Team Modeling

One of our core beliefs as educators and leaders is that we have a responsibility to model for people the kinds of behaviors and actions we are looking for. This is particularly important when people are trying to learn new ways of thinking and acting, as would be the case with technique 21, Participation Rubric. If we ask people to break old conversational patterns then we need to provide examples of what we're looking for. This is why we much prefer to run workshops, teach classes, and convene meetings as a team. Working this way, we can strive to model the elements of good discussion.

Purposes

• To model the behaviors in the Participation Rubric (technique 21)
• To demonstrate the point-counterpoint dynamic in discussion
• To express curiosity through questioning
• To bring different perspectives to bear on a topic
• To model respectful disagreement
• To express appreciation
• To show comfort with ambiguity

How It Works

• A key point about modeling is that it must be publicly explicit. You need to tell people what you're doing and why you're doing it. If your partner asks you a good question don't just say, “That's a good question,” and then proceed to answer it. Say why it's a good question (you've never been asked it before, it cuts to the heart of a contradiction in your argument, it introduces a new wrinkle in your thinking, it's beautifully expressed, it extends your thinking, and so on) and let people know that an important part of discussion is relying on others to pose good questions.
• Team members demonstrate how to participate in an ever-expanding organic conversation by making new points, countering or refuting each other's claims, posing alternatives, and striving to see if a synthesis of opposing viewpoints can be developed or what common ground exists.
• Team members demonstrate curiosity and strive to understand other viewpoints by asking questions that invite colleagues to elaborate on their position.
• Team members seek to bring in new perspectives that others are not considering or articulating to make sure whatever is being discussed is considered in its fullest context.
• Team members model respectful disagreement by summarizing a colleagues' viewpoints as accurately as possible to make sure they have understood them correctly before offering critiques; asking good questions that encourage colleagues to explain the core of their disagreements; giving the fullest reasons possible for disagreements; not seeking to convert colleagues to one's position; changing their minds when appropriate; and remaining open to better arguments or more convincing evidence.
• Team members model living with ambiguity by not always seeking to reach definitive conclusions or neat solutions. A productive discussion can be one in which disagreements and contradictions are clarified and better understood.

Where and When It Works Well

Team modeling works well in any context. In fact, we think there's a fundamental contradiction when only one of us is in charge of running a workshop, meeting, or class in which we're advocating a discussion-based approach. This is because participants never get to see us doing what we're urging on them: engaging in discussion with peers.

What Users Appreciate

1. The variety of approaches afforded by team facilitation. Because team members differ in their personalities, identities, and experiences, a higher percentage of participants are likely to feel a connection to the way at least one member of the team operates.
2. The diversity of perspectives a team brings. Team members working from differing perspectives makes for a more enlivening atmosphere.
3. The public engagement in disagreement. Nothing gets higher evaluation ratings than when team members disagree strongly yet respectfully with each other. This is theatrically engaging.
4. The demonstration of Participation Rubric indicators. If team members name when they are engaging in specific rubric behaviors and why they consider these to be important, then it helps participants find a way to enact these.

What to Watch Out For

1. Becoming too informal with each other. Teams that have worked together several times, like the two of us, often develop an ease and rapport that comes out as private jokes, muttered asides, and teasing that is off-putting to participants. When we have worked with multicultural groups, we have noticed that some Southeast Asian members are confused when we tease each other, interpreting that as disrespectful.
2. Agreeing too much. Frequent team teaching can lead to an artificial move to the center where the two or three of you explore only common ground, so you must strive to keep some productive dissonance going.
3. The discomfort of sitting with profound disagreements. The two of us believe that living with difference is crucial to democratic functioning. But we also know that when we express very different positions people are sometimes left feeling that the workshop, meeting, or class has somehow failed or run aground. So when a session ends with an expression of difference, team members must emphasize to participants that this is valuable in and of itself. They can also commit to exploring and reevaluating those disagreements in future sessions.

Questions That Fit This Protocol

Team modeling can be applied to address any question.