Report on ‘Better arguments in Scottish classrooms’

Abstract

This report describes a new project, ‘Better Arguments’, which seeks to teach learners in Scottish secondary schools about what constitutes a good argument, how to identify a bad argument and how to build their own ‘better’ arguments. The unit of lessons uses extracts from Cicero's Pro Caelio as a means of modelling both good and bad arguments, with the aim of equipping learners with a framework by which they can analyse and evaluate not only Cicero's arguments but arguments generally. By way of background, the report explains the current provision of Classics teaching within Scotland and the challenges facing those who are working to reinstate Latin and Classical Studies, particularly at National Qualification level. In this context, the ‘Better Arguments’ project is one strategy to increase the Classics provision in state schools. The report explains the rationale behind the design and content of the unit and then goes on to highlight the benefits of teaching this unit, especially the educational, cultural and social gains to be made. It identifies some of the potential challenges to the implementation of these lessons and offers some solutions to them. Finally, it considers the ways in which this project might be viewed as a starting point, with suggestions as to how the skills developed here might be further built upon through the use of other classical texts in future units of work.