Gain understanding of and empathy for the perspective/ narrative of others in the group- not only the positions taken or the opinions expressed, but the core issues, the underlying assumptions, values, needs and fears.
Develop a clearer understanding of own perspective, assumptions, values, identity etc, as well as one’s personal relationship with the issues.
Gain understanding on each other’s cultures and daily lives.

Relationship-building

Develop positive personal relationships with one another- not necessarily friendships, but relationships of mutual respect and understanding.

Skill-building

Gain skills including:

Media Literacy: the ability to analytically assess media and other information related to the relationship between the West and the Arab world;
The ability to engage in constructive dialogue,
Collaborative leadership and public speaking.

Knowledge:

Learn historical, political, and cultural information relevant to the relationship between the West and the Arab World.
Develop the ability to think more critically and complexly about issues relevant to West - Arab World relations.

Empowerment and sense of responsibility:

Develop a long-term interest in and engagement with the West- Arab World relationship.
Feel at the end of the program that they have the ideas, skills and tools they need to make a positive contribution to West - Arab World relations;
Feel responsible to make this kind of positive contribution.

Change:

Our hope is that all participants will have the opportunity to genuinely re-examine and analyze pre-existing opinions and beliefs in a space in which transformation and reconsideration of existing views is possible.

What kind of environment would allow this kind of learning and growth?

Three characteristics of such an environment are:

Honesty: Participants tell the truth, even when it is difficult. Ideally this means that group members express their honest opinions even when they know that others disagree, and that they are also willing to share their own confusion when they are internally conflicted about how they think and feel. The hope is that groups will talk about the core issues, not dance around the edges of things.
Understanding: Participants attempt to truly understand where the opinions and ideas of other people in the group come from. They are willing to put themselves in one another’s shoes, and to recognize the limitations in their own perspective. They ultimately develop a deep understanding of other group members’ ideas, feelings, values, and assumptions.
Equality: There is equality between individuals in the group, and between the “sides”- West and Arab World. This does not mean that every participant speaks an equal amount, but that everyone feels that their voice is welcome and appreciated, and that there are not systematic imbalances such that only participants from the West or participants from the Arab World are talking.

Achieving these things is very difficult when talking about contested issues. In fact, groups can not be expected to reach a high level of honesty, empathy and equality until they have been working together for awhile. Moreover, no group exhibits these characteristics all of the time.

The question is: how do facilitators move a group in this direction, and work to create a space in which participants can talk about difficult issues with as much honesty, empathy and equality as possible? The following information is intended to provide an overview of the skills and tools that can be used to enable the creation of such a space.

TOP 10 TIPS FOR EFFECTIVE

SOLIYA FACILITATION

Prepare for the session by creating an outline of the activities you want to do or topics you want to cover, opening and follow-up questions and a rough estimate of how much time each thing will take.

Be prepared to throw away your plan. It is really important to be flexible and to not get overly attached to your plan for the sessions or the semester as a whole. It is generally more important to have an interesting conversation than to get through your entire agenda. There is no need to complete all the topics or activities in the Online Curriculum. Follow the group pace instead of rushing through topics.

Always start on time and work with the group that you have- even if this means starting with a small number of people or including people who are having significant technical problems.

Encourage student leadership: Emphasize to your group throughout the semester that you want them to drive the conversation forward. Invite them to formulate to ask each other about each topic. You can do this formally by assigning students to come up with discussion questions for the next week, or informally by simply encouraging them to consistently ask each other questions.

Email the students between sessions. Participants want to know in advance what they are going to talk about each week. This also enhances the feeling of belonging to a group.

Don’t avoid difficult group dynamics by patching over them. Try to name them and bring them to the surface so they can be addressed.

You are the expert of your group. Use your judgment and observations of the group to decide what your group needs.

Get yourself feedback. Do closing rounds each day in which you strongly encourage students to provide detailed feedback about what is going well and what could be improved in future sessions.

Express affection for the group: Obviously it is important to be genuine… but if you are in the midst of a meeting and its going really well and you think “wow, what a great group”- don’t hold back- say it out loud! If you see someone’s face on your screen and it makes you smile- tell them! This will help create an atmosphere of safety and warmth.

Have FUN! Students learn most when they feel connected to each other. Creating a space where there is laughter and light interaction as well as deep conversation will optimize student learning.

…and never panic... we are always there to help if you need us! (we work too hard at Soliya, one of the team members is nearly always online!) J

FACILITATION SKILLS & TOOLS

This section will introduce the most important skills and tools that facilitators have at their disposal in working with groups.

PART 1: LISTENING

Active and Empathetic Listening

The core of effective facilitation is active and empathetic listening. By that we mean not only hearing the words that are said, but also trying to understand the assumptions and the feelings behind the words, and to track the full arc of the conversation. Ideally it means listening without judgment, trying to understand what the person is saying and why they are saying it without thinking about whether you agree or disagree. This kind of listening is important, because without it it is very difficult to effectively apply the rest of the tools outlined in this manual. If you are able to listen in this way it also creates an environment in which participants are able to express themselves more fully. Furthermore, it models effective listening for the group, which will improve the dialogue overall. A few things that you can do to help yourself listen better include:

During a dialogue session it is normal that facilitators’ minds wander. It is hard to focus on voices coming out of a computer for 2 hours. We find it helpful to notice that the mind is wandering and to very consciously, again and again, remind ourselves to focus on the conversation at hand.
Within your own mind, or in writing, summarize what is being said while the conversation is happening – this will also help you provide excellent summaries during and at the end of the session. Summarizing in the chat box will also help the participants to follow the conversation.
Take notes.
Consciously encourage yourself to be curious. Try to hold onto a child-like wonder “What will happen next???” and to remember that everyone in the group has the potential to teach you something.
Consistently ask yourself WHY the person thinks the way they do, and try to listen to the assumptions they are making. (This can be distracting or helpful- it’s worth experimenting how it works for you.)

Listening while “triggered”

While these techniques can help you listen better, in our experience the biggest block to listening is actually that what people say often “triggers” an emotional response within us. When that happens we often have a difficult time hearing what the other person is ACTUALLY trying to say because we hear them through the lens of our own response. While facilitating about issues as loaded as “West” – “Arab & Muslim World” relations, it is highly likely that from time to time someone will say something that you passionately disagree with, or that makes you feel threatened in some way.

These are actually the moments that it is MOST important to listen, as these are the moments when the group is most likely to need you to play an active role as a facilitator. While the above tools may seem flimsy when faced with such a moment, they are actually all still very helpful. There are a couple other things that we have found to be helpful in continuing to listen when we are “triggered.”

Get to know your own hot spots. Spend time, in advance, thinking about what the issues are that are most likely to elicit a strong response within you. That way you will notice when you are having a reaction, and can push yourself to keep listening. That way you can take some time to vent about the issue either before or after the dialogue session, and use your energy DURING the session to keep focused on the conversation.
Consciously work to like everyone in the group. Generally there will be one or two people in the group whose opinions are harder for you to listen to than other people. Immediately before a session starts you can bring to mind everything that you like about that person or those people. It can help make it possible to listen to them actively and empathetically.

PART 2: ASKING QUESTIONS

The ability to ask good questions is essential to effective facilitation.

