By Sara Marusek (influenced by Professor John Brigham, Political Science Department)

How it works:

Someone throws out a statement and each person following must build on the previous statement (or the flow of the conversation thus far) using as transitional phrases: "and so"..."however"...etc. Going off on a tangent is only allowed if that tangent can be grounded in relevance to the previous person's statement. All students need to be attentive to whether or not the statement follows the previous in a way that builds/makes sense/contributes and doesn't repeat/doesn't go off on an ungrounded tangent. (*Note: Sara suggests that we, as teachers, need to be particularly attentive to what each student says and she suggests that we refuse to move around the circle until that student has contributed in a meaningful way to the conversation)

More Info/Instructions:

Sara suggests that the first time around, you do it in a low-stakes way: silly or creative. (She offers the example of "My life would be so much better with a new laptop.") She reports that the conversation she had in class started with that statement and proceeded through related ideas of financial responsibilities, computer variations, computer dependency, monetary expense/exchange, and concluded with a worked-through procession of why her life would indeed be better with a new laptop, despite the problems discussed.)

The second time, she suggests a more serious, opinion-based example (i.e. "People are dying everyday in Iraq.") She reports that because "people" was not specific to Iraqi or American, students had to decide for themselves. The discussion led to atrocities of war, President Bush and his economic policy, his possible re-election, reasons for the Iraqi war itself and concluded with the idea that regardless, people were/are dying.

She suggests that the exercise is a nice illustration of units 2 and 3 and is also useful in demonstrating the structure of a non-5-paragraph essay (and how thoughts might contribute to such a beast). Statements made act as a mini-text that students have to grapple with, respond to and in the process, build upon. She reports that the structure reveals itself right away as the conversation begins with a focus (made without grandiose statements about how the world works). Each sentence thereafter needs to follow in a cohesive manner from the initial idea with related ideas incorporated throughout (as the body of the essay). The conclusion comes after the topic has (for the time being) been exhausted--usually when the last person in the circle repeats in a roundabout fashion the initial idea and wraps up the thoughts.

Sara suggests that it is prudent for the teacher to take notes during the building process so that he/she can illuminate the various structural components (intro, body, parts) of an essay, as well as commenting on (how?) the text that was developed throughout the conversation. Sara also suggests that this exercise is a great way to emphasize close attentive "listening" to what the author of a text has to say.