“I Didn’t Want to Be Ignorant”: An Exploration of Why Preservice Teachers Sometimes Choose Silence in Critical Conversations About Texts With Elementary Children

Discussions about texts can offer valuable opportunities for critical conversations about power and privilege. While we know such conversations are important to have in school, many teachers report feeling unprepared to facilitate them. In an effort to understand the in-the-moment decisions preservice teachers (PSTs) make in response to children’s contributions during critical conversations about texts, this qualitative, design-based study examines how PSTs responded to elementary-age children while facilitating discussions about texts in their field placements. Although various kinds of responses were made (e.g., eliciting children’s thinking, orienting children’s contributions to one another), in this analysis, we examine the moments where PSTs identified their silence as salient. Findings reveal that (1) some PSTs developing an understanding of the role of talk and desire to efficiently accomplish the task did not seem to set them up to see critical conversations about texts as a space for sensemaking, and (2) other PSTs did see critical conversations about texts as spaces to engage in sensemaking but felt discomfort grappling with unanticipated issues that arose. We discuss implications for literacy researchers and teacher educators committed to supporting critical conversations with children in schools.

Facilitating Constructive Discussions of Difficult Socio-Scientific Issues

Discussion can be an important and powerful tool in efforts to build a more diverse, equitable, and inclusive future for STEM (i.e., science, technology, engineering, and mathematics). However, facilitating discussions on difficult, complex, and often uncomfortable issues, like racism and sexism, can feel daunting.

Four Ways to (Re)consider Facilitating Discussions on Race and Social Justice

The year 2020 has offered an important opportunity to continue the important work of building anti-racist institutions. Community discussion is often challenging but is a vital part of building new institutions that are grounded in love and nonviolence. Drawing on years of experience facilitating discussions, this article offers suggestions for building trust, dealing with the consequences of the “poisoned well,” creating a pedagogy of listening, and understanding mistakes. Fostering authentic exchanges through dialogue is not easy work but it is essential to, in the words of John Lewis, “redeem the soul of America.”

Remote Supergroup for Chemistry Undergraduates

The Remote Supergroup for Chemistry Undergraduates (RSCU) brought together student and faculty scientists from 18 public and private institutions that primarily serve undergraduates, spanning 14 US states and one other country. RSCU’s goals included networking across institutions, promoting student understanding of the chemical literature, informing students about further educational and career opportunities, and facilitating discussions of equity and inclusion in science.

Facilitating difficult discussions in STEM

Discussion can be an important and powerful tool in efforts to build a more diverse, equitable, and inclusive future for STEM. However, facilitating discussions on complex and uncomfortable issues, like racism and sexism, can feel daunting. We outline a series of steps that can be used in offices, laboratories, and classrooms to facilitate productive discussions that empower everyone to listen, contribute, learn, and ultimately act to transform STEM.

Mental health night: A peer-led initiative

We describe a peer-led mental health (MH) workshop that was held at the Michael G. DeGroote School of Medicine (Niagara Regional Campus) in collaboration with Student Affairs. Workshop aims included facilitating discussions among peers and engaging in case-based learning about MH experiences in medical school. Post-workshop, attendees reported increased comfort in talking to classmates about personal MH, recognizing MH crises, and asking for help from peers. We believe that engaging medical learners in MH discussions early on in medical education is critical, and that peer-led workshops may aid in decreasing future MH difficulties and burnout. Due to the low-cost of holding peer-led workshops, this event could be easily replicated at other training sites.

Korean Muslims: Shaping Islamic Discourse and Identities Online

This ethnographic study explores the ways in which Korean Muslim youth are employing strategies of dialogue to build trust and acceptance through the use of Facebook. Using public posts and facilitating discussions within the private message setting, Korean Muslim youth are engaging mainstream Korean society in the hope of fostering solidarity, acceptance and normalization of their existence as Korean Muslims. Through these efforts, Korean Muslim youth are re-working notions of Korean identity through their personal conversions to Islam.

Disturbed Earth: Conceptions of the Deep Underground in Shale Extraction Deliberations in the US and UK

Hydraulic fracturing ('fracking') has enabled the recovery of previously inaccessible resources and rendered new areas of the underground 'productive'. While a number of studies in the US and UK have examined public attitudes toward fracking and its various impacts, how people conceptualise the deep underground itself has received less attention. We argue that views on resources, risk and the deep underground raise important questions about how people perceive the desirability and viability of subterranean interventions. We conducted day-long deliberation workshops (two in each country), facilitating discussions among diverse groups of people on prospective shale extraction in the US and UK. Themes that emerged in these conversations include seeing the Earth as a foundation; natural limits (a greater burden than the subsurface can withstand versus simply overuse of natural resources); and ideas about the fragility, instability and opacity of the deep underground. We find that concerns in both countries were not limited to specific, localised impacts but also addressed ecosystem links between surface and subsurface environments and broader questions about the use, identification and value of natural resources.