Lesson 17: How should the crew give out ten free seats? Educator guide

Ten seats, thirty names

The story: The sheet fills up fast

The crew has ten free seats for a workshop. Thirty people want one. The crew opened a sign-up sheet on Monday at 9 a.m. Twenty-two names were on it before 10 a.m. By Wednesday, there are thirty. The sheet still says, “How seats will be chosen: to be announced.”

Gia is running the sign-up. She wants to give the seats to the first ten names. It is simple, she can post it tonight and she has a shift at seven. Mateo suggests a lottery instead. A third idea on the whiteboard would give seats to people who cannot afford the paid version of the workshop.

Anika is 16 and at rehearsal most days. She checks her phone after rehearsal ends. “By the time I see the message, ten people will have answered,” she says. “I don’t even need a seat. I just want to know how you’re picking.”

Your role is to write down the rule before the crew picks the ten names.

Every rule has a cost

Any way of giving out ten seats to thirty people leaves twenty people without one. In Lesson 4, you learned that a trade-off is a choice where getting one benefit means accepting a cost or giving something up.

Look at the three options on the whiteboard. First come, first served is fast, but it favors whoever sees the message first. A lottery gives everyone the same chance, but it takes more work, and it does not consider need. A needs-based option helps people who cannot afford the paid workshop. Equity is a way of sharing that adjusts for different needs so everyone gets a fair chance. But that option asks people to share personal information. In Lesson 6, you learned that consent is permission a person gives for something specific. Applicants would need to agree to share that information, and the crew would need to protect it.

Criteria are the standards or reasons a group uses to make a decision. The crew should write its criteria down before anyone is chosen. Then everyone knows the rule ahead of time. Even people who do not get a seat may accept the result if the rule was clear. If the crew picks a rule after seeing the names, people may wonder if it was chosen to favor someone.

Anika is not asking the plan to revolve around her. “Just don’t tell me nobody loses out,” she says, “because I would.” Gia admits she mostly wanted the job off her list.

How real sellers choose

In November 2022, more than 3.5 million people registered for presale codes for Taylor Swift’s Eras Tour. Ticketmaster says about 1.5 million got codes. The other 2 million went on a waitlist (Ticketmaster, November 19, 2022). Someone chose a method for deciding who got a chance.

Key terms in this passage

Criteria

Criteria are the standards or reasons a group uses to make a decision.

Trade-off

A trade-off is a choice where getting one benefit means accepting a cost or giving something up.

Equity

Equity is a way of sharing that adjusts for different needs so everyone gets a fair chance.

Consent

Consent is permission a person gives for something specific, such as sharing a record with a named person.

Real sources cited

• Ticketmaster, “The Eras Tour onsale explained,” November 19, 2022. Open the source (opens in a new tab)

Fair before, not fair after

The story: To be announced

The crew has ten free seats for a workshop and a sign-up sheet that filled faster than anyone expected. It opened Monday at 9 a.m. Twenty-two names were on it before 10. By Wednesday, there are thirty. The line at the bottom still reads, “How seats will be chosen: to be announced.” The crew has been arguing about that line since dinner on Sunday.

Gia is running the sign-up, and she wants first come, first served. It is easy to explain, she can post it tonight and she has a shift at seven. Mateo suggests a lottery. Gia points out what that costs: a sign-up window and someone to run the drawing. A third option sits on the whiteboard, a needs-based rubric that would favor people who cannot afford the paid version of the workshop.

Anika, 16, is at rehearsal most days, and her phone lives in her bag until rehearsal ends. Under first-come, she would see the message after the seats were gone. She is careful about what she is asking for. She does not need a seat. She wants to know how the crew is picking, and she wants them to be honest that someone like her would lose out.

Your role is to write down the rule before the crew picks the ten names.

Criteria, trade-offs and equity

Criteria are the standards or reasons a group uses to make a decision. The new skill is setting fair criteria before choosing and saying honestly who each rule leaves out. The whiteboard already does part of that work. Option A, first come, first served, is fast to run and favors whoever sees it first. Option B, a lottery after a three-day sign-up, gives everyone an equal chance but needs a sign-up window and a drawing. Option C, a needs-based rubric, prioritizes people who cannot afford the paid version but needs personal information and someone to judge it.

