Lesson · Argument & evidence

Socratic seminar with a machine

Students prepare a position on paper, then cross-examine an AI arguing the other side: demanding evidence, checking a source and watching for flattery. The seminar itself is screen-free.

Level 1 AI after thinkingGrades 8–12Two 45-min sessionsELA · Social studies · DebatePaper + 1 teacher screen

The big idea

You don’t really understand your side until you can state the other side’s best argument.

Students will be able to, without AI:

Build a position with reasons and evidence
Ask probing questions that test a claim
Sort claims into evidence, opinion and unsupported
Represent an opposing view fairly in their own words

Lesson flow · the 5 P’s

Think first. Then the tool.

Most of the lesson happens on paper. AI appears for one short, structured phase, and the teacher can run it from a single projector screen. How the 5 P’s work →

Ponder

15 min · session 1○ Screens off · paper only

Students take a side on a debatable question. Use the default or swap in your own.

Question: “Should high school students be allowed to use AI on homework?”
Write your position and three reasons.
For each reason, write what evidence or experience supports it.
Write the best argument for the other side, as you understand it now.

Say to students“Today the AI is your opponent, not your judge. You won’t be graded on beating it. You’ll be graded on your reasons, your questions, how you check its claims and how fairly you state the other side.”

Plan

10 min · session 1○ Screens off · paper only

Students prepare to interrogate the AI.

Write three questions that would expose a weak argument (“What’s your evidence for…?” “What about students who…?”).
Write one claim you expect the AI to make, so you can check if it does.

Partner

15 min · session 1● AI on · teacher screen or lab

On the teacher’s screen, the AI argues against the majority view. Students take turns asking their prepared questions while the class takes notes.

Argue the side of “[position]” in a debate with high school students. Be persuasive but honest. Give evidence where you can and say when something is your opinion.

A student asks: “[question]”. Answer directly in under 100 words.

Now argue the opposite side just as strongly.

Probe

15 min · session 2○ Screens off · paper only

Screens off. Students audit the AI’s debate performance.

Label each AI claim in your notes: E (evidence), O (opinion), U (unsupported).
Did it cite a study or statistic? Between sessions, the teacher looks up one of them and brings a printout. As a class, check it: does the source exist, and does it say what the AI said?
When asked to argue the opposite side, how easily did it switch? What does that tell you about whether AI “believes” anything?
Did it flatter the questioner or agree too easily when challenged? AI chatbots have a known tendency to tell people what they want to hear.

Prove

30 min · session 2○ Screens off · paper only

A full Socratic seminar with no devices.

Inner circle discusses the question; outer circle tracks who uses evidence and who responds to the other side. Swap circles halfway through.
Rule: before disagreeing, you must restate the other person’s point fairly.
Exit ticket: the strongest point from the side you disagree with, in your own words.

Printable

Student worksheet

Print one per student. Everything students hand in is handwritten, so their thinking is visible.

Cross-examination notes

Prepare your position before the AI speaks.

Name:Date:Class:

My position and three reasons

Evidence for each reason

The other side’s best argument (before the AI)

Three questions to test the AI

One claim I expect the AI to make

AI claims I heard (label E / O / U)

We checked one source. Did it say what the AI claimed?

☐ Yes, accurately
☐ Partly / exaggerated
☐ No, or the source didn’t exist

What this tells me about the AI’s other claims:

Exit ticket: the other side’s strongest point now, in my words

Assessment

Grade the thinking, not the output

Every row scores something students did themselves. An AI can produce a product; it can’t produce a student’s reasons.

Criteria	4 · Excellent	3 · Solid	2 · Developing	1 · Beginning
Position & evidence	Clear position, strong reasons, relevant evidence	Clear position with reasons	Position with weak reasons	Unclear position
Questioning	Questions expose real weaknesses	Relevant questions	Surface-level questions	No questions
Claim audit	Accurately labels claims and explains what the class source check showed	Labels most claims	Few labels, no use of the source check	None
Seminar & fairness	Restates others fairly and builds on them	Participates with evidence	Participates without evidence	Does not participate

Why this is hard to cheat

The preparation is handwritten in class, the AI only appears on one shared screen, and the grade comes from questioning, auditing and a live, screen-free seminar.

Adjust it

Younger students: Use a lighter question (“Should our school have a four-day week?”) and give sentence starters for questions.

Older students: Assign students to argue the side they disagree with in the seminar, using the AI’s arguments as raw material they must improve.

No devices at all? Print an AI-written argument in advance (with at least one unsupported claim and one real statistic) for students to audit.

Discussion questions

Can an AI that argues both sides equally well be trusted on either?
Why might a chatbot tend to agree with whoever is talking to it?
What’s the difference between winning an argument and finding the truth?
When should you change your mind?

Extensions & connections

Have students write a fair, one-page summary of both sides for a school newsletter.
Read our research explainers and practice labeling claims by evidence type.
Pair with the Spot the Hallucination task cards (grades 6–12) to practice checking AI answers and sources.

Put curiosity to work

Read it. Try it. Question it.

Explore new AI research, or take a paper-first investigation into your classroom.

Classroom starter pack →Research explained →