Types of Questions:

There are at least four distinctly different kinds of questions:

1. Yes/No questions: "Do you think the UN has done a good job?

2. Cross-examination: "Don't you think that...?” “When you said … didn’t you mean?”

3. Points of clarification: "What do you mean when you say...?"

4. Open-ended questions: "Tell me more about your view..." "What lead you to that..."

Generally as a facilitator you strive to avoid asking questions 1 and 2, and to focus on asking questions 3 and 4, as the first two types tend to close down the conversation, and the second two to open things up. Asking clarifying questions can be particularly important in this medium, as it’s often less immediately apparent that someone has not been understood. When someone says something in a physical room, and the rest of the people don’t understand, that person can usually tell because of the body language/ expressions of their peers. In this medium it is harder to read people. Thus if you don’t understand what someone has said, and it seems to be an important point, you should generally ask for clarification.

Bias:

As a facilitator, it is also really important to try to avoid asking questions that reveal bias, or to ensure that there is balance in your “biased” questions. As will be discussed later in this document, it is important as a facilitator that you try to be “multi-partial” providing everyone in the “room” a space to fully express their opinions and ideas. If you consistently reveal bias in one direction, it will be difficult for certain group members to feel safe fully expressing themselves in the environment that you create. Thus ideally your questions will avoid revealing bias, or, you will make sure that you ask questions that are biased in all directions, that is – ask some questions that are really challenging to some people in the group, and other questions that are really challenging to other people in the group. We try to keep track of our questions and ensure that they are pushing all sides of the group equally. It is also important to be aware of your own possible biases and how they might affect the questions you formulate.

Question Objectives:

As a facilitator, you want to try to ask questions that push the conversation to a deeper level. We all know the feeling of being in a conversation when people are talking about things that REALLY matter to them – there is a particular richness, a particular flow. Ideally your questions will help the group move into this flow. The three most significant things that we usually try to achieve when asking questions are:

1) To push the conversation to the personal- to get people to think not only about WHAT they believe, but WHY they hold that belief, how they feel about it, and how that relates to their identity.

2) To help people recognize the assumptions they are making. In almost any conversation, there are assumptions being made about what words mean, that certain things are good or bad etc. For example, a group can easily have an entire conversation about terrorism, without defining what terrorism means. We try to ask questions that push a group to recognize their assumptions and confront them face-on.

3) To help people connect the conversation with larger themes or values. For example, a conversation that often happens is one in which students argue about whether the US should now leave Iraq. It can end up being a really detailed conversation that goes in circles. The key as a facilitator is help people to recognize what the larger themes and values are that are bound up in the conversation, for example “What role should the US play globally? In the Middle East?” “What values should countries strive to follow in their foreign policy? Did the US follow these values in Iraq? Did other Arab Nations? (vis-à-vis Iraq) Why or why not?” “Is intervention or invasion ever justified? When? Who should decide?”

Other tips on asking good questions:

Formulating questions in advance: In advance of a dialogue session, it’s a good idea to formulate not only opening questions but a variety of follow-up questions. While the On-line Curriculum will provide long lists of possible questions for each week, it will be useful for you and your co-facilitator to think about the kinds of questions that are likely to be most interesting to and challenging for your group, and to have them ready in advance.
Breadth of a question: As a facilitator, it is often a challenge to figure out how broad and/ or how narrow to make your questions. One way to test a question, to see if it is too narrow or too broad is to simply try to answer it yourself. See if you feel boxed in. See if you find it difficult to focus your answer or to provide an interesting, thought-provoking answer because the question is so broad. You and your co-facilitator will be really good guinea pigs.

In our experience it’s generally better to err on the side of making your question too broad, as opposed to too narrow, because you can always ask follow-up questions if you find that the answers are all over the place. For example, if you ask “why is the US in Iraq?” You can follow up by saying “I’m hearing that there is some disagreement about whether the US is promoting democracy in Iraq, what do you think: is the US in Iraq to build democracy?” If you start with “Is the US in Iraq to build democracy” you will box people in, and make it harder for them to express all that they think, you’ll also make the group think that you have an agenda.

Question length: Ideally, facilitator interventions will be quite short, and will not interrupt the flow of conversation. It is important to try to make questions as concise and to the point as possible.
Writing questions: We highly recommend writing questions, particularly questions that you want the whole group to respond to, up on the white-board or in the text box in the middle of the screen. This helps the group keep track of the conversation. It will also force you to make your questions more concise.
Providing alternatives: It is often tempting to not only ask a question, but to offer a menu of possible responses. “Why is this happening, is it x? Is it y? Is it z?” In general we find that it is much better to simply ask the the question, and to allow the group to define the scope of the answer. If you put out a range of possible options, it often makes it seem as if you are offering your own opinion, and it can lessen the creativity of the answers provided.

PART 3: HOLDING UP A MIRROR: REFLECTING CONTENT AND PROCESS TO THE GROUP

Another key facilitator tool is holding up a mirror to the group – helping them gain greater clarity and perspective on their work together. These kinds of interventions can be (roughly) divided into two categories: reflections on the substance of the conversation, and reflections on the group process.

PART 3A: SUBSTANTIVE REFLECTION: MIRRORING, SUMMARIZING & REFRAMING

We find mirroring, summarizing and reframing to be the most useful tools for substantive reflection. Here’s a short definition of the terms:

Mirroring: repeating back to an individual in the group what he or she said.
Summarizing: summarizing a number of key points in a conversation, and tying them together into a more coherent whole.
Reframing: taking the substance of what is said and connecting it to larger themes or finding connections between disparate perspectives.

When to use Mirroring and Summarizing:

Ensuring Understanding: Mirroring is generally used to ensure understanding. If someone says something and you aren’t positive that you or the group understood them, you can say “What I think I’m hearing you say is … is that right?”
Circular Conversation: It can also be really useful to mirror or summarize when people are restating their points again and again and the conversation is going in circles. Often when this happens it is because people do not feel that they are being heard or understood. Mirroring back one person’s point or summarizing the points made by a number of people can be very effective in making people feel that their point has been acknowledged, which can enable the conversation to move forward.

It can also be helpful to do a process observation at this point (discussed more below) by pointing out that the conversation is going in circles and that people may feel that they are not being heard or understood. By providing this awareness to the group, facilitators make it possible for group-members to try to adjust their behavior themselves.

Conversation overload: It can also be useful to summarize when there is “conversation overload” – when there are multiple conversations going on simultaneously and no one seems to be listening to anyone else. At that point you can step in and provide a summary of the various points being made, and the various threads of conversations. As above, it can also be helpful to do a process observation by pointing out that people seem to be having a number of conversations and talking past one another. Again, this makes it possible for the group members themselves to adjust their behavior.
Returning to key points: Summarizing can also be useful when the group is jumping around a lot, and may have moved on from an important topic without fully exploring it. At this point a facilitator can highlight the various points that were made, acknowledge that a particular point was skipped, and return the group to that point.
Ending a session or an activity: It is generally a good idea to summarize at the end of a session or when transitioning from one conversation/ activity to the next. Providing a brief summary of the various points made and linking the discussion back to the initial question that was asked can make people feel that there was real learning and progress. Reframing at these points by connecting what is said to other conversations or to larger themes can also be very helpful in promoting learning.
Turning the “heat” up or down: Finally, summarizing and reframing can be useful in turning the “heat” in the conversation up or down. In selecting the points to highlight, a facilitator can draw attention to either consensus or conflict. A facilitator can use reframing to highlight points of commonality, for example saying ““So, although Abed and Karen disagree about this issue, I’m hearing a commonality in the underlying values they espouse.” This can help the group move away from conflict towards consensus.

On the other hand, if a group seems to be agreeing all of the time, a facilitator can summarize the points and draw attention to differences in opinions or assumptions. It can be challenging for a facilitator to determine how “hot” a conversation should be. This is related to our assumptions about when and how learning happens. One paradigm that we find really helpful is the idea that learning happens when we feel SAFE and UNCOMFORTABLE. If we feel basically unsafe, then it’s really hard for us to take in new information. But if we feel too comfortable, if nothing challenges us, then there is no motivation for us to learn and we probably won’t. Summarizing and reframing can be useful tools in pushing the group out of or back into their comfort zone.

