Structured Academic Controversy
See It In Action
Note: This example is based on The Evolution of Political Parties module.
See It In Action
Note: This example is based on The Evolution of Political Parties module.
The overarching statement will guide deliberation throughout the structured academic controversy.
See It In Action
Note: This example is based on The Evolution of Political Parties module.
See It In Action
Note: This example is based on The Evolution of Political Parties module.
Participants are assigned a stance either for or against the overarching statement.
They will then develop background information with provided texts before being broken into smaller groups where pre-deliberation preparation continues.
See It In Action
Note: This example is based on The Evolution of Political Parties module.
See It In Action
Note: This example is based on The Evolution of Political Parties module.
Round 1: No Rebuttal
In assigned small groups, participants take turns using evidence to support their assigned claim.
See It In Action
Note: This example is based on The Evolution of Political Parties module.
See It In Action
Note: This example is based on The Evolution of Political Parties module.
Round 2+: Rebuttals to Round 1 Ideas
The facilitator monitors time and provides sentence stem prompts to support and guide the conversation. This ensures both sides of the deliberation are balanced in support for and against.
See It In Action
Note: This example is based on The Evolution of Political Parties module.
See It In Action
Note: This example is based on The Evolution of Political Parties module.
After a predetermined number of structured rounds, participants temporarily drop their assigned roles and have an open conversation.
Guided by sentence stem prompts, participants discuss the points they have heard and assess their persuasiveness in supporting or refuting the overarching statement.
See It In Action
Note: This example is based on The Evolution of Political Parties module.
See It In Action
Note: This example is based on The Evolution of Political Parties module.
Each group takes the opposite perspective of the one they were initially assigned.
After some time preparing their new stance, new “show and tell” rounds begin using the same timing and structures as the earlier rounds.
See It In Action
Note: This example is based on The Evolution of Political Parties module.
See It In Action
Note: This example is based on The Evolution of Political Parties module.
After all participants have made a case for both sides of the overarching statement, they again drop their assigned roles and have an open conversation about their personal stance on the statement.
Each small group votes for and against the overarching statement before sharing their vote with the large group.
After all group votes have been revealed, the entire group uses sentence stem prompts to discuss what they heard and the impact of statements both for and against the overarching statement.
