D2.Civ.9.6-8: Comparing How Different Groups Deliberate and Decide
In plain English: D2.Civ.9.6-8 is the C3 Framework civics indicator for grades 6-8 that asks students to compare deliberative processes used by many kinds of groups. Students compare how a town meeting, a council, a court and a youth board discuss a question and decide: who takes part and speaks, whether it is public, and which decision rule it uses.
Compare deliberative processes used by a wide variety of groups in various settings.
C3 Framework for Social Studies (NCSS) · Dimension 2: Applying Disciplinary Concepts and Tools · Discipline: Civics · Participation and Deliberation: Applying Civic Virtues and Democratic Principles · Official standard
Students learn to compare deliberative processes used by a wide variety of groups in various settings, the skill named in D2.Civ.9.6-8. To deliberate is to talk through a question carefully, weighing reasons, before deciding. A deliberative process is the set of steps and rules a group follows to do that: who takes part, who speaks and when, whether outsiders can watch, and how the final decision is made.
The lesson compares four very different groups: a New England town meeting as John Fiske described it in 1890, the Confederate Council of the Haudenosaunee (Iroquois) Confederacy in the version Arthur C. Parker printed in 1916, the conference of the U.S. Supreme Court as the federal courts describe it today, and an invented library teen board that decides by consensus. Students build a five-question comparison chart, test each process in a short simulation, and finish by explaining why groups with different jobs choose different processes. The homework applies the chart to a new invented group, a youth soccer league board.
Learning Objectives
By the end of this lesson, students will be able to:
Define deliberation, deliberative process and decision rule, and name the parts of a deliberative process
Describe the deliberative process of a town meeting, a Native nation's confederate council, a court and a youth board, citing evidence from the sources
Compare two or more processes using five questions: who takes part, who speaks and when, open or private, decision rule, and how disagreement is handled
Explain why a group's purpose and setting help decide which process it uses
Prior Knowledge Required
Students should already be comfortable with:
Taking part in a class discussion with agreed rules and roles SL.6.1
Citing evidence from a source to support an answer RH.6-8.1
Applying civic virtues such as respect and fairness in a group D2.Civ.7.6-8
"Think of two groups you belong to: a family, a team, a club, a class or a group of friends. When each group has to make a decision, how does it do it? Does everyone get a say? Does someone decide alone? Do you vote, or keep talking until everyone agrees?"
Students jot answers on a sticky note for each group, then post them on the board under three headings the teacher writes: Vote, Everyone agrees and One person decides. Point out that the class has just started comparing processes. Introduce the word deliberate (to talk through a choice carefully, weighing reasons, before deciding) and the question for the day: Why do different groups deliberate in different ways?
Direct Instruction15-20 minutes
Part 1: The parts of a deliberative process. Every group that deliberates answers the same five questions, whether it writes the answers down or not. Hand out Diagram 1 as a blank chart. Define three terms the chart uses:
Decision rule: the rule that says when the group has decided. A majority rule needs more than half of the votes. Unanimity means every member agrees. Consensus means the group keeps talking until every member can at least accept the decision, even if it is not each person's first choice.
Presiding officer: the person who runs the meeting, such as a moderator, a chair or a facilitator.
Dissent: disagreement with the group's decision, and the record of it.
Four decision rules in this lesson (working definitions)
Decision rule
When the group has decided
Example from everyday life
Majority
More than half of the votes cast are yes
A class votes 15 to 11 for a field-trip date
Unanimity
Every member votes yes
A three-person team must all sign off on a project
Consensus
No member blocks; all can accept it
Friends keep talking until everyone can live with the plan
Decision by one person after hearing others
The leader decides after listening
A coach asks the players, then sets the lineup
Part 2: A town meeting (Source 1). John Fiske was a historian who wrote a civics textbook in 1890. He describes the New England town meeting, where the voters of a town meet once a year to govern themselves directly. Glosses: a township or town is a local community and its government; appropriations are decisions to spend public money; the selectmen are the town's elected officers; a warrant is the official notice listing the business of the meeting; the constable is a town officer who posts it; the moderator runs the meeting. Read it aloud, then fill in Diagram 1 together as a model.
1In a New England township the people directly govern themselves; the government is the people, or, to speak with entire precision, it is all the male inhabitants of one-and-twenty years of age and upwards. The people tax themselves. Once each year, usually in March but sometimes as early as February or as late as April, a "town-meeting" is held, at which all the grown men of the township are expected to be present and to vote, while any one may introduce motions or take part in the discussion. [...]
2[...] At the town-meeting measures relating to the administration of town affairs are discussed and adopted or rejected; appropriations are made for the public expenses of the town, or in other words the amount of the town taxes for the year is determined; and town officers are elected for the year. [...]
[...]
3When this meeting is to be called the selectmen issue a warrant for the purpose, specifying the time and place of meeting and the nature of the business to be transacted. The constable posts copies of the warrant in divers conspicuous places not less than a week before the time appointed. Then, after making a note upon the warrant that he has duly served it, he hands it over to the town-clerk. On the appointed day, when the people have assembled, the town-clerk calls the meeting to order and reads the warrant. The meeting then proceeds to choose by ballot its presiding officer, or "moderator," and business goes on in accordance with parliamentary customs pretty generally recognized among all people who speak English.