Tips on Mirroring, Summarizing and Reframing:

While mirroring, summarizing and reframing can be really useful, they can also lead to problems if you are not careful. A few suggestions:

Quote directly. If you are going to summarize controversial points, make sure that you paraphrase the point accurately, and use people’s names. “Samya said x”, “Danny said y.” The danger of simply restating controversial points is that group members may believe you are expressing your own opinions. This can happen particularly when working with second or third language English speakers.
Don’t editorialize. It can be difficult while summarizing not to highlight only the points that you agree with. If you say “Frank made a good point that…” it can easily be taken to mean (and often does mean) that you agreed with what Frank said. We try to keep our language as neutral as possible: using words like interesting and thoughtful – and we try as hard as we can to apply this language to everyone, not just the people who are espousing our personal views.
Take notes: Unless you have an amazing memory, you should seriously consider taking notes. The conversation tends to move very quickly in this medium. It is very difficult to provide an accurate summary without good notes. Using the chat box to take notes, so that everyone can read them, has the dual benefit of helping you remember, and enabling the group to better follow the conversation.

PART 3B: PROCESS REFLECTION: MAKING OBSERVATIONS

Facilitators can reflect back to a group not only the substance of what is said, but how it is said, and how they see the group interacting. They can do this by making statements about what they observe in the group. There are a variety of types of observations that can be very useful in working with a group:

Observations about group process: “I’m noticing that only a few people are talking” or “I’m noticing that we have several conversations going on simultaneously” or “I’m noticing that this conversation is circling around the same points again and again”. Making such observations can provide an important learning experience for students and help them gain awareness of their own behavior patterns in groups.
Observations about body language/ facial expression: “I noticed that you nodded your head when Farhat spoke”; “Judging by people’s expressions it seems that some of you may be a bit confused.” Making such observations can enable group members who might not have felt comfortable speaking out to do so. It is particularly useful at the beginning of the group process or in drawing out quiet participants.
Observations about emotions or the emotional tenor of the conversation: “It seems like there are a lot of strong emotions in this “room”, and that this is an issue that people care about really deeply.” Or “Rasha, I noticed a lot of emotion in your voice when you were talking about … it seems like this has really affected you strongly.” This kind of observation can be important for a couple reasons. Firstly, like mirroring, it can help make people feel heard and acknowledged, as though their experience has genuinely been witnessed by the group. It can also invite people to share emotions with the group in a way that deepens the conversation. Finally, as above, it can also provide group members with an important learning experience, helping them recognize the importance of certain issues.
Observations about power dynamics: “I’m noticing that the students from the US are consistently the first to answer the questions we pose”. Making observations about the ways in which the dynamics in the group mirror the larger reality can also be really helpful for student learning and group empowerment. As with observations of group process, it can help students gain awareness of their own behavior patterns in ways that are really enlightening and can enable them to make different choices.
Observations about own reaction: “I’m feeling kind of scattered because of all the technical problems, I’m wondering if other people are feeling that way.” By noticing your own internal reactions to group dynamics, you can learn about how the group may be feeling/ reacting, and use your own feelings as the basis for observations.

Two additional kinds of observation that are very useful, but that are more “content” observations than “process” observations are:

Observations about underlying assumptions: “I’m noticing that an assumption is being made that the US has a responsibility for intervening in conflict situations.” Or “I’m noticing that there are different assumptions underlying your arguments – some of you seem to be assuming that the US is in Iraq to build democracy, others of you seem to think that democratization is not a genuine interest of the US. Why do you think the US is in Iraq?” Making observations about the assumptions being made can improve the quality of the conversation by helping move it to a deeper level and/or keeping the group focused on the core issues.
Observations about “trigger words”: “I’m noticing that when Kathy said the word ‘terrorist’ people had a really strong reaction. Let’s step back for a minute, Kathy – what did you mean when you said ‘terrorist’, what did other people hear? “ Trigger words are words that evoke a really strong reaction and / or are used to convey a whole system of ideas. Facilitators can move a conversation forward or push it deeper by noticing when trigger words are used and helping the group step back to try to understand why people had such a strong reaction. The facilitator can then share the concept of trigger words with his or her group – helping them understand the phenomena that they are experiencing. (More on this in the conflict dynamics section.)

PART 4: WORKING WITH GROUP DYNAMICS

While all of the skills and activities listed above are intended to contribute to the development and maintenance of an effective group dynamic, there are some particular tools that facilitators can use that can help build and maintain a positive group ethos and proactively manage destructive group dynamics.

PART 4A: BUILDING AN EFFECTIVE GROUP DYNAMIC

Building a sense of safety and trust

As said before, for effective learning to happen students have to feel a basic sense of safety and trust in the process. In addition to using the various tools outlined above, facilitators can:

Start slowly. Don’t ask the hardest, most contentious questions right away. Begin the dialogue process by talking about topics that are relatively comfortable for everyone to discuss.
Encourage the development of personal connections. If participants get to know each other personally, they will feel more comfortable in the group environment. There are a variety of things facilitators can do to enable this relationship building. These include:

1) Doing activities in the first few weeks that elicit personal information;

2) Starting each on-line meeting with a personal question, so participants know more about each others’ lives;

3) Encouraging participants to contact each other via e-mail between group meetings;

4) Using humor to build a sense of community (and fun!).

Set basic ground-rules. Early on in the process take a bit of time to talk with the group about the rules and guidelines that they would like to follow. That way they will know what kind of behavior is appropriate, and have a sense that they can express themselves without being attacked.
Give positive feedback. If someone asks a good question or the group discussion is going well, the facilitator can observe this. This can make people feel more comfortable in the environment and help them recognize that their voice is valued.
Express affection for the group. Little things can make a big difference in this regard: Tell the group that you look forward to the weekly meetings; When you log in and see their faces on the screen express pleasure at seeing them; Tell the group that you missed them if you miss a week (or tell an individual that they were missed if they missed a meeting); Tell them that you think they’re great. Obviously it is important to be genuine… but if you are in the midst of a meeting and its going really well and you think “wow, what a great group”- don’t hold back- say it out loud! This will help with group bonding and thus help people feel safer.
Express empathy when people share their feelings. If a group member is expressing pain, a facilitator can express empathy and understanding. This can both help the person who spoke about their experience to feel heard, and model such behavior for the rest of the group. This will help people to feel safe to express themselves fully.
Be Multi-partial. Work hard to ensure that your own opinions do not show, and that you work to bring out all voices – whether or not you agree with them.
Manage destructive group dynamics: If the group is very out-of-balance, with 1 or 2 people constantly dominating the conversation, if there are consistent imbalances in power, or if conflict spins out of control, people will not feel safe. Thus using the tools outlined below in the “managing group dynamics” section will be important in ensuring a continuing sense of safety and trust.

