. As you know, these are complex socio-economic problems, the solution of which, by definition, requires an integrated approach, because these problems affect the interests of various departments and organizations, various sectors of society. Moreover, these interests are usually conflicting, since a decision beneficial to one party may harm the interests of the other party.

In reality, a round table is most often held in order to identify these different positions, behind which there are different interests, in order to imagine the whole range of problems associated with a particular solution, and, if necessary, try to find a compromise that, if possible, takes into account the interests all parties involved.

Among the external goals related to communication skills, the formation of public speaking skills takes on special importance in the round table.

Let us now list what exactly is recorded here as public speaking skills and the corresponding skills:

1) Ability to start and finish a performance. This is a concretization of such phases of communication that are already familiar to us, such as entering into contact and leaving contact.

2) Ability to structure public speaking. It was noted earlier that giving a message a certain structure increases the impact of the information being conveyed. In addition, this skill is closely related to the ability not only to convey information, but to convey a certain position to the addressee. Even if it is present in your words, unstructured speech can make it very difficult for your interlocutors to understand your position. While listening to you, they themselves have to do the hard work of isolating a position from the stream of your speech, which is fraught with distortions and misunderstandings. In the absence of a clear structure of the speech, the position you express becomes camouflaged among arguments, emotions, information, criticism and everything that usually accompanies the process of our self-expression during discussions.

3) The ability to persuade and the ability to argue and, what is important for

“Round Table” - the ability to understand the difference between one and the other.

The fact is that such characteristics of a speech as persuasiveness and argumentation are often mixed, or rather, identified. This is partly justified, because a more reasoned judgment often looks more convincing. But not for everyone and not always.

The reason lies in the fact that the power of persuasion can be achieved both through the content and through the form of speech. Reasoning is a characteristic related to the content of speech. It is not difficult to imagine a speaker who makes weighty, fair arguments, but does so in an impassive monotonous voice, devoid of intonation, logical emphasis and any expressiveness. The persuasion effect of such speech can be extremely low. And, conversely, a speech that is not very well-argued in terms of content can be convincing for those listeners who respond more to external characteristics - rich expression, expressiveness of speech using means of non-verbal communication, including gestures and voice volume. This means that the system of arguments underlying the belief must be presented in an appropriate way. This is why the ability to argue and the ability to persuade should not be equated and why both of these skills turn out to be important for increasing the effectiveness of influence. This question is especially relevant for discussions in the form of a “round table”, since in them the group most often “splits” into two parts - into supporters and opponents of the decision being made. In this sense, the decisive factor is not so much a rational assessment of the facts, but rather the persuasiveness of the considerations expressed.

4) The ability to participate in a collective discussion of a problem. As noted earlier, different positions of participants may conflict with each other due to purely objective reasons. For example, the construction of a nuclear waste processing plant can solve the problem of unemployment in the region and a number of other social problems, but at the same time will worsen the environmental situation. Therefore, the search for mutually acceptable solutions may be associated with the need to find a compromise. This requires the participants in the discussion to be able to relate their own position to the positions of others, which, in turn, is associated with the genius of listening to the interlocutor, even if he acts as an opponent. Hearing another is the initial condition necessary for comparing different positions: you always first need to understand in order to compare.

The internal goals of a round table discussion are to conduct a comprehensive exchange of views, which is necessary for the subsequent decision-making on the issue under discussion. This means that the decision itself is not made at the round table. This formulation of the goal corresponds to the actual practice of holding “round tables”, when a comprehensive discussion of any pressing problem is carried out in order to identify only all possible consequences expected decision.

A philosophical café (French: Le café philosophique) is an extra-institutional form of organizing philosophical dialogue, in which the line between a seminar and a coffee break is blurred.

Goes back to the ancient philosophical feast of the students of Socrates. Literary salons are considered the immediate predecessors of philosophical cafes. According to some reports, the formation of philosophical cafes was influenced by the television genre of talk shows, where participants are divided into three categories: host, speaker and listeners. In the newest tradition of philosophical cafes, which modern researchers begin with Marc Sautet (French Marc Sautet) and his “Lighthouse Cafe” on the Place de la Bastille in Paris.

1. Speech by the moderator in which he introduces the topic and speaker to all participants.

2. An introductory message about (15-20 minutes) - a speech by the author, offering to the public a number of theses, preferably interconnected.

