In the original 9 Conversations project we developed a face to face program to support refugees wanting to start their own business in their new place of residence through nine meetings and the development of a relevant local network in between each session. The central dilemma was about how to balance imparting useful information with opportunities to put it into practice.
Our first model was the Nordic Transformative Learning Circle.
During the project we uncovered the MasterMind approach used by small groups of business people to advance their companies. This mirrors very strongly the Nordic Transformative Learning Circle approach and is obviously focused on business. Therefore this indicated that we were on the right track from a pedagogical perspective.
Another approach to explore is the Harkness table one. This is a development of the teacher-centred Socratic questioning to a more democratic discussion built on a preparation activity. Reference to a table is because a small group of learners of about 6-16 people together have the discussion around an oval table. The main features of the Harkness approach include that this is a team activity that results in a group grade. The role of each group member is therefore not to outcompete their colleagues but to support their colleagues to bring out the important aspects of the topic under discussion. Part of that mutual support includes coming prepared with key questions and having studied the topic beforehand.
A further development of the Harkness approach is Alexis Wiggins’ Spider Web Discussion approach developed by Alexis Wiggins, which has mapping of the discussion at its heart. It is the map of the discussion which gives rise to the Spider’s Web name. The aim is for a successful discussion to have involved every participant at the table almost equally and this can be worked out by having the teacher/facilitator map the discussion either on paper or using an app. A good discussion will result in a diagram such as the one below. The thicker the line, the more that person spoke. The aim is to end up at the end of the discussion with an even spread of interactions where the lines are all more or less the same thickness. A key part of the approach is to ensure there is a 5-15 minute period after the end of the discussion to look at the discussion map and evaluate the results as a shared endeavour. Was everybody heard? If not, what could be done to do better next time?
What I like about the Spider Web Discussion
- It pulls the focus back to the learners.
- The suggested time of 45-50 minutes for discussion and 5-15 minutes for debrief fits well with the existing 9 Conversations programme.
- The skills promoted by this method are sought after business skills according to Google’s Project Oxygen.
What does not fit
- Grading. In the context of the 9 Conversations course, the overriding aim of the participants is to find out enough to know whether they can start a business. A grade is not a high priority for these adults. The post-discussion feedback is likely sufficient to get the message that a group grade would communicate.
- According to Wiggins, it takes about three months to train a learning group in the effective use of this method whereas the 9 Conversations programme lasts for just over two months.
- The facilitator role needs to be clarified. In 9 Conversations we do not exclude the possibility that the facilitator may be themselves starting a business and therefore in this case theirs, would be a legitimate voice to include. Certainly in Transformative Learning Circles and Mastermind groups, there is no leader, only an organiser.
How to integrate into 9 Conversations
In the follow up project, Mastering 9 Conversations, we aim to support 9 Conversations facilitators. One of the ways we will do this is by making sure that additional relevant materials are available to supplement the original course materials. These materials could be used in addition to the networking activities as the pre-session preparation to guide the Spider Web discussion in each of the 9 steps.