Creating a sense of Empowerment and Ownership

Ideally group members will come to feel a sense of ownership over the group process. They will feel responsible for making discussions go well. They will ask each other questions, rather than waiting for the facilitators to take the lead. There are a variety of things that facilitators can do to encourage this feeling:

Have group members set group guidelines/ ground-rules: If the group sets the guidelines themselves they are more likely to want to follow them. Doing this early on plants the seed that students are responsible for their own group dynamic.
Talk about expectations, goals and discussion topics: Early on in the group process, ask participants to talk about their expectations and goals for the group, and the topics they’d like to discuss. Then spend time with your co-facilitator trying to figure out how the topics they want to talk fit with the other topics in the Curriculum.
Tell the group that you want it to be “their” group: Starting the first day, tell the group that this is THEIR group, remind them that it is a unique opportunity and that you hope they will make it something positive for themselves. Tell them that while there is an agenda, you really want their feedback, and if they want to focus on different topics, or talk in a different way, you want to help them do so. Keep reminding the group about this and continuously encourage them to take ownership of the discussions.
Encourage group members to ask one another questions and make observations. In an “ideal” group, the facilitator becomes increasingly superfluous. Encouraging the group to ask each other questions and to make observations about their own dynamic is a critical first step. This can be done by simply asking: “What questions do you have for each other?” or “What do you notice about the way that we are talking (or who is talking) today?” or you can reflect “I notice that you aren’t really asking each other questions – one of your group expectations/ goals was to gain understanding of one another’s viewpoints.” One thing to be cautious of, however, is that often the higher power group feels totally empowered to ask questions, while the lower power group does not.(more on power dynamics later in the manual) It’s important, then, to be aware of this dynamic, and to not simply praise the high-power group for asking questions, as that would reconfirm the power dynamic.

PART 4B: MANAGING CHALLENGING GROUP DYNAMICS

While all of the tools outlined in previous sections of this document are useful in managing group dynamics, we wanted to share some suggestions as to how to deal with some of the most challenging dynamics.

WORKING WITH QUIET/ EXTREMELY TALKATIVE PARTICIPANTS

In an “ideal” group, all students will actively participate. This does not mean that everyone talks exactly the same amount, but that everyone shares their opinion fairly regularly, and 1 or 2 voices do not completely dominate the conversation. To achieve this balance, it is often necessary to actively draw out quiet participants or to limit the participation of extremely talkative participants.

Quiet participants

Some helpful tools include:

Use Rounds: A great way to ensure that everyone has a chance to speak is to ask a question and have each participant answer in turn.
Give time to think: While some participants are comfortable with the rapid pace of on-line dialogue, others want more time to reflect before speaking. Thus an effective way to draw in quiet participants can be to ask a key question or questions and give people 2- 3 minutes to think before responding.
Observe group dynamics: Facilitators can observe that only some participants are talking. This will often prompt quiet people to get more involved.
Call on people: Facilitators can directly call upon a quiet participant and ask for their opinion. This should be done with sensitivity, as sometimes it can make shy participants even more uncomfortable.
Observe body language: Facilitators can draw the quiet person in by observing their body language: “I notice that you were frowning and I wondered if you disagreed with my last comment.”
Ask why: it is important to think why a particular student might be quiet –he or she might be just having a bad day or rough time in school/home. You can always send a private text to the student to find out why they are quiet.

Extremely talkative participants:

Using many of the above techniques will have the effect of not only drawing out quiet participants, but of limiting the participation of very talkative participants. A few additional things to try include:

Directly naming the dynamic: If the talkative person does not respond to the more subtle tools outlined above, you can also directly say “I want to make sure that everyone has a chance to speak. Samantha, we’ve heard from you a lot, what do other people think about this issue?”
Observing power dynamics: When there is a systematic imbalance, in which the higher power group is talking a great deal, and the lower power group is generally being quiet, it is also a good idea to observe that. Concrete observations are most effective “I notice that Americans have talked for 8 of the last 10 minutes.”
Talking to the individual independently: If the dynamic is becoming really problematic, you can also directly address the person by sending a private message. In the most serious cases facilitators can also do this via e-mail. We have written to people before, thanked them for their active and thoughtful participation, and asked them to consider holding back a bit in future sessions to ensure that everyone has a chance to speak.
Acknowledge their desire to speak: Sometimes you might have to intervene and take the mic if the same people are in the talk queue all the time. Then you can acknowledge that the talkative people want to speak but you would like to get other opinions in the discussion, too. You can say something like: “I noticed that you Rachel want to speak, and we do want to hear from you, but let’s hear first from Nora and Aya as they haven’t had a chance to speak yet, and then we’ll come back to you.”

WORKING WITH GROUPS IN CONFLICT

When group members get angry it can be tempting, as a facilitator, to turn the group away from the contested issue and move on to less difficult topics. However, if managed well, conflict and anger can provide real learning opportunities and can lead to genuine transformation in the group and the group dynamic. The challenge, then, is not figuring out how to avoid conflict, but how to work with it so that it becomes a productive part of the group process. Some possible ways to work with conflict include:

Continue the conversation: Sometimes the facilitator’s comfort with anger is lower than his or her group. Often it is OK to let the group continue to vent their anger. This is particularly true midway through the group process.(around session 4, 5 or 6) Often group members need to go through a period where they are really frustrated and feel totally angry and stuck, before they are able to move onto a new and more productive way of interacting. Some groups literally have to wear themselves out.

Do a round: When tensions are really high people often feel that they do not have enough space to speak. One thing to do in that moment is go around and allow each person to say the 1 or 2 things that are most important to them about the issue, that they want to make sure the other side understands. In preparation for the round, the facilitator can encourage the group members to try to listen as if this was their first introduction to the issue – and to try to keep listening, even through the voice in their head that says “that’s wrong”, “that’s ridiculous.”
Reflect what you hear: Sometimes it is hard for participants to listen to one another when they are really angry or frustrated. Thus sometimes it will help the group move forward to have you accurately summarize all the key points that you have heard people make.
Move the conversation towards the personal: The facilitator can reflect that “People obviously really care about this issue. What is it about this issue that makes it so important to you? What experiences have you had, or what parts of your identity are affected by this issue?” This can often change the tone of the conversation and shift the focus onto past experiences and influences.
Help them remember the purpose of the conversation: : It can be helpful to remind them that the goal of this process is not to convince each other to think exactly alike – that it’s unlikely they are going to change each others’ views significantly over 2 months, and that the goal, instead is to try to UNDERSTAND why each person thinks the way they do- and that if they don’t understand why someone holds the opinion they do, that they should keep asking questions until they do understand.
Normalize the experience: Reflect to group members that they are acting out of a global conflict, and if there weren’t feelings of anger it would be strange.
Do a role reversal activity: Sometimes it can be helpful to ask 2 or more people in the group to represent the point of view that they are arguing against. The risk is that if people are really angry they probably will not have listened well enough to repeat back what they heard. Thus, it’s generally not a good idea to do the role reversal right at the end of the sessions, as it can leave people feeling even more frustrated. If you can build in the time for people to ask clarifying questions and then return to their reversed roles, such an activity can be really effective. More information about the role reversal activity will be provided in the Online Curriculum.
Refer to the teaching tools: The Online Curriculum provides a variety of interactive teaching tools, which you will probably use at the beginning of your dialogue sessions. Referring back to the lessons learned through these tools about Identity Threat, Active Listening/ Noticing the Internal Voice, Partisan Perceptions, Escalation, Trigger Words, Multiple Truths, or Stages of Group Processes can be a helpful way to move the conversation forward when it is stuck.
Remind the group of the guidelines, rules and norms that they agreed to: If people are becoming really inappropriate, facilitators can point out that group members are not behaving according to the rules that they established, this can help the group to stay on track.
Encourage reflection re. what they would change on THEIR side: If the group is divided along regional lines, with both sides attacking the “other”, but not being self-critical, a good activity to do is to ask students to highlight 2-3 things that they’d like to see change on THEIR side.
Take a breather. Sometimes it can be helpful to just take a moment of silence. Then you can start the conversation with any of the above tools.