[...]
4Within its proper sphere, government by town-meeting is the form of government most effectively under watch and control. Everything is done in the full daylight of publicity. The specific objects for which public money is to be appropriated are discussed in the presence of everybody, and any one who disapproves of any of these objects, or of the way in which it is proposed to obtain it, has an opportunity to declare his opinions. [...]
[...]
5In the kind of discussion which it provokes, in the necessity of facing argument with argument and of keeping one's temper under control, the town-meeting is the best political training school in existence. [...]
John Fiske, Civil Government in the United States, chapter II, the New England town-meeting (Source 1: how a town meeting works; cuts marked [...]) (1890). Public domain (published 1890). Source text.
Notice what Fiske leaves out: in his time only men aged 21 and older could vote in town meetings. Today, many New England towns still hold town meetings; at an open town meeting, every registered voter of the town may vote (some larger towns elect representatives to a representative town meeting instead).
Part 3: A confederate council (Source 2). The Haudenosaunee (Iroquois) Confederacy united five nations, the Mohawk, Oneida, Onondaga, Cayuga and Seneca; the Tuscarora joined in the early 1700s, making six. Its Great Law was kept by memory and with wampum (strings and belts of shell beads). In 1916, Arthur C. Parker, a New York State Museum scholar of Seneca descent, printed an English version written down by Seth Newhouse of the Six Nations community in Ontario. Glosses: Lords is Parker's translation of the title of the chiefs who sat in the council; the Firekeepers are the Onondaga chiefs, who keep the council fire; unanimously means with every member agreeing. The numbers in parentheses are Parker's notes on where each law sits in the original code.
19 All the business of the Five Nations Confederate Council shall be conducted by the two combined bodies of Confederate Lords. First the question shall be passed upon by the Mohawk and Seneca Lords, then it shall be discussed and passed by the Oneida and Cayuga Lords. Their decisions shall then be referred to the Onondaga Lords, (Fire Keepers) for final judgment. (10-X, TLL).
2The same process shall obtain when a question is brought before the council by an individual or a War Chief. (11-XI, TLL).
310 In all cases the procedure must be as follows: when the Mohawk and Seneca Lords have unanimously agreed upon a question, they shall report their decision to the Cayuga and Oneida Lords who shall deliberate upon the question and report a unanimous decision to the Mohawk Lords. The Mohawk Lords will then report the standing of the case to the Firekeepers, who shall render a decision (17-XVII, TLL) as they see fit in case of a disagreement by the two bodies, or confirm the decisions of the two bodies if they are identical. The Fire Keepers shall then report their decision to the Mohawk Lords who shall announce it to the open council. (12-XII, TLL).
411 If through any misunderstanding or obstinacy on the part of the Fire Keepers, they render a decision at variance with that of the Two Sides, the Two Sides shall reconsider the matter and if their decisions are jointly the same as before they shall report to the Fire Keepers who are then compelled to confirm their joint decision. (18-XVIII, TLL).
[...]
513 No Lord shall ask a question of the body of Confederate Lords when they are discussing a case, question or proposition. He may only deliberate in a low tone with the separate body of which he is a member. (21-XXI, TLL).
[...]
615 No individual or foreign nation interested in a case, question or proposition shall have any voice in the Confederate Council except to answer a question put to him or them by the speaker for the Lords. (41-XLI, TLL).
Arthur C. Parker (editor), New York State Museum Bulletin 184, The Constitution of the Five Nations, sections 9-11, 13 and 15 (Source 2: how the Confederate Council of the Haudenosaunee decides; two cuts marked [...]) (1916). Public domain (published 1916). Source text.
Model the comparison: in Source 1, "any one may introduce motions or take part in the discussion" (paragraph 1). In Source 2, someone "interested in a case" has no voice "except to answer a question" (paragraph 6). Ask: why might a council of nations keep interested outsiders from arguing their own case?
Guided Practice15-20 minutes
A court (Source 3). The U.S. Supreme Court has nine Justices. After lawyers argue a case in public, the Justices decide it in a private meeting called the conference. Glosses: seniority means time served on the Court, so the most senior Justice has served longest; petitions for certiorari are requests asking the Court to hear a case; to recuse is to step aside from a case; the opinion of the Court is the written explanation of the decision; a concurring opinion agrees with the result for different reasons. The page comes from the Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts, which runs the business side of the federal courts.
1When oral arguments are concluded, the Justices have to decide the case. They do so at what is known as the Justices' Conference. [...]
2Before going into the Conference, the Justices frequently discuss the relevant cases with their law clerks, seeking to get different perspectives on the case. At the end of these sessions, sometimes the Justices have a fairly good idea of how they will vote in the case; other times, they are still uncommitted.
3According to Supreme Court protocol, only the Justices are allowed in the Conference room at this time—no police, law clerks, secretaries, etc. The Chief Justice calls the session to order and, as a sign of the collegial nature of the institution, all the Justices shake hands. The first order of business, typically, is to discuss the week's petitions for certiorari, i.e., deciding which cases to accept or reject.
