1

Understanding Teaching (UT)

Autumn 2009–2010

Bilquis HAMID

Do Debates Enable Students to Think

Critically and Analytically?

Word count: 3838

Master of Teaching (MTeach)

Institute of Education, University of London

March 2010

2

INTRODUCTION

Students are considered to be the main stake holders in an educational institute,

therefore they should be given an environment to think critically and learn effectively.

Students‟ critical thinking could be enhanced when they are challenged by critical issues

and allowed to express their ideas orally (Ornstein, 1995). Therefore, I opted for debate

as an oral exercise and a good method to measure the critical thinking of my students.

However, Moon (2008, pg.150) has proposed a definition for debate that subscribe to

the same phenomenon, „debate is designed to enact critical thinking- with evidence

given, evaluated and judged‟. Looking back at the above mentioned researchers I would

like to discuss in this paper the importance of debates and discussions in enhancing

students‟ critical and analytical thinking skills.

CONTEXT

In the autumn term 2009 I had been given a chance to observe the practicum lessons

delivered by the Secondary Teacher Education Program (STEP) students of cohort two

at West London Bait-al-Ilm (BAI). Later in spring I had to continue teaching the

literature module to the same class. The religious classes are observed at the Branford

School for girls, which is a mainstream secondary school. The BAIs are opened on all

Saturdays except the term breaks and run from 10:00 a.m. till 1:00 p.m. Out of this

instructional time is two and a half hours whereas the lunch break is thirty minutes.

Usually primary level students attend the assembly after break time is over but the

secondary classes are resumed immediately after break time. The management of the

BAI is well organised as they have streamlined the students to follow the procedures set

at the beginning of the year and keep check on whether the students have reached their

respective classrooms.

3

The classroom is located at the corner of the first floor with no neighbours to disturb the

teaching-learning environment in any way. The corridors are well decorated with

bulletin boards with students‟ and teachers‟ pieces displayed. The room is spacious to

accommodate about thirty students. The classroom walls are decorated with colourful

science drawings. It is well equipped with all the required resources, for example chairs,

desks, computers and whiteboard. Ventilation is according to the comfort level of

students. Seats are arranged in a rectangle form so that each student can easily focus on

the white board and communicate with their peers. However, there are other tables

surrounding the centre, which are often used when students have to move for group

tasks.

There are sixteen thirteen-year-old students in my class in all out of which

approximately ten (six boys and four girls) attend the BAI regularly. The rest of them

show up on alternate Saturdays because that they live very far from the religious centre.

The students are very active and always ready to share their opinions. They are very

socialized with one another and with the teachers. The students not only discuss the

matters related to the classroom with me but share other personal affairs too at the

beginning of the class.

RATIONALE

During my observations I came across a constraint in students‟ learning and teaching

pedagogy. The students were not coming up with the expected learning out comes in

spite of the enthusiastic involvement in the learning activities. Furthermore, the

discussions were unfocused and uncritical rather than challenging enough for the

students. For example, the lesson I observed was covering the topic, „The Sira‟ (the

early biographical literature), and their focus was the various methods to collect the

information about the biography of the Prophet Muhammad done by Ibn Ishaq. It was a

4

well-planned lesson but during the delivery of the lesson I observed that students were

distracted from the topic. Instead of concentrating on the methods of collecting

information the students were discussing the biography of the Prophet. Furthermore, the

teachers were addressing the misconceptions of the students but were unable to direct

them towards the lesson, and thus were unable to achieve the objective of that day.

In addition, I realised that students were very much capable of sharing their ideas and

were intellectually strong enough to interpret and explain various concepts to their peers

during classroom discussions. That is why I reflected on the teaching strategy used by

the teachers that was basically focused on teacher directed questions and answers.

Although the strategy was very much engaging and involving students it could not keep

them focused on the topic taught. I think that these questions were not challenging

enough for these students and did not make them think critically and analytically to

build up the topic. Therefore, I would like to involve the students in debates and

discussions, which would involve them in argumentative discussions on controversial

issues, related to their real life situations.

