How does the quality of evidence impact the accuracy of a judgement?
Lesson Focus: How does the quality of evidence impact the accuracy of a judgement?
Suggested Length: 1 hour
Learning Objectives:
- Analyze the strength of evidence presented
- Draw an evidence-based conclusion
| Approaches to Learning | Vocabulary | Reflection Questions |
|---|---|---|
| Thinking Skills Analyze the strength of evidence. Draw evidence-based conclusions. Self-management Use appropriate strategies for organizing complex information. | analyze evidence conclusion justify stance perspective interpretation certainty doubt | What implications does this have for real-life jury trials? Can we ever be certain that a jury has delivered an accurate verdict? What does “beyond a reasonable doubt” mean? |
Preparation Task
Share the Kialo discussion Is the defendant guilty beyond a reasonable doubt? with students and ask them to familiarize themselves with it before the lesson.
Note for teachers: This case is based on the famous movie, 12 Angry Men. Do not disclose this to your students so the discussion remains organic.
Introduction
Use the Background Info to introduce/recap the scenario and questions to establish that students have picked up on the key details of the case:
- What is the crime committed? (Murder)
- What is the suspect’s relationship to the victim? (Son)
- What is the punishment if the defendant is found guilty? (Death, likely by electric chair)
Divide the students into small groups (ideally 3–5 students per group).
Share a clone of the discussion with each group using Small Group Mode, and allow them time to review the evidence in the discussion.
Students can use Voting to indicate their opinion on the strength of each piece of evidence. This will support them with the main activities.
Main Activity
MAIN ACTIVITY, PART 1
Each group should use the Kialo discussion to complete a timeline, putting forward the most likely sequence of events on the day of the murder.
- Ask groups to compare their timelines.
- What are the differences and why?
Each group should decide whether they think the defendant is guilty or not guilty.
There should be at least one group representing each side. If not, nominate a group to take an undefended stance.
Each group should nominate a spokesperson for the main activity.
MAIN ACTIVITY, PART 2
Students will participate in a debate to decide whether the defendant is guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.
Give groups time to prepare a justification for their stance, based on the evidence in the Kialo discussion.
- Ask the spokesperson for each group to present their group’s justification.
Once each group has presented, open the debate for questions and challenges.
- All responses should center around the information provided in the Kialo discussion and students’ interpretation of this.
- Encourage students to be open to adjusting their stance in light of different perspectives.
Discussion points may include:
- The eyewitness testimonies
- The defendant’s personal history
- The physical evidence
- Racial bias in the justice system
Emphasize to students that there are no right or wrong answers, but all claims should be supported by evidence.
Reflection Activity
Use this to discuss the factors that might affect how we interpret evidence e.g., biases, personal experiences, emotions, cultural backgrounds, peers.
- What implications does this have for real-life jury trials?
- Can we ever be certain that a jury has delivered an accurate verdict?
- What does “beyond a reasonable doubt” mean?
