Related Article" width="592" height="395" />
Teaching ideas based on New York Times content.
Overview | Something happens — a moment of injustice, a threat to the nation, a potentially criminal act. Why do some people speak out or take action, while others remain silent? And how can we encourage more people to recognize the moment when bravery is required?
In this lesson, we explore ethical dilemmas that face normal people around the world, in all walks of life. Some of their cases are familiar, while others are obscure. But they hold one thing in common: They feature individuals who followed the guidance of their own moral code, often risking personal injury or community censure to do so. We’ll ask students to examine the underlying characteristics of such episodes, and consider whether some acts are more deserving of support than others.
Warm-Up | You may wish to begin by tapping into students’ existing experiences and beliefs. Ask students to jot down some examples of people who spoke out against injustice, took a lone public stand, intervened during an emergency or controversy, or failed to do so. You can also ask if they themselves have ever stood up for what’s right, even in a difficult situation. Pick a few particularly compelling examples and ask students, as a class, to suggest what motivated each individual’s actions and speculate on the thoughts that went through that person’s mind at the crucial moment. Then, by a show of hands, ask students whether they approve or disapprove of the action that was taken in each case.
Related Article" width="190" height="133" />
Related | In the story “The Whistle-Blower’s Quandary,” researchers at Northwestern University and Boston College studied people’s reactions to a variety of ethical dilemmas.
Imagine you’re thinking about blowing the whistle on your employer. As the impassioned responses to the actions of whistle-blowers like Edward J. Snowden have reminded us, you face a moral quandary: Is reporting misdeeds an act of heroism or betrayal?…
In one study, we asked a group of 74 research participants to write a paragraph about an occasion when they witnessed unethical behavior and reported it (and why), and we asked another group, of 61 participants, to write about an occasion when they witnessed unethical behavior and kept their mouths shut. We found that the whistle-blowers used 10 times as many terms related to fairness and justice, whereas non-whistle-blowers used twice as many terms related to loyalty.
Read or summarize the entire article with your class. You may wish to introduce students to the following words or concepts before reading: whistle-blower, social psychology, moral quandary, unethical behavior, government contractor.
Questions | For reading comprehension and discussion:
Ethical Contexts | Ways to Use This Content
For the stories below, teachers may wish to assign students or groups to a particular issue and ask them to report back to the class on how the issues of whistle-blowing, speaking out or taking action play out in that particular place or situation. How do we evaluate someone who speaks out against a perceived injustice, or takes action while others stand by and watch? What factors determine whether we view the lone individual who takes action as a hero or a renegade?
Students may also choose their own issue, or search through a range of topics to find similarities and differences. What makes each situation different, and does the context influence our opinion of the person who takes a stand? For additional teaching ideas for how to use the resources included below, go to the bottom of this post.
Related Article" width="190" height="107" />
1. In Your Neighborhood
Sometimes the toughest situations occur close to home. A man falls on the subway tracks. A woman is groped by a stranger on the way to work. Employees say they’re being mistreated in the local bakery. A man wonders whether he should help an overburdened fellow subway passenger (in a video from Facing History and Ourselves).
Consider this Room for Debate feature on bystanders. Then decide what makes each of the situations above unique; whether some individuals are more likely than others to receive help from a stranger; and what factors might make a person more likely to step forward and get involved.
2. At School
All students will encounter bullying or other forms of antisocial behavior at some point in their education. But what should be done about it? Peer pressure can be fierce, and research shows many people can be coerced into doing the wrong thing or keeping quiet. Researchers from Williams College say that schools must teach students to speak up. And sometimes, as in this article from the Guardian about a brave teacher from Iran, the adults can lead the way. What are the lessons for your school?
Related Article" width="190" height="253" />
5. On the Sports Field
In 1968, two members of the United States Olympic Team were suspended for raising their arms in a black-power salute in support of civil rights during their medal ceremony in Mexico. In 2014, the French soccer player Nicolas Anelka was barred from five matches after making a quenelle gesture, which many consider anti-Semitic and inspired by hate speech, prompting an uproar among French athletes in both Europe and America.
Analyze the two situations, both of which involve athletes making gestures with broader social meaning. What are the factors that have prompted many people to regard the 1968 athletes as heroes, while Anelka is widely condemned for his actions in 2014?
Pretend you work for a professional sports league, and the commissioner has just assigned you to develop guidelines for permissible gestures by the league’s athletes. How can you balance athletes’ freedom of speech — their right to speak out on issues they view as important — with the need to prevent actions that might be interpreted as derogatory or hateful? Should privately-owned sports teams or leagues get involved in such issues?
6. In the Workplace
What prompts some employees to speak out when they see wrongdoing at their company or workplace, while others remain silent? Read this story about corporate whistle-blowers, paying attention to the types of problems that get reported most frequently. Then read this commentary, which includes a discussion on the “fundamental rules of corporate life”:
Ask your parents or other adults about the culture in their workplace. Is dissent or speaking out about problems encouraged or discouraged? And what can be done to encourage people to speak up for the right reasons, i.e., to help the organization to improve and better fulfill its mission?
Related Article" width="190" height="126" />
7. In Politics
Ilya V. Ponomarev and Representative Dana Rohrabacher have something in common.