WORKING WITH VERY POLITE OR “POLITICALLY CORRECT” GROUPS

Some groups consistently avoid conflict and/ or simply agree on almost everything. This can lead to a very bland conversation. Here are some ideas on how to work more effectively with these groups:

Bring alternative perspectives into the group

There are many ways to introduce alternative perspectives into the discussion. You can use short articles, quotes, or video clips. There are also material provided by Soliya that you can use, like the jpeg slides and provocative articles.

You can also ask your students to view responses to questions in the US-Islamic World Forum, and ask them to answer the questions below. Ideally you should assign students’ to present perspectives that are different from their own Suggestions as to how to use these questions & responses can be found in the online curriculum.

Conduct a poll:

Poll your students using strong statements about whatever issue you are discussing- ones that are likely to inspire strong reactions. You can have them choose between strongly disagree, disagree, neither agree or disagree, agree, strongly agree. That will likely highlight the fact that there are differences between them and push them to address these differences. If they show difference in the poll, but then say that they all agree in the conversation, you can point this out “why do you think we are agreeing so much? Do you think it’s because we actually agree, or because we are nervous about expressing differences?”

Break into uni-regional groups:

Break into uni-regional groups (as described in the Online Curriculum). In these groups you can ask people how they feel about the group, if they feel able to be honest, and why or why not. People will often open up in the uni-regional groups in a way that they would not in the mixed groups.

Ask the group hard questions:

Generally as facilitators you want to be really careful about seeming biased. This is particularly important when you are working to gain the group’s trust in the early stages of the dialogue process. In groups where there is lots of disagreement between group members, this perceived neutrality remains really, really important, because it ensures that everyone feels that what they say is valued equally.

All that said, if you have a group where everyone is agreeing all the time, and you feel like they really trust you as facilitators, you may be able to shift the boundaries of your role a bit and play “devil’s advocate.” It’s important to acknowledge that you are doing this – and to say “It seems like there is lots of agreement, so I’m going to push you.” You can then ask some questions or express some ideas that are not being expressed by the group saying for example: “many argue x, y, or z, what do you think?” Or if someone makes a really strong statement and everyone in the group just agrees with them, you can be the one to push them by asking hard questions that might show up the gaps in their thinking or the contrasts between different peoples’ statements.

When doing this there are a few things to keep in mind:

If the group then starts arguing with YOU, rather than with the idea you suggest, it’s important not to get drawn in- not to take on the challenge and try to prove them wrong. You want to make clear that this isn’t your position- you simply want to get them to explore a range of opinions. You also want to make sure that you aren’t dominating the group but just throwing out an occasional tough question.
You want to make sure that you push EVERYONE in the group not just a few individuals.
Wherever possible, when presenting common arguments that no one in the group is making we’d recommend having the Western facilitator point out arguments commonly made by people from the Arab World, or the Arab facilitator point out the arguments commonly made by people from the US.

If you are careful in these ways, playing the role of the gadfly in their conversation can make the conversation MUCH more interesting.

Ask them directly:

One question to ask the group is: “do you feel that you are being fully open and honest? Which of your opinions are you not sharing because you are worried they might be too controversial, or un-PC?” One way to do this is to pose the question, and ask everyone in the group to spend a few minutes thinking about what they are NOT sharing and why. Before they begin thinking, tell them that they will not HAVE to share these thoughts – that you simply want them to think about the question. After they think for a couple minutes you can ask if anyone DOES want to share the ideas that they have been holding back and/ or to talk about why they think they are refraining from being fully open and honest.

WORKING WITH IMBALANCES IN POWER

In some groups there are systematic power imbalances, such that one “side” is consistently more empowered than the other. These dynamics sometimes mirror larger societal or global dynamics, such as political, economic, military, or linguistic power differences. Being the less powerful, and the victim, could also bring with it a certain kind of "moral" power if used strategically. These inequities in power, if not acknowledged and addressed, can prevent the group from having meaningful dialogue and communicating at a non-superficial level. On the other hand, an awareness of imbalances in power among the participants and the facilitators can help participants understand the relationship being discussed more deeply and thus become more effective agents for change. NOT addressing power dynamics can be harmful and can prolong the conflict instead of resolve it. It can conjure up more resentment and anger, and make it harder for members of a group to work together. A variety of examples of these kinds of dynamics can be found in the article by Agbaria and Cohen.

How to notice inequities in power

1. Language: one of the preexisting inequities in power that Soliya is very aware of is the fact that the dialogue takes place in English. American participants get to speak in their native tongue, while Arab and some European participants - as fluent as they might be in English - are speaking in a foreign language. This can also create certain dynamics among Arabs from different universities. Students from English-medium universities, like AUC and AUB will inevitably have feel more comfortable speaking in English than students from Arabic-medium universities like South Valley University in Upper Egypt or al-Quds University in Palestine.

It is therefore important to acknowledge this imbalance in power and to highlight that it is not a result of Arab students' lack of knowledge of English, but rather a result of Americans' lack of knowledge of Arabic that forces the language of communication to be English. Often times, American students make such an acknowledgement spontaneously by commenting on how well the Arab students speak English. But it is important for you as a facilitator to remind the group of the fact that the Arab students are speaking in their second or even third language, and show your appreciation for that effort.

Addressing the language issue: In addition to acknowledging the situation, there are concrete ways to allow everyone to comfortably communicate and follow the conversation.

Take careful notes of the conversation (in the text box) - students will follow the text more easily than the audio.
Spend a bit of time talking in Arabic the first day- make it clear that this is a space where students CAN speak Arabic- and that speaking in Arabic and having translation is a normal part of the dialogue process. You can suggest that the dialogue can move back and forth between languages and that the facilitators will help out by translating.
Do an ice-breaker activity that brings in the multiple languages. A good one is to have everyone explain what their name means and/ or why their parents named them what they did. You can also ask people if they like their name, and why.
Make sure you are in touch with the students and that they feel comfortable asking for clarification and help, but be careful not to show too much concern for any particular student, since that might also embarrass them.
Ask everyone in the group to answer a question that enables them to reflect upon the issue of language. A couple possible questions are: 1) Ask everyone to share a story of a time that they were in a place/ situation where they did not understand the language, and what happened or how they felt. Often people will tell funny stories- and it can be a good bonding experience. 2) Ask everyone to talk about how they feel when they speak in different languages. If you have a personal story you can share it to set the tone. For example, when I’m speaking Spanish I always feel kind of relaxed and comfortable, but when I’m speaking French I always feel a bit uptight. Often this will give the Arabic-speaking students a chance to talk about how they feel speaking in English. Both of these rounds can help the American students remember that they have an advantage in the discussion, because they are always speaking in the language in which they feel most comfortable.

2. Word Choice: participants may unconsciously use words that indicate certain assumptions about the power relationship between the parties. For example: You may hear the US students in the group say something along the lines of “People in the Middle East need our help in order to set up democratic governments,” or “How can we help you?”

Addressing the dynamic: Again, if the facilitators leave such words unacknowledged it can have a negative effect upon the group. A few possible ways of addressing word choice include:

Asking the person speaking a question: “What do you mean when you say that people in the Arab World need help from the United States?”
Observing the reaction of the group: “I thought that I noticed that others in the group had a reaction to the word ‘help’, is that the case? What does the word ‘help’ mean to you? What do you hear when someone uses the word “help?” This can be a good time to bring up the concept of “trigger words”- words (like “terrorist”) that are based on a whole series of assumptions- and that tend to provoke very strong reactions. This is discussed in greater detail in the Online Curriculum.
Paraphrase a participant’s comment to make the patterns more clear both to the speaker and to the other members of the group: “So I am hearing you say that people in the Arab World need help from the United States in order for their governments to function effectively.”

