EDUCATION for JUDGMENT The Artistry of Discussion Leadership EDITED BY C. Roland Christensen David A. Garvin Ann Sweet Harvard Business School Harvard Business School Press Boston, Massachusetts98 Education for Judgment ‘Moments like this, when the process works for the benefit of all con- ‘ceed, allay my old worries about the unhealthy separation of intellect 6 and emotion in medical education. Roger and Martha's argument and Su-Yin’s promising triumph over his shyness were as integral to the | Teaming process a8 the research any of us had done—much of which i Every Student Teaches and Every ‘tured out to be wrong anyway. Such exchanges are a rich reward for . taking a chance on discussion teaching (though there have also been Teacher Learns: ‘moments of panic, indecision, frustration, and discouragement). After The Reciprocal Gift of three years of leading discussions, I am beginning to leam how to manage . : 7 ‘this complex, dynamic process. But the satisfaction of watching groups Discussion Teaching ” of beginning medical students forge solid working relationships while ‘mastering huge amounts of difficult technical material encourages me (C, ROLAND CHRISTENSEN, to say that I will never go back to the didactic lecture model. The verve with which my students tackle complex questions delights and impresses me as much as their ultimate success. Even the blind alleys and wrong turns our discussions sometimes take bave value. If nothing ele, they IT HAS BEEN SAID that we live life forward but understand it backward. help our students leam to cope with the inevitable uncertainties and Caen ea ee ee Sp dlesusion teaching, Tse how intenaly 1 frustrations of their profession. And it hes been a plesrure to bear several process has intrigued, baffled, and intellectually nourished this practi- students —speaking of colleagues from widely disparate socioeconomic, tioner—and the fascination shows no signs of abating. At its core lies a cultural, oF racial backgrounde-—say, “Sovand-eo is my bet friend, and fundamental insight teaching and leaming are inseparable, parts of a Trnever would have gotten to know him [or her) if we hadn't worked | r————. together in a group like this.” "The impact of the process on future health land receiving. In discussion pedagogy students share the teaching task care delivery lsat] unclear but cu peel of helping moetical students With the instructor and one another. All teach, and all lear. This view. blend the competent self-confidence of rsearchen with the cooperative of the dynamic has implications for every aspect of discussion teaching, consulting sil of team workers seems to be within reach, Ina profession Pak rated appt oped precmcten enres where ays sate ofthe a tomorow cence, ave probe Tethen cm toundcn eal Beng otecng oh Doe eet the prism of reciprocity has allowed me to discern certain components ‘The power of group dacusion in medical teaching suggests thatthe the pose that can be named, Gcacbed,sudled, and communist. method is broadly applicable to other disciplines. This power has nothing ene thould not be surprised to find “what | know.” and, in? to do with selfaggrandizement or adulation by stodents and peer. ee Rather, it isthe power of meaningful interconnection among the students | Gf questions rather than statements. Four decades of discussion teaching ara teachess as they all leary and, én 5 very eal seme, trassnoend theme leave their mark—in my case, an aversion to divorcing knowledge from selves, adding vital new layer to the growing coral reef of human ericr, dulegus cocina engagement, and penohal development. understanding. ‘The quest for wisdom, as distinet from knowledge, will alvays remain open-ended. ~ ‘say will present insight I have collected about the discussion NOTE teaching process with some details about the context that allowed me to tee them, It will begin in the past, with my very fist discussion class 1. D. Kantor and W. Leht, Inside the Family (San Francisco: Jomey-Bas Sa cinling effort leara how tn leam about is mystics, Iwill then oe continue with hypotheses about the nature of the process and the very ”100 Education for Judgment role students play in sharing its leadership with their instructors. ‘And it will conclude in the present, with overarching “lessons learned” about values and the essential ingredient in all good teaching: faith. Early. Years: How I Leamed to Learn about Discussion Teaching Exploring the discussion process has been a wondrous adventure, a long journey within the confines of classroom walls, Like any productive ‘educational enterprise, mine was aided by a fortunate synergy between instructor and institution. My colleagues