3. The opportunity to ask questions to the speaker during the presentation is welcome, but not to the point of excessive importunity. Correct and concise. Ideally, these are questions of a clarifying nature that do not contain hidden statements, polemics or threats to the author’s concept.

4. Collective discussion of the presented provisions, every now and then directed by a moderator in terms of quality and quantity.

5. A summary of what was said, given by the moderator or one of the participants.

Café-Filo hosts regular discussions, usually once a week, on any topic proposed by the participants, who include both regulars and casual visitors. In this case, a prerequisite is to conduct the discussion in the form of a philosophical discourse, which, to a certain extent, is ensured by the moderator of the discussion, who, however, is not necessarily a professional philosopher.

Philo cafes are a manifestation of democratic discourse. They express the spontaneous reaction of people looking for points of reference in the face of radical and rapid changes in economic and social structures modern society.

Philo cafés are, in a sense, a group “philosophotherapy”, the participants of which, critically perceiving modern society, meet to critically reflect on their identity, mentality, and values, while using the intellectual synergy of working in a group. New ideas and concepts that arise at the level of individual consciousness and generated by the individuals themselves can and should influence the collective consciousness and contribute to the emergence of a new vision, new ethics and value system more adequate to the new conditions of human existence.

The cafe-philo is a modern agora, a public place where individuals gather to forge a new social consensus through democratic discourse.

The first phyllo café, the Beacon Café, appeared on the Place de la Bastille in Paris in 1992 on the initiative of the French philosopher Marc Sautet, who subsequently wrote the book Café for Socrates.

Currently, you can find on the website of the French Cafe-Filo Association the addresses of about a hundred cafes in Paris and its environs and more than a hundred cafes in the rest of France. About eighty cafes are already operating outside of France, in Western Europe, USA, Canada, Australia, Central and South America, Japan and China.

Thus, the types of discussions considered are unique forms of group discussion. Group discussion is considered as a form of socio-psychological training. Of fundamental importance is the fact that in this case we take from psychology not only the name, not only the technology for conducting the discussion, but also the very strategy for organizing group discussion. Using the discussion method in classes foreign language- this is truly a symbiosis of psychology and methods of teaching foreign languages.

The common idea of ​​a discussion as exclusively a dispute involving opposition between the parties is not entirely correct. Along with discussion-argument, there is also discussion-dialogue, when similar views are complemented and developed. As a rule, in reality the discussion combines both of these points. But for you and me, the reference to a discussion-dialogue is especially interesting, in this respect. When explaining to our students what the skill of discussion is, we usually talk about the need to argue their point of view in case of disagreement with the opinion of their partners. It is equally important to explain to students that in case of agreement, silence is not the only possible reaction.

Even if you agree with your partner, you can also argue your point of view. Firstly, your arguments in favor of the position expressed may be completely different. This means that we are dealing with a situation where a person arrived at the same result following a completely different logic. In a discussion, the course of reasoning itself has independent value. And secondly, new, additional arguments can be brought forward. This will mean developing and adding to the thoughts expressed, and this is also a possible form of participation in the discussion.

In a discussion, the course of reasoning itself has independent value. In addition, new, additional arguments can be brought forward. This will mean developing and adding to the thoughts expressed, and this is also a possible form of participation in the discussion.

The interest of psychologists in group discussion is primarily due to the fact that it represents an excellent model for mastering the most important processes group communication.

The goals of a group discussion can be very diverse depending on its subject and the way the discussion is organized.

• 1. Most often, the purpose of using a discussion is to achieve a definite opinion on the problem under discussion, in this case the following tasks can be set:
  • - participants’ awareness of their opinions, judgments, assessments on the topic of discussion;
  • -clarification of mutual positions in the dispute;
  • -developing a respectful attitude towards other opinions;
  • -developing the ability to see a problem from different sides, understanding the polysemy of possible solutions that is characteristic of most problems;
  • -refusal to perceive the superiority of any point of view;
  • - formation of skills for formulating a unified group decision, taking into account various points of view, including the opinion of the minority.
• 2. The discussion method is actively used to find ways

solving the problem, the following tasks can be solved:

