Pride, Prejudice, and Discrimination AWS
Toward a More Considered World: Critical-Thinking and Consensus-Building through Debate and Dialogue Selena Kohel Cottey College 6th:
September Pick a topic as a group(s). Divide into teams. Examples of previous topics: Abnormal Psychology • people should be allowed to opt for euthanasia vs. people should not be allowed to opt for euthanasia • people living with alcohol addiction should learn to drink in moderation vs. people living with alcohol addiction should abstain from alcohol Forensic Psychology • repressed memories do exist vs. repressed memories do not exist • people convicted of crimes should be punished vs. people convicted of crimes should be rehabilitated
September 18th: Submit individual references in APA style to support one’s side. To include: • the course textbook • two relevant, credible journal articles May include: • an interview • a media resource
October 16th: Submit individual bullet points, with in-text citations and references in APA style, to support one’s side. To include: • three main points • two pieces of separate, detailed evidence to directly support each main point
November 13th: Submit group bullet points, with in-text citations and references in APA style, to support one’s group’s side. To include: • six main points • two pieces of separate, detailed evidence to directly support each main point RESEARCH POSTER PRESENTATION DESIGN © 2011
www.PosterPresentations.com
December 11th: Engage in debate and seek to convince the opposing side and audience to take your side. To include: • five minutes preparation time • a coin flip to determine which side goes first • side #1: states main points (2 minutes) • side #2: states main points (2 minutes) • side #1: states evidence for main points (8 minutes) • side #2: asks clarification and elaboration questions (2 minutes) • side #2: states evidence for main points. (8 minutes) • side #1: asks clarification and elaboration questions (2 minutes) • side #1: pokes holes in other side’s argument (5 minutes) • side #2: pokes holes in other side’s argument (5 minutes) • given eight minutes preparation time • side #1: saves any undamaged points and gives a summary (2 minutes) • side #2: saves any undamaged points and gives a summary (2 minutes)
December 13th: Engage in dialogue and seek to come to consensus. To include: • five minutes preparation time • reintroduction of all main points and evidence for all main points OR • summary of any undamaged points and evidence for any undamaged points • active-listening • opinion-giving/ opinion-seeking • information-giving/ information-seeking • clarifying • elaborating • summarizing • consensus-building/ consensus-testing • presentation style • teamwork
Debate Grading Rubric On a scale of 1-4, 4 = highest, students are graded on: • organization, clarity, and overall hook • use of arguments (quantity) • use of arguments (quality) • use of examples and facts • use of rebuttal • presentation style • teamwork
Dialogue Grading Rubric On a scale of 1-4, 4 = highest, students are graded on: • organization and clarity of perspective • use of statements to support perspective (quantity) • use of statements to support perspective (quality) • use of examples and facts • active-listening • opinion-giving/ opinion-seeking • information-giving/ information-seeking • clarifying • elaborating • summarizing • consensus-building/ consensus-testing • presentation style • teamwork
At Various Times: Evaluate the group process. To include: • out of 100%, students write the % they think each of their group members, including themselves, contributed to the group outline/ debate/ dialogue assignment; everyone’s % together is expected to equal 100% • students provide detailed rationales for the %s they assigned • then, out of A, A-, B+, B, B-, C+, C, D, and F, students write the letter grade they think each of their group members should receive for the group outline/ debate/ dialogue assignment • students provide detailed rationales for the grades they assigned
Debate Learning Objectives On a scale of 1-10, 1 = not at all, 10 = very much, students rated how much the preparation for the debate and the debate impacted them on the following: • being able to identify relevant resources (M = 8) • being able to identify credible resources (M = 9) • being able to discuss and negotiate controversial issues (M = 8.33) • being able to listen and hear someone else’s perspective (M = 8.83) • being able to listen critically yet constructively (M = 8) • being able to formulate critical yet constructive statements and questions (M = 7.33) • being open to having their views challenged (M = 9) • using their mistakes to reconsider their point of view (M = 9)
Dialogue Learning Objectives On a scale of 1-10, 1 = not at all, 10 = very much, students rated how much the preparation for the dialogue and the dialogue impacted them on the following: • being more self-aware (M = 7.83) • being able to share their experiences, views, and knowledge (M = 8.83) • examining the sources of their assumptions and biases (M = 7.67) • being more aware of others (M = 8.83) • trying to see through different perspectives (M = 8.83) • being able to ask others for their perspectives (M = 8.33) • being able to ask for clarification (M = 9.5) • being able to summarize large amounts of information (M = 7.33) • being able to work through disagreements and conflicts (M = 7.17) • being able to work cooperatively with people with different perspectives (M = 8.17) • being able to come to agreement with people with different perspectives (M = 8.5)
