I need to find something that they can discuss- I feel like they might all agree about those, but I could do a temperature check about local vs Amazon. At least one of them probably buys from Amazon.
I was thinking about giving pairs a company to research and they could look up reasons to boycott or support them and then debate that. I don’t know if anyone would want to argue for the companies, but they might want to argue against boycotting. I could maybe assign each of them a role in the company, industry, interest groups and government, then have them debate a policy.
I took a speech class in college and was assigned pro-gun and pro-hunting as my platform for the persuasive speech, something which I am not, actually, in favor of for the most part. I took it seriously, and did a good enough job to get an A. I still don’t support those positions but that’s not the point.
It’s actually really good to get students to research and write things they disagree with to some extent because it opens them up to new alternatives and information, and forces them to really think about good ways to counter-argue their own beliefs. Which imho is super useful long term because it makes people very aware of the… I guess non-absurdity? of their opposition. Like those people often came to their beliefs for similarly logical (or illogical) reasons you arrived at your own.
So maybe them not wanting to argue for the company doesn’t really matter, if you assign randomly and tell them they don’t have to agree with the position, but they do have to make a solid effort to support it. Even better if you give each of them an opportunity to swap sides for another, maybe similar, thing later.
How about:
You don’t have much choice as an individual consumer because huge conglomerates are allowed to buy or ruin competitors.
Shrinkflation?
Push to buy local, union, or from co-ops
I need to find something that they can discuss- I feel like they might all agree about those, but I could do a temperature check about local vs Amazon. At least one of them probably buys from Amazon.
I was thinking about giving pairs a company to research and they could look up reasons to boycott or support them and then debate that. I don’t know if anyone would want to argue for the companies, but they might want to argue against boycotting. I could maybe assign each of them a role in the company, industry, interest groups and government, then have them debate a policy.
I took a speech class in college and was assigned pro-gun and pro-hunting as my platform for the persuasive speech, something which I am not, actually, in favor of for the most part. I took it seriously, and did a good enough job to get an A. I still don’t support those positions but that’s not the point.
It’s actually really good to get students to research and write things they disagree with to some extent because it opens them up to new alternatives and information, and forces them to really think about good ways to counter-argue their own beliefs. Which imho is super useful long term because it makes people very aware of the… I guess non-absurdity? of their opposition. Like those people often came to their beliefs for similarly logical (or illogical) reasons you arrived at your own.
So maybe them not wanting to argue for the company doesn’t really matter, if you assign randomly and tell them they don’t have to agree with the position, but they do have to make a solid effort to support it. Even better if you give each of them an opportunity to swap sides for another, maybe similar, thing later.