CONSTRUCTIVE CONTROVERSY AND ACADEMIC LEARNING
In an English class, participants are considering the issue of civil disobedience. They learn that in the civil rights movement, individuals broke the law to gain equal rights for minorities.
In numerous literary works, such as Mark Twain’s The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn, individuals wrestle with the issue of breaking the law to redress a social injustice. Huck wrestles with the issue of breaking the law in order to help Jim, the run away slave. In the 1970s and 1980s, prominent public figures from Wall Street to the White House felt justified in breaking laws for personal or political gain. In order to study the role of civil disobedience in a democracy, participants are placed in a cooperative learning group of four members. The group is given the assignment of reaching its best reasoned judgment about the issue and then divided into two pairs. One pair is given the assignment of making the best case possible for the constructiveness of civil disobedience in a democracy. The other pair is given the assignment of making the best case possible for the destructiveness of civil disobedience in a democracy. In the resulting conflict, participants draw from sources such as Thomas Jefferson’s “Declaration of Independence,” Henry David Thoreau’s Civil Disobedience, Abraham Lincoln’s “Cooper Union Address,” and Martin Luther King Jr.’s “Letter from Birmingham Jail” to challenge each other’s reasoning and analyses concerning when civil disobedience is, or is not, constructive.In order to use constructive controversy to foster academic learning, you implement the following procedure (D. W. Johnson and R. Johnson, 1979,1989,1995).
Structure the Task
The task must be structured (a) cooperatively and (b) so that there are at least two well-documented positions (pro and con). The choice of topic depends on the interests of the instructor and the purposes of the course.
In math courses, controversies may focus on different ways to solve a problem. In science classes, controversies may focus on environmental issues. Because drama is based on conflict, almost any piece of literature may be turned into a constructive controversy, such as having participants argue over who is the greatest romantic poet. Because most history is based on conflict, controversies can be created over any historical event. In any subject area, controversies can be created to promote academic learning and creative group problem solving.Make Preinstructional Decisions and Preparations
The teacher decides on the objectives for the lesson. Students are typically randomly assigned to groups of four. Each group is then divided into two pairs. The pairs are assigned randomly to represent either the pro or con position. The instructional materials are prepared so that group members know what position they have been assigned and where they can find supporting information. The materials helpful for each position are (a) a clear description of the group’s task, (b) a description of the phases of the constructive controversy procedure and the relevant social skills, (c) a definition of the positions to be advocated with a summary of the key arguments supporting each position, and (d) relevant resource materials (including a bibliography).
Explain and Orchestrate the Task, Cooperative Structure, and Constructive Controversy Procedure
The teacher explains the task so that participants are clear about the assignment and understand the objectives of the lesson. The task must be structured so that there are at least two well-documented positions (pro and con). The choice of topic depends on the interests of the teacher and the purposes of the course. Teachers may wish to help students “get in role” by presenting the issue to be decided in an interesting and dramatic way. Teachers structure positive interdependence by assigning two group goals. Students are required to:
1.
Produce a group report detailing the nature of the group’s decision and its rationale. Members are to arrive at a consensus and ensure everyone participates in writing a high-quality group report. Groups present their report to the entire class.2. Individually take a test on both positions. Group members must master all the information relevant to both sides of the issue.
To supplement the effects of positive goal interdependence, the materials are divided among group members (resource interdependence) and bonus points may be given if all group members score above a preset criterion on the test (reward interdependence).
The purpose of the constructive controversy is to maximize each student’s learning. Teachers structure individual accountability by ensuring that each student participates in each step of the constructive controversy procedure, by individually testing each student on both sides of the issue and by randomly selecting students to present their group’s report. Teachers specify the social skills participants are to master and demonstrate during the constructive controversy. The social skills emphasized are those involved in systematically advocating an intellectual position and evaluating and criticizing the position advocated by others, as well as the skills involved in synthesis and consensual decision making. Finally, teachers structure intergroup cooperation. When preparing their positions, for example, students can confer with classmates in other groups that are also preparing the same position.
