AL TATE RE RELL TICE STINET SITET OITA SPAY ESV ATT EEN IED NADL SOIT PT RRS YOST BA ESN SRI NRE: RN EE NS Conquering Western Civilization With a Contest Probably the most difficult segment of early Western Civilization for most students to understand is the Near (or Middle) East, and of necessity this segment appears at the outset of the course when taught chronologically. College students with little or no background in Euro- pean history, not to speak of world geography, invariably find themselves mired in academic quicksand when confronted with Sumerians, Akkadians, Babylonians, Chaldeans, Assyrians, Hittites, Phoenicians, Hebrews/ Israelites, Hyksos, Medes, Persians, Egyptians, and on and on. The lifestyles, art, culture, and (with only partial exception of the Hebrews) religion of these peoples are all quite foreign to the experiences of first-generation college students who make up the majority of my classes. It is challenging to bring life and meaning to this segment of the course. In response to this challenge, I have developed an instructional strategy that is simple, yet effective—a debate/contest held during the second week of classes. The subject of the debate/contest is “Which Civiliza- tion Contributed Most Significantly to Our Western Heritage?” Students are seated in parallel rows of desks six across and five deep, and I arbitrarily assign each of the rows an ancient civilization to research: Sumeria, Egypt, Persia, Phoenicia, Israel, and Assyria. After two days of research, a volunteer from each row offers the group’s opening statement, and a different student from each group prepares a rebuttal. On the day of the contest, the first six debaters come before the entire class. A “scribe” from each group is asked to write a few of the group’s key points on the board. Two additional student volunteers act as scribes and record the debate. After my explanations of the ground rules for the debate, the individual debaters begin introducing themselves, presenting their opening state- ments, and arguing their points within a three-minute limit. I act as timekeeper. After all presentations have been made, groups take a time-out to confer about their rebuttals. | visit with each group, suggesting how they might make their civilization look better—e.g., by “placing into perspective” (or downgrading) some of the so-called achievements of the various other groups. We reassemble for the closing arguments, again each limited to three minutes. Groups present in reverse order. After rebuttals, members of the audience (students who did not volunteer to give open- ing or closing comments for their groups) vote on the civilization it believes made the most significant contribu- tions (based on the arguments), but no one may vote for his or her group's civilization. We make a quick tally and 2 announce the ultimate “winners.” The next day, some class time is spent debriefing the debate/contest. Especially important is learning how difficult it is to rank or value various kinds of “contribu- tions” or achievements. For example, while Egyptian pyramids were significant as architectural accomplish- ments, we must ask if they were as important to our Western heritage as the development of the Phoenician alphabetic system from which our modern alphabet is derived. And, we must ask if the political and imperial achievements of the Persians’ world empire was as important as the religious system upon which modern Western Judeo-Christian values are based. Students begin to see that big is not necessarily best, and that “might” does not necessarily make “right,” significant points for American students to grasp in an age that sometimes suggests the contrary. A few days after the debate, the class receives a typed handout, courtesy of the debate “scribes,” summarizing key points made in the contest. This handout, in chart form, serves as class notes for the day of the debate. What is the value of this debate/contest? It transfers the teaching responsibility from the instructor to the students. The debate saves class time; a large body of material and the key points about each civilization are condensed into a manageable form. The exercise gets the entire class involved within a short period of time. (Of course, some students are more involved than others— specifically, the ones who volunteer to assume the roles of debaters.) Students are forced to locate the college library within the first several days of the term. As well, some debaters supply maps, thus building a geography lesson into the presentation. In short, Western Civilization comes alive early in the course. Some students who have entered the course with negative attitudes toward history find themselves intrigued, if not totally enthralled. The debate/contest provides an excellent kickoff for the course and a useful point of reference throughout the term. Norman G. Raiford, Instructor, History For further information, contact the author at Greenville Technical College, P.O. Box 5616, Greenville, SC 29606- 5616. Suanne D. Roueche, Editor January 22, 1983, Vol. XV, No. 1 ©The University of Texas at Austin, 1993 Further duplication is permitted by MEMBER institutons for their own personnel. INNOVATION ABSTRACTS is a publication of the National Institute for Staff and Organizational Development (NISOD), Department of Educational Administration, College of Education, EDB 348, The University of Texas at Austin, Austin, Texas 78712, (512) 471-7545. Funding in part by the W. K. Kellogg Foundation and the Sid W. Richardson Foundation. Issued weekly when classes are in session during fall and spring terms. ISSN 0199-106X.