Week 12: Don't Put All the Power in One Person
Protecting People and Sharing Power - Phase 2
This week asks a design question: who should hold power in a group?
If one person makes the rules, decides who broke them, and picks every consequence, trouble grows fast. Fair groups usually share those jobs.
Kid Hook
Imagine one student in class gets to:
- make all the rules
- decide who broke them
- choose every consequence
Would that feel fair? What could go wrong?
Today's Mission
Learn why groups work better when the power jobs are shared.
You'll Make / You'll Try
- a bad design / better design sort
- a power map for the learner's future group agreement
Materials
- paper
- pencil
- cards labeled Rule Maker, Rule Doer, and Rule Decider
- Case Notes
Quick 20-Minute Version
- Compare one person doing all 3 jobs with 3 people sharing them.
- Sort 3 scenarios into too much power in one place or better design.
- Draft who does each job in the learner's own group.
Main Activity
Map the 3 major group jobs and decide how to spread them so no one person controls everything.
- Replace engineering language with plain design language: too much power in one place, backup helper, second opinion.
- Use classrooms, clubs, library teams, family meetings, community groups, and online groups as the main analogies.
- Preserve the key tradeoff: shared power can be slower, and that is often a feature.
- This week feeds directly into the Micro-Charter structure in Week 13.
Week at a Glance
| Prep time | ~10 minutes |
| Materials | Role cards, paper, pencil, Case Notes |
| Core vocabulary | power, role, backup, second opinion, fair |
| Difficulty | Moderate |
Facilitator Preparation
- Make 3 cards: Rule Maker, Rule Doer, Rule Decider.
- Think of one or two examples where too much power in one person creates a problem.
- Bring back the group domain chosen in Week 11.
Keep asking:
- Who writes the rule?
- Who carries it out?
- Who settles the argument?
Those 3 questions give the learner a practical model of checks and balances.
Younger Learner Adaptation (Ages 8-9)
Simple idea: It is usually safer and fairer if one person does not control everything.
Concrete substitutions:
- Use 3 role cards on the table.
- Use a club, library helper team, family game setting, or community-room example.
- Replace "checks and balances" with "backup helper" and "second opinion."
What success looks like: The learner can tell why one person holding all 3 jobs is risky.
Older Learner Extension (Ages 10-12)
- After the child-friendly model is clear, introduce checks and balances and separation of powers.
- Older learners can compare the group design with branches of government.
- They can also discuss when one person may need temporary extra power in a genuine emergency.
Civil Discussion Moves
- "One reason I think that is..."
- "Can you explain what you mean by...?"
- "Who might be affected by this design?"
- "What feels fairer, and why?"
- "Another perspective might be..."
Guided Session 1
Bad Design or Better Design?
Learning Goal
By the end of this session, the student can:
- identify 3 major jobs in a rule system
- explain why too much power in one person can be dangerous
- suggest a fairer design
Activities
1. Lay out the 3 jobs
Place the cards on the table:
- Rule Maker
- Rule Doer
- Rule Decider
Explain them in kid language:
- one job writes or changes rules
- one job carries the rules out
- one job settles arguments about the rules
2. Try the bad design / better design sort
Use scenarios such as:
- one person does all 3 jobs
- 3 different people do the 3 jobs
- one person usually decides, but there is a backup helper if they are absent
- a disagreement gets a second opinion from someone outside the argument
Ask:
- What feels risky here?
- What feels fairer?
3. Talk about speed versus fairness
Ask:
- Is the fastest design always the fairest?
- Why might a slower system sometimes be better?
Guided Session 2
Power Map for Your Group Agreement
Learning Goal
By the end of this session, the student can:
- assign the 3 power jobs in their own group
- add a backup or second opinion
- explain why their design feels fairer
Activities
1. Choose the group
Use the same group or domain from Week 11.
2. Fill in the power map
Write:
Who helps make rules?
Who helps carry out rules?
Who settles disagreements?
Who gives a backup or second opinion if needed?
3. Test one bad day
Ask:
- What if the rule decider is part of the disagreement?
- What if the rule doer forgets or is away?
- What if the group wants to change a rule too quickly?
This is how the learner starts designing a fair structure, not just isolated rules.
Independent Practice
Goal
Notice where power sits in a real group.
Activities
1. Do a power audit
Pick one real group: family meeting, club, class, sports team, library group, community team, or game group.
Ask:
- Who makes the rules?
- Who carries them out?
- Who settles disagreements?
2. Suggest one improvement
If too much power sits in one place, suggest one backup helper or second opinion.
Case Notes
Add this to Case Notes:
Date:
My group:
Who makes rules:
Who carries them out:
Who settles disagreements:
One better design idea:
Sentence starters for younger learners:
- "Too much power is in ___."
- "A second opinion could come from ___."
- "A fairer design would be ___."
Check for Understanding
After this week, check whether the learner can:
- Name the 3 jobs: "What are the 3 big power roles?"
- Spot a bad design: "Where does one person have too much control?"
- Suggest a fix: "Who could be the backup helper or second opinion?"
If the learner can do at least 2 of these, they are ready for Week 13.
Pause and Notice
Fair systems are not always the fastest systems.
Sometimes a second opinion, a backup helper, or shared jobs slows things down. That can be a feature, not a bug, because it protects people from rushed or unfair power.
This week's takeaway: A group is safer when no one person controls every power job.
Preview of Next Week
Next week, the learner uses everything from Weeks 11 and 12 to write a real one-page group agreement, also called a Micro-Charter.