3. Framing: Notice how a topic is being discussed. The basis on which a topic is discussed can in itself create a fundamental imbalance.

For example: the controversy of the Danish cartoons that took place in the fall of 2005 was framed in two fundamentally different ways: in the West, the issue was framed as being primarily about free speech and a question re. whether the Muslim World is able to accept differing opinions, whereas in the Arab and Muslim World the problem was framed as an issue of respect for Islam. We found that in some of our online dialogue groups the issue was discussed entirely as a free-speech issue, in others, it was framed as an issue of respect. In either case this indicates an imbalance in power with one side controlling the way that the issue is discussed and thus limiting individual’s ability to express themselves fully.

There are a few possible ways to address the dynamic:

Ask a question that brings the alternative frame into the room
Ask people from the community whose frame is not being included in the conversation how the issue is generally being talked about in their community and in their newspapers.
Observe that the issue is being discussed entirely as an issue of freedom of speech (or respect). Observe that this has also often been considered an issue of respect, and ask why they don’t think this has been addressed in their conversation.

4. Space taken up and Timing: Notice if members of a certain group tend to be the first always to speak, or if they tend to take up more time speaking.

Addressing the dynamic:

Directly intervene: Invite people who haven’t spoken to speak, or do a round so that they are automatically given the floor.
Make an observation. For instance, “I notice that someone from the US is always the first to speak.” Or “I notice the people in this group from the Arab World are really quiet today.”
Ask a question: after you observe that there is an imbalance in the level of participation ask: “why do you think that is?”

5. Emotional vs. Analytical: Often times, participants from the less powerful side have more intense emotions of being mistreated than the more powerful. What they say, as a result, can sound more emotional, while the more powerful side can sound more analytical.

Some suggested ways to address this dynamic:

Ask a question: “I notice that this issue seems more emotional for some people in this group than for others, why is that?” Generally students will say that it is because the issue affects them personally.
Do a round at the beginning of the day: “What are the issues that you have a hard time arguing about without getting emotional? Why?”
Observe: “There is sometimes an assumption that being able to talk about things without emotion is somehow preferable, or a feeling that if you can argue without being emotional you have more power in the conversation. Do you think that is true? Why?”

Additional strategies for addressing all of the power dynamics mentioned above:

Break into uni-regional groups. (There are extensive ideas about things to talk about in the uni-regional group in the Online Curriculum.)
Ask the group questions such as: How would you notice power dynamics? Do you ever think power dynamics from global dynamics are reflected in interpersonal relations? Then you can ask them what THEY think the dynamics are in the group, and if the dynamics reflect broader global dynamics in any way.

PART 5: USING ACTIVITIES AND TEACHING TOOLS

Soliya will provide all facilitators with an Online Curriculum, providing suggested activities and teaching tools intended to help all participants to understand where their fellow group members’ views come from and why they think and feel the way they do. The activities will hopefully also help participants understand the source of their own perspectives.

Activities

Activities included in the manual are intended to promote an exploration of the various elements that led to the formation of the students’ perspectives. These include activities on media, culture and religion among others. Please see the Online Curriculum for the whole list.

Teaching Tools

The Online Curriculum also provides a variety of suggested “teaching tools”. These are very short interactive activities intended to promote better understanding of typical group and conflict dynamics. These tools address for example identity threat, partisan perceptions and trigger words. Please have a look at the Online Curriculum to see the full list of tools.

Rounds

A final tool that can be very effective in enabling all students to express their opinions are “rounds,” in which you go around the circle and each student answer a question in turn. These can be used at the beginning of the group to reconnect people with one another and with the issues they are discussing. It can be used part-way through a group to ensure that all voices are heard, to manage strong emotions, or find out how people are feeling. Or it can be used at the end of a group to provide a sense of closure, to enable to people to reflect upon what they have learned and to express any concerns or issues that they had that day. Some typical round topics include:

What was one interesting thing that happened to you this week? (opening round)
What thoughts did you have this week about our conversation last week? (opening)
What did you think of the video footage? (or whatever the week’s assignment was) (opening)
Please use the weather as a metaphor to describe how you are feeling. (opening, middle, closing)
Please say two or three words about what you are feeling right now. (opening, middle, closing)
Please share the one thing that you think is most important about this topic that you hope everyone will understand. (middle or closing)
How was today for you? What did you like and what would you like to do differently next week? (closing)
Please share one or two things that you learned today? (closing)

Note on using rounds. Facilitators quickly find that doing rounds tend to take a lot of time and can slow discussion down. Please be mindful of the timing of rounds to make sure that participants don’t feel frustrated waiting for everyone to answer. Sometimes rounds also produce “canned” answers – and people answering later on in a round imitate the ones before them. It is also good to be SPECIFIC what you want them to answer. For example, ask specifically for constructive criticism (if you want it) because otherwise normally people will just say positive things and it wont provide a learning opportunity for you and other group members.

A FINAL NOTE

It is important to note that each group is different, and requires a different combination of interventions to enable group members to learn from one another, and to engage with one another honestly, empathetically and on equal terms. Groups differ also in what they will gain from participating in Soliya. It is up to the facilitation pair to determine what kind of interventions are most appropriate for each group.

Facilitators quickly become the experts on their own group and will know the group and its inner dynamics the best. There is always support available if you want to have an outside perspective to your group (your coach) but you should also trust yourself and your co-facilitator in making the call what the group needs.

FACILITATOR PROFILE

Certain qualities and behaviors can contribute to successful discussion groups. These include:

