Interdisciplinary Laboratory for Research in Didactics, Education, and Training

AREN teaching sequence

The benchmarks presented on this page are available in PDF format: here.

Research has shown that repeated practice in debating promotes the development of argumentation skills and that these skills are reinforced when debates are combined with reflective activities focusing on the arguments produced by students (see Benchmarks for Student Learning in Argumentation). As part of the AREN-DIA project, a team of researchers in education, language sciences, and psychology, in collaboration with a group of teachers, designed teaching sequences centered on a digital classroom debate on socio-scientific issues (SSI), the general structure of which is outlined below.

A. General structure of an AREN-DIA teaching sequence

The teaching sequences take place in three phases: a preparatory phase, a debate on AREN, and a reflective activity.

B. The three phases of the AREN-DIA teaching sequence

Now, let's describe in more detail each of the three phases of this teaching sequence aimed at teachers of different subjects (French, history-geography, philosophy, physics-chemistry, life and earth sciences, etc.).

Preparatory phase

The teacher begins by identifying the knowledge and skills to be developed, as well as the educational objectives of the sequence. He or she can draw on their usual teaching resources and suggest one or more activities that serve the dual purpose of covering part of the curriculum and preparing students for the debate that will follow.

Before the first debate, it is also possible, as an option, to suggest that students work together to draw up a debate charter. This could include rules such as:

  • Being respectful or polite to other students
  • Take the time to read what other students write.
  • Stay on topic, don't talk about anything else
  • Use a tool to ask for help (such as Tréta'aide, for example, which allows students to ask for help without raising their hand or going to the office).

Debate on AREN

Once the topic has been covered, the teacher devotes a session to discussion on the AREN platform.  To do this, they provide students with a text related to the topic, incorporating various elements likely to stimulate discussion. It is recommended to use a short text, which could be a newspaper article, an excerpt from a book, an excerpt from a website, or a collection of articles. To ensure that the text is suitable for students, the selected excerpt can be shortened and certain complex words replaced or accompanied by a definition (alternatively, complex words can be defined or clarified orally). It is also recommended that the text present contradictory points of view. It should include several arguments while remaining accessible to students.

It is essential to show students how to use the platform before asking them to discuss the text online. To do this, the teacher can give a live demonstration in class or show them our video tutorial [link to the tutorial] available on our website.

On the day of the debate, each student has a computer and logs on to the AREN platform ( if this is not possible, students can also work in pairs on one computer). Students click on the debate thumbnail indicated by their teacher.

The teacher can reread the text with their students and clarify any points of confusion. This rereading is more common in middle school than in high school. The teacher then gives instructions for the debate. It should be noted that a debate can be (more) persuasive or (more) cooperative[1]. As part of the AREN-DIA project, we favor cooperative debates, which are more consistent with the functioning of a deliberative democracy[2] [insert footnote: definition], which we wish to teach students about. With this in mind, the instructions may be as follows: 

  • collectively explore the ideas expressed in the text in order to understand them;
  • discuss them, question them;
  • compare your points of view by arguing;
  • and if there are disagreements among students, seek to understand and overcome them.

Before or during the discussion, the teacher may explain to students that they can respond alternately to passages from the text or to other students' contributions.

As an example, here is a text for debate proposed in 2023 by researchers and a French teacher (see a collection of Texts for Debate in Middle School and High School):

Here is an example of a discussion forum on AREN based on this text:

Reflective activity

In the session following the online debate, the teacher asks students to complete a reflective activity based on the debate (see the more detailed description of several Reflective Activities). This activity may focus on one or more standards of argumentation on SSSQs (see the Benchmarks for Standards of Argumentation on Socio-Scientific Questions). In our example, the French teacher is interested in the standard of justification, so she seeks to make students aware of the importance of justification and to develop simple criteria for identifying and defining what constitutes justification. She selects student contributions from the debate, both with and without justification, to design her activity.

[1] In a persuasive debate, each participant argues with the aim of convincing others to adopt their point of view on the issue under discussion. In a cooperative debate, participants argue with the aim of enriching each other's understanding and helping each other form their own point of view on the issue under discussion. This second type of debate can more easily lead to a consensus point of view.

[2] Deliberative democracy is a form of democracy that places deliberation at the heart of the collective decision-making process. Deliberation involves comparing, examining, and debating the views, interests, and arguments of all citizens; it provides an opportunity to learn from one another, engage in collective reflection, and revise one's views; it enables the formation of shared opinions and ideally leads to the fairest possible collective decisions.