Learning to Give, Philanthropy education resources that teach giving and civic engagement

Project—Going to the Round Table (The)
Lesson 10
Academic Standards
Philanthropy Framework


To gain active student involvement discussing an issue they find important.


One 60-Minute Class Period


The Learner will:

  • use skills and concepts developed in this unit to analyze a specific situation that might warrant the intervention of volunteers or volunteer organizations.

Service Experience:

Although this lesson contains a service project example, decisions about service plans and implementation should be made by students, as age appropriate.
Learn more about the stages of service-learning.

Students will be active participants in a round table discussion about a local issue.


  • Group Discussion Scoring Guide Fishbowl Evaluation Form (see Attachment One)

  • Group Discussion Scoring Checklist Fishbowl Evaluation Form (see Attachment Two)

  • Tape recorder

  • Chairs
Handout 1
Group Discussion Scoring Guide
Handout 2
Group Discussion Scoring Table

Instructional Procedure(s):

Anticipatory Set:
Tell the class the they should keep in mind the question, "Whose job should it be and why?"

  • Each cooperative group will select one individual to participate in a "round table discussion"
    The group discussion will be based upon a question posed on a specific topic. A sample question could be:
    "Which community needs are the responsibility of government, and which should be handled by local non-profit, philanthropic organizations?"

  • The students in the discussion will demonstrate their understanding of philanthropy, volunteerism, and service to others through their discussions.

  • Students not on the Discussion Panel will have Fishbowl Evaluation Forms (Attachments One and Two) to fill out to help evaluate each student and give them an opportunity to demonstrate their own understanding of the topic discussed.


  • Fishbowl Evaluation Forms will be used to evaluate the students.

  • Tape recordings of students will be assessed using the same Fishbowl Evaluation forms.
    Note: Parental permission is advised before taping students either by audiotape or videotape.

Cross-Curriculum Extensions:

    Students write a case statement for the community need that they discussed.

Bibliographical References:

Fishbowl Evaluation Forms courtesy of the Michigan Department of Education.

Lesson Developed By:

Thomas Webb
Fulton Schools
Fulton Middle School
Middleton, MI 48856


Handout 1Print Handout 1

Group Discussion Scoring Guide

Points Description
4 In order to receive a 4-point score during the discussion, the student must:
  • demonstrate an understanding of Core Democratic Values.
  • make at least two relevant statements.
  • respond appropriately at all times.
  • ask at least two questions relating to the topic being discussed.
3 In order to receive a 3-point score during the discussion, the student must:
  • demonstrate an understanding of Core Democratic Values.
  • achieve the performance standard on two of the remaining three elements.
2 In order to receive a 2-point score during the discussion, the student must:
  • achieve the performance standard on two of the four elements.
1 In order to receive a 1-point score during the discussion, the student must:
  • achieve the standard on one of the four elements.
0 In order to receive a 0-point score, the student뭩 discussion will show no evidence of any of the elements associated with the standard.

Handout 2Print Handout 2

Group Discussion Scoring Table

Question Discussed:                                                    Date:                                        

Discussion Time:                      minutes



1.                                  2.                                  3.                                          

4.                                  5.                                  6.                                          

1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6.
Student used Core Democratic Values            
Student made a statement about the issue that was accurate and relevant.            
Student asked questions that were on the subject being discussed.            
Responded Appropriately            
Invited the contributions of others.            
Acknowledged statements of other students in the discussion.            
Tactfully challenged the accuracy, logic, relevance, or clarity of statements made by others.            
Summarized points of agreement and disagreement.            
Responded Inappropriately            
Made irrelevant/distracting statements.            
Monopolized the discussion.            
Engaged in personal attacks.            
Rating for “Responded Appropriately”            
Final Score            

Philanthropy Framework:

Submit a Comment

All rights reserved. Permission is granted to freely use this information for nonprofit (noncommercial), educational purposes only. Copyright must be acknowledged on all copies.