Futures discussions are 90-minute working sessions. As the leader, you'll frame a useful question, help people think together, and guide the table toward a useful ending. This guide offers several ways to do that. Use the pieces that fit your topic and your group.
What these sessions are for
These sessions give communication scientists room to work on unfinished questions. A table might clarify a disagreement, surface a neglected question, compare research practices, sketch a research agenda, or connect people with shared interests. Come with a direction and leave room for the group to change it.
Your role
Bring one real question. Give people the context they need in the first few minutes, then get them talking. Listen for threads worth following, make room for different voices, and help the group identify areas of agreement, disagreement, and future work.
Before the conference
Prepare three things: (a) one main question, (b) three to five prompts, and (c) a possible ending. The ending might be a list of open questions, a map of competing positions, a few recommendations, the outline of a future project, or new connections among participants.
If you're co-hosting, decide who will open, watch the time, track participation, and arrange for notes. Share responsibility for one conversation. Use slides, pre-reading, or handouts when the group needs them.
Choose a format
Start with the path closest to your topic:
- A broad, unsettled questionExplore an open question
- A shared obstacleWork through a problem
- A genuine fault lineStage a structured debate
- A concrete first draftBuild or sketch something together
- Different approaches to the same workCompare experiences and practices
Explore an open question
This format works well for emerging concepts, theoretical blind spots, and questions that cut across areas of communication research. Open with a short account of the question and why it matters. Ask participants for concrete cases, then look across them for recurring assumptions and meaningful differences.
Possible prompts:
- What would a good answer need to explain?
- Where does the question look different from your corner of the field?
- What assumptions are we bringing to the question?
- What evidence would make you revise your current answer?
Aim to end with a clearer question, several competing answers, or a set of smaller questions that researchers could investigate.
Work through a shared problem
This format works for methodological, theoretical, institutional, ethical, or practical problems. Start with one concrete example. Ask participants where they encounter the problem, what they have tried, and what keeps it in place.
Possible prompts:
- Where does this problem show up most clearly?
- Who experiences the costs, and who currently has the ability to change it?
- What has already been tried? What happened?
- Which part of the problem could this group make progress on?
Aim to end with several recommendations, experiments worth trying, or a clearer account of the problem.
Stage a structured debate
This format works when a real disagreement deserves closer examination. Frame the positions plainly and fairly. Ask people to place themselves along a continuum, develop the strongest case for each position, or identify the evidence each position values most.
Possible prompts:
- What is the strongest version of each position?
- Which disagreements are substantive, and which might come from different definitions?
- What does each position explain well? What does it struggle to explain?
- What evidence would move someone from one position toward another?
Aim to end with a map of the positions, assumptions, relevant evidence, and remaining questions.
Build or sketch something together
This format produces a concrete first draft: a conceptual model, research agenda, checklist, reporting standard, taxonomy, or project outline. Name the intended product and its audience. Give people a few quiet minutes or use pairs to generate pieces, then combine them on paper, a whiteboard, or a shared document.
Possible prompts:
- What has to be included for this to be useful?
- Which pieces belong together, and which should stay separate?
- Where are the gaps or redundancies?
- What needs to happen next, and who might want to carry it forward?
Aim to end with a photographed sketch, rough outline, or plan for the next version.
Compare experiences and practices
This format works well for research practices, teaching, tools, collaborations, institutional constraints, and emerging norms. Ask participants to briefly describe one approach, challenge, or lesson. Then compare what is common, what varies, and which differences depend on local conditions.
Possible prompts:
- How are you currently handling this?
- What has worked better than you expected?
- Where have you run into trouble?
- Which parts of your approach might transfer to another setting?
Aim to end with practices worth sharing, conditions that affect their usefulness, or people and resources for follow-up.
Use the 90 minutes
- First 10 minutesWelcome people, frame the question, and provide context.
- Next 10 to 15 minutesUse pairs, brief writing, a show of hands, or a short first round to involve everyone.
- Middle 45 to 50 minutesFollow the strongest threads, connect comments, and periodically summarize what the group has established.
- Final 15 minutesIdentify what remains unsettled, what seems worth doing next, and who should stay connected.
Adjust the timing as needed. Keep the opening short, involve participants early, and protect the final 15 minutes.
Facilitation prompts
Use these when the conversation needs a push.
To open
- What brought you to this table?
- Where does this issue show up in your work?
- What's one concrete example we can start from?
- What would make this conversation useful to you?
To go deeper
- Say a little more about that.
- What makes you think that's the key issue?
- What assumption is doing the work there?
- Does anyone have a case where that doesn't hold?
- What evidence would help us sort this out?
To connect comments
- How does that build on what we just heard?
- Are these two versions of the same problem?
- Where do these accounts actually disagree?
- What haven't we heard yet?
To close
- What can we say now that we couldn't say at the beginning?
- What remains unresolved?
- What's the next question someone should ask?
- Is there something here that people want to continue after the conference?
Five-minute preparation
Write your main question at the top of a page and pick three prompts from this guide. Give the group five minutes of context, then ask people to discuss the question in pairs. Bring everyone back, ask each pair for one point, and follow the strongest threads. Use the final 15 minutes to identify unresolved questions and possible next steps.
When the discussion changes course
The group is quiet
Ask for a concrete example, give everyone 60 seconds to write, or use pairs before returning to the whole table. A narrower question often gives people an easier entry point.
One or two people are doing most of the talking
Summarize the useful thread and redirect: “I'd like to hear from a few people who haven't had a chance to come in yet.” A quick round or pair exchange can also widen participation.
A new question takes over
Name the choice: “This is taking us into a different question. Do we want to follow it, or park it and return to the one we started with?” If the group follows it, adjust the ending accordingly.
The disagreement gets tense
Slow the exchange down. Ask people to identify the claim, definition, or evidence at issue. A precise account of the disagreement can be a useful result.
More or fewer people show up than you expected
With a small group, pull the chairs together. With a large group, use pairs or groups of three and ask each group to bring one point back.
Someone brings unexpected expertise or a better direction
Ask the person to provide the relevant context, then connect the contribution to the main question. The expertise in the room is part of the session.
The group wants to keep working after the session
Use the final minutes to name one concrete next step and identify who wants to participate. Options include exchanging contact information, circulating notes, scheduling a follow-up call, or asking one person to start a short working document.
Ending the session and sending notes
At the beginning, ask someone to keep light notes. Three to five bullets are enough. Capture (a) the questions the group returned to, (b) areas of disagreement, (c) ideas worth pursuing, and (d) any agreed follow-up.
A photo of handwritten notes is fine. After the session, email the notes to commscifutures@msu.edu with the discussion title in the subject line. We will use them to pull together a short record of what came out of the conference.
Logistics
Most discussions will happen at round tables in the main conference space, with a few tables in the atrium. Feel free to claim a quieter nearby spot. Tell us in advance about AV, power, wall space, printed materials, accessibility, or room-setup needs.