• -development of skills to analyze a problem or problematic situation;
• -search and development of promising ideas;
• -development of the ability to produce multiple solutions;
• - finding the optimal solution among several alternatives.
• 3. Another common goal of using the discussion method: increasing communicative competence. The tasks to be solved in this case may be as follows:
  • -development of the ability to formulate questions and value judgments, conduct debate;
  • -development of the ability to accurately express one’s thoughts in a speech, to speak briefly and to the point;
  • - formation of the ability to actively defend one’s point of view;
  • -development of the ability to argue reasonedly and refute the enemy’s erroneous position;
  • -development of the ability to carry out constructive criticism of existing points of view and perceive critical comments addressed to oneself;
  • -ability to listen and interact with other participants;
  • -developing the ability to speak in public.
• 4. Within the framework of socio-psychological training, discussion is often used to launch the processes of group dynamics, establish and develop relationships in the group. In this case, the tasks can be formulated as follows:
  • - structuring the group, nominating leaders, distributing roles;
  • -increasing group cohesion;
  • - actualization and resolution of hidden intragroup conflicts;
  • -optimization of the role structure of the group;
  • -conducting group reflection through analysis of individual experiences;
  • -giving group decisions the status of group norms;
  • -involvement of discussion participants in the subsequent implementation of group decisions.
• 4. At the same time, discussion methods can be used in the learning process for the purpose of deeper assimilation, clarification theoretical issues(in educational discussion).
• 5. For psychotherapeutic purposes, discussion is used to facilitate self-knowledge and self-disclosure of participants, expand views on the situation that has arisen, find a way out of it, and receive support

And feedback, deepening self-knowledge.

Forms of group discussion can be classified on different grounds.

So, according to the degree of structure they distinguish:

structured discussions in which the topic, questions for discussion, the order of statements are clearly defined, and time is regulated (for example, a brainstorming);

unstructured, in which the topic is chosen by the participants themselves, the discussion is conducted freely, with virtually no rules, the leader plays a passive role, the time of discussion is not formally limited (for example, discussions in group meetings). Such discussions can spontaneously arise during a training session; its “danger” is that it aggravates intragroup conflicts, enhances the processes of group dynamics, it is difficult to control it and predict its outcome, which accordingly requires the development of specific skills from the leader.

Based on the subject of discussion, discussions are divided into (N.V. Semilet):

thematic, in which problems that are significant to all group members are discussed (for example, “How to manage yourself in difficult situations?”, “Is conflict evil or good?” etc);

biographical, focused on the past experiences of the participants; such a discussion involves discussing the client’s life history, individual episodes and events of his biography, problems, conflicts, relationships, attitudes, behavioral characteristics, etc.;

interactional, the material of which is the structure and content of relationships between group members; the features of interpersonal interaction in the group and situations arising during the group process are analyzed.

Another criterion for classifying discussion methods is the form of organization of the discussion. According to this criterion, many types of discussions can be distinguished. Let's list some of them:

Progressive discussion, the purpose of which is to solve a problem in a group. It is carried out as follows: after presenting a problem, participants are invited to put forward ideas about ways to solve it, which are recorded on the board, then each option is discussed, all ideas are ranked, after which the most optimal solution is selected in the discussion.

Discussion in subgroups. This method consists of dividing the group into several subgroups for an initial discussion of the problem (2--4, depending on the size of the group, the number of members of each micro-group can vary from three to 5--7 people). After the members of the subgroup come to a common opinion on the issue under discussion or develop their own approach to solving the problem, a discussion is organized in the “large” group. To present the results of their work, each subgroup nominates a representative, but it is also possible that the opinion of the microgroup is expressed by all (or almost all) of its members. After which the entire discussion is summed up.

Relay method. The performance of the participants is organized according to the principle of a relay race: if you speak, give the floor to another participant. Quite often, in discussions structured in this way, a “relay baton” is used, the role of which is played by some object (for example, a soft toy or a small ball). This method is often used at the initial stages of development of a socio-psychological training group; it allows you to structure the discussion, reduce anxiety, allow all group members to speak out, and limit the talkativeness of individual participants.

Discussion-competition. All participants are divided into teams. A jury is selected that determines the criteria for evaluating the proposed solutions: the depth of the solution, its evidence, logic, clarity, adequacy of the goal. The topic of the discussion is agreed upon (for example, prepare and conduct two fragments of the lesson) and the point system. In this case, the moderator himself can lead the discussion. At the end of the discussion, the jury announces the results and comments on them.

