Structured academic controversy is a small-group discussion model,
developed by David W. Johnson and Roger T. Johnson, leading experts
on cooperative learning. Thus, the model incorporates features of
cooperative learning.
Structured academic controversy is designed to help students achieve
three goals: (1) to gain a deeper understanding of an issue, (2)
to find common ground, and (3) to make a decision based on evidence
and logic.
Discussion
in the SAC model focuses on policy questions, such as: Should the
state of Colorado increase the driving age to 18? or Should the
United States continue to use a policy of pre-emptive strikes against
countries that pose an “eminent threat”? To use the
SAC model, teachers need grade-level appropriate background material
on the selected issue; the background material should provide facts
about the issue, as well as arguments favoring opposing views on
the issue. When students first learn the SAC model, they will also
need an outline of the SAC procedures: |
1.
Students are organized into groups of four, and each group is
split into two pairs. One pair in a foursome studies one side
of the controversy, while the second pair studies an opposing
view. Partners read the background material and identify facts
and arguments that support their assigned position. They prepare
to advocate the position.
2. Pairs take turns advocating their positions. Students on
the other side make notes and ask questions about information
they don’t understand.
3. Next, pairs reverse positions. Each pair uses their notes
and what they learned from the other side to make a short presentation
demonstrating their understanding of the opposing view.
4. Students leave their assigned positions and discuss the issue
in their foursomes, trying to find points of agreement and disagreement
among group members. Teams try to reach consensus on something;
if they cannot reach consensus on any substantive aspect of
the issue, they should try to reach consensus on a process they
could use to resolve disagreements.
5. The class debriefs the activity as a large group, focusing
on how the group worked as a team and how use of the process
contributed to their understanding of the issue. |
|
