 |
|
|
Academic Controversy
Students debate wildlife conservation.
 Watch a video:
Dial-up | DSL
|
|
| Purchase DVD or VHS |
Most WIDE ANGLE episodes may be purchased for educational and non-theatric use, and occasionally for home video use from Films Media Group.
Go
|
|
| PBS TeacherSource |
Visit PBS TeacherSource to find 3,000+ free lesson plans and activities.
Go
|
|
|
 |
 |
|
|
The challenging process of Academic Controversy can be a valuable method for exploring global issues in the classroom. Developed by cooperative learning experts David and Roger Johnson, it engages students in a deep exploration of complex issues, pushing their thinking beyond the boundaries and limitations of traditional debate.
In both Academic Controversy and traditional debate, students research and argue one side of an issue or question. In Academic Controversy, however, students go on to switch sides, making the case for the opposing position. Both sides then work together to reach a resolution that synthesizes elements of both positions.
Instead of a win-lose, competitive framework, Academic Controversy utilizes a collaborative process of communication, perspective-taking, and problem-solving. This enables participants to move away from a narrow focus to a vision that encompasses broader contexts and brings to view the underlying needs of both sides.
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 |
|
 |
|
|
|
Before engaging in Academic Controversy, students should first be introduced to the process, rules, and steps. Student Handout 1 and Student Handout 2 summarize these; Handout 1 also provides a checklist, which helps students to track their progress throughout the process. Handout 3 and Handout 4 are rubrics designed to provide standards and to help teachers and students evaluate student work.
Students work in groups of four to address a particular issue. Within these groups, students form teams of two. Each team is then assigned one of two opposing positions on the issue. Students then proceed to:
Step 1: Create the best case for their positions.
Students thoroughly research the issue, then organize and frame logical, compelling arguments. Student Handout 5 can help them take notes.
Step 2: Present the best case for their positions.
Students present their arguments persuasively. While each side presents, the other listens and takes notes without speaking, flagging and analyzing strengths and weaknesses of the arguments. Student Handout 6 is designed to help them with this part of the process.
Step 3: Engage in open discussion.
At this point, students on both sides continue to advocate for their positions while looking to refute the evidence and reasoning of the other side.
Step 4: Reverse perspectives.
Pairs switch sides, adopting the point of view they earlier tried to refute. Each pair now presents the best case for what was previously the opposing position. In turn, they listen to the other side present the best case for what had been their own position.
Step 5: Synthesize and come to consensus.
The opposing pairs join together to integrate the most powerful arguments from both positions and meld them into a new position that all can agree to. Student Handout 7 is designed to help students formulate their ideas.
Step 6: Prepare a report.
The entire group then writes a joint report explaining the synthesis, including a thesis statement, a rationale, and a conclusion. The report may be presented orally to the entire class.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
The process of Academic Controversy may be used to address the academic standards listed below. These standards are drawn from CONTENT KNOWLEDGE: A COMPENDIUM OF STANDARDS AND BENCHMARKS FOR K-12 EDUCATION and have been provided courtesy of McREL, the Mid-Continent Research for Education and Learning.
Working with Others: Standard 1
http://www.mcrel.org/compendium/Benchmark.asp?SubjectID=22&StandardID=1
Contributes to the overall effort of a group
Benchmarks: Challenges practices in a group that are not working; Demonstrates respect for others in the group; Takes initiative when needed; Identifies and deals with causes of conflict in a group; Engages in active listening; Evaluates the overall progress of a group toward a goal.
Working with Others: Standard 4
http://www.mcrel.org/compendium/Benchmark.asp?SubjectID=22&StandardID=4
Displays effective interpersonal communication skills.
Benchmarks: Displays empathy with others; Displays friendliness with others; Seeks information nondefensively; Provides feedback in a constructive manner; Uses nonverbal communication such as eye contact, body position, voice tone effectively; Reacts to ideas rather than to the person presenting the ideas.
Thinking and Reasoning: Standard 1
http://www.mcrel.org/compendium/Benchmark.asp?SubjectID=21&StandardID=1
Understands and applies the basic principles of presenting an argument.
Benchmarks: Understands that when people try to prove a point, they may at times select only the information that supports it and ignore the information that contradicts it; Identifies techniques used to slant information in subtle ways; Understands that to be convincing, an argument must have both true statements and valid connections among them; Evaluates the overall effectiveness of complex arguments.
Thinking and Reasoning: Standard 2
http://www.mcrel.org/compendium/Benchmark.asp?SubjectID=21&StandardID=2
Understands and applies basic principles of logic and reasoning.
Benchmarks: Analyzes the deductive validity of arguments based on implicit or explicit assumptions; Understands that people sometimes reach false conclusions either by applying faulty logic to true statements or by applying valid logic to false statements; Understands that a reason may be sufficient to get a result but may not be the only way to get the result (i.e., may not be necessary), or a reason may be necessary to obtain a result but not sufficient (i.e., other things are also required; some reasons may be both necessary and sufficient).
Thinking and Reasoning: Standard 5
http://www.mcrel.org/compendium/Benchmark.asp?SubjectID=21&StandardID=5
Applies basic trouble-shooting and problem-solving techniques.
Benchmarks: Applies trouble-shooting strategies to complex real-world situations; Represents a problem accurately in terms of resources, constraints, and objectives; Reframes problems when alternative solutions are exhausted; Evaluates the feasibility of various solutions to problems; recommends and defends a solution.
Thinking and Reasoning: Standard 6
http://www.mcrel.org/compendium/Benchmark.asp?SubjectID=21&StandardID=6
Applies basic trouble-shooting and problem-solving techniques.
Benchmarks: Applies trouble-shooting strategies to complex real-world situations; Represents a problem accurately in terms of resources, constraints, and objectives; Reframes problems when alternative solutions are exhausted; Evaluates the feasibility of various solutions to problems; recommends and defends a solution.
Language Arts: Standard 4
http://www.mcrel.org/compendium/Benchmark.asp?SubjectID=7&StandardID=4
Gathers and uses information for research purposes.
Benchmarks: Uses appropriate research methodology; Uses a variety of print and electronic sources to gather information for research topics; Synthesizes information from multiple research studies to draw conclusions that go beyond those found in any of the individual studies; Uses systematic strategies to organize and record information.
Language Arts: Standard 8
http://www.mcrel.org/compendium/Benchmark.asp?SubjectID=7&StandardID=8
Uses listening and speaking strategies for different purposes.
Benchmarks: Uses criteria to evaluate own and others' effectiveness in group discussions and formal presentations; Asks questions as a way to broaden and enrich classroom discussions; Uses a variety of strategies to enhance listening comprehension; Makes formal presentations to the class; Responds to questions and feedback about own presentations.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