4After the petitions for certiorari are dealt with, the Justices begin to discuss the cases that were heard since their last Conference. According to Supreme Court protocol, all Justices have an opportunity to state their views on the case and raise any questions or concerns they may have. Each Justice speaks without interruptions from the others. The Chief Justice makes the first statement, then each Justice speaks in descending order of seniority, ending with the most junior justice—the one who has served on the court for the fewest years.
5When each Justice is finished speaking, the Chief Justice casts the first vote, and then each Justice in descending order of seniority does likewise until the most junior justice casts the last vote. After the votes have been tallied, the Chief Justice, or the most senior Justice in the majority if the Chief Justice is in the dissent, assigns a Justice in the majority to write the opinion of the Court. The most senior justice in the dissent can assign a dissenting Justice to write the dissenting opinion.
6If a Justice agrees with the outcome of the case, but not the majority's rationale for it, that Justice may write a concurring opinion. Any Justice may write a separate dissenting opinion. When there is a tie vote, the decision of the lower Court stands. This can happen if, for some reason, any of the nine Justices is not participating in a case (e.g., a seat is vacant or a Justice has had to recuse).
Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts, Supreme Court Procedures, the Conference section (Source 3: how the nine Justices discuss and vote; one cut marked [...]) (2026). US government work (17 U.S.C. 105). Source text.
Comparing who may speak (Sources 1 and 2)
Compare who may speak in a New England town meeting and in the Confederate Council.
Result: In the town meeting, "any one may introduce motions or take part in the discussion" (Source 1, paragraph 1), so every person at the meeting can argue a point. The Confederate Council is a meeting of the nations' chiefs: a person "interested in a case" has no voice there "except to answer a question put to him" (Source 2, paragraph 6). The town meeting is open to every voice; the council keeps people with a stake in the case from arguing it, so the chiefs do the deliberating.
Comparing decision rules (Sources 2 and 3)
What decision rule does each body use?
Result: Each side of the Confederate Council must reach "a unanimous decision" before reporting (Source 2, paragraph 3), and the Firekeepers "confirm the decisions of the two bodies if they are identical." The Supreme Court decides by majority: votes are "tallied," and a Justice "in the majority" writes the opinion of the Court (Source 3, paragraph 5). The council works until every chief on a side agrees; the Court lets the larger number decide.
Counting votes on a nine-member court (Source 3)
Nine Justices vote 5 to 4. Is that a majority, and which opinions may be written?
Result: A majority of 9 is more than 4.5 votes, so 5 is a majority. One Justice in the majority writes the opinion of the Court (paragraph 5). Each of the 4 Justices in the minority may write a dissenting opinion, since "any Justice may write a separate dissenting opinion," and a Justice in the majority who agrees with the result but not the reasons may write a concurring opinion (paragraph 6). The minority loses the vote but keeps its voice in writing.
Why a process fits its purpose (Sources 2 and 4)
The Confederate Council and the library teen board both refuse to decide until members agree. Why might two such different groups choose that?
Result: A reasonable reading: the council joins separate nations, and requiring each side to agree unanimously (Source 2, paragraph 3) means no nation's chiefs are simply outvoted on the Confederacy's business. The teen board is small and only recommends a plan to the head librarian (Source 4, paragraph 10), so it can afford to keep talking until no one blocks. A city of thousands could not work this way: one person could stop every decision. Comparing processes means asking what each group is trying to do.
Pair task: Pairs add a column for Source 3 to their Diagram 1 chart and answer all five questions with a quotation for each. Then they compare their Source 2 and Source 3 columns and circle one question where the two bodies differ most. Use Diagram 2 to check the order of the steps.
Independent Practice15-20 minutes
Students read Source 4, an invented transcript (a written record of what people said) of a library teen board deciding by consensus. A facilitator is a person who runs a discussion fairly without taking a side. In fist-to-five, each person holds up zero to five fingers to show how much he or she supports a plan. Students add a Source 4 column to the chart, then write one paragraph comparing the teen board's process with one of Sources 1-3.
1Ms. Okafor (librarian and facilitator): "The library has a $600 grant for teen services, and the head librarian asked this board to recommend how to spend it. We decide by consensus, which means we keep talking until everyone can accept the plan. After we discuss a plan, everyone shows a fist-to-five. Five fingers means 'I love it.' Three means 'I can live with it.' Two means 'I have doubts, but I won't block it.' A fist or one finger means 'I can't support this yet,' and that person explains why. I don't vote; my job is to keep the discussion fair. We'll go around the circle once before anyone speaks twice."
2Jalen: "I'd spend all $600 on a video-game night: a console, controllers and a few games. It would bring in teens who never come to the library."
3Rosa: "A lot of us come here after school to do homework, and there's no place to work in a group. I'd spend it on a homework corner with a big table, chairs and a whiteboard."
4Wei: "Graphic novels. The teen shelf has about forty of them, and they're always checked out."
5Amara, Devon, Priya, Sam and Lucía each spoke once. Devon said, "I like game night, but the equipment would only be used once a month."
