3.2.9 Facilitation Tools

by Vicky Minderhout (Chemistry, Seattle University) and
Peter Smith (Mathematics & Computer Science, St. Mary’s College, Emeritus)

---

Inventory of Common Facilitation Tools

Table 1 lists some common tools used when facilitating classes. They are intended to be off-the-shelf techniques designed for entire-class interactions. They differ from constructive interventions which focus on individual students or teams (3.2.8 Constructive Intervention Techniques).

Discussion and Guidance for Selected Tool Usage

To aid teachers in choosing the appropriate facilitation tool, the following section provides a description of the tool, when and where the tool should be used, a discussion of the anticipated learning outcomes, and an example situation for implementing the tool.

Increasing the Performance Criteria

This facilitation tool is used to improve performance in one or several domains (cognitive, social and affective). For example, consider the skill of identifying assumptions (2.3.4 Cognitive Domain). The various levels of performance for this skill are given in Table 2 of that module. Specifically in a low level performance, the students are unaware that they or others are making assumptions. In higher levels of performance, students are first aware of their own assumptions, next they are aware of the assumptions of others, and, eventually, they recognize the effects of assumptions on interpretations and conclusions. An initial activity might require students to identify one of their own assumptions, but increasing the performance criteria might require them to identify and list all the assumptions being made in the group.

Structuring a Competition

A competition can be used as a tool to increase student energy levels and focus, thus helping them generate a quality work product. Teams can compete against each other or they can compete against the clock. In a cross-team competition, the instructor or the student teams need to create a rubric or set of guidelines for a quality product so the teams know how to meet the standard. After the activity, teams score each other’s work using the rubric. Competition can also be conducted against a clock, a situation in which all teams that meet the standard are awarded points.

Students Assessing the Work Products of Others

Peer assessment is a powerful tool to increase performance in virtually any situation. It is particularly useful for demonstrating to students what high-level skills look like and for coaching complicated processes and high level thinking (2.2.2 Elevating Knowledge from Level 1 to Level 3). A peer assessment involves teams completing a SII (4.1.9 SII Method for Assessment Reporting) on each other’s activity or product. Through analyzing the strengths and areas for improvement in another team’s product, students gain valuable insights into processes that help elevate their future performance. To implement this tool effectively, the facilitator needs to allow sufficient time following the completion of a work product for teams to complete the SII and for the class to report insights gained from the entire activity.

Narrowing the Focus of the Reflector’s Report

The reflector’s report examines team performance issues, including many in the social domain (2.3.5 Social Domain). Facilitators can help train reflectors and help the teams improve specific process skills by narrowing the focus of the reflector’s report. For example, if the students are having problems with listening, the facilitator can direct the reflectors to report on rephrasing, attending, and responding. This will help the students identify and focus on the key aspects of listening. The choice of listening and rephrasing skills is particularly useful at the beginning of a course when students first form teams. As the students become more sophisticated team members, the focus can shift to other skills.

Skimming

Skimming is a foundational tool for facilitation and is one of the primary means of gathering data on class progress. By quickly scanning the written work and listening to the discussion of each team, the facilitator can gauge the progress of the class and determine if other facilitation tools might be required. For example, if all teams appear to be confused, a “just-in-time” lecture might be an appropriate action. Additionally, a facilitator can anticipate through planning (3.2.5 Creating a Facilitation Plan) the difficulties students might have while completing the activity. By observing the discrepancy between the expected and actual written and verbal performance, the facilitator can adjust to and influence the progress of the class more efficiently.

Public Summary of Mid-Term Assessment

A mid-term assessment is a SII activity in which students complete a course assessment, either individually or in groups, two or three times during the term. A public summary by the facilitator of the data collected from the mid-term assessment can provide the instructor with an opportunity to clarify the teaching approach taken in the class and build consensus. The collected data is tallied and organized by the instructor in the categories of strengths, areas for improvement, and insights.

Generally the strengths cited by the students are in agreement with the instructor’s goals for the class and help reinforce the teaching approach. Students who are not in agreement with the cited strengths observe that they are in the minority opinion. This helps generate consensus. The cited areas for course improvement can provide the instructor with valuable suggestions to improve the course while there is still time to do so. If there are any areas for improvements that received widespread support but which the instructor cannot in good conscience implement, it is best to share the reasoning behind this decision with the students (3.3.6 Mid-Term Assessment).