Lesson 4 gave you the word trade-off, a choice where getting one benefit means accepting a cost or giving something up. Every option seats exactly ten people, so every option leaves twenty without a seat. The choice is which cost to accept. Equity is a way of sharing that adjusts for different needs so everyone gets a fair chance. Option C aims at equity, and it carries a cost Lesson 6 prepared you to see. Consent is permission a person gives for something specific. A needs-based rule asks applicants to share personal information, so the crew would need their consent and a plan for who sees it.

Timing matters as much as the rule. The sign-up sheet shows most names arrived in the first hour, before any rule was posted. If the crew picks a rule now, after seeing the names, people may wonder whether it was chosen to favor someone. A rule stated clearly and early is easier to accept, even for the twenty who miss out.

Anika also suggests a better way to compare the options. Ask two questions. Which option helps the most people? And is the way we pick fair to everyone? Gia, for her part, admits she mostly wanted the job off her list. What would change her mind is learning that the people the crew most wants in the room are the ones who would see the message last.

Real rationing decisions

Santa Clara University’s Markkula Center suggests looking at a decision through several ethical lenses, including consequences, rights, fairness, the common good, character and care (Markkula Center for Applied Ethics, revised November 5, 2021). The lenses can point to different answers.

Real institutions face the same choice. New York City uses random lotteries for some middle and high school seats (Chalkbeat New York, October 1, 2024). For Taylor Swift’s Eras Tour, more than 3.5 million people registered for presale codes. Ticketmaster says about 1.5 million received codes, and 2 million were waitlisted (Ticketmaster, November 19, 2022).

Key terms in this passage

Criteria

Criteria are the standards or reasons a group uses to make a decision.

Trade-off

A trade-off is a choice where getting one benefit means accepting a cost or giving something up.

Equity

Equity is a way of sharing that adjusts for different needs so everyone gets a fair chance.

Consent

Consent is permission a person gives for something specific, such as sharing a record with a named person.

Real sources cited

• Markkula Center for Applied Ethics, Santa Clara University, “A Framework for Ethical Decision Making,” November 5, 2021. Open the source (opens in a new tab)
• Chalkbeat New York, “What your ‘lottery’ number for middle and high school applications means,” October 1, 2024. Open the source (opens in a new tab)
• Ticketmaster, “The Eras Tour onsale explained,” November 19, 2022. Open the source (opens in a new tab)

Choosing a rule before you see the names

The story: Thirty names, no rule

Ten free workshop seats should be good news. For the crew, it is a problem. The sign-up sheet opened Monday at 9 a.m., and 22 names arrived before 10. By Wednesday, 30 people have signed up, and the sheet still says the selection method is “to be announced.” The crew has argued since Sunday dinner.

Gia is running the sign-up, and her preference is practical. First ten to reply get a seat. It is simple, she can post it tonight and she has a shift at seven. Mateo proposes a lottery, and Gia counts its costs: a sign-up window and someone to run the drawing. The whiteboard lists a third choice, a needs-based rubric for people who cannot afford the paid workshop. It would require personal information and someone to judge it.

Anika, 16, is at rehearsal most days and checks her phone only afterward. Under first-come, she would find out after the seats were gone. Her request is precise. She does not need a seat. She wants the crew to say how it is picking, and not to pretend nobody loses out, because she would. When someone asks whether she wants the plan to revolve around her, she says no. Admit the cost, and then maybe they can fix that part.

Gia’s honesty moves the conversation too. She admits she mostly wanted the task off her list. What would change her mind is evidence that the people the crew most wants in the room are the ones who would see the message last. She would rather ask them than guess.

Your role is to write down the rule before the crew picks the ten names.

Criteria first, then choice

Criteria are the standards or reasons a group uses to make a decision. The new skill is setting fair criteria before choosing and stating who each rule leaves out. It builds on Lesson 4, where you learned that a trade-off is a choice where getting one benefit means accepting a cost or giving something up. Here every option seats ten and excludes twenty, so the real decision is which cost the crew is willing to defend.