6Ms. Okafor: "Let's test Jalen's plan." The hands were: Jalen 5, Devon 4, Priya 4, Sam 5, Amara 3, Lucía 2, Wei 1 and Rosa a fist.
7Rosa: "I showed a fist because the homework corner would help people every single day, and this plan leaves nothing for it." Wei: "I showed one because the shelf would stay empty."
8Devon: "What if we spend $300 on graphic novels and $300 on the homework corner, and ask the library to let us hold one game night using consoles that members bring from home?"
9Ms. Okafor: "Let's test Devon's plan." The hands were: Jalen 3, Devon 4, Priya 3, Sam 3, Amara 4, Lucía 5, Wei 4 and Rosa 5. Jalen said, "I can live with it, as long as the game night really happens."
10Ms. Okafor: "Nobody showed a fist or one finger, so we have consensus. I'll send the plan to the head librarian as the board's recommendation and include Jalen's condition."
SVHS (invented scenario; the library and the board members are invented), Source 4: the Millbrook Library Teen Advisory Board decides by consensus (invented scenario written for this page) (2026). Original passage written for this page.
Closure5-10 minutes
Exit ticket: "Which process from today would you choose for a decision your class has to make this month, and which would you not choose? Give one reason for each, naming the source."
Teacher note on the sources: Source 1 is quoted exactly from the 1890 edition; Fiske writes "men" and "his" because only men voted in his time, which is worth pointing out. Source 2 is quoted from Parker's 1916 printing. It is one English version of the Great Law, written down from oral tradition; Haudenosaunee people keep and tell the Great Law in their own languages, and versions differ in wording and detail, so treat the passage as Parker's version, not the only one. Avoid claims that it was copied into the U.S. Constitution: historians disagree about that, and this lesson does not depend on it. Source 3 is a current federal publication; Sources 4 and 5 are invented.
Homework passage. Source 5 is the invented minutes (the official written record of a meeting) of a youth soccer league board. A motion is a formal proposal; to second a motion is to support bringing it to a vote.
1Board members present: all 7 (Gloria Mendez, president and chair; Ken Ito; Ruth Adeyemi; Tomás Vega; Carla Novak; Sean Brady; Mei Lin). Also present: 23 parents and 4 coaches.
2Public comment. The chair explained the rules: anyone present may speak once, for up to 2 minutes, and board members listen without debating speakers during public comment. Six people spoke. Three parents asked the board to keep games on Saturday because they work on Sunday afternoons. Two coaches and one parent said the high school has reserved the fields on Saturday mornings for the whole fall season.
3Motion. Ken Ito moved, and Ruth Adeyemi seconded, "that Under-12 games be moved from Saturday mornings to Sunday afternoons for the fall season." Each board member spoke once, going around the table, and the chair spoke last.
4Vote. The board voted by roll call (each member says yes or no aloud when the secretary calls his or her name). Yes: Ito, Adeyemi, Vega, Mendez. No: Novak, Brady, Lin. The motion carried, 4 to 3. At their request, the reasons of the members who voted no are recorded: Carla Novak and Sean Brady said many families cannot come on Sunday, and Mei Lin asked the league to look for other fields first.
5The minutes, including how each member voted, will be posted on the league website within 3 days. The board agreed to report at its next meeting on whether other fields are available.
SVHS (invented scenario; the league and the board are invented), Source 5: minutes of the Lakeside Youth Soccer League board (invented scenario written for this page, for the homework) (2026). Original passage written for this page.
Differentiation Strategies
For Struggling Students
Give Diagram 1 with the Source 1 column filled in and the first row of each other column started
Read Sources 2 and 3 aloud in short parts; give a glossary card with Lords, Firekeepers, unanimous, seniority and recuse
Use the frame: "In Source ___, ___ may speak, but in Source ___, ___. This difference matters because ___."
For Advanced Students
Add a sixth question to the comparison chart (for example, "How long does the process take?") and answer it for all four groups
Explain why Source 2 lets the two sides compel the Firekeepers to confirm a joint decision, and compare that with how the Supreme Court handles a tie
Find out whether a town near you holds a town meeting or a city council meeting, and compare its rules with Source 1
Assessment Guidance
What to Look For
Strong work compares, not just describes: it names the same feature in two processes (for example, who may speak) and states how they differ or agree, with a quotation and paragraph number from each source. Watch for students who list facts about one group without a comparison, or who judge a process as "wrong" without asking what the group's job is.
02
Classroom Activities
3 Activities
1
Process Experts Jigsaw
15 minGroups of 3, then mixed groups
Each student in a home group becomes the expert on one of Sources 1-3, then teaches the others so that every student finishes with a complete comparison chart.