Ability to organize thoughts and adapt quickly to changes in group feelings: Thinks quickly on his or her feet. Adjusts to the direction that the group is taking quickly, but helps pull out underlying themes and issues so that the conversation is not scattered.
Accepting: Tries to be non-judgmental, even when ideas are presented that are in conflict with his or her own.
Multi-partiality: A facilitator avoids bias towards any one side by paying respectful attention to and showing empathy for all perspectives. No one is unbiased, but, hard as it may be, it is critical to try to put personal thoughts about meeting content aside while facilitating.
Good listening skills: Concentrates on what participants say, constantly tries to understand underlying assumptions/ feelings etc, watches their nonverbal communication (facial expression) for clues about genuine thoughts and feelings.
Flexibility: It is critical that a facilitator not try to over-control a group. In an ideal group, the group will pretty much entirely run the show- asking each other questions, selecting the topics to discuss- with the facilitator only needing to open and close the group and make process observations. In order to move in this direction it is critical that the facilitator be flexible to the demands of the group, rather than trying to constantly push through his or her agenda.
Shows empathy to all participants: clearly demonstrates through words and facial expression that they care about the participants and their experiences. Ensures that they do not show more empathy towards some participants than others, by nodding at only certain comments, or listening more attentively to certain delegates.
Addresses tensions within the group: If the facilitator observes signs from group members that indicate hostility or resistance, he or she invites comments or discussion so that the air can be cleared and the session can progress.
A sense of humor: Doesn’t take him or herself too seriously. Uses appropriate humor to add interest to the discussion.
Enthusiasm: Is interested in the discussion and in the group members. Appears energetic.
Is not a teacher/ is not authoritarian: Does not lecture or provide his or her own opinion. Does not pretend to have all the answers and is willing to learn from other participants’ experiences and ideas. Welcomes feedback about their facilitation approach.
Aims for understanding, not agreement: Until the final stages of the dialogue process, a facilitator should help the group gain an understanding of one another’s viewpoints, but should not push the group to reach an agreement or settlement. A facilitator is not a mediator.
Genuineness and Honesty: The facilitator is able to be themselves, rather than putting on a façade or pretending to be something that they are not. This also involves a match between verbal and non-verbal communication. If a facilitator says that they are enjoying a particular conversation and then looks at their watch every 2 minutes, they will lose the trust of the group.
Helps the group address the underlying issues: Is able to sense when the group is dealing with the underlying issues and when the group is “avoiding” the real issues. Asks questions or makes observations that help the group focus on core issues.
Keeps the conversation flowing by asking questions, making observations etc.
Allows silence: Is able to sit with silence and recognizes that sometimes silence is necessary to allow people to collect their thoughts. Often silences are followed by deeper discussion.
Is self-aware: Consistently monitors his or her own reaction to group members, group dynamics and the discussion. Notices if he or she is having a strong response, and works to avoid having their unconscious reactions affect the group. Uses his/ her reactions as information to help them better understand how group members may be feeling.
Is aware of process, not simply content of the discussion: skilled at observing and if appropriate naming the dynamics within the group.
Encourages the group to take ownership over the process: doesn’t feel threatened by an empowered group, encourages participants to ask each other questions, etc.
Is warm and welcoming: facilitators set the group tone, not only by modeling behavior, but also by their attitude. If they are warm, they help create a warm environment, if they are judgmental and harsh this will contribute to the creation of a harsh and judgmental atmosphere.
Genuinely likes and respects all group members: finds something that he or she likes in each group members. If necessary, works to find these things so that all group members feel that their presence is genuinely appreciated.
Feels comfortable with conflict: does not panic when there is conflict. Helps the group recognize that conflict is normal, and makes them feel that they are smart and healthy to be directly addressing difficult issues.
Is aware/ curious about the role that culture plays in the discussion: Is aware of the way that culture can affect communication patterns, but does not assume that culture is always the defining factor in relationships. Is able to make observations about the impact of culture and/ or ask the group whether culture might be relevant.
Understands conflict dynamics: When tensions emerge, skilled facilitators help the group recognize that they may be falling into patterns of discussion that is typical in conflict situations.
Always keeps the focus on the group: Consistently checking with self to ensure that their interventions serve the groups’ learning process.
Does not get pulled into the substance of the argument: Comments on the process, not the substance. Does not give own opinions or enter into the discussion as a participant.
Has a purpose in mind when he/ she makes an intervention: Knows what he/ she is trying to achieve through their interventions and generally has a sense of how their interventions will affect group members.
Time-keeping: Facilitators should keep track of the time, to ensure that the group begins and ends on time and that the group doesn’t get bogged down in any one activity.
Helping keep the group on task: If the group is working on a project, the facilitators can help ensure that things get done on time or, ideally, that a group member takes responsibility for ensuring that the work is getting done.
Finds their own voice: No two facilitators are exactly alike. It is critical that facilitators find an approach that is comfortable for them, so that they can be themselves in the group.
A facilitator incorporates some support for him/ herself: Facilitation is hard work, particularly during parts of the process when strong feelings are emerging within the group. Facilitators should actively solicit support and feedback from their co-facilitator and from others both internal and external to the program.
Is able to multitask: can juggle the various things that need his or her attention simultaneously such as communicating with technical support and private texting students, while still following the conversation in the room.
Is able to work in a team: Being a facilitator requires working closely with a co-facilitator and engaging with the broader Soliya community.

No one facilitator possesses all of these characteristics or consistently exhibits all of these behaviors. Much of learning to be a facilitator is learning to maximize one’s inherent strengths and manage one’s challenges.

TIPS FOR ON-LINE FACILITATING

1. Especially in the first few meetings, students are likely to be pretty uncomfortable and nervous when they first enter the “room.” It really helps to enthusiastically welcome group members into the room when they first arrive and make small talk with them asking a general question that gets them talking with one another etc. We’ve found that if they begin talking when they first enter the room, they are likely to talk much more freely and easily once you switch over to more demanding topics.

2. It is harder to do a quick interaction in the on-line medium: getting responses to basic questions such as “Has everyone finished thinking, can we start the activity” or “Does everyone understand?” can take a really long time if you ask everyone to answer verbally. To manage this ask people to either type their responses (typing yes or ready, etc.) or to give a “thumbs up” in the video window (where everyone gives a thumbs up to their webcam). While the “thumbs up” is fun and interactive, it is important to keep in mind that there is sometimes a time-lag for some students video, such that (in a worst case scenario) it can take up to 20 seconds for some students’ images to catch up. Another way to manage this is instead of asking “Does everyone understand?” to say “Is there anyone who DOESN’T understand? If so, please go ahead and ask questions”, and then assume that if people don’t speak up they do understand.

It is hard enough communicating across language barriers without adding the challenge of on-line communication. A few thoughts:

Speak slowly and over-enunciate. This will help understanding as well as serve as a model for the rest of the group;
If you ask a question that you want everyone to answer it’s a good idea to write it on the in the text box at the bottom of the screen.
Try not to ask questions with lots of different parts or if you do clearly divide them into sections and write up the various parts of the question.
If students don’t understand something or if someone is speaking too quickly, encourage them to write “I don’t understand” or “Slow down” in the text box.
Clarify from the beginning that if they wish to speak in Arabic and have translation they should do so. While most student participants’ English will be excellent, it is important that students feel welcome to speak in the language of their choice.
If some of the students are struggling with English, a great way to manage this is to have one of the facilitators type the dialogue as it happens. Even if English is not a challenge, typing the major points made on the whiteboard can be a great way to keep the group on-track.

Introduce people to the “Queue” function next to the students’ names. Tell them that this is how they can tell if someone wants to talk, or indicate that they want to talk.

Based on the feedback that we got from students who participated in the program in the past, one of the main challenges inherent in participation is that when the session is over everyone logs out and they are left alone in a room staring at a blank screen. Obviously this is particularly hard when sessions are really intense. For that reason it is really important to encourage students, from the very beginning, to use the website and to e-mail one another.

Because it is difficult to see people clearly in this medium, sometimes it is necessary to exaggerate your expressions or body language. For example, if you want to make sure that the group knows that you are laughing or smiling at them, you may need to make your smile extra-wide. This is also an important area for self-reflection – if you know that you have a naturally expressive face, you may not need to think about this. But if your face is fairly impassive normally, you may have to exaggerate your expressions. The key is to remember that the only information group members have about your mood or body language is your face.

Encourage laughter and fun. Everything in the group will go smoother if you manage to create a fun and light space with your group where people not only discuss important global issues- but have FUN. This is particularly true in weeks when you are having technical problems.(more information about this below) If you can get the group laughing about the challenges they face it will make a huge difference. Usually conversations go much deeper if students feel connected on a human level- and laughter and fun are a key part of this.

Managing Technical Problems

Unfortunately, in the course of the semester you are almost certain to have some sessions in which you have to deal with technical problems. You will always have a member of the tech support team in the “room” with you and a Soliya staff member on call in Skype meaning that you will not be responsible for solving the technical problems yourself. However, it will fall to you to try to continue to integrate student who can only type, or the student who keep getting kicked out of the room and logging back in etc.

