Difference Between Group Discussion and Debate

Discussion?

Based on its etymology which is “discussus” (Latin), group discussants often

“break up” a topic to examine various perspectives. In this sense, a group
discussion is a friendly exchange of ideas which give more light to the subject
matter. The participants are free to express their opinions and aptly rationalize their
view points as the main goal of the group is to have a clearer understanding of the
selected issue.

1. Goal of Discussion

The main goal of a discussion is to have a clearer understanding of the chosen

topic. Debate is conducted to verify if a certain standpoint is more credible than its
opposite.

2. Formality

discussions are less formal as they do not have strict rules on topic coverage, time,
taking turns, mode of speaking, and others.

3. Position

opposing opinions are not needed for a group discussion to commence.

4. Competition

As for discussions, the participants are not competing with each other so they do
not need to worry about gaining points.

5. Audience

On the other hand, group discussants may or may not have an audience and if they
would have listeners, some types of discussions welcome input from them.

6. Taking Turns

discussions do not have rules on taking turns.

7. Cooperation
discussions are often more cooperative as they are meant to achieve a more
comprehensive and accurate view of a topic.

8. Complexity

As for a group discussion, this may be done more spontaneously with less
guidelines and keypersons.

9. Persuasion

discussants simply aim to share information.

10. Conclusion

discussions may not have a specific conclusion as there is no winner nor loser at
the end.

Debate?

The word “debate” came from the Latin prefix, “dis-“, which expresses “reversal”
and “battere” which means “to fight”. Correspondingly, a debate is an
argumentation between two groups or individuals. It is usually a formal
competition which showcases the extent of knowledge and reasoning skills of the
opposing sides. The debaters have to take turns in countering the other team’s
stated key points. Thus, participants have to be keen in spotting flaws in the other
side’s arguments.

1. Goal of Debate

Debate is conducted to verify if a certain standpoint is more credible than its

opposite.

2. Formality

Unlike discussions, group debates are more formal as they do have strict rules on
topic coverage, time, taking turns, mode of speaking, and others.

3. Position

The contradicting positions are evidently stated in the beginning of a debate

whereas two
 4. Competition

In a debate, there is a winner and a loser though there are times when the results
can be a draw.

5. Audience

Debaters have an audience who listen to the pros and cons of an issue. The
listeners have a more passive role as they cannot take part in the argument.

6. Taking Turns

Participants in a debate need to properly take turns in airing out ideas.

7. Cooperation

There is less cooperation involved in debates as the opposing sides need to attack
or defend opinions. Thus, aggressive speech may sometimes be manifested.

8. Complexity

A debate is largely more complex as more preparation, details, and roles are
involved.

9. Persuasion

Debaters need to persuade the listeners to take their side.

10. Conclusion

Debates end with a specific conclusion which denotes the winning side
Importance of dialogue 1 classroom:

Dialogue is one of the best vehicles for learning how to think, how to be reasonable, how to
make moral decisions and how to understand another person’s point of view. It is supremely
flexible, instructional, collaborative and rigorous.

Robin Alexander, advocates for teaching through dialogue, In his books, Towards Dialogic
Teaching: Rethinking Classroom Talk (2006), he makes the following argument:

“We define our identity always in dialogue with, sometimes in struggle against, the things our
significant others want to see in us. Even after we outgrow some of these others—our
parents, for instance—and they disappear from our lives, the conversation with them
continues within us as long as we live.”(Taylor, 19 9 4)

Dialogue 1 in classroom include the opportunity to ask appropriate questions, articulate

problems and issues, imagine life’s possibilities, see where things lead, evaluate alternatives,
engage with each other and think collaboratively.

In class teacher began the session with a fictional story about two hunters, Hank and Frank,
who are chased by a talking bear. The teenagers then created a number of philosophical
questions from which they chose their favorite: Why sacrifice yourself for others? After a short
pause for quiet reflection, I invited an eager young man to start us off by giving his first
thoughts. This is what he said:

It seems to me that “sacrifice” is the most important concept in this question. I think someone
might sacrifice themselves based on instinct, impulse or intuition. Of course, two of these are in
the cognitive domain and one is in the affective domain, so I suppose we need to determine
which of these is more likely in any given situation before we can answer the question
effectively.

Yet teaching students how to think feels like something of an abstract concept. Perhaps the
simplest way to picture it is to consider one strategy for thinking that we all use when faced
with a difficult choice: to list advantages and disadvantages. Dialogue allows us to model
structures for thinking, for example, by asking questions, giving counter-examples, asking for
reasons, justifying answers, adding to the last idea you heard. All of these are new thinking
structures, and you are explicitly modeling and teaching them with students.
Origin of critical thinking approaches in social sciences:

According to Robert H. Ennis (1985, 45),

"Critical thinking is reflective and reasonable thinking that is focused on deciding what to
believe or do."

All students, regardless of social class or presumed limitations in ambition or ability, have some
degree of potential to think critically. This potential can be developed to the fullest by
embedding critical thinking in the core curriculum, school subjects required of all students.
Thus, critical thinking would become an essential element in the general education of citizens
rather than the privilege of intellectual or social elites.

Students' capabilities to think critically are likely to be increased if they practice strategies and
skills systematically and extensively in all subjects of the social studies curriculum, and in a
manner that is consistent with their cognitive development and prior learning experiences.
Subject-specific teaching of critical thinking may be the most effective means to develop
students' abilities to transfer strategies and skills to similar subjects in school and problems in
life outside of school. By contrast, separate courses on critical thinking seem to be a rather
weak means of developing cognitive strategies and skills.

In this context, a critic is someone who reviews, analyzes, and makes judgments or evaluations
on issues, ideas, processes, and experiences. Critical thinking is the kind of thinking through
which such evaluation is achieved. Critical thinking, an important component of the thinking
process, includes creative thinking through which ideas are generated. Thus creative and critical
thinking are interrelated: creative thinking generates ideas, critical thinking evaluates those
ideas.

An appropriate classroom environment is vital to encourage students to become critical

thinkers. Aside from modelling critical thinking skills, teachers need to develop an open, non-
threatening climate for the discussion of ideas and issues in class. In a manner similar to
controversial issues, the focus should be on the ideas, viewpoints, and supporting arguments,
rather than on the person who is presenting them. A creative and critical thinker cannot be
closed minded and dismissive of others and their ideas.

Adequate knowledge about an issue is imperative for the critical thinker. The geography
curriculum identifies many knowledge-based outcomes that specify what students need to
know on a variety of topics. In addition to knowledge, the critical thinker requires a variety of
skills, many of which are identified in the curriculum, to review, analyze, and evaluate ideas.
Learning to think critically involves multi-faceted intellectual activity involved in complex
processes, such as decision making. Effective teachers challenge students to apply interrelated
knowledge and skills to decisions about what to believe and what to do. In the process of
justifying and evaluating knowledge claims and value judgments involved in decision making,
students are able to develop propensity for and capability in critical thinking.

Teacher modeling of critical thinking and expressions of support for it are effective classroom
behaviors. Teachers who promote and practice critical thinking in the classroom contribute
strongly to their students' intellectual development. Furthermore, they are likely to engender a
critical spirit, or positive attitude toward critical thinking, among their students.

There is a strong relationship between an open, supportive, and structured classroom climate,
where opinions on issues may be explored and expressed in a free and disciplined manner, and
development of critical thinking and attitudes supportive of it. Effective teachers challenge
students to examine alternative positions on controversial topics or public issues, require
justification for beliefs about what is true or good, and insist on orderly classroom discourse. In
this manner, they provide powerful lessons on responsible scholarship and citizenship in a free
society.