Procedure
Home groups of 3: each member takes Source 1, 2 or 3
Expert groups (all the Source 1 readers together, and so on) answer the five questions in Diagram 1 for their source, with one quotation for each answer (6 minutes)
Experts return home and teach their column; listeners copy it and ask one question each (6 minutes)
Each home group writes one sentence comparing all three sources on question 4, the decision rule (3 minutes)
Answer Key for the Teacher
Source 1: the town's voters; any one may speak or move; open; adopted or rejected by vote; objectors declare their opinions in public
Source 2: the chiefs of the five nations, in two sides plus the Firekeepers; each side discusses within itself; outsiders only answer questions; each side must agree unanimously; the Firekeepers confirm or decide, and paragraph 4 sets the rule if they rule against both sides
Source 3: only the nine Justices; each speaks without interruption, Chief Justice first, then by seniority; private; majority of votes; dissenters may write dissenting opinions
Check for Understanding
Ask each home group: "Which two of the three processes are most alike? Which one is most different from the other two?" Any answer is acceptable if it names the shared feature and quotes both sources.
2
One Question, Three Processes
20 minWhole class
The class decides the same invented question three times, each time with a different process: "Should our class spend its reading-challenge reward on a pizza lunch or on a class set of new books?" Students time each round and record who spoke.
Round 1: Town Meeting (5 minutes)
The teacher posts a short "warrant" naming the question
The class chooses a moderator by secret ballot
Anyone may make a motion or speak; the moderator calls on raised hands
Decide by majority vote of everyone present
Round 2: Two Sides and Firekeepers (8 minutes)
Split the class into Side A, Side B and three Firekeepers
Side A must agree unanimously, then report to Side B; Side B must also agree unanimously
Members may talk only within their own side, in low voices
The Firekeepers confirm the sides' decision if they match, or decide if they differ; if the Firekeepers rule against what both sides agreed, follow Source 2, paragraph 4
Round 3: Conference (7 minutes)
Choose 9 "Justices"; give each a seniority number from 1 (the "Chief") to 9; the rest of the class watches silently, as if outside the room
Each Justice speaks once, without interruption, in seniority order, then votes in the same order
A Justice in the majority writes a two-sentence opinion; a Justice in the minority may write a two-sentence dissent
Debrief Questions
Which round took longest, and why?
In which round did the most people speak? In which did the fewest?
Which round left the fewest people unhappy with the result? Which result would you trust most, and why?
Which round felt most like a real setting: a town, a council of nations or a court?
3
Match the Process to the Group
15 minGroups of 4
Each group gets 6 situation cards. For each one, the group chooses the decision rule it would recommend (majority, unanimity, consensus, or one person decides after hearing others) and whether the meeting should be open or private, and explains why by comparing it with a process from the lesson.
The 6 Situation Cards
Four friends choosing a movie to watch together on Saturday
A town of 2,500 people deciding how much to spend on fixing its roads
A judge panel of three deciding whether a school rule broke a student's rights
A school's student council choosing the theme of the spring dance
A sports team deciding who plays which position in tomorrow's game
A neighborhood association deciding whether to adopt rules that all members must follow
Answer Key for the Teacher
Several answers can be defended; grade the reasoning. Likely choices: card 1, consensus (a small group that must all enjoy it); card 2, majority in an open meeting (public money, as in Source 1); card 3, majority in a private conference with written opinions (a court, as in Source 3); card 4, majority vote of the council, open to the student body; card 5, the coach decides after hearing the players (speed and expertise); card 6, a larger majority or consensus, because the rules bind every member.
Procedure
Each member reads one or two cards aloud
The group agrees on a decision rule and open or private for each card
For each card, the group writes one sentence that begins "This is like Source ___ because ___"
Groups compare their choices for card 2 and card 3 with another group
03
Diagrams & Visual Aids
2 diagrams
Diagram 1: Five Questions for Comparing Any Deliberative Process
To compare deliberative processes, ask the same five questions about each group. The model answers are for the New England town meeting in Source 1. Students add columns for Sources 2, 3 and 4 during the lesson.
Diagram 2: How a Question Moves Through Two Deliberative Bodies
The steps of the Confederate Council of the Haudenosaunee (Source 2, paragraphs 1-4) and of the U.S. Supreme Court's conference (Source 3, paragraphs 3-6). Both bodies follow a fixed order, but the council requires each side to agree unanimously, while the Court decides by majority and records dissent.
04
Homework Assignment
~30 min
D2.Civ.9.6-8 Homework: Comparing a Soccer League Board
Directions: Problems 1-4 use Source 5, the invented minutes of the Lakeside Youth Soccer League board, printed in the Closure phase of the lesson plan, together with Sources 1-4. Problems 5 and 6 ask you to apply the comparison to new situations. Cite sources and paragraph numbers.
Part 1: Describe and Compare (Problems 1-3)
Answer the five questions of Diagram 1 for the soccer board in Source 5, with a quotation or detail from the minutes for each answer.
The motion carried 4 to 3. Explain why that is a majority of the 7 board members. Then explain whether the same plan would have been adopted if the board used the library teen board's consensus rule from Source 4, assuming each member who voted no showed a fist.
Compare public comment at the soccer board (Source 5, paragraph 2) with discussion at Fiske's town meeting (Source 1, paragraph 1). In which setting does a parent in the audience have more voice in the decision? Explain.
Part 2: Apply the Comparison (Problems 4-6)
Source 5, paragraph 4 records the reasons of the members who voted no. Compare this with how the Supreme Court handles Justices who disagree with the majority (Source 3). Why might each group want disagreement written down?
