A big part of oracy is facilitating discussions between learners.

These can be in pairs, in groups, or they can involve the whole class.

All three approaches have their benefits. As teachers, we often use a mixture.

If you’re unsure about how to choose between the options, this guide will help.

Paired Discussion

Paired discussion is a valuable aid to whole-class teaching.

You can use it throughout a lesson, without needing to plan.

The only requirements are that pupils have a partner to hand, and that disruption is kept to a minimum.

This usually means learners working with the person who is sat next to them; it may sometimes involve one or more learners moving or turning around.

The great benefit of using paired discussion is that the teacher rarely has to plan, create resources, or establish a structure.

They can simply give learners a question, statement or topic, and the ask them to discuss it.

Here’s an example:

• Teacher: ‘OK, before we start to investigate the functions of the digestive system, turn to your partner and discuss what you think the functions might be. 30 seconds, off you go.’

And a further example:

• Teacher: ‘In a moment we’ll review what we have learnt this lesson. First, I would like you to spend five minutes discussing your work with your partner. Identify what you think you have done well and what could be improved. Find evidence to support what you say.’

The second example is more detailed, encouraging a more structured discussion.

This differs from the first case, in which the teacher’s intention it to elicit learners’ prior knowledge.

What ties both examples together, is that the teacher is using paired discussion with a specific goal in mind. This means the instructions they give to learners are directed, meaningful and designed to move the learning on.

By giving learners an opportunity to discuss in pairs, we gain a few benefits.

First, everyone in the class is engaged in the activity. Everyone has an opportunity to articulate their thinking, and to be exposed to the thinking of their peers.

Second, the teacher immediately gains access to useful information.

They can see who is discussing and who isn’t.

They can see the extent to which pairs can talk about the question or topic.

And, by circulating, they can listen in to the discussion learners are having, helping them to better understand what knowledge learners possess.

Third, when the teacher ends the discussion and asks for feedback, everyone has something to share.

The teacher can select any pair and pose the question: ‘What did the two of you discuss?’

Even if learners struggled with the question, they can still share this, telling the teacher why they struggled.

This illustrates how paired discussion helps with eliciting information and removes the situation where learners either don’t have anything to say or are reluctant to articulate their thinking.

Paired discussion, in which every ‘group’ consists of only two members, gives all members of a class the greatest opportunity to speak.

Learners are competing for airtime with only one other person and a discussion will not ensue unless both parties accept that they must contribute.

Paired discussion is thus a powerful tool for ensuring all learners can participate fully in debate, verbalise their thinking, and engage in active practice.

The final thing to note is that paired discussion tends to work well as a starting point for other activities or tasks.

As demonstrated by the two examples above.

Of course, paired discussion can stand alone – just as it can be highly structured or supplemented by extra resources – but, generally, it works in concert with another activity, or as part of a tapestry of tasks.

It is a technique as much as an independent entity.

One the teacher can use to develop thinking, elicit knowledge, or to lead into other pieces of work.

Group Discussion

In contrast to paired discussion, group discussion usually requires more structure and greater planning.

There is one important reason for this.

When learners are grouped in threes, fours or fives (the traditional numbers found in group activities) there is the potential for some learners to sit back and leave it to others to do the work.

Psychologists have named this phenomenon.

It is called social loafing.

When challenged on this, many learners will point to the fact that other members of the group are taking part in discussion as justification for their own inaction.

The rationale is that if the work is being done then everything is OK.

For us as teachers, this is obviously not the case.

Our aim is to have all members of the class engaged in whatever work has been set, so that everyone is learning.

For the teacher, the work is not instrumental. It is an end in itself.

As such, it is important to forestall social loafing and prevent it undermining the power of group discussion.

You can do this with careful planning, including through the following:

• By allocating roles.
• By providing a structure that means all learners are bound into the discussion.
• By separating the group discussion into a series of time limited mini-discussions.
• By thinking carefully about which learners are grouped together.
• By providing discussion topics that are accessible to all.

Despite requiring extra planning and prior input from the teacher, group discussion tends to see learners given greater freedom and independence.

For the method to be worthwhile, the teacher needs to step back.

Having provided a structure for the discussion, they must leave learners to their own devices (while maintaining a watchful eye, of course).

In group discussion, there is a greater ceding of control by the teacher then is the case in either paired or whole-class discussion.

Two points arise from this.

First, the teacher must be prepared to cede control.

Group discussion is impeded if the teacher keeps intervening, for example, by continually drawing the class’s attention to make teaching points.

The main purpose of group discussion is for learners to engage with the learning through a framework (the discussion activity) set out by the teacher.

Second, there may be some classes where the behaviour issues that arise from the ceding of control outweigh any benefits.

In these cases, there are two options open to the teacher:

• Train the class so they are capable of discussing successfully in groups. This can take time but usually works. It involves gradually introducing group work into discussion tasks and establishing ground rules in paired and whole-class discussion that can be transferred to group discussion.
• Do not do group discussion with the class. This is not the end of the world; you can still use paired and whole-class discussion as well as a range of other activities. Sometimes, it is better to acknowledge that a certain class struggles with an activity type then to continue using it despite the problems it throws up.

Drawing the previous few points together, we can say that group discussion carries higher risks than paired and whole-class discussion, but that it also has potentially high payoffs.

A successful group discussion – in which three, four or five learners are exploring ideas, challenging one another and working together to construct knowledge and develop understanding – is an incredibly rich learning experience.

That is why, despite the potential difficulties that come with the approach, it is worth pursuing.

Whole-Class Discussion

We turn finally to whole-class discussion.

This usually sees the teacher standing at the front of the room with the whole class sat before them.

(One alternative is to have the teacher and the learners sat together in a large circle).

It is a method that allows the teacher to retain the maximum level of control over their pupils.

They are the focal point for the class and in a position to direct proceedings.

This can include a stipulation that all comments must pass through the teacher (for example, if the teacher always chooses who gets to speak).

The approach is good for establishing ground-rules that can then be transferred to paired and group discussions.

These usually include the following principles:

• Only one person is allowed to speak at any one time.
• All contributions and contributors are to be treated with respect.
• We actively listen to the person who is speaking.

The teacher’s role as head of the discussion (judge, facilitator, director) allows them to deal with rule breaches and to praise learners for doing the right thing.

One of the biggest benefits of whole-class discussion is that it has the greatest possible number of contributors.

This means there is the potential for learners to hear a diversity of opinions that may not be accessible through paired or group discussion.

Exposure to a wide range of ideas often leads to developments in understanding (including by greying that which might previously have been viewed as black and white).

It is also encourages creative thinking.

Bringing disparate perspectives together helps provoke original thoughts.

This is because a larger number of contributions means a larger number of potential contribution-combinations.

Innovative or unusual suggestions often come forth due to the sheer increase in numbers.

The last point to note concerning whole-class discussion is that it has greater theatricality than paired or group discussion.

The teacher, at the front of the class, can embellish and dramatize contributions that learners make (or which they themselves provide).

This presents the opportunity to engage and motivate learners.

The teacher can draw them into the discussion by using rhetorical devices, through acting and with oratory.

And learners can take advantage of this, if they wish, by using such techniques themselves when they are called on to speak.

In conclusion, paired, group and whole-class discussion are all to be recommended.

Each approach has its benefits. Deciding what to use and where is partly about knowing your learners, partly about judging what is most relevant for the content you are teaching, and partly about judging the feel of the classroom and using this to work out what approach is going to be of most use.