Free discussion. It is distinguished by minimal regulation of the actions of participants; everyone speaks based on their own position and expresses exclusively their opinion. The time and timing of performances are not limited. The facilitator only guides the discussion, encouraging participants to speak openly. Such an exchange of opinions leads to high emotional involvement of the participants. The topic for such a discussion is selected to be relevant, useful for personal and professional development. In conclusion, the presenter sums up what issues were discussed and thanks the participants for their active work.

Guided discussion. Unlike the free one, so-called speakers are appointed here (there can be up to 5-6 of them), whose position is known in advance. It can represent the point of view of a group (professional community, party, etc.). All other participants in the directed discussion are divided into support groups for the points of view presented by the speakers; they can complement the speaker’s speech. Participants are located in sectors behind their speaker, who usually stand in a circle. The order and time for speakers to speak is established by the regulations. Speeches by speakers begin a discussion, and after this a polemic or general discussion may begin. Summing up the results of a guided discussion involves a brief description by the presenter of all the positions presented by the speakers, an assessment of the course of the controversy that flared up between the participants, the revealed similarities, differences, advantages and disadvantages of each of the stated points of view or approaches.

Debate. Discussion in this type of discussion is built around a topic with an ambiguous solution (for example, abortion, euthanasia, etc.). Participants are divided into 2-3 subgroups (optional or based on the results of a draw), representing opposing points of view. Then each team presents its position, answers questions from opponents, and puts forward counterarguments. Finally, the discussion is summarized.

The structure of the educational discussion includes several stages. The first of which is introductory, provides for the updating of students’ knowledge, the creation of a discussion situation, and the formulation of a problem.

The second, main one, includes a direct discussion of the stated problem, during which the formation of skills and habits of mental activity is carried out, the development of socially valuable ways of behavior in the process of communication.

At the final stage, an analysis of the progress of the discussion, a generalization of its results, an assessment of the degree of implementation of the assigned tasks, an analysis of the speeches and behavior of the participants, errors and difficulties that arose during the discussion are proposed.

During the discussion, the following educational goals are realized:

1. mastery of logical analysis, the ability to formulate a problem, argue, prove the truth or falsity of judgments, highlight what is essentially important and secondary and on the basis of this come to productive conclusions.

2. mastering socially valuable methods of communication, which involves learning the ability to listen and understand another, understanding that most problems have multi-valued solutions and no one is able to fully take into account all aspects of the problem, the formation of a “decentration” position.

The facilitator of the educational discussion needs to consider the following points:

1. Do not force participants to follow in the discussion the order of ideas that are main from the teacher’s point of view. Let students act in the order dictated by their own interests.

2. You should not insist every time on discussing only those theoretical issues that are provided for training course. Let it develop in a way that is interesting to the students.

3. Do not discuss unimportant issues at length.

4. Try to reinforce theoretical ideas with practical exercises.

Necessary conditions The development of a productive discussion is the personal knowledge of the discussion participants, which they acquire in the process of independent work with problematic material, as well as with special literature.

During the educational discussion, a solution to the educational problem is provided, carried out under conditions of control by both the moderator and the participants in the discussion themselves. The nature of the discussion of the problem, methods of behavior, and relationships that have developed during the educational discussion can also be analyzed and discussed.

1. Formulate the purpose and topic of the discussion (what is being discussed, why the discussion is needed, to what extent the problem should be solved);

2. Set the discussion time (20-30-40 minutes or more).

3. To interest the participants in the discussion - to present the problem in the form of some kind of contradiction.

4. Achieve a clear understanding of the problem by all participants by checking it control questions or by asking participants to ask questions.

5. Organize an exchange of opinions and remarks (can be done in a circle).

6. Activate passive people (ask a question or request for help).

7. Collect as many proposals as possible for solving the problem being condemned (express your proposals after listening to the opinions of all participants).

Question 16. Method of case study analysis. Definition, goals, procedure. Training using this method is based on the analysis of a situation that represents a fact, an event that took place in life experience specific person, or a case from the experience of recognized “aces” in their professional activities. The situation is detailed description or demonstration of the execution of any matter from any field of professional activity of a recognized specialist. The situation is presented for observation, analysis, and discussion, which can take place both in individual and group training.