Your school's 120 eighth graders must choose between two end-of-year trips. Choose one process from this lesson for the decision, and compare it with one other process you rejected. Give two reasons, each tied to a source.
Write a paragraph answering: "Which process in this lesson does the most to make sure every member is heard before a decision?" Compare at least two sources, with a quotation from each.
Rubric
Criterion
Full Credit (2 pts)
Partial Credit (1 pt)
No Credit (0 pts)
Comparison
Names the same feature in two processes and states how they differ or agree
Describes two processes without connecting them
Describes one process only
Evidence
Quotes or cites each source with a paragraph number
Refers to the sources without paragraph numbers
No evidence
Accuracy
Describes each process correctly, including vote counts
One error in a process or a count
Several errors
Reasoning
Explains how the group's purpose or setting fits its process
States a preference without a reason
No reasoning
05
Quiz: 20 Questions
Interactive, with answers
Instructions
Questions 1-3 use Fiske's town meeting (Source 1), Questions 4-7 use the Confederate Council (Source 2; Question 5 also uses Source 4), Questions 8-10 use the Supreme Court conference (Source 3), Questions 11-12 use the library teen board (Source 4), and the rest compare sources. All sources are in the lesson plan phases above. Choose the best answer, then check your work.
Multiple choice: pick an option to check it. Short answer: write your answer, then reveal the model answer.
0 of 20 answered · 0 correct
Question 1 of 20 · Multiple Choice
How often is a town meeting held, according to Source 1, paragraph 1?
Answer: B
Fiske writes, "Once each year, usually in March but sometimes as early as February or as late as April, a 'town-meeting' is held." Choice C gives the moderator a power the passage does not describe: the selectmen issue the warrant, and the moderator is chosen at the meeting itself. Choices A and D are not in the passage.
Question 2 of 20 · Multiple Choice
Why does Fiske call the town meeting "the best political training school in existence" (Source 1, paragraph 5)?
Answer: A
The sentence gives the reasons: "in the necessity of facing argument with argument and of keeping one's temper under control." Choices B, C and D sound like training, but none is in the passage; Choice C confuses the moderator's job of running the meeting with teaching.
Question 3 of 20 · Multiple Choice
According to Source 1, paragraph 3, what does the constable do before a town meeting?
Answer: D
"The constable posts copies of the warrant in divers conspicuous places not less than a week before the time appointed." Choice B describes the town-clerk's job on the day of the meeting. Choice A is wrong because the meeting chooses its moderator "by ballot," and Choice C is not in the passage.
Question 4 of 20 · Multiple Choice
In Source 2, paragraph 4, what happens if the Firekeepers decide differently from the Two Sides?
Answer: A
Section 11 says the Two Sides "shall reconsider the matter and if their decisions are jointly the same as before" the Fire Keepers "are then compelled to confirm their joint decision." Choice C stops at paragraph 1's phrase "final judgment" and misses the rule for a disagreement. Choices B and D describe steps the passage never mentions.
Question 5 of 20 · Multiple Choice
Which statement accurately compares the role of the Firekeepers in the Confederate Council (Source 2) with the role of Ms. Okafor on the library teen board (Source 4)?
Answer: B
The Firekeepers "render a decision (17-XVII, TLL) as they see fit in case of a disagreement by the two bodies" (Source 2, paragraph 3), while Ms. Okafor says, "I don't vote; my job is to keep the discussion fair" (Source 4, paragraph 1). Choice A overstates both roles: the Two Sides can compel the Firekeepers to confirm a joint decision (paragraph 4), and Ms. Okafor never chooses. Choice C fits Ms. Okafor, who only reports the board's plan, but leaves out the Firekeepers' power to decide when the two sides disagree. Choice D is wrong on both counts: Ms. Okafor has no tie-breaking vote, and the Firekeepers give the "final judgment" (paragraph 1).
Question 6 of 20 · Multiple Choice
According to Source 2, paragraph 2, when else is "the same process" used?
Answer: B
"The same process shall obtain when a question is brought before the council by an individual or a War Chief." So a question raised by one person goes through both sides and the Firekeepers, like any other. Choices A, C and D name situations that the excerpt does not connect to this sentence; Choice D mixes in the speaker for the day, a section the excerpt leaves out.
Question 7 of 20 · Multiple Choice
Under Source 2, paragraph 5, how may a Lord take part while the council is discussing a case?
Answer: D
Section 13 says no Lord "shall ask a question of the body of Confederate Lords" during discussion; "he may only deliberate in a low tone with the separate body of which he is a member." Choice A is exactly what the rule forbids. Choices B and C describe practices the passage never mentions.
Question 8 of 20 · Multiple Choice
At the Supreme Court's conference, who assigns the opinion of the Court when the Chief Justice is in the dissent (Source 3, paragraph 5)?
Answer: C
The Chief Justice, "or the most senior Justice in the majority if the Chief Justice is in the dissent, assigns a Justice in the majority to write the opinion." Choice B ignores the exception. Choice A confuses the last Justice to vote with the one who assigns, and Choice D is not in the source.
