Advantages
Encourages students to engage thoroughly with course content as part of an interactive process that promotes collegiality and peer-based learning. Hones critical thinking and communication skills through in-depth and robust in-class discussions. Easily translated to a variety of disciplines (and courses) where in-depth discussion of weekly readings will enhance learning outcomes and positively contribute towards a constructive learning environment.
Challenges
Lack of student enthusiasm can mar this task. Students must participate earnestly in discussions (as well as invest sufficient time and effort to their critical reflections) for the ideal delivery of this task. For this reason grading students on both their
written
submissions as well as in-class participation (to a collective weighting of moderate significance) is effective to encourage full participation.
Tips for implementation
Staff should aim to set readings for discussion that are either progressive (i.e. extracts from the same primary text), or that are of a length, and depth appropriate for the year level, number of other assessment items, and discussable within a standard tutorial/workshop.
How it supports academic integrity
While the written element of this task is not Identity verified, it is assessed via Turnitin and informs weekly in-class (observed) discussions. Staff may be able to informally verify if students written proficiency does or does not align with their level of understanding during in-class discussions as a means of detecting academic misconduct.