Works with Claude, ChatGPT, Gemini, or your own local model: paste this prompt and your AI will co-facilitate this exercise with you.

Help me prepare and run the exercise below. First ask for my participant count, time, setting, access needs and intended result. Check these against the stated limits. Use the supplied rules and materials. Explain any proposed changes before using them, and label them as adaptations. Do not invent source claims or require personal disclosure. Give me one step at a time when I say start. I manage the people, physical activity and clock; do not claim to observe the room. Ask me what happened before choosing a next step.

Reference revision: 4ff89ebbd20c2f1873b9f1b16116bb197e130c1ad0598db3f9e851d4268b362e

# Awareness of Context, Bias, and Assumptions

Participants write their initial assumptions about a controversial prompt on large paper and display them openly before discussing the topic. In small groups, they clarify these assumptions without debate, hold an exploratory dialogue, and debrief how naming preformed ideas shaped their communication.

**Time:** 50 minutes. Source specifies 50 minutes: 5 min reflection, 15 min review and suspension, 20 min discussion, 10 min debrief.
**People:** 4 to 24. Groups of 4 to 6 people; for awkward counts, form one group of 3 or one group of 7

## Choose this exercise

**Purpose:** Surface preformed assumptions about a policy topic so participants can explore diverse perspectives without debating personal stances.
**Use it when:** Use when an established group needs to tackle a polarized topic without sliding immediately into positional debate.
**Skip it when:** Skip with brand-new groups lacking basic rapport, or when an immediate tactical decision or consensus vote is required.

## Materials and tools

- Large sheets of paper (1 per person)
- Dark or colored markers (1 per person)
- Roll of low-tack masking tape (1 per small group)
- Prepared topic cards or slides with one controversial discussion prompt
- Smartphone or tablet for designated hybrid volunteer (hybrid only)

## Before participants arrive

1. Arrange seating into small tables seating 4 to 6 people.
2. Place paper, markers, and masking tape on each table.
3. Select a single discussion topic suitable for varied viewpoints (for example: The government should provide universal basic income to all citizens).
4. Display the chosen prompt where everyone can read it.
5. In hybrid settings, recruit one in-person volunteer before starting to photograph physical cards for remote participants.

## Say this to open

Today we are exploring how preformed assumptions shape dialogue. We will look at a specific topic together. Before discussing it, each person will write down their initial assumptions and hang them up in plain view. We practice what dialogue theorist William Isaacs calls suspending assumptions: hanging our beliefs out in the open so we can inspect them together rather than defend them. You decide how much detail to write or share.

## How to run it

### 1. Write and display initial assumptions (5 minutes)

Speak the opening script and reveal the topic prompt. Distribute paper and markers. Ask participants to reflect silently and write their initial biases, preformed ideas, or strong opinions about the topic in large print. Each participant tapes their paper to the front edge of their desk facing out toward their group. If desk fronts are obstructed, prop the paper upright on the table facing the group. In hybrid rooms, the designated volunteer snaps photos of in-person papers at minute 4 and posts them to the shared board.

### 2. Review and clarify displayed assumptions (15 minutes)

Give groups 2 minutes to silently read the sheets around their table. Then run structured clarification turns: allocate 2 minutes per person. When a person is spotlighted, group members may ask neutral clarifying questions using only the three allowed stems: 'What do you mean by this?', 'Where does this assumption come from?', and 'Can you give an example or context for this?' The spotlighted person answers briefly or may pass. Strictly enforce the boundary: no debate, disagreement, or critique during these turns.

### 3. Discuss topic from multiple angles (20 minutes)

Open the conversation for small groups to discuss the central prompt. Instruct them to explore multiple facets of the issue rather than trying to win an argument. Encourage participants to mark edits, annotate shifts, or cross out statements on their displayed papers as their thinking evolves. Group members may also constructively point out when a stated viewpoint reflects an unlisted assumption.

### 4. Debrief in full room (10 minutes)

Bring the full room back together. Spend the first 4 minutes inviting 2 or 3 volunteers from different tables to share brief 90-second observations on what it felt like to have their assumptions displayed. Then spend the remaining 6 minutes facilitating a guided discussion across the room using the debrief questions on how upfront awareness changed communication.


## Debrief questions

- What impact did publicly suspending your assumptions have on your contributions to the discussion?
- How did seeing other people's assumptions upfront affect how you listened to them?
- Did you notice yourself shifting, editing, or defending any of your posted assumptions as the conversation went on?

**Finished output:** A set of publicly displayed assumption sheets marked with reflections, additions, or updates during the dialogue.

## Remote

Form breakout rooms of 4 to 6 people. In each room, provide a shared digital board with individual workspaces. Participants spend 5 minutes typing their initial assumptions into sticky notes. Allocate 2 minutes per person in breakouts for group members to ask clarifying questions aloud using the three stems, with no debate. Run the 20-minute open discussion in breakouts while participants annotate their cards. Convene in the main room for the 10-minute debrief.

## Hybrid

Seat in-person participants at physical tables and group remote participants into a dedicated virtual breakout using a digital whiteboard. Before Step 1 ends, the designated in-person volunteer photographs table sheets and uploads them to the virtual whiteboard. Screen-share the remote whiteboard onto the room projector so tables can read remote assumptions. During Step 4, alternate debrief reflections between room tables and remote participants.

## Access and participation choices

- Participants may write bullet points, brief phrases, or use a typed digital screen instead of handwriting on paper.
- Anyone may choose to post broad public assumptions rather than personal opinions, or decline to answer clarification questions without explanation.

## If the session gets stuck

**Participants immediately start arguing against each other's posted assumptions during the clarification round.**

Intervene promptly. Remind the group that clarification is solely for understanding what words mean, and that exploratory viewpoints belong in the upcoming open discussion.

**A participant writes nothing, stating they have no preconceptions or biases on the topic.**

Suggest a neutral external prompt: 'What is a common argument or assumption you have heard others make on this issue?' Posting a recognized external perspective satisfies the task.


## Terms used here

- Suspending assumptions: Holding preformed opinions and beliefs in conscious, visible view so they can be examined collectively rather than defended automatically.

## Participant material: Sample Topic Prompts and Question Stems

Sample Topics:
1. The government should provide universal basic income to all citizens.
2. Remote work should be a guaranteed legal right for all eligible employees.
3. Standardized testing should be eliminated in public school admissions.

Clarifying Question Stems (Use during Step 2):
- What do you mean by this?
- Where does this assumption come from?
- Can you give me an example or context for this?

## Sources and adaptation

Observed in materials from the Collaborative Discussion Project under the title '3.3 Awareness of Context, Bias, & Assumptions', which cites concepts on suspending assumptions from William Isaacs.

Retained the Collaborative Discussion Project core mechanic: physically displaying pre-discussion assumptions, using three specific clarifying stems without debate, holding a multi-angle discussion with paper annotations, and running the 50-minute structure (5-15-20-10). UWT clarified the Isaacs concept of suspending assumptions in the opening script, introduced a strict 2-minute-per-person turn structure for Step 2 clarification, structured Step 4 into volunteer sharing followed by broad debrief questions, and defined a concrete hybrid photo volunteer workflow.

[Collaborative Discussion Project](https://www.collaborativediscussionproject.com/items-1/33awarenessofcontextbiasassumptions)

Current run sheet: https://unitedwetransform.com/exercises/3-awareness-of-context-bias-assumptions/