Discussion Board Resources

Describe and connect 

Prompt: After reviewing ____, describe the main ideas in your own words and explain how at least one of those ideas connects to a personal experience, another course, or a current event. End your post with one open question you would like your small group to explore further. 

Compare perspectives 

Prompt: Identify two different perspectives or interpretations presented in ____ (these might be authors, stakeholders, methods, or data readings). Compare their strengths and weaknesses and argue which perspective you find more convincing — and why. Cite evidence from ____ to support your choice. 

Apply then critique 

Prompt: Use the theory, method, or model from ____ to solve a short, concrete problem or to interpret a case. Then critique the model’s limitations: where did it fail or produce ambiguity? Offer one suggestion to improve its usefulness in practice. 

Two-step ethical reflection 

Prompt (step 1): Briefly summarize the facts or scenario in ____ so someone unfamiliar could understand it. (step 2): Identify an ethical or value tension embedded in the scenario and explain which stakeholder interests you prioritize and why. Offer a practical compromise that considers at least two sides. 

Devil’s advocate 

Prompt: Take the opposite position of your initial reaction to ____ and argue it persuasively for at least two paragraphs. After your devil’s‑advocate section, write a short reflection on whether playing the opposing view changed your thinking and why. 

Evidence hunt and evaluate 

Prompt: Pick one claim or conclusion from ____ and locate one additional credible source that either supports or challenges it. Summarize both pieces of evidence, evaluate their credibility, and explain which source you trust more and why. 

Design a mini‑experiment or project 

Prompt: Based on the questions raised by ____, propose a short study, classroom activity, or project (2–4 steps) that would help answer a remaining question. Include what data you would collect, who would participate, and one likely limitation of your design. 

Policy or practice recommendation 

Prompt: Imagine you are advising a decision‑maker about the issue in ____. Give a concise policy or practice recommendation (one paragraph). Then list two anticipated objections and how you would respond to them. 

Synthesis across media 

Prompt: If ____ were presented as a short podcast, infographic, or video instead of its current format, how might the audience’s understanding change? Propose one alternative representation (audio/video/visual), explain why you chose it, and describe one concrete change you would make to the content for that medium. 

Peer support and next steps 

Prompt: Read two classmates’ posts in your small group. Identify one idea from each post that you want to build on and offer one concrete resource, question, or counterexample they could use to deepen their argument. End by describing how you would synthesize those ideas into a short final product (a policy memo, presentation slide, annotated bibliography, etc.). 

The Big Four

Respond to at least one peer.  As you view each post, include the following types of comments to engage with the presenter: 

• Questions 

• Wonders 

• Connections 

• Affirmations 

 Add new evidence or a supporting source 

Find one credible source (article, video clip, dataset, image) that supports or complicates the original post. Summarize the key point (1–2 sentences), explain how it connects, and paste a citation or link. 

Ask a probing question 

Pose a thoughtful, open‑ended question that pushes the author to clarify assumptions, extend their argument, or apply it in a different context. Explain in one sentence why this question matters. 

Offer a constructive critique 

Identify one specific strength and one specific weakness in the post. Be concrete: reference a line, idea, or claim, then suggest one way the author could strengthen their argument (e.g., add evidence, clarify terms, address counterarguments). 

Play devil’s advocate 

Briefly argue the opposite position or raise a counterexample. Limit to 1–2 short paragraphs, then end with a reflective sentence about what would need to be true for your counterargument to hold. 

Connect to personal/professional experience 

Share a concise example from your own life, work, or prior coursework that illustrates or questions the original post. Describe the outcome and one takeaway that relates back to the topic. 

Suggest two follow‑up resources 

Recommend two different types of resources (e.g., one scholarly article and one short video or podcast). For each, give a one‑sentence rationale for how it deepens or challenges the original post. 

Extend with an application or mini‑proposal 

Describe a short, practical application, classroom activity, policy idea, or small experiment based on the post. Include one step and one measure of success (how you’d know it worked). 

Synthesize multiple classmates’ ideas 

If responding after several replies exist, summarize two classmates’ contributions and explain how combining them leads to a new insight or solution. End by asking one clarifying question to further the synthesis. 

Ask for clarification with an explicit prompt 

Quote a short passage (1–2 sentences) from the original post that was unclear. Explain what you didn’t understand and offer two specific prompts the author could answer to clarify (e.g., “How exactly would X be measured?” / “Who benefits in this scenario?”). 

Creative reframe or multimodal reply 

Reframe the original idea as a brief analogy, metaphor, or visual description (1–2 sentences), or record a short audio/video (1–2 minutes) that summarizes and responds. If using media, include a one‑sentence caption that explains your reaction and a transcription or key points in text. 

Clear summary (10%)

Original analysis or application (40%)

Use of evidence or source connection (20%)

Thoughtful question for peers (10%)

Clarity and tone (10%)

Multimodal submission quality if audio/video (10%)

• Require one of these reply types (or let students choose) and include it in the rubric. 

• Ask students to explicitly label which reply type they used (e.g., “Reply type: Ask a probing question”). 

• Set a minimum depth (e.g., 150–250 words for written replies, 60–120 seconds for audio/video). 

• Encourage evidence and civility: no one‑sentence agreements or simple emojis. 

• For small facilitation teams, rotate which team member posts the initial reply and which two respond, to spread responsibility.