Agreed that the purpose of the review matters. I generally think of three primary and often overlapping purposes:
* Individual learning and clarity - what does this mean for me?
* Uncovering collective meaning - what is coalescing?
* Discerning what¡¯s next - what action makes sense now?
I see feedback on the session as a different function. So I¡¯m going to focus on how I go about the three primary purposes for the group¡¯s needs.
The specifics of what I do depend on the mix of purposes. ?No matter the purpose, I rarely debrief groups because, as others have pointed out, that tends to be dull. Gallery walks can be helpful.?
The thing I¡¯ve found most successful when there is a need to get group specifics is to flip the process. Rather than groups reporting, have them share their flip charts or digital equivalent, or even better, images and invite questions and comments from everyone else. No report from the group, though they can respond to questions. Their work speaks for them and what is discussed is guided by the interests of those who weren¡¯t in the group.
More often, I start with individual meaning making, what moves people. So rather than group reports, I invite people to speak for themselves about what surprised, delighted, challenged or inspired them. (That framing is from anthropologist Angeles Arrien.) ?There¡¯s authenticity and energy behind the responses. Speaking it helps people internalize it and helps others discover what resonates for them.?
I find discovering collective meaning also happens most effectively by beginning from individual meaning. It still seems magic to me but I now know that when individuals name what matters to them, they and others discover they¡¯re not alone. What is most deeply personal is also universal.? You can use a variety of approaches to clustering to discover group resonance. When face to face, I have multiple ways of going about that, usually with people physically moving around to discover their kindreds. I find the online tools, particularly with groups who aren¡¯t tech savvy, challenging. I¡¯ve used??with some success for this purpose. It becomes a basis for conversation to discern resonant themes. People grow in excitement and connection as they see a few themes coalescing. And what emerges can frame action.
When the purpose includes discerning?what now?,?my preferred approach is some form of?simple self-organizing. Again, it is inviting individual energies, this time with action in mind. Particularly following individual meaning making and discovering collective meaning, some people are ready to name what they want to pursue. Before inviting others to join them to discuss and agree to a description and who does what by when, you can do a sanity check. I¡¯ll often ask something like, "If we do what has been named, will we accomplish our purpose?" It¡¯s a chance to tease out other needed actions and who is willing to take responsibility. Sometimes something emerges and someone steps forward. Mostly what has been raised stands and people organize and get to work.
So that¡¯s my general pattern for what I think you¡¯re asking about.
Peggy
________________________________
Peggy Holman
Co-founder
Journalism That Matters
15347 SE 49th Place
Bellevue, WA ?98006
206-948-0432
www.peggyholman.com
Twitter: @peggyholman
JTM Twitter: @JTMStream
Enjoy the award winning?
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
On May 21, 2021, at 10:07 AM, Whitney Caruso <
whitney@...> wrote:
Thanks everyone! This has been very helpful to review. Appreciate the different perspectives being shared...and looking forward to being able to bring groups together in-person!
Whitney Caruso (she/her/hers)
Vice President
On Fri, May 21, 2021 at 8:56 AM Luci McKean <
luci@...> wrote:
If the point of the review is group learning, another option not mentioned is using the chat box, maybe a waterfall chat.? I sometimes give a specific prompt, give them a minute (by the clock) of silence to consider their answer and type it into chat WITHOUT pressing "enter" ... then after?a minute has passed, ask (or look) if anyone needs more time, and then tell everyone to press enter and see what happens. THEN give everyone a few minutes to read the chat, and type "@someone" with either an amplifying message or support of great ideas (do not use direct messaging, but still chatting to "everyone").? This allows everyone to be engaged without having everyone have minutes to speak.
But the bigger, earlier question is what is the purpose of the sharing (as others have pointed out in their replies already).? If the point is for you, the organizers, to improve your practice, then instead of doing this orally in-session or even using Chat, better to have a Google Form with these questions so people can answer anonymously (giving them the option of including their email if they want a personal reply or if they are open to being asked clarifying questions).? AND if you do that, then in your next session, be sure to read aloud something from each respondee (just a sentence or so).? Because people so often complete exit surveys that seem to evaporate into thin air, this demonstration of your having READ their comments is important, and when people hear that others have very different opinions, they grow to value the diversity of thinking within the group.
On Fri, May 21, 2021 at 10:48 AM Nicole Martin <
nlmartin1@...> wrote:
Very interesting topic, thank you for raising it Whitney. I would love to hear more responses as I also struggle with this.?
One site I like is which has many, many articles about the art of reviewing. There's no simple answer provided, and the focus is more on reviewing experiential learning, but this article on avoiding cliches has helped me reflect on the importance of phrasing the question well:?
A few tactics I have used include:?
?- Giving a sentence starter vs. question ("The biggest aha for me was...")?
?- Having them sum up in chat, similar to the suggestion to capture in a powerpoint?
?- Letting them brag on each other ("did someone in your group have a great solution that stuck with you?") this solves the social pressure of people not wanting to share their own cool idea or win, of course it's important that the thing being shared is positive & not vulnerable.?
The other reflections are encouraging me to consider whether the share-out is truly critical, though.?
Nicole
On Thu, May 20, 2021 at 1:05 AM Andrea Gewessler <
andrea@...> wrote:
I think as this was actually an evaluation of the session, my own feeling, rightly or wrongly, is that :
?
- Participants don¡¯t care about hearing about the evaluation of our session
- The questions were skewed towards the negative ¨C 3 even better ifs, 2 don¡¯t like, 1 like ¨C I would have removed the numbers and maybe done it with software such as PollEverywhere or
- I usually prefer to end on a positive note such as max 3 words how today was for you. Or even just one word.
- Generally, group shares I assume you are talking online: I have successfully used fishbowl conversations to bring back the different strands of conversation in groups, yes, using the whiteboard and a virtual gallery walk, or time limits on feedback ¨C 1 minute per group with the clock ticking.
?
You probably do all of this already. Everybody here is so experienced.
?
By the way my platform of choice is now Welo Space. It¡¯s superb.
?
Andrea
?
Andrea Gewessler
Mobile ¨C 0044 796 396 0194
Office ¨C 0044 20 8776 9111
Skype ¨C Andrea.Gewessler
?
?
?
I feel your pain. We often ditch the share out entirely by having the breakout groups take notes in a shared PowerPoint deck (each group gets one slide that has the prompt on the top) and then allowing time for everyone to do a gallery walk, and then share their key observation and one question in the chat. Another option is to provide a strict template for the share-out, where people write down on a piece of paper the answer to a question or fill in a blank, and then they read out loud what they wrote on the paper.
Will be curious what others do!
Hello! A team member of mine posed the question below, and I thought this group might have some ideas. Thanks in advance!
Would love to tap into the collective brain power of this group around a topic that I have been thinking a lot about lately....?the group share-out.Context: group share-outs after breakout/ small group work seem to provide little value and fail to even keep the attention of the groups listening. I have attempted to make really pointed instructions for what to share out (ex. Friday I asked a group to do 1-2-3, share 1 thing they liked, 2 things they did not like, and 3 suggestions or questions) in an attempt to make these more meaningful and concise. Even with these types of instruction people succumb to the typical rambling summary.In past roles, I have simply skipped the share-out completely, but doing so can have social consequences in a group such as feelings of lack of transparency, or feelings like the group discussion wasn't valued, etc.How can we make the group-share out more engaging and purposeful?
--
Luci Englert McKean?()
Text or voicemail: 812-325-9432
Peggy Holman