WORDS FROM W.W. November 15, 2016
Being a history major in college I looked forward to substitute teaching for one of the seventh grade social studies teachers a couple of weeks ago. In preparation I sat in on one of Mr. Miller’s classes two days before to hear his “story’ (Don’t tell 7th graders you are about to lecture! Tell them you are about to tell a story!) about Genghis Khan.
My day to manage the class involved a debate about Genghis Khan’s tactics. It was an interesting, and at times entertaining, experience. The question presented to the mass of adolescent opinionated debaters was whether or not they agreed with the tactics that Genghis Khan used to conquer cities, which included wiping out whole populations of cities and also an early form of biological warfare?
The students arranged themselves in one of six rows of chairs in the classroom: the first two rows for those who agreed; the middle two rows for those who were undecided; and the last two rows for those who disagreed. Mr. Miller referred to it as ‘philosophical chairs.”
I called on one speaker from those who agreed, and then one from the undecided, and then one from those who disagreed…and then repeated the process. The next speaker needed to summarize what the previous speaker had just said before stating his/her opinion. What a concept! That means the student had to actually listen to the previous speaker…a forgotten skill!
Student “philosophy” went back and forth. Students moved from one held opinion to an opposite, according to what was being said. The rows of undecided students bounced back and forth like ping-pong balls. One student presented her opinion for why she agreed with Khan’s tactics, and then immediately moved to the other side of the room. She, evidently, convinced herself as she was speaking that she didn’t agree with herself…a dilemma for sure!
Some students were like small herds of sheep following their student shepherd to different philosophical pastures around the room. Most of them, however, were intensely into it! One young lady clearly articulated why she was still undecided by summarizing the strong points of both sides. One young man made no sense at all in his commentary, to the point where I had to keep from busting out in laughter!
For 45 minutes the points and counter-points were voiced. In the last five minutes anyone in the undecided middle had to pick a side. In four different class periods of philosophical chairs no one called another student an idiot, a criminal, tax evader, or loser! Security did not have to be called! No pencils or water bottles were thrown at anyone! In four class periods, totaling close to 120 students, only five students did not give their view at least once. Of the five who didn’t, only one seemed to be more interested in how her hair looked than the discussion.
It was awesome! In three of the four classes I had to end the debate before they were ready.
The most brutal part of each class period was simply taking attendance and slaughtering almost as many names as Genghis Khan had slaughtered people!
Words from WW Blog 