Modeling

Modeling is a facilitation tool that is used to illustrate how the instructor would perform a complicated process —for example, problem solving (2.3.7 Learning Processes through the Use of Methodologies). Modeling is often most effective after the students have tried to implement the process themselves. By observing the instructor’s skill usage following their own attempt, students can begin to analyze how they might have improved their own performance. In the example of problem solving, the instructor might consider having students practice solving an open-ended problem either as homework or as an in-class activity. Following this student attempt, the instructor models the method of solving the same problem using a general problem solving approach.

Using Star Performers

This facilitation tool directs students from teams who have completed their work to consult with other teams to assist them in completing the activity. This expands the teaching role of students beyond their own team and can help empower students. Generally this tool works best if teams are really having difficulty completing the activity, not just working slower than the team that finished first. In fact, it can impede learning to send star performers to teams who are already performing satisfactorily. In this case it is best to increase the challenge.

Increase the Challenge

When a team quickly completes the day’s work at a high level of performance, and the other teams do not need assistance, it is good to increase the challenge for that team. In this situation learning growth can occur through an extension of the original activity in which the team considers another aspect or a new constraint. Sometimes the team will generate its own extension by asking a question that the instructor suggests that they solve and present to the class, thereby increasing their challenge. Instructors would be wise to anticipate this situation and prepare an activity extension either before class, using observations of uneven performance from the prior year’s class, or as class proceeds, using data from skimming that reveals that one team is far ahead of the other teams.

Strategies for Implementing a New Facilitation Tool

Ideally, the first step in implementing a new tool is to observe it being used by another facilitator, perhaps by volunteering to be a peer coach (Millis & Cottell, 1998). The tool-modeling instructor who will be observed must share the outcomes to be accomplished and describe the context in which the tool is to be used ahead of time. This knowledge will help focus the peer coach’s observations and make them relevant while determining whether the outcomes were met. An important aspect of the peer coach role is to discuss the class performance with the instructor.

However, it is not always possible to observe another instructor using a new tool. In that case, careful planning will aid first-time tool practitioners in achieving good results. The plan should begin with identifying the desired learning outcomes for an activity and the appropriate tools to use. The desired outcomes may stem from observations collected previously, either in the current class or from the last course offering. For example, suppose that the last time the course was taught some teams finished a given activity quickly while others were slow. Depending on the activity and the students, the facilitator could select one of several tools to implement: assigning the spy role to level the performance of teams; allowing star performers to be teaching assistants who help other teams; or providing additional/increased challenge to the teams that are ahead of the others.

The choice depends on the desired outcomes and to some extent on the class situation. It is important to envision the use of the tool ahead of time in order to choose the most appropriate one. Even if the new tool is not the most appropriate one in the current context, it is often worthwhile to use it and observe the results. There is no better way to learn a new tool than through trial and error.

Assessing Performance with a Tool

Assessing any performance requires establishing clear criteria (4.1.1 Overview of Assessment) for the performance and/or the outcomes. The Profile of a Quality Facilitator (3.2.2) module is a good resource to assist in establishing criteria. Facilitators need to collect data, either by themselves or through a peer coach, and make observations during the tool usage in order to assess the outcomes with a SII report. In a situation in which teams are performing an activity in an extremely uneven manner, the facilitator might choose a tool to help even out the completion of the activity so that no teams are idle and all students remain engaged. Depending on the students and the difficulty of the activity, some teams might remain engaged if they are in control of their destiny. These teams might want to send a spy to learn from another team rather than having star performers come to them. Alternatively, it may be effective to publicly reward a solid performance, empowering those students on the team that was ahead and possibly pressuring the other teams to push themselves harder next time. Choosing the star performer tool would be most appropriate. In either case the facilitator as well as the peer coach needs to complete a SII report about the performance with the tool to help reflect on what occurred during the tool implementation and to improve future performance.

Concluding Thoughts

This module has discussed a variety of facilitation tools available for teacher implementation during classroom activities. To improve skills in using facilitation tools, instructors should select some of the more unfamiliar tools, choose a context for their use, plan carefully, make an attempt to implement them, and assess the results, writing down what was learned during the performance. Even unsuccessful attempts are useful experiences in learning to use the tools. Students will respect the instructor’s courage in trying something new and will be inspired to take risks themselves.

References

Angelo, T. A., & Cross, K. P. (1993). Classroom assessment techniques: A handbook for college teachers. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Apple, D. K., Duncan-Hewitt, W., Krumsieg, K., & Mount, D. (2000). Handbook on cooperative learning. Lisle, IL: Pacific Crest.

Johnson, D. W., Johnson, R. T., & Smith, K. A. (1991). Active learning: Cooperation in the college classroom. Edina, MN: Interaction.

Millis, B. J., & Cottell, P. G. (1998). Cooperative learning for higher education faculty. Phoenix, AZ: Oryx Press.