Can something be fair to some people while being unfair to others?
This lesson sequence explores children’s concepts of fairness and justice. Over three lessons, pupils reflect on different principles of justice (equality, need, merit, entitlement) through discussion and group work. A central worksheet presents a fictional scenario in which zoo tickets must be distributed fairly. Pupils rank different distribution options, justify their choices, and discuss why ideas of justice can differ. The lesson combines circle discussions with collaborative tasks and supports perspective-taking and early political judgment skills.
| Age group | 8 – 10 years |
|---|---|
| Duration | approx. 150 minutes |
| Learning goals & outcomes |
Reflect on and further develop pupils’ concepts of fairness and justice. Recognise and compare different principles of justice (equality, need, merit) and justify one’s own position in discussion. |
| Methods | Community Circle |
| Source / Author |
Huemer, Robert (2024) Kann etwas für jemanden gerecht sein, das für andere ungerecht ist? In: Philipp Mittnik et al. (eds.), Politisches Lernen in der Volksschule (Wien) 68–73. https://www.politik-lernen.at/dl/LnLtJMJKomMMNJqx4kJK/Publikation_Politisches_Lernen_Volksschule_2024_pdf |
| Values | In reflecting on what is fair or unfair, good or bad, and just or unjust, the European core value of justice is addressed. The lesson presents justice as fairness that can be interpreted through different, equally legitimate principles rather than as a single fixed rule. By comparing these principles, pupils learn that perspectives, experiences, and collective negotiation shape justice in a democratic society. |
Didactic notes
The following lesson proposal aims to encourage learners to reflect on and further develop their own concepts of justice. In addition, it seeks to establish an understanding that ideas of justice can differ from person to person. Ultimately, justice is a normative concept that cannot be predefined in a democracy but must be negotiated politically.
At the centre of the example is a worksheet framed by an introductory and a concluding circle discussion. Learners are encouraged to draw on their prior experiences and existing ideas. The aim is to reflect on one’s own perspectives and to become familiar with the views of others who think differently. By differentiating and refining their own concept of justice, learners begin to develop basic political subject-matter competence, which provides an essential foundation for the formation of political judgment.
Material & Downloads
Worksheet M1 and M2
Introduction: Justice through an Everyday Dilemma
takes place in a community circle and aims to provide an initial approach to the topic of justice. As an activating introduction, pupils are confronted with a real-life problem. The teacher holds a set of coloured pencils that are to be distributed in the classroom. Since there are not enough pencils for everyone, the pupils are asked to find a fair solution. They are also expected to explain why they consider this solution to be fair. The discussion then moves from the specific situation to more general considerations. In a guided circle discussion, the topic of justice is explored in greater depth. The teacher may draw on guiding questions (see question box) and should refrain from evaluating the pupils’ contributions. Key results are documented in writing by the teacher for later review (Step 3).
• Why do we have different ideas about justice?
• Is it a problem if not everyone shares the same idea of justice?
• Is there a solution that would be fair for everyone?
• Are there other possible ways to solve the situation?
Exploring Principles of Justice
forms the core of the lesson. Pupils work on a worksheet (see M1), preferably in small groups, to discuss and argue the advantages and disadvantages of the different options. The task is based on a fictional scenario about distributing free tickets to the municipal zoo. The tickets are allocated by the mayor, who is responsible for the zoo as the city’s head. In this scenario, the number of available free tickets is limited because the city is assumed to have limited financial resources and needs to save money. The mayor, therefore, faces the challenge of finding a fair distribution key. To develop a suitable solution, she seeks the children’s opinions. Pupils take on this role and consider which of the proposed options they regard as the fairest. Their task is to rank the four options accordingly and to create a “justice ranking” (M2), which can be submitted to the mayor as a recommendation for action.
Reflecting on and Comparing Concepts of Justice
also takes place in a circle setting. In the concluding circle discussion, the results of Step 2 are first presented. Based on the “justice rankings” that have been created, pupils discuss which solution options are considered fair and for what reasons. The focus then shifts to the overarching question of why concepts of justice differ (see question box). Pupils should become aware that each solution option is based on a different principle of justice and that there are multiple ways of defining what is just. None of these options is necessarily “right” or “wrong”.
At a deeper level, alternative solution scenarios that were not included in the proposal can be explored. For example, one could argue that the city could also save money in other areas so that every child could receive a free ticket. In this phase, the teacher takes on a moderating role and poses targeted questions to stimulate further reflection (see question box).
Finally, the results of Step 1 are revisited to reflect on whether and how individual concepts of justice have changed. Pupils should recognise that in a pluralistic society, there can be no universally valid definition of justice, as ideas of justice differ from person to person, for example, depending on personal experiences and interests. For teachers who wish to continue working on the topic with their classes, a related follow-up lesson proposal by Ammerer is suggested.