Teacher field guide
Civic learning
A good choice for whom?
Ten free seats, thirty people who want one. How should the crew decide?
Clubs, schools and governments constantly decide who gets limited seats, money or time, and every method helps some people and costs others. Students who can name the trade-off out loud make fairer decisions and can challenge unfair ones without pretending there’s a perfect answer.
What students make
Note, 4–6 sentences
The civic idea
Words that do the work.
- Ethical lensPerspectiva ética
A way of examining a decision, like its consequences, fairness, rights or care for people involved.
Gia looks at how many people get in. Anika looks at whether the process is fair to people who can’t stay late.
- Trade-offTensión entre opciones
A choice where helping one goal limits another.
First-come is quick for Gia to run but favors whoever sees the message first. A lottery is fairer to Anika but needs a sign-up period.
- EqualityIgualdad
Treating everyone the same way, like giving each person an equal chance.
A lottery gives all thirty people the same chance at a seat.
- EquityEquidad
Adjusting how things are shared so people with different needs get a fair chance.
A needs-based rubric could prioritize students who can’t afford a paid version of the workshop.
- CriteriaCriterios
The factors a decision is supposed to use, stated before deciding.
The crew has to publish the rule before sign-ups open, not after they see who applied.
- LegitimacyLegitimidad
Whether people accept a decision as fair because of how it was made.
Even students who don’t get a seat may accept the result if the process was clear in advance.
I’m not asking the plan to revolve around me. I’m asking you to count the cost instead of saying nobody loses.
The evidence
Handle the case file.
Every artifact comes with a question. The captions are the lesson.
FORMOpened Monday, 9 a.m.
Workshop sign-up sheet
CHATSunday, 8:30 p.m.
Crew dinner debate thread
DRAFTSunday night
Three selection options on the whiteboard
Use it in your tools
Take it into class.
Share it, schedule it or edit it in the apps your school already uses.
In the real world
This isn’t just a story.
Real reporting, clips and research on the same question. The crew is fictional; these are not. Each link opens the original in a new tab.
The workshop
45 minutes, block by block.
5 min
The problem
TeacherPresent ten seats, thirty sign-ups, and Anika’s note that she can’t stay late.
StudentsWrite your gut answer and one reason.
CheckEveryone has a position before discussion.
10 min
Three options
TeacherDescribe first-come, lottery and needs-based rubric.
StudentsFor each, list who gains and who carries the cost.
CheckEach option has at least one named cost.
10 min
Two lenses
TeacherIntroduce consequences and fairness lenses (Markkula Center).
StudentsApply both lenses to your preferred option.
CheckStudents find a cost in their own preference.
12 min
Decision note
TeacherModel a 150-word note: choice, reason, strongest objection, revision.
StudentsWrite the note.
CheckNote includes an objection and a revision.
5 min
Hear the cost
TeacherPairs read notes aloud to someone who prefers a different option.
StudentsListener names one thing the note missed.
CheckEach writer receives one specific challenge.
3 min
Exit
TeacherFrame: “I would reconsider if __.”
StudentsComplete the frame.
CheckCondition is concrete and checkable.
Differentiated routes
One case. Seven ways in.
Each route changes what students read, make and prove, not only how long it takes.
Middle school
Grades 6–8: Hold a small-group discussion, then write a short note to the thirty students explaining how the ten seats will be given out.
- Sources
- The three options and Gia and Anika’s perspectives.
- Product
- Note, 4–6 sentences
- Raises the rigor
- Add one change that reduces the cost for people who won’t get a seat.
Supports
- Who-gains / who-pays chart
- Frames: “We chose __ because __. This is hard for __.”
- Discussion roles: facilitator, recorder, questioner
- Vocabulary: fair, equal, need
Success looks like
- Explains the method clearly
- Gives a reason
- Names who it’s harder for
- Offers one fix
High school
Grades 9–10: Write a 150-word decision note defending one option, its strongest objection and one revision.
- Sources
- Case options and the Markkula Center framework summary.
- Product
- Decision note, 150 words
- Raises the rigor
- Use two lenses, including one that challenges your choice.
Supports
- Decision-note template
- Lens cards: consequences, fairness, rights, care
Success looks like
- Clear choice and reason
- Names the strongest objection
- Proposes a realistic revision
- Uses two lenses accurately
High school
Grades 11–12: Compare the three methods in a memo to a student club, recommending one and specifying the published criteria.
- Sources
- Case materials and the Markkula framework.