on the faculty of the Harvard Business School honored teaching as a legitimate subject to be studied, as well as an action to be performed—an attitude that affected my per . spective on everything that I saw, heard, and sensed as I taught, and my, decisions on the best investment of my own intellectual resources. ‘My personal chain of discovery began with the first discussion class lever taught: Tuesday, February 14, 1947. Yesterday. Remembered painfully, it was a bit like a session with a dental surgeon, sans novocaine. I was to teach an eighty-student section of the required second-year Business Policy course. The course mission was complex: to help students learn the functions, roles, and knowledge requirements of a general manager, with emphasis on the qualitative intricacies of strategic de- cision making. Underlying all this was the more basic goal of promoting the development of essential personal qualities: judgment, wisdom, and ethics. Promptly at 8:30 a.m., having. ‘through the weekend and Mon- day, I opened the doar to Baker Library 101. It was.a thin, cald roam, with windows that rattled in the northeast wind-and metal-blinds stuck in various positions of closure. A slightly curved amphitheater format barely allowed space at the front for a platform, replete with brass rail and curtain that but pastially hid the instructor's chair and desk, My suit coat over one arm—army eee frame and ‘Harvard's salary did not allow for wardrobe refurbish t—andta folder ‘of class notes in the other, I walked to the small platform, started up the three steps, tripped, and fell. I blushed a bright red and knelt to gather-my scattered papers. The room was quiet, except for an embarrassed half-laugh from the right, so brief it must have been squelched. | took a deep breath and, finally, stood up to look around at “them”: scores of almost indistinguishable ‘Every Student Teacher and Every Teacher Learns 101 faces. A few smiled at me, thank heavens. My opening question—“Mr. ‘Adams (you can imagine my reason for selecting him to start off], what is your diagnosis of the Consolidated Vultee situation?” —went well. But the remainder of the eighty minutes was a blur. My carefully prepared teaching plan, crafted to direct the group through an efficient analysis of the case that would reveal both the principles of Business Policy and my own indispensability to the discussion process, had minimal impact. We were discussing a case about a company organizing for rapidly ‘expanded military production during wartime, a topic sill of high interest in 1947. The students wanted to pursue their own concerns and questions in ways that were meaningful to them. They agreed, disagreed, expressed confidence in (or incredulity at the naiveté of) their associates’ sugges- tions, Infrequently, someone would admit confusion—a predicament appreciated and shared by the instructor. A few seemed bored, but most were deeply involved in the case, both intellectually and with their gus ‘There was no antagonism—all were polite—but the group permitted neither plan nor professor to get in its way. ‘When the class was over, I had heard hundreds and hundreds of words—verbal exchanges between and among the students, a multiplicity ‘of conclusions, and an explosion of suggestions as to what the president ‘of Consolidated Vultee should do. For me, it had been an academic ‘Tower of Babel, a throw of conversational confetti. Most puzzling, how- ever, was the reaction of the students. Seemingly, the class had made sense to them. Small groups stayed in the classroom after the discussion. (Others left still carrying on their dialogue with an intensity that would have been difficult to contrive. Several commented, “Good class, profes- sor.” I thought, “Good class? Come on!” ‘The few steps back to my office felt like a stroll through a sandstorm. AIL could remember of what had happened but minutes before were a few major themes and some dramatic statements. Students’ comments fused; I couldn't recall who had said what or the responses those com- ments had triggered. A psychologist might have diagnosed my condition as cognitive overload: too much information to process too fast. How ‘could I lead such a confusing process as this discussion had been? “It can't be done,” I thought. “It simply can’t be done!” ‘The only sensible course of action was to get help. Our faculty was the best, artists of the classroom, the teaching equivalents of Monet, Miré, and Jasper Johns. I asked senior colleagues to explain the discus- sion teaching process to me. Unfortunately, mastery of a creative activ- ity does not guarantee the ability to explain it or help another master