Philosophical Chairs: Jury Style
April Caldwell: John Tyler High School [email protected]
Overview:
A philosophical chair is a structured form of academic discourse which relies on a prompt as the
foundation for discussion and informed debate. This form of dialogue allows students to develop
further understanding of a text or a subject through inquiry and discussion. This activity
increases verbal capacity and fluency, as well as develops skills in the precise use of academic
language. The jury style works well with smaller numbers of students (12–24), or if students are
less inclined to embrace public speaking despite a desire to participate.
Procedure:
1. Students read, prior to coming to class, a newspaper article, short story, essay, or
literary selection, taking notes as they read; bring these notes to class. Pick a reading
assignment which allows students to place value and take a side. *** For philosophical
chairs you do not have to have a reading assignment, you could simply put a topic up on
the board for general discussion***
2. Room Set-Up:
• Place a question/ prompt on the board (example questions will follow)
• Arrange the classroom into three zones: the prosecution (agree), defense
(disagree), and jury (neutral).
3. Upon entering classroom instruct students to move to the side that best represents
their perspective (based on the question/prompt on board). Students who are undecided or
truly neutral on the prompt are assigned to the jury. Ensure that the jury does not
outnumber either the prosecution or the defense.
4. Once students are in their prosecution and defense groups, have each group choose two
lawyers to represent their position and deliver their arguments.
5. Instruct the prosecution and defense groups to begin preparation for their opening
arguments by sharing the reasoning behind their perspectives.
6. Instruct the jury members to prepare to take notes on the debate and craft opening
questions that may have contributed to their original indecision on the prompt.
7. Have the prosecution lawyers provide their opening arguments, followed by the
defense lawyers.
8. Instruct non-speaking students on the prosecution and defense to record what is said
and any new lines of argumentation or rebuttal that they can develop. Those notes are
then shared with their respective lawyers during the deliberations.
9. Instruct the jury to direct a common question to be answered immediately: first by the
prosecution, and then by the defense. As this process becomes comfortable for students,
the jury can develop separate questions for each side.
10. Once the questions are completed, the first round of Philosophical Chairs: Jury Style
is complete.
11. Direct each group to go into deliberation for approximately three minutes and prepare
comments for the next round. • To promote greater participation, encourage the defense
and prosecution sides to each choose two new lawyers and the jury to select a new
foreperson to direct their questions.
12. Offer groups the options of clarifying arguments, rebutting the opposition’s claims, or
introducing new reasoning.
13. Follow this up with another round, following all of the steps previously detailed,
until class time nears completion.
14. With the final set of closing arguments, the jury does not ask questions, but
deliberates over their notes and announces the side with the stronger argument.
Want to Increase RIGOR???
•
•
•
Once students have selected a side, promptly switch them and have them debate
from the opposing perspective.
After introducing the central statement or prompt to students, provide them with
two resources (e.g., articles, videos, etc.) with opposing viewpoints, and then have
students debate the merits of their arguments.
Have small teams of students find an article or issue to analyze, create the prompt,
and facilitate the debate.
Possible Topics for Prompts: Increase Resources should be invested into making alternative energy sources efficient,
instead of finding more ways to extract fossil fuels.
State governments should raise income taxes to provide low-income housing for the
working poor.
Who is better at life; SpongeBob or Patrick?
Should students formally rate their teachers’ effectiveness in the classroom each year?
Possible Sources for Prompts: Political cartoons, primary/secondary documents, literature, topical/local news stories,
magazine articles, state/supreme court rulings, gallop poll results, blogs and podcast,
TEDtalks, Museum websites, Inspiration from student writing/conversations.
*please note there are many different variations of Philosophical chairs you can use in your classroom. TIPS TO MAKE THIS AN AMAZING ACTIVITY FOR YOUR STUDENTS: Preparation Before: • Be prepared with a second prompt in case students respond to the first with lopsided support for one side. • Discuss with students the need for polite responses as alternatives to aggressive “You said…” statements. Additionally, remind students of the messages that they send through body language and non-­‐verbal communication. During the Activity: • To encourage a wider array of student speakers, put speaking limits, such as “Three before me,” (i.e., “Three students must speak before I can speak again”) in place to avoid having one or two students dominate. • Consider asking all students to reconvene in the middle of the classroom halfway through the debate to discuss the merits of the debate so far. Then, prompt them back to the side which best represents where they currently are in their mindset. With everybody moving, students often feel more at ease with demonstrating their change of mind. • Frequently remind students that they should be making eye contact with the other side of the class—and not with the teacher or facilitator—when delivering their points. • The role of the teacher is to remain the facilitator of the debate, and not to engage students with arguments for one side or the other. After the Activity: • Always allow time in class for debriefing after the activity ends. In addition to reflecting on the discussion points, it also functions as a “cool-­‐down” period for when students are passionate about their opinions. • Consider summarizing the arguments using a T-­‐chart to inventory the statements made. It will demonstrate to students how much was truly said beyond their own beliefs and opinions. • Choose the assessment/debrief writing tool that best fits the targeted learning standard. Beyond the Activity: • Explicitly connect students’ argumentative statements to real-­‐world current events or judiciary decisions, whether on the local or global stage.