Question 9 of 20 · Multiple Choice
A Supreme Court case is heard by 8 Justices because one has recused. The vote is 4 to 4. According to Source 3, what happens?
Answer: A
Four of 8 is exactly half, so neither side has a majority. Source 3, paragraph 6: "When there is a tie vote, the decision of the lower Court stands." Choice B invents a tie-breaking power. Choices C and D describe outcomes the source does not give; under the stated rule a tie leaves the earlier ruling in place.
Question 10 of 20 · Multiple Choice
Source 3 says that at the conference "each Justice speaks without interruptions from the others." What is the most likely purpose of this rule?
Answer: C
The same sentence group says "all Justices have an opportunity to state their views on the case and raise any questions or concerns," and only then does voting begin. Choice A contradicts the vote that follows. Choice B is wrong because the point is to share views inside the room, and Choice D is about speed, which the source never gives as a reason.
Question 11 of 20 · Multiple Choice
Why was there no consensus on the first plan in Source 4 (paragraph 6)?
Answer: D
Ms. Okafor's rule (paragraph 1) is that a fist or one finger means "I can't support this yet"; Wei showed 1 and Rosa a fist. Choice C is wrong because two fingers means "I won't block it." Choice B is wrong because the facilitator does not vote, and Choice A is wrong: 5 of the 8 members showed 3 or more fingers.
Question 12 of 20 · Multiple Choice
Suppose the teen board in Source 4 had used a majority vote for the first plan, counting 3 or more fingers as a yes. What would have happened?
Answer: B
The first hands were 5, 4, 4, 5, 3, 2, 1 and a fist. Five members (Jalen, Devon, Priya, Sam, Amara) showed 3 or more, and 3 (Lucía, Wei, Rosa) did not, so 5 of 8 is a majority. Choice C counts only 4 or more fingers as a yes (Jalen, Devon, Priya, Sam); Choice A reverses the counts; Choice D treats every hand as a yes. The comparison shows that the same group can reach different results under different decision rules.
Question 13 of 20 · Multiple Choice
Fiske says town-meeting business "goes on in accordance with parliamentary customs pretty generally recognized among all people who speak English" (Source 1, paragraph 3). What does this suggest?
Answer: D
"Customs pretty generally recognized" means rules of order that many English-speaking assemblies share, such as motions and votes, so voters know the steps in advance. Choice A is the opposite. Choice B misreads "people who speak English" as a rule about who may attend, and Choice C is not in the passage.
Question 14 of 20 · Multiple Choice
Which feature do the town meeting (Source 1) and the Supreme Court conference (Source 3) share?
Answer: C
The town-clerk "calls the meeting to order" (Source 1, paragraph 3), and "the Chief Justice calls the session to order" (Source 3, paragraph 3). Choice A is true only of the town meeting, Choice D only of the conference, and Choice B of neither: both decide by vote.
Question 15 of 20 · Short Answer
Compare the New England town meeting (Source 1) and the library teen board (Source 4) on two of the five questions in Diagram 1. Use evidence from each source for each question.
Model answer: Who leads: the town meeting chooses "by ballot its presiding officer, or 'moderator'" (Source 1, paragraph 3), while the teen board's facilitator, Ms. Okafor, is the librarian and says "I don't vote; my job is to keep the discussion fair" (Source 4, paragraph 1). Decision rule: the town meeting adopts or rejects measures by vote (Source 1, paragraph 2), while the teen board needs consensus, with no one showing "a fist or one finger" (Source 4, paragraphs 1 and 10). The town meeting can decide over objections; the teen board cannot. Rubric: 2 points per question compared with evidence from both sources.
Question 16 of 20 · Short Answer
Give one advantage and one drawback of the Supreme Court's private conference (Source 3) compared with the town meeting's "full daylight of publicity" (Source 1).
Model answer: Advantage: because "only the Justices are allowed in the Conference room" (Source 3, paragraph 3), each Justice can state views and change his or her mind without public pressure, which suits judges who must follow the law. Drawback: the public cannot watch the discussion, so it cannot check the reasons as town voters can when spending is "discussed in the presence of everybody" (Source 1, paragraph 4); it sees only the written opinions afterward. Rubric: 2 points for each side, tied to a source.
Question 17 of 20 · Short Answer
Explain how the consensus process in Source 4 changed the teen board's final plan. Would a majority vote have produced the same plan? Use paragraph numbers.
Model answer: Because a fist or one finger blocks a plan (paragraph 1), Rosa and Wei had to explain their objections (paragraph 7), and Devon proposed a new plan that split the money $300 and $300 and kept one game night (paragraph 8). On the second test nobody showed fewer than 3 fingers (paragraph 9), so the board reached consensus. A majority vote would have adopted Jalen's first plan, 5 to 3, and the homework corner and graphic novels would have received nothing. Rubric: 2 points for the change, 2 for the majority comparison.
Question 18 of 20 · Short Answer
Explain how the rule in Source 2, paragraph 5 shapes the way the Confederate Council deliberates. Compare it with how the Justices discuss a case in Source 3.