Each option distributes that cost differently. First-come rewards attention and availability, which disadvantages people with rehearsals, shifts or less phone time. A lottery gives equal odds but ignores need. A needs-based rubric pursues equity, a way of sharing that adjusts for different needs so everyone gets a fair chance. It also imposes an entry cost. Applicants must disclose personal information, and Lesson 6’s concept of consent, permission a person gives for something specific, applies. The crew would need to ask for only what it needs, get clear consent and decide who sees the answers.

Timing is itself an ethical variable. The sheet shows most sign-ups arrived before any rule existed. Choosing a rule after seeing the names invites suspicion that the rule was picked to favor someone. A rule announced in advance can earn acceptance even from those who lose. That is why the crew’s decision note should state the method, its main objection and one change that reduces the cost for people who miss out.

Anika offers a structure for comparing options, and it maps onto two classic ethical approaches. One asks which option helps the most people, a consequences question. The other asks whether the way of choosing is fair to everyone, a fairness question.

Lenses and real allocation debates

The Markkula Center’s framework offers several lenses: consequences, rights, fairness, the common good, character and care. These lenses can reveal different concerns rather than producing an automatic score (Markkula Center for Applied Ethics, revised November 5, 2021). The Belmont Report, a foundational federal statement on research ethics, lists five widely accepted ways to share benefits and burdens: an equal share, individual need, individual effort, societal contribution and merit (Belmont Report, April 18, 1979).

Scarcity decisions happen at every scale. During the COVID-19 pandemic, a bioethicist explained how leaders chose who received vaccines first (NPR, December 20, 2020). Medical experts argued against first-come, first-served for scarce resources and proposed explicit criteria instead (Emanuel et al., New England Journal of Medicine, May 21, 2020). In New York City, families disagree over lotteries versus grades for high school admissions (Chalkbeat New York, August 9, 2023). In each debate, people agree that there is not enough to go around. They disagree about which rule should decide who gets a share, and that is the crew’s question too.

Key terms in this passage

Criteria

Criteria are the standards or reasons a group uses to make a decision.

Trade-off

A trade-off is a choice where getting one benefit means accepting a cost or giving something up.

Equity

Equity is a way of sharing that adjusts for different needs so everyone gets a fair chance.

Consent

Consent is permission a person gives for something specific, such as sharing a record with a named person.

Real sources cited

• Markkula Center for Applied Ethics, Santa Clara University, “A Framework for Ethical Decision Making,” November 5, 2021. Open the source (opens in a new tab)
• National Commission for the Protection of Human Subjects of Biomedical and Behavioral Research; published by the U.S. Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, “The Belmont Report,” 1979. Open the source (opens in a new tab)
• NPR, “The Ethics Of Who Gets The COVID-19 Vaccine And When,” December 20, 2020. Open the source (opens in a new tab)
• New England Journal of Medicine (Emanuel et al.), “Fair Allocation of Scarce Medical Resources in the Time of Covid-19,” May 21, 2020. Open the source (opens in a new tab)
• Chalkbeat New York, “Debate over NYC high school admissions heats up at parent meeting,” August 9, 2023. Open the source (opens in a new tab)

Allocating scarce goods fairly

The story: Thirty applicants, ten places

The crew has ten free seats in a workshop and thirty people who want them. A sign-up sheet opened Monday at 9 a.m. with no stated selection method. Twenty-two names arrived within the first hour, and the list reached thirty by Wednesday. The crew’s whiteboard lists three methods, each with its benefit and cost. First come, first served is fast but favors whoever sees it first. A lottery after a three-day window gives equal chances but requires a window and a drawing. A needs-based rubric prioritizes those who cannot afford the paid version but requires personal information and a judge.

The crew members’ positions are candid. Gia, who runs the sign-up and has a shift at seven, prefers first-come because it is simple. She later admits she mostly wanted the task off her list. Mateo proposes a lottery. Anika, 16, who checks her phone only after rehearsal, would be excluded by first-come. She explicitly declines to make the decision about herself. She does not need a seat. She wants a stated method and an honest account of who loses.

The case asks students to treat a small allocation as a serious ethical problem, because the same structure governs school admissions, housing lotteries and medical triage.