This type of discussion stimulates turning to the experience of others, the desire to acquire theoretical knowledge in order to obtain answers to the questions under discussion. Discussion various options solving the same situation significantly deepens the experience of students: each of them can familiarize themselves with the solution options, listen to and weigh their many assessments, additions and changes. Goals: consolidation of theoretical knowledge and familiarization with examples of their practical use, development of analytical abilities, incl. the ability to correctly use information, analyze unrefined tasks; developing the ability to formulate a task independently;

development of the ability to produce independent decisions and justify them; initiative development.

Purpose Analysis of the situation can be logically integrated into the lecture material, and used to sharpen attention to particularly significant content, introducing elements of problematic nature into the educational process. This can be a special lesson, completely focused on resolving the problem situation.

Procedure:

1. Description or demonstration of a situation. Moreover, the situation can be described by the presenter, but it can also be proposed by the students themselves in accordance with the given topic.

2. Familiarity with the situation (reading the description or observing the execution),

3. Identification of the problem,

4. Discuss it,

5. Making an appropriate decision.

This teaching method consists of conducting educational group discussions on a specific problem in relatively small groups of students (from 6 to 15 people).

Traditionally, the concept of “discussion” refers to the exchange of opinions in all its forms. The experience of history shows that without an exchange of opinions and the accompanying debates and disputes, no development of society is possible. This is especially true for development in the sphere of spiritual life and professional development of a person.

Discussion as a collective discussion can be of a different nature depending on the process being studied, the level of its problematic nature and, as a consequence, the judgments made.

Although in scientific pedagogical literature discussions are not classified according to the components of activity (subject, object, means, goals, operations, needs, conditions, results), in practice discussion is considered as a universal phenomenon, which, in essence, can be mechanically transferred without change from one area to another, for example, from science to professional pedagogy or methods of teaching a professionally oriented foreign language.

An educational discussion differs from other types of discussions in that the novelty of its problems relates only to the group of people participating in the discussion, i.e., the solution to the problem that has already been found in science will have to be found in the educational process in this audience.

For a teacher organizing an educational discussion, the result, as a rule, is already known in advance. The goal here is a search process that should lead to objectively known, but subjectively, from the students’ point of view, new knowledge. Moreover, this search should naturally lead to the task planned by the teacher. This can be, in our opinion, only if the search for a solution to the problem (group discussion) is completely controlled by the teacher.

Management here is twofold. Firstly, to conduct a discussion, the teacher creates and maintains a certain level of relationships among students - relationships of goodwill and frankness, i.e., management of the discussion on the part of the teacher is communicative in nature. Secondly, the teacher manages the process of searching for truth. It is generally accepted that educational discussion is permissible “provided that the teacher is able to ensure the correctness of the conclusions.”

Summarizing the above, we can highlight the following specific features of an optimally organized and conducted educational discussion:

1) a high degree of competence in the problem under consideration of the teacher-organizer and, as a rule, sufficient practical experience in solving similar problems among students;

2) a high level of predicting solutions to typical problem situations due to the serious methodological training of the teacher-organizer, i.e., a relatively low level of improvisation on the part of the teacher. At the same time, there is a fairly high level of improvisation on the part of students. Hence the need for the teacher to control the discussion process;

3) the goal and result of educational discussion is a high level of students’ assimilation of true knowledge, overcoming misconceptions, and the development of dialectical thinking in them;

4) the source of true knowledge is variable. Depending on the specific problem situation, it is either the teacher-organizer, or the students, or the latter derive true knowledge with the help of the teacher.

In conclusion, it should be noted that this method allows you to make the most of the students’ experience, promoting a better assimilation of the material they are studying. This is due to the fact that in a group discussion it is not the teacher who tells the students what is correct, but the students themselves develop evidence, justification for the principles and approaches proposed by the teacher, using their personal experience as much as possible.

Educational group discussions give the greatest effect when studying and working through complex material and forming the necessary attitudes. This active learning method provides good opportunities for feedback, reinforcement, practice, motivation, and transfer of knowledge and skills from one area to another.

Let us next consider one of the most popular methods in Western practice for improving the qualifications of management personnel - analysis of specific practical situations (case-study - English, Fallstudie - German). Over the past decade, this method has become increasingly popular wide application in business education in Russia when studying a variety of disciplines: marketing, personnel management, business foreign language, etc.