Model answer: The rule forbids a Lord to question the whole council during discussion and lets him talk only "in a low tone with the separate body of which he is a member," so discussion stays inside each group of chiefs: each side talks the question through and reaches its own unanimous answer before reporting to the other (paragraphs 1 and 3). The Supreme Court works the other way: all nine Justices sit together and each speaks in turn to the whole group, "without interruptions" (Source 3, paragraph 4). Rubric: 2 points for the effect, 2 for the comparison.
Question 19 of 20 · Short Answer
A family of five is choosing where to spend a vacation, and a state legislature of 120 members is voting on a new law. Which process from the lesson fits each group better? Compare at least two processes in your answer.
Model answer: The family should use consensus, as in Source 4: it is small, everyone has to go on the trip, and talking until no one blocks (paragraph 1) is practical with five people. The legislature should use a majority vote under shared rules of order, like the town meeting in Source 1: requiring all 120 members to agree, as each side of the council must (Source 2, paragraph 3), would let one member block every law, and the law affects the whole public, so the vote should be open. Rubric: 2 points per group, with a reason tied to the group's size or purpose.
Question 20 of 20 · Short Answer
Why do different groups use different deliberative processes? Answer with a claim and evidence from two sources.
Model answer: Groups choose processes that fit their job and their members. A town meeting spends the voters' money, so it is open and lets "any one" speak (Source 1, paragraph 1). A court must decide by law, so it meets privately, lets each Justice speak without interruption, and decides by majority with written dissents (Source 3, paragraphs 3-5). A confederation of nations that must stay united requires each side to agree "unanimously" (Source 2, paragraph 3). Rubric: 1 point for the claim, 2 points for each source used as evidence.
0 of 20 answered · 0 correct
06
Frequently Asked Questions
10 Questions
What does D2.Civ.9.6-8 mean?
D2.Civ.9.6-8 asks students in grades 6-8 to compare deliberative processes used by many kinds of groups in many settings. Students look at how groups such as town meetings, councils, courts and clubs discuss a question and reach a decision, and explain how and why those processes differ.
What is a deliberative process?
A deliberative process is the set of steps and rules a group follows to talk through a question and decide it. It includes who takes part, who speaks and in what order, whether the public can watch, the decision rule (such as majority or unanimity), and what happens to members who disagree.
What is the difference between consensus and a majority vote?
A majority vote decides when more than half of the votes are yes; consensus decides only when no member blocks the decision. Under consensus, as in Source 4 of this lesson, a single member who cannot support a plan can stop it, so the group keeps working until everyone can accept a plan.
Is D2.Civ.9.6-8 taught in civics or in history class?
It can be taught in either. It sits in the civics strand of the C3 Framework, under Participation and Deliberation, but many teachers use historical sources, such as the town meeting and the Great Law in this lesson, to show how different groups have deliberated over time.
Why does this lesson include the Haudenosaunee Confederate Council?
Because the standard asks for a wide variety of groups, and the Haudenosaunee Confederacy has a long-standing deliberative process of its own, very different from majority voting. The lesson uses Arthur C. Parker's 1916 printed version and notes that Haudenosaunee people keep the Great Law in their own languages, with versions that differ.
How do I keep students from just describing each group?
Require the same five questions for every group and a comparison sentence for each question. The sentence frame "In Source ___, ___, but in Source ___, ___" pushes students to compare instead of list, and the rubric gives most of its points to comparison and evidence.
How is D2.Civ.9.6-8 different from D2.Civ.9.9-12?
D2.Civ.9.6-8 asks students to compare deliberative processes; D2.Civ.9.9-12 asks them to use appropriate deliberative processes in multiple settings. Middle school students study and contrast how groups deliberate; high school students choose a fitting process and carry it out themselves.
Do my students need to know how the Supreme Court works before this lesson?
No. Source 3 explains the conference in plain terms, and the lesson defines seniority, recusal and opinions before students read it. A short reminder that the Supreme Court is the highest federal court, with nine Justices, is enough background.
What are common mistakes students make when comparing processes?
A frequent mistake is judging one process as simply better without asking what the group's job is, for example calling the private Supreme Court conference undemocratic. Another is confusing consensus with unanimity, or assuming that "most people liked it" means a decision has been made under every rule.
How does D2.Civ.9.6-8 connect to other C3 indicators?
It builds on D2.Civ.7.6-8, applying civic virtues in groups, and works alongside D2.Civ.11.6-8, which compares procedures for making decisions in different settings. It prepares students for D2.Civ.9.9-12 and for D4.8.6-8, where they apply deliberative procedures to make decisions themselves.
07
Related Standards
5 standards
These standards connect to D2.Civ.9.6-8: prerequisites to review first, parallel standards at the same level, and next steps that build on it.
Before this lesson
SL.6.1Prerequisite
Engage in collaborative discussions with diverse partners on grade 6 topics
Apply deliberative and democratic procedures to make decisions and act in and out of school
Lesson coming soon
Standard text: National Council for the Social Studies (NCSS), The College, Career, and Civic Life (C3) Framework for Social Studies State Standards: Guidance for Enhancing the Rigor of K-12 Civics, Economics, Geography, and History (Silver Spring, MD: NCSS, 2013). NCSS was not involved in the production of this lesson and does not endorse it.