- Product
- Memo, 400–500 words
- Raises the rigor
- Address privacy: a needs-based rubric requires personal information. How would you protect it?
Supports
- Options matrix
- Model criteria statement
Success looks like
- Compares all three fairly
- Specifies criteria in advance
- Addresses privacy
- Explains legitimacy of the process
High school
Honors: Argue whether equal chance or greatest need should guide how public programs with limited seats choose participants.
- Sources
- Case materials plus one teacher-selected example (a charter-school lottery or a summer-jobs program).
- Product
- Argument, 600–700 words
- Raises the rigor
- Connect the club decision to one public program without overgeneralizing.
Supports
- Claim/counterclaim chart
- Examples of each method in public life
Success looks like
- Clear, qualified thesis
- Accurate public example
- Engages the strongest opposing lens
- Considers implementation
Pre-AP
Pre-AP: Hold a Socratic seminar on “Is first-come, first-served fair?” using the three options, then write an evidence-based reflection on how your view changed.
- Sources
- The three selection options and the crew’s dinner debate.
- Product
- Seminar participation plus reflection (200 words)
- Raises the rigor
- Quote a classmate’s point accurately and respond to it in writing.
Supports
- Seminar norms and stems
- Higher-order question bank
- Reflection frame: I thought / I heard / I now think
Success looks like
- Contributes a question and a response
- Cites the case
- Accurately represents a peer’s view
- Explains a change or confirmation of view
AP English Language
AP Lang: Write an argument addressed to the twenty students who didn’t get a seat, defending the method the crew chose.
- Sources
- The chosen method and the case facts.
- Product
- Argument letter, about 450 words
- Raises the rigor
- Build credibility with a disappointed audience through concession and specific commitments.
Supports
- Audience analysis grid
- Concession stems
Success looks like
- Defensible thesis
- Concedes the real cost
- Offers commitments tied to the audience
- Line of reasoning is clear
AP U.S. Government
AP Gov: Concept application: explain how the crew’s lottery and needs-based options reflect two American values, equality of opportunity and concern for outcomes, and how ideologies weigh them differently.
- Sources
- Case and a short explainer on core American political values.
- Product
- Concept-application response, about 300 words
- Raises the rigor
- Connect the club decision to one public program that uses a lottery.
Supports
- Values chart
- Ideology comparison chart
- Vocabulary: equality of opportunity, individualism
Success looks like
- Accurately describes the values
- Applies them to the options
- Fair to ideological perspectives
- Accurate public example
AP Seminar
AP Seminar: Team presentation: “How should limited public opportunities be allocated?” Members research lotteries, needs-based selection, merit and first-come systems in real programs, then present a recommendation to the crew.
- Sources
- Case plus teacher-approved sources on allocation methods.
- Product
- Individual research report (800–1,000 words) plus 8-minute team presentation
- Raises the rigor
- Recommendation must include how applicants who don’t get in are treated.
Supports
- Lens assignments
- Comparison matrix
- Presentation storyboard
Success looks like
- Accurate research
- Multiple methods compared
- Synthesized recommendation
- Addresses the people left out
School pathway
Pre-IB: Write a reflective essay on the question: can a fair process produce an unfair result? Use the crew’s seat decision as the main example and one public allocation, such as a school admissions lottery, as a second. Then take part in a structured paired discussion and add a paragraph on what your partner changed in your thinking.
- Sources
- The sign-up sheet, the dinner debate thread, the whiteboard options, the Markkula Center framework and one teacher-selected article on a public lottery.
- Product
- Reflective essay (500–600 words) plus a paragraph on the discussion
- Raises the rigor
- Construct a case where the process you favor produces a result you would call unfair, and explain what you would do about it.
Supports
- Process-versus-outcome organizer
- Lens cards: consequences, rights, fairness and justice, care
- Paired-discussion protocol with listening stems
Success looks like
- Distinguishes procedural fairness from outcome fairness precisely
- Uses two examples without treating them as identical
- Engages a real counterexample
- Discussion paragraph shows genuine listening
Middle Years
IB MYP: Investigate “What makes a fair share?” and design an allocation process for a real school resource.
- Sources
- Case materials; global context: Fairness and development.
- Product
- Process design plus 200-word reflection
- Raises the rigor
- Test the process with three invented applicants and adjust it.