Based upon our experience over the past year, here are some general suggestions for managing difficult technical problems:

Firstly, the group is likely to feel a bit scared when things go wrong – particularly early on in the process. They are likely to feel pretty powerless and confused. In our own experience, the most important thing as a facilitator is that you remain calm, explain what is happening and reassure the group that 1) someone is working to resolve the problem; and 2) communication won’t always be so difficult. Saying “it seems like so and so is having problems - we’re working on it” or “this may be happening to you right now, I’m really sorry, someone is working to take care of it” etc. will make people feel like you are managing the situation even if YOU actually have no idea what the technical people are doing.
Making jokes about how unlucky the group is or how terrible the technical problems are can help to cut the tension, and make people feel that they are all in this together.
It’s generally useful to summarize more than usual when there are technical problems, to ensure that those with problems are able to continue to follow the discussion. This also provides a feeling that there still a conversation thread, despite the fact that things may feel somewhat chaotic.
If one or more participant is having trouble with their audio, it is helpful to assign one of the co-facilitators to keep a typed record in the chat box of what people say. That way, even those who can’t hear properly can continue to follow the conversation.
If one or more participant is unable to speak and be heard, it is helpful to ask them to type their responses. Then you can read their response out loud to the group. That way they have a presence in the group even though they can not speak themselves.
Provide the group with as much information about what is happening as possible, as they will be wondering, and not knowing generally makes things much more confusing and scary. Providing status updates such as “Heba’s struggling to get access to the room, but I’ve just received a private message from Tech support, and they are working on it” will help the group feel that things are under control.
Assign one of the co-facilitators as technical liaison. That person can be responsible for communicating with the tech support person who is in the “room” helping, keeping track of the problems that students are having so that they can relay this information to tech support, and providing the group with information from tech support as soon as it is available.

CO-FACILITATION:

THINGS TO THINK ABOUT

For a number of obvious reasons co-facilitation is in many ways much easier than facilitating alone. It means that there is always someone there to help you if you don’t know what to say or where to go with the group. It also enables you to gain insights into the group and the group process that you would not get on your own.

However, there are a number of additional things that must be kept in mind when working as a pair. The relationship between the facilitators is often seen as the model for group interaction. For this reason, when co-facilitating it is important to try to:

Work as a balanced team: As much as is possible, it is important to share the microphone, and to share group decision-making. When facilitators have worked together a lot this begins to come naturally. Without thinking about it they intervene about the same number of times in a way that maximizes both of their skill sets. However, when facilitators have not worked together before, it is often important to clearly assign roles: to have one person take “lead” on some activities, and the other take lead on other activities.

Work together: It is important to check in periodically to make sure that you are on the same page. One of the advantages of this medium is that you can write each other private messages.(we recommend skype, though the private text function in our software also works) Whenever about to move onto a new activity, or frustrated because not sure where to go with the group, it is good to write a private message to your co-facilitator. All that said, it is also important not to get bogged down by constant communication with your co-facilitator. If you are feeling overwhelmed by the multi-tasking required in this medium, remember that it is the student dynamic that is most important, and keep focused on their process.

In terms of working together another important point, one that is probably obvious but still worth stating, is that it is important not to argue, contradict or undermine one another in front of the group. The group will sense it if there are tensions, and these tensions will often infect the group. In general we recommend that you go along with what your co-facilitator does, even if you don’t immediately see the point in it. Sometimes he or she will see something in the group that you don’t see, and their line of inquiry will lead the group in an interesting direction that you might have missed. Having this kind of trust also limits the necessity of constantly communicating with your co-facilitator. While it’s always a good idea to check in if you are able to deviate from the plan established before the meeting, it’s important to know that if you have a strong instinct that something different is needed, your co-facilitator will back you up. Facilitation requires flexibility and the ability to shift mid-stream to meet the needs of the group. If you do not have some level of trust with your co-facilitator it is hard to make the kind of shifts that are sometimes required.

Make targeted interventions: Sometimes there are interventions that are easier for one facilitator to make than the other. Sometimes it is important to ask hard questions to help a group recognize the complexity of a situation or to push them to a deeper level of discussion. If these questions are likely to be seen as challenging to one side or the other – as “biased” in a way that is pro-“Western” or pro-Arab, it is better if the facilitator from the same group asks the question (ie. the Western facilitator asks tough questions of the Western students and the Arab facilitator asks tough questions of the Arab students). This is another advantage of being able to type messages – you can write to one another and say “I think you should ask this question” or vice-versa.

Conduct post-session meetings: It’s a good idea to talk immediately after the session, even if only for 15 or 20 minutes. Immediately after a session you have lots of information about the group and the group process that you are likely to forget if you wait to have the discussion until later in the week. Topics include:

Impressions of the day
Impressions of individual group members - did they seem engaged etc.
Impressions of facilitator interventions - how did we do? How did we work together?
If we deviated from the plan, did we check in sufficiently?
What should we do next week? What are the discussion points that we want to continue?

Planning

Working with someone from a different time zone and very different schedule can be a challenge. It is very important to establish early on in the semester when and how are you going to plan your sessions. It is essential that co-facilitators find time to TALK over the course of the week, as planning only via e-mail is extremely difficult, and also does not allow the facilitators to build a working relationship.

We also strongly recommend that you not leave the planning to the last minute since this does not allow any possibility for you to really think the plan through. This also means that the student come to the sessions unprepared –often they like to know in advance what the topic of the day will be.

As indicated earlier in this document, while creating a session plan is very important, you will rarely be able to follow it in its entirety. Due to technical problems, student interest in a specific topic or lack of interest in another things generally will not unfold in the way that you anticipated. To manage this we recommend that you:

Talk with your co-facilitator in advance about what the MOST important things are that you want to cover in the session. That way you will know what to cut if time is short.
Be flexible: if the students are really passionate about a certain topic, don’t feel that you need to cut them off and stick to your agenda. Co-ordinate with your facilitator behind the scenes to cut out all the parts of the session that are not absolutely essential, so that you can follow your students’ lead.
Formulate a session plan for a 2 hour session, a 1 ½ hour session, a 1 hour session and a ½ hour session. You don’t know how much time you will have- and this will help you and your co-facilitator get really clear about what is MOST important to cover that week.

Getting to know your co-facilitator

The best way to ensure that your co-facilitation team works well is to know your co-facilitator. This will make all of your work much easier. Unfortunately you probably will only be assigned to your co-facilitator about a week before the program starts. We strongly recommend that you talk on the phone (or via skype, or in a Soliya meeting room) with your co-facilitator during that week and get to know each other a bit. Some possible things to discuss include:

Who are you?

who am I and where do I come from
what am I doing at the moment
why am I facilitating with Soliya
any other stuff you want to share

What are you like as a facilitator?

what are your strengths and weaknesses
what would you like to work on as facilitator
where do you need support
what would you like to learn as a facilitator

The planning process:

How do we plan the sessions –the time and method (when will you meet? What medium will you use?)
How detailed a plan do you want to write up?
How much time do we allocate to each activity?
how do we divide the roles in the sessions

During the sessions

How much communication do you want to have during a session: do you want to write back and forth consistently or only occasionally?
What medium do we want to use? (we recommend that you are both logged into Skype)
Do you feel comfortable if your co-facilitator shifts the direction of the session mid-stream or is it important to check in extensively first?
What are your comfort-levels with conflicts in group and silences?

The Debrief:

how do we debrief the sessions (talk right after? Via e-mail? When planning for next one?)
how do we give feedback to each other
how are we going to support each other
how are you going to vent if you are frustrated

And remember to spend some time chatting informally too!

Conclusion:

At the end of the day, good co-facilitation, like good group facilitation, is about good communication. While the information above can serve as guidelines, ultimately good facilitation requires effective and open discussion. For example, some co-facilitator teams decide in advance that if either individual has a strong instinct about what the group needs they can completely shift the plan without consultation. Other co-facilitator teams decide that they need to extensively check-in. There is not a wrong or a right answer – the key is that you talk about it and figure out in advance what works for both individuals.

User login

INTRODUCTION TO THE CONNECT PROGRAM