131Time
(mins)
Activity Learning targets [Motivation phase](^0) Learning to understand the moral dilemma (present, read and let
students retell) and elaborate the ‘core of the dilemma’
[Support]
1.The students are acquainted with the broader
circumstances of the dilemma and
- Learn to understand the (moral) dilemma and to
put themselves into the actors’ position.
15 Let the students vote on the solution to the dilemma (‘Who
votes for...?’ ‘Who votes against...?’ OR: ‘What behaviour is right or
wrong?’).
Form pro- and contra-groups; if the groups are not equal: repeat
the presentation of the dilemma emphasising the part with fewer
votes; if necessary, modify the dilemma so that some of the
participants switch to the ‘smaller’ camp.
[Challenge]- Exposing one’s opinion on a controversy publicly.
- Learning to understand the difference between
a decision made under pressure and one made
without pressure. - Learning to appreciate the diversity of opinions on
a moral problem.
(^30) Form groups of 3-4 students of the same opinion, who exchange
the reasons for their opinion and gather new ones.
[Support]
- Learning to recognise like-minded people as a
source of support. - Learning to see others’ arguments as a source of
strengthening one’s own position.
40 Discussion of pros and cons in plenary. The lecturer explains the
rules of the discussion; the groups of opposing opinions sit across
from each other; one participant from each group repeats the
group’s opinion and some of the reasons for it. After this, ‘battling’
with arguments begins: when one person in one group is finished,
he/she picks someone from the other group to present his/her
argument.
In this phase the educator serves almost exclusively as a host; he/
she only makes sure the discussion rules are being observed.
[Support]- Learning to recognise like-minded people as a
source of support. - Learning to see others’ arguments as a source of
strengthening one’s own position.
[Challenge] - Learning to appreciate public debates on real
moral issues. - Learning to make oneself heard; learning to
present one’s own arguments precisely. - Learning to carefully listen to others.
- Learning to differentiate between the quality of
arguments (which is sometimes very upsetting) and
of people
(who should always be treated respectfully).
70 Further group phase: Evaluation of the opposition’s arguments.
Which of these arguments are acceptable?
[Support]- Discussing with like-minded people how far one
can/should accommodate different-minded people.
(^75) Plenary: One spokesperson from each group reports on the best
argument of the opposition; maybe rank the arguments.
[Challenge and Support]
- Learning to appreciate good arguments even if
they come from the opposition.
80 Final vote to decide which decision the person facing the dilemma
should take.
[Challenge]- Appreciating criticism of one’s own position.
- Learning that controversial discussions about
serious problems can add to life quality.
(^85) Enquire: How did the participants perceive the discussion? As a
benefit? What was the supposed objective of the lesson? What did
the students learn about themselves and their classmates? Clarify
that the focus is not on the final decision but on the process of
the discussion, on the mutual exchange. In dilemma situations
there is no right or wrong – otherwise they would not be
dilemmas! Only by becoming acquainted with one’s own, as well
as others’ opinions, is development possible. It is acceptable, not
reprehensible, to change your opinion, as long as you can reason it.
[Support]
- Realising the development oneself and others
have experienced through the dilemma discussion.
90 End of dilemma lesson
cross-currIcular