September Pick a topic as a group(s). Divide into teams. Examples of previous topics: Abnormal Psychology • people should be allowed to opt for euthanasia vs. people should not be allowed to opt for euthanasia • people living with alcohol addiction should learn to drink in moderation vs. people living with alcohol addiction should abstain from alcohol Forensic Psychology • repressed memories do exist vs. repressed memories do not exist • people convicted of crimes should be punished vs. people convicted of crimes should be rehabilitated
September 18th: Submit individual references in APA style to support one’s side. To include: • the course textbook • two relevant, credible journal articles May include: • an interview • a media resource
October 16th: Submit individual bullet points, with in-text citations and references in APA style, to support one’s side. To include: • three main points • two pieces of separate, detailed evidence to directly support each main point
November 13th: Submit group bullet points, with in-text citations and references in APA style, to support one’s group’s side. To include: • six main points • two pieces of separate, detailed evidence to directly support each main point RESEARCH POSTER PRESENTATION DESIGN © 2011
www.PosterPresentations.com
December 11th: Engage in debate and seek to convince the opposing side and audience to take your side. To include: • five minutes preparation time • a coin flip to determine which side goes first • side #1: states main points (2 minutes) • side #2: states main points (2 minutes) • side #1: states evidence for main points (8 minutes) • side #2: asks clarification and elaboration questions (2 minutes) • side #2: states evidence for main points. (8 minutes) • side #1: asks clarification and elaboration questions (2 minutes) • side #1: pokes holes in other side’s argument (5 minutes) • side #2: pokes holes in other side’s argument (5 minutes) • given eight minutes preparation time • side #1: saves any undamaged points and gives a summary (2 minutes) • side #2: saves any undamaged points and gives a summary (2 minutes)
December 13th: Engage in dialogue and seek to come to consensus. To include: • five minutes preparation time • reintroduction of all main points and evidence for all main points OR • summary of any undamaged points and evidence for any undamaged points • active-listening • opinion-giving/ opinion-seeking • information-giving/ information-seeking • clarifying • elaborating • summarizing • consensus-building/ consensus-testing • presentation style • teamwork
Debate Grading Rubric On a scale of 1-4, 4 = highest, students are graded on: • organization, clarity, and overall hook • use of arguments (quantity) • use of arguments (quality) • use of examples and facts • use of rebuttal • presentation style • teamwork
Dialogue Grading Rubric On a scale of 1-4, 4 = highest, students are graded on: • organization and clarity of perspective • use of statements to support perspective (quantity) • use of statements to support perspective (quality) • use of examples and facts • active-listening • opinion-giving/ opinion-seeking • information-giving/ information-seeking • clarifying • elaborating • summarizing • consensus-building/ consensus-testing • presentation style • teamwork
At Various Times: Evaluate the group process. To include: • out of 100%, students write the % they think each of their group members, including themselves, contributed to the group outline/ debate/ dialogue assignment; everyone’s % together is expected to equal 100% • students provide detailed rationales for the %s they assigned • then, out of A, A-, B+, B, B-, C+, C, D, and F, students write the letter grade they think each of their group members should receive for the group outline/ debate/ dialogue assignment • students provide detailed rationales for the grades they assigned
Debate Learning Objectives On a scale of 1-10, 1 = not at all, 10 = very much, students rated how much the preparation for the debate and the debate impacted them on the following: • being able to identify relevant resources (M = 8) • being able to identify credible resources (M = 9) • being able to discuss and negotiate controversial issues (M = 8.33) • being able to listen and hear someone else’s perspective (M = 8.83) • being able to listen critically yet constructively (M = 8) • being able to formulate critical yet constructive statements and questions (M = 7.33) • being open to having their views challenged (M = 9) • using their mistakes to reconsider their point of view (M = 9)
Dialogue Learning Objectives On a scale of 1-10, 1 = not at all, 10 = very much, students rated how much the preparation for the dialogue and the dialogue impacted them on the following: • being more self-aware (M = 7.83) • being able to share their experiences, views, and knowledge (M = 8.83) • examining the sources of their assumptions and biases (M = 7.67) • being more aware of others (M = 8.83) • trying to see through different perspectives (M = 8.83) • being able to ask others for their perspectives (M = 8.33) • being able to ask for clarification (M = 9.5) • being able to summarize large amounts of information (M = 7.33) • being able to work through disagreements and conflicts (M = 7.17) • being able to work cooperatively with people with different perspectives (M = 8.17) • being able to come to agreement with people with different perspectives (M = 8.5)