Your role is to write down the rule before the crew picks the ten names.

Procedure, criteria and consent

Criteria are the standards or reasons a group uses to make a decision. The new skill is setting fair criteria before choosing and disclosing who each rule disadvantages. Lesson 4’s trade-off, a choice where getting one benefit means accepting a cost or giving something up, is unavoidable here. Every method seats ten and excludes twenty. Choosing among them means choosing which cost to accept and defend.

Each method encodes a principle. First-come rewards speed and availability, which correlate with flexible schedules rather than need or merit. A lottery embodies equal chance and treats applicants as interchangeable. A needs-based rubric pursues equity, a way of sharing that adjusts for different needs so everyone gets a fair chance. It also shifts costs onto applicants, who must disclose personal information. Lesson 6’s consent, permission a person gives for something specific, frames that cost. Any data collection should be minimal, voluntary and limited to people who need to see it.

Procedure carries independent moral weight. The sheet shows that most names arrived before any rule was posted, so a rule adopted now will be applied to a known list. That invites the suspicion that it was chosen to produce a result. Announcing criteria before selection is a form of procedural fairness that can secure acceptance from those who lose. A decision note should therefore state the method and the reason for it, name the strongest objection and offer one mitigation for those who miss out.

Anika’s proposed framing, comparing which option helps the most people and whether the method is fair to everyone, separates outcome-based and fairness-based reasoning. Holding both keeps the crew from mistaking an efficient rule for a just one.

Frameworks and real-world allocation

The Markkula Center’s framework examines decisions through lenses of consequences, rights, fairness, the common good, character and care. It explains that ethics and law are different questions (Markkula Center for Applied Ethics, revised November 5, 2021). The Belmont Report treats justice as fairness in distribution and names five accepted bases: equal share, need, effort, societal contribution and merit. It also holds that “respect for persons requires that subjects, to the degree that they are capable, be given the opportunity to choose what shall or shall not happen to them” (Belmont Report, April 18, 1979). That principle bears directly on a rubric that asks for personal information.

High-stakes allocation debates mirror the crew’s options. Emanuel and colleagues argued that first-come, first-served is a poor way to allocate scarce medical resources (New England Journal of Medicine, May 21, 2020). Commentators laid out competing vaccine criteria such as risk, fairness and benefit (Scientific American, September 3, 2020). New York City uses random lottery numbers for some school admissions (Chalkbeat New York, October 1, 2024). Consumer markets make similar choices. For the Eras Tour presale, more than 3.5 million people registered, about 1.5 million received codes and 2 million were waitlisted (Ticketmaster, November 19, 2022).

For public servants, ASPA asks members to “treat all persons with fairness, justice, and equality and respect individual differences, rights, and freedoms” (ASPA Code of Ethics, 2013).

Key terms in this passage

Criteria

Criteria are the standards or reasons a group uses to make a decision.

Trade-off

A trade-off is a choice where getting one benefit means accepting a cost or giving something up.

Equity

Equity is a way of sharing that adjusts for different needs so everyone gets a fair chance.

Consent

Consent is permission a person gives for something specific, such as sharing a record with a named person.

Real sources cited

• Markkula Center for Applied Ethics, Santa Clara University, “A Framework for Ethical Decision Making,” November 5, 2021. Open the source (opens in a new tab)
• National Commission for the Protection of Human Subjects of Biomedical and Behavioral Research; published by the U.S. Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, “The Belmont Report,” 1979. Open the source (opens in a new tab)
• New England Journal of Medicine (Emanuel et al.), “Fair Allocation of Scarce Medical Resources in the Time of Covid-19,” May 21, 2020. Open the source (opens in a new tab)
• Scientific American, “How to Decide Who Should Get a COVID-19 Vaccine First,” September 3, 2020. Open the source (opens in a new tab)
• Chalkbeat New York, “What your ‘lottery’ number for middle and high school applications means,” October 1, 2024. Open the source (opens in a new tab)
• Ticketmaster, “The Eras Tour onsale explained,” November 19, 2022. Open the source (opens in a new tab)
• American Society for Public Administration (ASPA), “ASPA Code of Ethics,” 2013. Open the source (opens in a new tab)