Students attend schools to enhance their knowledge (Moore, 1995) and develop skills

and attitude. Teachers are responsible for the intellectual and moral development of the

child (Ornstein, 1995). While teaching Secondary Ta‟lim curriculum the teachers

specifically focus on the holistic development of the child. Similarly, I would like my

students to be intellectually and morally strong and that they succeed in every aspect of

life. For which, I am not just trying various teaching techniques that would motivate

students towards learning but I am expecting them to think beyond the textbooks.

Moreover, the interactions involved in the activities would lead them to ask questions

and think critically and analytically. I want my students to clarify their misconceptions

5

by asking questions because in my schooling life I was restricted from doing that as it

was considered as disrespect to a teacher. Therefore, I want my students to have the

ownership of their own learning and I would serve as scaffold for them. As stated by

Muijs and Reynolds (2001) those students perform well, from whom the teachers have

the expectations to perform well.

Once the students are able to acquire the short-term objectives then their teachers can

easily facilitate achieving long-term goals. In my experience of secular as well as

religious education centre (REC) teaching I used many teaching strategies and not a

single one could be said to be perfect. Moreover, if in one class a technique had been

successful, in another class it would have been a complete failure. At times it seemed

impossible to cater to each and every child due to various variables involved, especially

class size. But here in London the BAI has fewer students so I can easily focus on each

and every child and see whether I can get the desired outcomes. The teaching technique

that I used in this spring term was Debate that would enhance students‟ critical and

analytical thinking skills. And the objectives that I focused for critical thinking were to

enable learners to:

Discuss the critical issues in detail and analyse the facts.

Evaluate their arguments respond with reasoning.

TEACHING AND LEARNING ACTIVITIES AND RESOURCES USED

I comfortably used debates and role- plays in my home country Pakistan and observed

that students also took keen interest. But the problem I faced there was that the group of

intelligent students used to dominate their peers. For this I had to apply conditions of

group work. An example of the conditions was that, each member of the groups should

6

be given a chance to state their opinion otherwise the group would lose their points.

Similarly, while using this technique in London BAI context I used the same provision.

I incorporated debates as a tool for analytical and critical thinking skill in my first

lesson plan (see Appendix C). In addition, I decided to include those contextual issues

that would allow students to think and relate to their physical and social environment

and make their own meaning to construct knowledge (Piaget cited in Moore, 2000).

Thus, students comfortably shared their experiences, and contentedly comprehended the

process to hit upon a solution. Similarly, the Vygotskyan theory cited in Wells (1997)

also confirms that the curriculum needs to be reconstructed such that it would challenge

students to assist themselves in focusing on process rather than product in achieving

their goals.

The lesson started very well as they were motivated by the discussions of their own pet.

Students‟ interest towards the topic enhances if they are involved in sharing personal

experiences (Ornstein, 1995). Each student shared the stories related to their pet animals

and birds, which reflected that they internalized the position and importance of them in

their lives. Later on, I had to further expand their thinking towards the environmental

responsibilities as human beings and involved them in a debate. The statement used was

“Humans are superior to plants” and they were given instructions regarding the whole

process. The whole class was divided into two groups A and B, one of which was in

favour of the statement while the other was against. Team A had to start the argument

then team B had to rebut and present their argument which team A had to rebut. Hence,

in this way the whole process was to continue until the goal of the lesson was achieved.

In addition, I also shared the assessment technique that I used during the activity i.e. the

observation checklist (see Appendix B). I used an observation checklist because it is

7

easy to check the criteria achieved by each group. Moreover, the criteria I chose for this

lesson were; respect for the other team, use of facts or evidences, understanding the

topic and presentation style. Furthermore, I included the criteria of respect for the other

team and the presentation style to maintain the discipline among group members.

Therefore, if the instructions are given prior to the activity, then the lesson flows very

smoothly. Secondly, the criteria of using facts and understanding the topic were related

to students‟ critical and analytical thinking. Therefore, I made it clear to them that their

statements should have facts to prove their stance and they should give statement which

would allow the opponent team to think critically and analytically.