The two lawmakers — one from Russia’s lower house of Parliament, the other from the United States House of Representatives — both defend the unpopular view on Russia’s invasion of Crimea. Mr. Ponomarev is against it, while Mr. Rohrabacher is all for it, putting each one in opposition to the vast majority of his colleagues in each house. Neither one has been at all shy about speaking out, even though he is speaking in nearly complete isolation from fellow lawmakers.
Read their statements in the two articles. Then construct an imaginary dialogue between the two legislators, in which they discuss the invasion and other issues. Do you think they would find any common ground as fellow “lone wolves” — brave, independent voices of dissent — even though their positions on the invasion of Crimea are at odds?
8. On the College Campus
College administrators have gone to great lengths to find ways to decrease dangerous behavior on their campuses, like sexual assaults, that are often influenced by binge drinking. But sometimes, as in this Guardian article about Oxford University, students take the lead in combating problems like racial prejudice. What do you think? Are students part of the problem or part of the solution when it comes to fighting dangerous or undesirable activities on college campuses?
9. In the Laboratory
People don’t necessarily think of scientists as being particularly brave. But their work sometimes leads to tough dilemmas, and some do better than others at making the right calls. One climate researcher says scientists in his field can no longer remain on the sidelines as dispassionate bystanders. And you might be surprised how many other scientists have found it within themselves to speak out. Ask students to find a scientist or researcher who blew the whistle and make a short presentation to the class on the situation that prompted that person to act.
Related Article" width="480" height="318" />
Going Further
Should whistle-blowers be supported? Research other whistle-blowing cases in The New York Times or the National Whistleblowers Center in which employees or government officials spoke out based upon their personal beliefs. Then decide: Should the government make it easier or harder for employees to speak up?
Does the system need fixing? Read this essay by Peter Ludlow, a philosopher at Northwestern University, that considers whether people must occasionally take action to address “systemic evil” in organizations or whole societies. Do you agree with his assertion that young people are particularly well attuned to such issues?
Can dissenters protest in constructive ways, without harming their societies? Read this Room for Debate feature in which experienced activists talk about what makes protest effective. Do their motives seem positive or threatening to the systems that they are challenging? Pick one or several activists whose messages seem particularly useful, and consider how their opponents might respond to their statements. Then use their ideas to design a strategy for confronting a completely different social problem.
This resource may be used to address the academic standards listed below.
Comments are no longer being accepted.
Leslie Ryan April 4, 2014 · 9:39 amMuch appreciated. Looking forward to working with the material next week. Good mix of topics to work with.
William Corcoran April 7, 2014 · 7:31 amThe article should be updated to include references to all five of Jonathan Haidt’s categories of moral psychology.
I have a hard time understanding why someone would not intervene to help someone else in their time of need. I could never just stand around and watch another person be hurt and treated unfairly when I could stop it. If it were you that was being mistreated, you would hope someone else would step in for you. I expect more people to start standing up for others whether they know them or not.
There are people who are very brave to take action or speak out on a certain event they feel they need to speak out for. Then there are others that do remain silent for probably many reasons, or others can remain silent and speak their minds out at moments they may choose to. Everyone is different when it comes to speaking out on your decisions or others in life and it is a very risky thing to do. It is a very brave thing to do, to be able to do the right thing in life or decisions but at the same time it is a dangerous situation to do. When someone does try to make a difference in this world, there will always be someone who will not like the message you are trying to announce towards the event. It may be hate by the actions or just too simply disagree. There are problems when the issue will become violent and it does not need to be the easiest way is to make the choice the right way not the wrong way. For example, a student can do the right thing by speaking there mind out for bullying or a someone wanting to help those in need. Some people get punished for even doing the right thing but others who disagree with that certain person will think of it as a wrong thing and will want it stopped. The reason for them getting in trouble is because they will not want a scene of disapproval towards the event. People who do the right thing are not all bad people but want to speak their minds out of anything they may have a problem with and think it is wrong. The people who stay silent are also not bad people they just choose not to respond to it and it is there decision to not be involved. The main thing is doing the right thing is good and bad at the same time but it is also a very brave thing to do with or without the danger in it.
Corruption and injustice will always roam the world we live on today and forever on. The cause that started this plaque from the start of time was us humans. The reason injustice is committed because the person who performs it will be benefitting from others who are affected by the persons injustice. Corruption is the source that is seen or heard all over the world, people say a school is a safe place but there are times when a teacher takes advantage of his or her authority to punish or even abuse sexually a child at will and that injustice will not be reported. A hero is needed in much situations of injustice; and when the term hero is said most people think of super man or wonder woman, heroes are people who serve their community and protect it from corrupted people, a hero in our society would be a judge or police officer, even a priest. Besides the people of authority the brave heroes without a badge or gown can be any common citizen who speaks out of action to any injustice the person sees, that persons opinion might be the catalyst to a revolutionary change to eliminate all corrupted scum within our organizations, school systems, or even the church itself. That one person can prevent a raping to start or the theft of tax dollars going to politicians pockets and so on. I believe if we are all equal no corrupted acts will be made, if we receive the same health care and drive the same car, no one will find the need to steal or blackmail others. Every one will be working together creating a perfect environment.
