Lessons 1 and 2: Why does a community need rules?

Rules are tools to solve problems

Description of lesson 1

1. The teacher introduces the task

The students brainstorm their experience in the fishing game

The teacher gets the students involved immediately by prompting them to recall their experience in the fishing game:

1. Describe the problems that you encountered in the fishing game.

The students may be expected to refer to the goals of sustainability. Depending on what was discussed and on their understanding, they will also talk about the difficulties in balancing these goals, and achieving them over long periods of time. A wide range of answers is possible. The students may respond to each other, while the teacher chairs the input round.

2. Give your opinion on your attempts to solve these problems.

This question includes everything: the goals of the players, their way of communicating, their will and ability to co-operate, the depth of understanding the problem, the final outcome – success or failure. If necessary, the teacher reduces the focus of this broad question.

The students may be expected to address the absence of clear rules. Depending on their decisions, they may have attempted to develop such rules.

The students may also suggest certain approaches: rules require state authority, or work best in small networks with more informal rule setting. They may also have thought about the issue of private or public ownership of the fish stocks. The teacher takes note of such comments, as they may be linked to student handout 5.2.

The teacher outlines the task.

The initial brainstorming has provided the context for the task. The teacher explains that the fishing community incurred such serious problems because of the absence of a clearly set framework of rules that defined the mode, and perhaps also the goal of interaction.

The students’ experience in the fishing game can be generalised:

• No human society exists without conflict.

• No human society will survive without co-operation.

• No community can co-operate or settle its conflicts in a peaceful manner without an institutional framework of rules.

• These rules can be enforced by law, but alternative solutions are possible too.

The students can now explore what rules serve the community best. They return to their roles as members of the fishing community, but now the game is different. They act as inventors of rules. They form groups and draft rules, compare them and judge them, and in a conference, finally vote to adopt a framework of rules for their fishing community.

The schedule for decision making

The students receive student handout 5.1.

The teacher explains that the game is a model of a political decision-making process – a special one, dealing with the introduction of basic rules, rather than a process taking place in an already established framework.

The game continues until lesson 4, when the students step out of the game and reflect on their experience.Student handout 5.1 describes the agenda, and gives some Information on why this particular game method is used here. In the game, as in reality, what makes a good framework for the community is a practical question, not an academic one. The students must make a decision.

The teacher distributes student handout 5.2 as a guide to some key questions worth considering. If the students have addressed any points during the brainstorming that may be linked to the student handout, the teacher makes the students aware of them.

Once the students are ready to start, they form groups.

2. The students work on their project (lessons 1 and 2)

The students form groups of four to six. In turn, the members of each fishing crew enter their names on lists on the blackboard or flipchart, making sure that their crew is represented by at least one member of each group. The teacher explains that this is important to take into account the different experiences and perspectives of all four crews. The teacher records the members of the groups.

The group members first assign basic tasks: 1-2 presenters, 1-2 writers, group manager (chair), mate-rials and time manager, monitor. The groups meet at tables set as wide apart as possible. The materials managers collect the materials for their groups.

The students work in groups during the second half of lesson 1 and during lesson 2.

They are free to plan their work, including homework.

Description of lesson 2

The students share their key choices

At the beginning of lesson 2, the teacher asks each group to report on their basic choices – hierarchy or networking – or a mixed system? Should there be private or public ownership of fish stocks? If two or more groups have made the same choices, the teacher encourages them to share their results at some point during the lesson. Such exchanges can be very helpful in the conference, as similar modeis can be merged into one.

Groups who wish to continue working on their own should not be disturbed.

Agreeing on procedural rules in advance

Once the teacher has taken the floor at the beginning of the second lesson, he/she distributes stu­dent handout 5.4, and asks the groups to read the drafts and decide whether they are acceptable. At the end of the lesson, the groups will be asked to vote. In case of objections or questions, the students should raise these during the lesson.

The groups prepare their presentations

The materials managers collect the materials for presentation during the lesson.

The teacher does not intervene if a group is running late. He/she may remind the group that it is the students’ responsibility to have their presentation ready before the third lesson begins, which allows some final touches to be made at home.

The teacher asks the writers to prepare a final document of their draft – in writing, or printed with a computer – that may be signed by all community members (see the procedural rules in student handout 5.4).