CRITICAL REFLECTION

According to Bloom and Tyler (cited in Ornstein, 1995) effective learning is attained

when the objectives are clear, learning activities are set according to the objectives and

assessment is done to evaluate the achievement of the designed objectives. Therefore, I

decided to concentrate on thinking process through debates as Watkins (2001) reaffirms

my belief that students would learn effectively through this method. The debate

statement „Are humans superior to plants?‟ gave the learners a situation to think in

depth and allowed them to evaluate the views of others. A compelling argument is put

forward by Kennedy (2009) that teacher‟s goal to teach and test should not be limited to

knowledge and comprehension level rather it has to go far ahead into higher cognitive

stages.

Kennedy (2009) and Claxton (2008) conducted research where they found that debates

facilitated the teachers to successfully involve the students in learning experience to

attain lower-order thinking skills i.e. knowledge, understanding and application, as well

as higher-order thinking skills i.e. analysis, synthesis and evaluation. During the

8

discussions before debate the students were interpreting the importance of God‟s

creations in their lives which proved that they were using their cognitive skills. While in

the rebutting exercise, I observed that students were analytical (see Appendix D). For

instance, they were analytical while arguing that „humans are not superior because they

depend on plants for food and oxygen to live‟. But they were unable to synthesize and

evaluate, and needed my assistance. According to Kyriakoua (2001) there are context,

content and process variables that hinder learning process. Hence, the proceeding

section of this paper would elaborate those variables.

Discussion and Debates

Classroom interactions or dialogues between teacher-student and student-student are

very important for effective learning. Wells (1997) rightly states that learning depends

on active contribution of students in classroom activities. Vygotsky (cited in Moore,

2000) emphasizes that the student-student discourse assist them to internalize the

acquired knowledge and skills. These dialogues enable them to argue and counter argue

their position. Krieger (2005) opines that debate is a game that engages students in a

range of cognitive opinions. Hence, students involve in process of diverse view points

and finally concluding at one decision (Kennedy, 2009; Watkins, 2001).

Students get an opportunity to groom their interpersonal as well as intrapersonal skills.

Abraham Maslow (cited in Ornstein, 1995) posits that group learning builds the need of

self- actualization and fosters knowledge and trust of others. Muijs and Reynolds (2001)

research emphasizes that students develop the responsibility for their own learning as

well as group accountability through the group work, which in turn develop their

interpersonal skills. Furthermore, during the whole process students think logically,

persuade their viewpoint creatively, organize their thought tactfully and they speak

9

confidently (Krieger, 2005; Wells, 1997). Hence, by practicing these skills students can

evaluate their own learning and become more confident (Claxton, 2008; Watkins,

2001). Thus, students enhance their intrapersonal skills through self- expression.

Although, debates offers a unique opportunity to the students to explore their

capabilities and build upon them, but there are limitations of this technique too.

Kennedy (2009) has pointed out that during debates all the students do not get chance to

participate. For instance, when the debates are carried out in groups the well prepared or

intelligent students get hold of the whole discussions whereas the introverts do not

speak throughout the whole process (Muijs and Reynolds, 2001). According to

Kyriakoua (2001) time was the context variable that hindered in students‟ participation

in my class.

Debates require significant amount of time to be allocated for the research of the topics.

Claxton (2008) rightly states that students need appropriate amount of preparation to

search on the topics and come up with effective arguments for rebutting. In addition, I

think that another variable for the inactive participation of few students was the lack of

resources provided to them to prepare for the debate. As recommended by Claxton

(2008) the explanation sheet of the subject matter could have been provided to the

students to better prepare for the debate. In future I would assign the topic, as a research

project and ask the students to collect information as a take away task. Thus students

would actively participate in the debates with the prior knowledge rather than without it.

Moreover, I was unable to build on the prior knowledge of the students. Piaget proposes

in Moore (2000) that assimilation and accommodation are very vital processes through

which the learners build upon their existing information and comprehension. Eventually

10

without giving them the environment to assimilate I indulged them in the debate. Hence,

some of the students were perplexed by the situation and were unable to support their

respective team. Therefore, I intervened in the group debate and gave hints to students

in such situation. For instance, when team A was perplexed by the comment of

opponent team that „we give you oxygen‟, then I posed a question to team A „do you

need their oxygen?‟ Then they readily came up with the rebuttal that „we can prepare

our own oxygen we do not need yours‟. Torrance and Pryor, 2001; Vygotsky cited in

Moore (2000) rightly commented that students need adult assistance to further

accelerate their thinking processes.