Academic Controversy Procedure
The students’ overall goals are to learn all information relevant to the issue being studied and ensure that all other group members learn the information, so that (a) their group can write the best report possible on the issue and (b) all group members achieve high scores on the test. The constructive controversy procedure is as follows.
1. Research, learn, and prepare position: Students are assigned randomly to groups of four, each of which is divided into two pairs.
One pair is assigned the pro position and the other pair is assigned the con position. Each pair is to prepare the best case possible for its assigned position by:a. Researching the assigned position and learning all relevant information. Students are to read the supporting materials and find new information to support their position. The opposing pair is given any information students find that supports its position.
b. Organizing the information into a persuasive argument that contains a thesis statement or claim (“George Washington was a more effective president than Abraham Lincoln was”), the rationale supporting the thesis (“He accomplished a, b, and c”), and a logical conclusion that is the same as the thesis (“Therefore, George Washington was a more effective president than Abraham Lincoln was”).
c. Planning how to advocate the assigned position effectively to ensure that it receives a fair and complete hearing. Make sure both pair members are ready to present the assigned position so persuasively that the opposing participants will comprehend and learn the information and, of course, agree that the position is valid and correct.
2. Present and advocate position: Students present the best case for their assigned position to ensure it gets a fair and complete hearing. They need to be forceful, persuasive, and convincing in doing so. Ideally, more than one medium will be used. Students are to listen carefully to and learn the opposing position, taking notes and clarifying anything they do not understand.
3. Engage in an open discussion in which there is spirited disagreement: Students discuss the issue by freely exchanging information and ideas. Students are to (a) argue forcefully and persuasively for their position (presenting as many facts as they can to support their point of view), (b) critically analyze the evidence and reasoning supporting the opposing position, asking for data to support assertions, (c) refuting the opposing position by pointing out the inadequacies in the information and reasoning, and (d) rebutting attacks on their position and presenting counterarguments.
Students are to take careful notes on and thoroughly learn the opposing position. Students are to give the other position a trial by fire while following the norms for constructive controversy. Sometimes a time-out period will be provided so students can caucus with their partners and prepare new arguments. The teacher may encourage more spirited arguing, take sides when a pair is in trouble, play devil’s advocate, ask one group to observe another group engaging in a spirited argument, and generally stir up the discussion.4. Reverse perspectives: Students reverse perspectives and present the best case for the opposing position. Teachers may wish to have students change chairs. In presenting the opposing position sincerely and forcefully (as if it was yours), students may use their notes and add any new facts they know of. Students should strive to see the issue from both perspectives simultaneously.
5. Synthesize: Students are to drop all advocacy and find a synthesis on which all members can agree. Students summarize the best evidence and reasoning from both sides and integrate it into a joint position that is new and unique. Students are to:
a. Write a group report on the group’s synthesis with the supporting evidence and rationale. All group members sign the report indicating that they agree with it, can explain its content, and consider it ready to be evaluated. Each member must be able to present the report to the entire class.
b. Take a test on both positions. If all members score above the preset criteria of excellence, each receives five bonus points.
c. Process how well the group functioned and how its performance may be improved during the next constructive controversy. The specific conflict management skills required for constructive controversy may be highlighted.
d. Celebrate the group’s success and the hard work of each member to make every step of the constructive controversy procedure effective.
Monitor the Controversy Groups and Intervene When Needed
While the groups engage in the constructive controversy procedure, teachers monitor the learning groups and intervene to improve students’ skills in engaging in each step of the constructive controversy procedure and use the social skills appropriately.
Teachers may also wish to intervene to reinforce particularly effective and skillful behaviors.Evaluate Students’ Learning and Process Group Effectiveness
At the end of each instructional unit, teachers evaluate students’ learning and give feedback. Qualitative as well as quantitative aspects of performance may be addressed. Students are graded on both the quality of their final report and their performance on the test covering both sides of the issue. The learning groups also process how well they functioned. Students describe what member actions were helpful (and unhelpful) in completing each step of the constructive controversy procedure and make decisions about what behaviors to continue or change. In whole-class processing, the teacher gives the class feedback and has participants share incidents that occurred in their groups.