Academic Controversy crashes and burns (sort of)

I tried Academic Controversy with my three grade 10 classes over the past couple of days, with mixed results. I first showed them the process using a couple of hot-button topics like school uniforms and banning cell phones if you are under 20 years of age. The students did well with these topics and things went relatively smoothly, though it always surprises me how little some people can come up with when given the opportunity to discuss things that actually have meaning to them. I guess I can't assume everyone actually likes to talk about things; many are very happy copying things and taking everything at face value.

Next I had them debate Mackenzie King's decision to turn away the SS St. Louis that was carrying 900 Jewish refugees in 1939. Our community is NOT a multi-cultural one, and I couldn't get over the complete lack of emotion that went along with the "debate"...I put it in quotations because there really wasn't one.

One thing that students seemed to dislike about Academic Controversy was the amount of restrictions that were placed on them. It seemed like there was no momentum with the arguments and students just read them like an accepted list of facts. When they actually had time to participate in open discussion, few had anything to say. I guess that I had set my expectations too high when I thought that students would bring some emotion to the debate. There was such apathy!

Please let me know if you have used Academic Controversy in your classes, and if so, how it went. Can it be modified and/or improved? I don't want to give up on this supposedly "powerful" strategy just yet.

Using crostics to assess understanding

I think I might have posted about this strategy in the past, but I just used it with my classes recently and was reminded of how effective it can be. Choose a topic from your curriculum (I used the word "Hitler")and, after students have studied content, have them work in pairs to identify words or phrases for each letter in the word that have direct connections to the word. Here is an example created by one of my Grade 10 pairs:

H= hatred for Jewish people
I= I will put Germans back to work
T= terrorized people (or took away rights)
L= led Germany into war again
E= everyone seemed to believe him
R= revenge motivated him (referring to Treaty of Versailles)

I first read about this strategy in one of Paul Vermette's books. It can easily be inserted into a lesson to check for understanding. Cheers.