Reflecting upon the activity I realized that debates topics need to be of students‟

interest. Kennedy (2009) and Abraham Maslow (cited in Ornstein, 1995) suggests that

students would involve enthusiastically and put all their efforts, if they are inclined

towards the topic. For instance, I started the lesson with the discussion on their pet

animals, which enabled students to personalize the topic with their lives. And it was

quite interesting for them to share their personal experiences about their pets. In next

half of the lesson they were relating their thinking to the environment while discussing

plants. Plants such as flowers, fruits, vegetables and trees are quite attractive and

everyone was sharing their ideas in the discussions.

Lastly teacher should be a critical thinker too to enhance critical thinking in students.

(Meyers, 1989; Topping, Crowell and Kobayashi, 1989; cited in Moon, 2008) opines

that the teachers should create an environment feasible for students to be critical thinker.

They would allow their students to be critical if they themselves would be critical

enough. Therefore, to enhance my critical thinking I had to encourage thinking process

in my classroom teaching instead of the „thought-out product‟ (Moon, 2008, pg. 134).

11

Hence, debate proves to be a correct strategy to give challenge and support to the

students to expand their critical thinking.

My learning from this debate

During the whole process I realized that the students were actively communicating with

each other because of the appropriate classroom environment. When I used the same

technique in my home country it was challenging to accommodate and involve all the

students in the task. Because, in Karimabad REC all the classes from year seven to

fourteen were arranged in a big hall, instead of separate rooms. Due to lack of distance

between the classes the noise level was too high. Therefore, during the debates students

had problems in paying attention to the arguments and for which each of the teams had

to repeat their statements. However, London BAI gave me an insight into the contextual

suitability of this method. Research by Muijs and Reynolds (2001) posit that a proper

classroom environment is most essential for effective classroom interactions and the

teacher attains the desired goal.

My prior objective was to enable students to think critically and analyze the facts. Thus,

accordingly I gave the instructions to the students to ask „why‟ and „how‟ questions

during the group task and the presentations of the arguments. I observed that students

were coming up with very critical accounts and the opposing teams were defending

their stances with valid evidences, which reflected their critical analysis of the situation.

Although, during they were unable to synthesize and evaluate the situation, and I think

that these students were too young for that. But I believe that they would develop these

cognitive skills with more practice.

12

OUTCOMES

During the rebuttal exercise, I observed that students were coming up with various

critical arguments for which, the opponent team did not had the answers. For example,

one of the team commented that „humans depend on plants for food‟, and then the

opponent team responded that „plants depend on humans for their nourishments‟.

However, at this spot students needed teacher‟s support, for which I gave them a hint

that there are places where humans cannot reach but plants grow. Hence, as a rebuttal

the first team remarked that plants can grow without humans support and gave example

of desert plants.

Torrance and Pryor (2001, p.628) opines that when students are involved in dialogue

they „make their own judgments and thus clarity is achieved‟, even without an adult

support. For example, team B brought up a statement that „when humans die their souls

are raised up to God whereas when plants die their souls go nowhere‟. However, for the

first statement I gave them a hint of Quranic verses but for the second I was unable to

support the team A. But, still they came up with an argument that their opponents need

to prove their stance. Similarly, such arguments were coming up in the rebuttal activity

and I noted those comments to further elaborate in debriefing session after the debate

was over.

During the debriefing session I inquired from the students about their learning. And one

of the student asked, „why do plant‟s soul is not raised to God‟. I was unable to respond

to this question; therefore I forwarded the question to other students. And they were

coming up with various answers such as „human whose soul is bad is reincarnated to

plants and animals‟ and another commented that „ these animals and plants are then

reincarnated to humans and in this way the cycle repeats‟. However, I asked them to

13

further search for this question. I realized that I was unable to give them an authentic

answer but at least I gave them an environment to mobilize their thinking instead of

developing misconception.

Similarly, during the whole process I observed that few students became dominant in

groups and enforced misconceptions regarding the concept. Hence, it was very essential

to clarify any misconception that might have involved throughout the activity (Muijs

and Reynolds, 2001). Therefore, I discussed those misconceptions with the whole class,

which assisted students to internalize the learning processes and build up their

understanding (Vygotsky cited in Moore, 2000). For example, one of the arguments that

humans‟ soul is raised to God was taken as a sign of superiority for humans. Therefore,

during the debriefing session I asked, „whether all the human beings are raised up to

God‟. Then the students realized that only those humans‟ souls whose deeds in this

world are good would be raised high up to God. Torrance and Pryor (2001) reaffirms

my belief that the process of reviewing their own comments would help the students to

proceed from analyzing the situation to synthesizing their learning.

Moreover, through the lesson students „gained a wider perspective on morals and ethics

across culture‟ (draft material, p.51). Furthermore, while students were discussing I

observed that they were realizing that humans are not superior to plants, but all the

creations of God are dependent on each other. In addition, they analyzed that humans

have the accountability to their actions, and only those are superior whose actions are

morally and ethically strong. Similarly, they realized that every human being has

responsibility not only towards their fellow human beings but also towards their

environment.

14

In future I would continue to observe and further use the metacognitive cycle of do,

review, learn and apply (Watkins at al. 2001) as a reflective tool for assessing my own

learning and apply various strategies in different milieu. And not only debates but

discussions also help students to think critically and analytically. Torrance and Pryor

(2001) conducted a research where they used observations as an assessment tool to get

in-depth information about students‟ learning rather than just monitoring the activities

going on in the classroom. I would also use reflective journals as a tool to reflect on the

learning process to further enhance my teaching pedagogy.

CONCLUSION:

Debate is not the only strategy to enhance students learning but it is one of the effective

strategies to enhance their critical and analytical thinking (Kennedy, 2009). It is an

effective strategy for ensuring both group goals and individual accountability. Thus, the

students actively involved in learning process by exploring the learning that takes place

(Watkins, 2001). The speakers‟ ideas regarding topics were reasonable, yet their

arguments were at times too critical to be counter argued. Again, although it is obvious

that both teams were not able to do a great deal of research, but I found that they were

critically and analytically proving their stances with my guidance. Hence, at the end of

the lesson they accepted the fact that humans are accountable to all the creation of God.

15

References:

Black, P. & William, D. (1998). 'Inside the Black Box: Raising Standards through Classroom Assessment’, London School of Education, Kings College. Available online

at: http://www.pdkintl.org/kappan/kbla9810.htm [accessed 3 January 2010]

Claxton, N., 2008. Deliberating across the Curriculum using Deliberative Techniques

in the English as a Foreign Language Classroom: A manual for Teachers of Advance

Level of Students. [E-book]. USA: IDEA Press

Availableat:http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=vIO9HpsIWS0C&printsec=frontcover

&source=gbs_v2_summary_r&cad=0#v=onepage&q=&f=false[accessed 29 December

2009]

Institute Of Ismaili Studies (IIS), 2005. Teachers Guide Module Three: Moral and

Ethical Conduct. London.

Kennedy, R. R., (2009). The Power of In-Class Debate: Active Learning in Higher

Education, 10(3), 225- 236.DOI: 10.1177/1469787409343186.

Krieger, D,. 2005. Teaching Debate to ESL Students: A Six-Class Unit. The Internet

TESL Journal [online]. XI (2). Available at: http://iteslj.org/Techniques/Krieger-

Debate.html [accessed 5 January 2010]

Kyriacou, C. (1996). 'Ways of Thinking about Effective Teaching', In Kyriacou, C.,

Effective Teaching In Schools: Theory and Practice’, Cheltenham: Stanley Thornes.

Available at: http://www.stepvle.org/file.php/3/Kyriacou1996.pdf [accessed 10

December 2009]

Moon, J. (2008). Critical Thinking: An exploration of theory and practice, London and

New York: Routledge.

Moore, A. (2000). „Models of teaching and learning‟, in Teaching and Learning:

Pedagogy, Curriculum and Culture, London: Routledge Falmer.

Muijs, D. & Reynolds, D. (2001). Effective Teaching: Evidence and Practice. Great

Britain: Paul Chapman publishing.

Torrance, H. and Pryor, J. (2001) „Developing formative assessment in the classroom:

using action research to explore and modify theory‟, in British Educational Research

Journal 27(5) (December), pp. 615–631. Available at:

http://www.stepvle.org/file.php/44/TorrancePryor2001.pdf[accessed 15 December

2009]

16

Watkins, C., Carnell, E., Lodge, C., Wagner, P. and Whalley, C. (2001). „Learning about

learning enhances performance‟, in National School Improvement Network Research

Matters 13 (Spring), Institute of Education, University of London.

Wells, G. (1997). 'Dialogic Inquiry in Education: Building on the legacy of Vygotsky' in

Lee, C. and Smagorinsky, P. (2000). Vygotskian Perspectives on Literacy Research,

New York: Cambridge University Press.

17

Appendix A

Understanding Teaching Coursework Focus

Presentations of initial ideas

Description and setting the scene:

The lesson I observed was delivered by two of the STEP teachers. Their main focus was

to implement the literature module. They started teaching this module in September

2009 and ended in December 2009 and covered almost two units having eight topics

altogether. I was there to observe only four of these classes. The first class I observed

was covering the topic, The Early Biographical literature, the Sira and their focus was

the biography of Prophet Muhammad (SAS) written by Ibn Ishaq. It was a well-planed

lesson but during the delivery of the lesson I observed that students were distracting

from the topic. Although the teachers were clearing the misconceptions of the students

there and then but that took too much time and the teachers were not able to achieve the

objective of that day. This reflects that either the previous contents were not been taught

effectively or the teaching strategies used were not effective to enhance students

learning.

Rationale:

As observed during the four sessions the teaching strategy used was mostly discussion

based and students liked talking without focusing to the topics being taught. That

hindered their learning and interpreting knowledge. In order to give them focus I would

try debates, which would not only give them, chance to speak but to think critically and

specifically. In addition I would use role-plays as physical activities, which develop

interest and students‟ involvement in the lesson.

Evaluation strategies:

For evaluation I would use observations checklists. In addition I would take notes and

anecdotes during observations if necessary. I would share the observation checklist with

students, prior any observations.

Main outcome:

I would get clear idea whether these teaching strategies helped my students to

learn effectively. Whether, these strategies would help me in teaching effectively. In the

end it would broaden my horizon to plan my lessons in future.

18

Appendix B

Debate: Are humans superior to plants?

Teacher Name: Ms. Bilquis Hamid Hussain

CATEGORY 4 3 2 1

Respect for

Other Team

All statements,

body language,

and responses

were respectful

and were in

appropriate

language.

Statements and

responses were

respectful and

used appropriate

language, but

once or twice

body language

was not.

Most statements

and responses

were respectful

and in

appropriate

language, but

there was one

sarcastic remark.

Statements,

responses and/or

body language

were consistently

not respectful.

Use of

Facts/Statistics

Every major

point was well

supported with

several relevant

facts, statistics

and/or examples.

Every major

point was

adequately

supported with

relevant facts,

statistics and/or

examples.

Every major

point was

supported with

facts, statistics

and/or examples,

but the relevance

of some was

questionable.

Every point was

not supported.

Understanding

of Topic

The team clearly

understood the

topic that

Humans are

accountable to

God‟s creation

and presented

their information

forcefully and

convincingly.

The team clearly

understood the

topic that

Humans are

accountable to

God‟s creation

in-depth and

presented their

information with

no difficulty.

The team seemed

to understand the

main points of

the topic that

Humans are

accountable to

God‟s creation

and presented

those with

difficulty.

The team did not

show an adequate

understanding of

the topic that

Humans are

accountable to

God‟s creation.

Presentation

Style

Team

consistently used

gestures, eye

contact, tone of

voice and a level

of enthusiasm in

a way that kept

the attention of

the audience.

Team usually

used gestures,

eye contact, tone

of voice and a

level of

enthusiasm in a

way that kept the

attention of the

audience.

Team sometimes

used gestures,

eye contact, tone

of voice and a

level of

enthusiasm in a

way that kept the

attention of the

audience.

One or more

members of the

team had a

presentation style

that did not keep

the attention of

the audience.

19

Appendix C

LESSON PLAN # 1

BAI / students’ age: West London /

13years

Teacher: Ms Bilquis Hamid

Date: 16th

January 2010 Module: Selections from Muslim devotional

and Ethical literature.

Unit: 03 Lesson number: 3.1

Lesson Focus: Humans accountability towards Allah’s creation

References and resource materials: Colour papers, white board, pens, colours and observation checklist.

Expected learning outcomes:

Gain familiarity with the Ikhwan al – Safa‟ and their encyclopedic work, the

Rasa‟il.

Be aware of the genre of fables and its use by the Ikhwan al – Safa‟ in „The case

of the Animals versus Humans‟

Understand the central argument of „The case of the Animals versus Humans‟

Students’ Prior learning:

Primary Four ,book 2 : A fountain of stories

Lesson Content, Organization and Management:

Teacher would introduce herself to the students (2 min)

Recap of previous module (Revelation and prophecy, Glimpses from the lives of

the Imams) through questioning. (15 min)

Setting class rules with class, students would decide and draw symbols on paper

instead of writing the rules (for example, for speak softly they draw an ear, etc.)

(10 min)

Initiating Activity:

Teacher would ask if someone has a pet at home. Later 2-3 students would

share some story about that pet and within that story she would elicit the notion of

care for the animals. (7 min)

Developmental Activity:

The teacher would introduce the topic by relating to a story about animals and

humans that they have already learnt in their Primary REC classes. She would

explain who the writers of Ikhwan al- safa were and who the audience of the

writings was.

Then each student would read the story from his or her textbooks pg # 70 – 72.

( (10 min)

Students will write down according to their thinking, the main theme of the story

in pairs and share with the group. (15 min)

Then would debate on the statement, Are humans superior to plants? (30 min)

Students and teacher would come up to a consensus that humans have

accountability toward Allah‟s creation regarding every living and non-living

thing around them.

Concluding Activity: (7 min)

Teacher would ask,

If you were the author of the story what would have been your conclusion? Students

would share orally.

20

Recap Questions.

1. What is the difference between Hadiths and Sira?

2. Who worte the sira of the Prophet Muhammad which you wrote?

3. How did Muhammad convey the message of God at Ghadir khumm?

4. What is Shia perspective of this message?

5. Who was Qadi Al Numan?

6. What was Ahd document?

7. Who wrote Nahj al balagha? What he meant by describing the beauty of

peacock?

8. How did Qadi al numan interpret the fountain pen?

9. What do you remember about the sayings of Sultan Muhammad Shah Aga

Khan?

10. What do you mean by Pluralism?

Lesson Strategies:

Debate and discussions.

Assessment Methods:

Students will share, whether the humans are accountable to other things then

animals. Then she would ask them to take a home task,

Write a story of a debate between the nature (trees, plants, water, etc) and humans.

Write your own conclusion.

Reflection on teaching and learning practices:

Students will answer these questions in their note books,

What did I learn today?

What the most interesting part of today‟s lesson?

21

Appendix D

Rebuttal exercise of opponent teams

Example 1:

Team A (Team in favour of statement): We humans are superior than you as we can

move around freely.

Team B (Team against the statement): You move because we give you oxygen.

Team A: we are scientists we can produce oxygen ourselves in laboratory.

Example 2:

Team B: We provide you with food that you eat and keep your selves alive.

Team A: We give you water, soil, and keep you in sunlight so that you can grow.

Team B: What happens when you are not there to water us for example in deserts and

mountains? We can grow by ourselves we do not need you to grow.

Example 3:

Team B: We are superior to you as when we die our souls are raised up to God where

as when you die you are there nowhere.

Team A: We do not agree that your souls are raised to God; do you have proof for this

statement?

Team B: Yes, the proof is the holy book Qur‟an in which God has promised to rise up

human soul and would bring us out of our graves and would deal with our reckoning on

the Day of Judgment.