Supports
- Statement of inquiry frame
- Process design template
Success looks like
- Statement of inquiry is clear
- Process has published criteria
- Tested and revised
- Reflection addresses fairness
Access for every learner
- Provide the three options as picture cards
- Read Markkula lenses aloud with one-line summaries
- Spanish vocabulary: justo, igualdad, equidad, sorteo
- Allow oral decision notes
- Reduce to comparing two options
Extension
- Research how a real program uses a lottery and what critics say
- Design a hybrid method and test it against all three lenses
Annotated student work
What a draft shows us.
Write the decision note: how should the crew give out ten seats?
First draft
We should do first come first served because 1it’s the most fair. 2Everyone has the same chance to sign up and if you really want it you’ll sign up fast. It’s simple and 3nobody can complain because they had the same opportunity as everyone else. Also it’s way less work for us than reading thirty applications or doing some random drawing. The people who don’t get in 4can just come to the next workshop whenever we have one. 5This is obviously the best way.
- 1Gap Fair by which lens? Say what kind of fairness you mean.
- 2Evidence Not quite: people who see the message late or work shifts start behind.
- 3Audience Anika could: she saw the message after rehearsal.
- 4Strength Good instinct toward a fix. Make it specific: when, and who gets priority?
- 5Gap Every option has a cost. Name yours.
Revised
We recommend a lottery after a three-day sign-up period. A lottery gives each of the thirty people an equal chance, while first-come, first-served favors whoever sees the message first, which leaves out people like Anika who check their phones after rehearsal. The cost is that a lottery doesn’t prioritize people with the greatest need. To reduce that, we’ll announce the sign-up in the group chat, at the bookshop counter and on paper, and we’ll run a second session for the twenty people who don’t get seats. We’d reconsider if the second session can’t happen.
Assessment
One-page rubric.
Mark the evidence you see. Leave room for a comment and a next step.
| Criterion | Beginning | Developing | Proficient | Advanced |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Evidence | No reference to who is affected. | Mentions people vaguely. | Names specific people and effects from the case. | Uses case facts to show who gains and who pays. |
| Reasoning | Claims an option is obviously best. | Gives one reason only. | Uses a lens and names the strongest objection. | Uses two lenses and proposes a revision tied to the objection. |
| Audience & purpose | Ignores the twenty who miss out. | Mentions them briefly. | Explains the process to all applicants. | Builds legitimacy by publishing criteria and a remedy. |
| Revision | No change. | Wording only. | Adds a named cost and revision. | Explains how the revision addresses the objection. |
Evidence I saw
Next step
Standards
What this case teaches, by the book.
CCSS 6–8 3
SL.7.1Students discuss options, pose questions and acknowledge new information from peers.W.7.1Students argue for one method and acknowledge an opposing claim.SL.6.1Students follow discussion rules while comparing three options.
CCSS 9–10 3
SL.9-10.1Students propel a discussion by relating the case to broader questions of fairness.W.9-10.1Students write a decision note with a claim, counterclaim and revision.SL.9-10.3Students evaluate a peer’s reasoning for unstated assumptions.
CCSS 11–12 3
SL.11-12.1Students promote divergent perspectives and resolve contradictions where possible.W.11-12.1Students defend a method, weigh the strongest objection and propose a revision.SL.11-12.4Students present a decision with a clear line of reasoning and alternatives.
C3 Framework 4
D2.Civ.7.6-8Students apply civic virtues like fairness in a club decision.D2.Civ.10.6-8Students explain how personal interests shape views of the best option.D2.Civ.9.9-12Students use a deliberative process to choose an allocation method.D2.Civ.11.9-12Students evaluate procedures for making decisions in terms of the purposes they achieve.
AP English Language 3
Reasoning and Organization (REO)Students build a line of reasoning that concedes a real cost.Claims and Evidence (CLE)Students support a value claim with the case’s facts about who is affected.Rhetorical Situation (RHS)Students address thirty applicants, including the twenty who won’t get seats.
IB MYP 3
Individuals and Societies D: Thinking criticallyStudents evaluate options from several perspectives and justify a choice.Language and Literature B: OrganizingStudents organize a decision note logically.Individuals and Societies C: CommunicatingStudents communicate a decision clearly to those affected.
IB DP 2
Theory of Knowledge — Knowledge and the knower (core theme)Students ask how their position shapes what seems fair.Global Politics — key concepts: equality, justice and legitimacyStudents compare equal-chance and needs-based allocation.
Take it off the page
Ask how your school decides who gets limited spots.
- Pick one limited resource at school: a class, a trip, a club seat
- Find out the selection method and whether it’s published
- Ask who the method helps and who it might leave out
- Suggest publishing criteria in advance if they aren’t