Appendices

As many of you know, the selec­tion of group com­po­si­tion can be a dif­fi­cult task. Depending on the dynam­ics of your class, you may decide to have the stu­dents select their own groups. If you choose this approach, make sure that stu­dents under­stand the respon­si­bil­i­ties of each group mem­ber, as well as the col­lec­tive respon­si­bil­i­ties of the group. Groups may also be select­ed ran­dom­ly, or com­posed by you. The lat­ter is our sug­ges­tion, giv­en the com­plex­i­ty of the group dynam­ics for this unit. Given the open-end­ed nature of the research and role-play sim­u­la­tion, teacher guid­ance is of the utmost importance.

Logistics of group work: Emphasize that this is a coop­er­a­tive endeav­or, where indi­vid­ual opin­ions should be respect­ed — the stu­dents are act­ing as a cit­i­zen research team.

Have the groups iden­ti­fy roles that each mem­ber will play (roles may be dou­bled up, with excep­tion of the role of the facil­i­ta­tor — only one per­son should hold this role):

• Speaker (the pri­ma­ry, although not the only, pre­sen­ter of the group research; par­tic­i­pates in the team)
• Facilitator (keeps the group on task, focus­es ques­tions, over­sees issues of qual­i­ty and time man­age­ment; respon­si­ble for indi­vid­ual and group assessment)
• Writer (coor­di­nates the writ­ten work of research and the pro­duc­tion of the final group brief to be pre­sent­ed to the team — there may be two, if dis­sent­ing opinions emerge)
• Visual pro­duc­ers (coor­di­nates and pro­duces the visu­al prod­uct high­light­ing the major points of their groupâs position/​research on the propo­si­tion on poster board or PowerPoint

Note: This divi­sion of labor can be used through­out the year if you uti­lize group work fre­quent­ly in your class, so that before the end of the year every­one will assume one of these roles dur­ing some research or group project.

You are the leader of your group. Your pri­ma­ry respon­si­bil­i­ty is to ensure that all group mem­bers are involved, and that the var­i­ous parts of the project are com­plet­ed and on time. You will be grad­ed on the following criteria:

Outstanding (4.0)

• All eval­u­a­tions done dai­ly and thoughtfully
• All com­po­nents are com­plet­ed ahead of time and are exceptional
  
• Group mem­bers are all involved at your urging
  
• Group con­flict is man­aged pro­duc­tive­ly, and dif­fer­ent opin­ions are expressed and respecte

Satisfactory (3.0)

• Most eval­u­a­tions done some are less thought­ful than others
• Most com­po­nents are com­plet­ed on time
  
• Some mem­bers are allowed to opt-out occasionally
  
• Group con­flict is min­i­mized but some opin­ions are not heard or recognized
  

Unsatisfactory (2.0 – 0.0)

• Most eval­u­a­tions missing
• Parts of project are miss­ing and you make no effort to fix it
  
• One or two peo­ple do all the work
  
• Group is out of con­trol, and you make lit­tle or no effort to bring it to order
  

You are the pre­sen­ter for your group. You will be respon­si­ble for mak­ing your groupâs case to the leg­isla­tive hear­ing. You will be grad­ed by the following criteria:

Outstanding (4.0)

• Attention-get­ting intro­duc­tion (cre­ative)
• Presentation is seam­less with few stops to check notes
  
• At least three arguments made
  
• Persuasive con­clu­sion
• Answers all ques­tions clear­ly and thoughtfully
  

Satisfactory (3.0)

• Basic intro­duc­tion of group case (sim­ply stat­ing the group proposition)
• Some stum­bling spots, checking notes
  
• One or two arguments made
  
• Basic sum­ma­ry conclusion
  
• Has dif­fi­cul­ty answer­ing clear­ly, or answers none at all
  

Unsatisfactory (2.0 – 0.0)

• Missing or late for presentation
• Incoherent pre­sen­ta­tion
  
• No clear supporting arguments
  
• No clear conclusion
• Does not answer questions
  

You are to pre­pare a visu­al prod­uct to sup­port your presenter(s) when they make their case to the leg­isla­tive hear­ing. The fol­low­ing standards apply:

Outstanding (4.0)

• Visually rep­re­sents three or more arguments
• Neat, attrac­tive and creative
  
• Uses col­or and pictures

Satisfactory (3.0)

• Visually rep­re­sents one or two arguments
• Neat and attractive
  
• Uses col­or effectively

Unsatisfactory (2.0 – 0.0)

• Little or no visu­al rep­re­sen­ta­tion of arguments
• Messy, no effort evident
  
• Little or no col­or or pictures used

Your group should pre­pare one doc­u­ment that explains and sup­ports your posi­tion on this top­ic. If your group can­not come to con­sen­sus on one side or the oth­er, you should pre­pare two sep­a­rate papers — have one per­son from each side write a sep­a­rate posi­tion paper. The fol­low­ing standards apply:

Outstanding (4.0)

• More than one full page
• Clearly stat­ed and reasoned position
  
• Three dif­fer­ent arguments
  
• Recognizes and refutes opposing argument
• Paper is well written
  
• No spelling or grammar errors
  

Satisfactory (3.0)

• One full page
• Clearly stat­ed position
  
• One or two arguments
  
• Recognizes oppo­si­tion
  
• Paper meets min. standards
  
• One or two mistakes
  

Unsatisfactory (2.0 – 0.0)

• Less than one full page
• Position is not clear
  
• No sup­port
  
• No respect­ful treat­ment of opposition
• Paper is incoherent
  
• Many mis­takes
  

Group Facilitator _____________________

Date_​_​_​_​_​_​_​

Group Grade Average: ________________

Grading Rubric:

(If any­thing oth­er than a 3.0 is giv­en — either a 4.0 or under a 3.0 — the group leader is required to give an expla­na­tion for this on the com­ment sec­tion of this form.)

• 4.0 Student coop­er­at­ed ful­ly, or respectfully/​productively dis­agreed, with group and leader, per­formed assigned tasks, found nec­es­sary infor­ma­tion as well as addi­tion­al infor­ma­tion and could explain it.
• 3.0 Student coop­er­at­ed ful­ly with group leader, per­formed assigned tasks and found necessary information.
• 2.0 Student required reminders to get to work, found only the nec­es­sary infor­ma­tion, and com­plet­ed only the min­i­mum assigned tasks.
• 1.0 Student com­plet­ed assigned tasks after exten­sive pres­sure or teacher involvement.
• 0.0 Student was unco­op­er­a­tive and unproductive.

Comments: