コミュニケーション4：適切な回答とは

A group of young people raising their hands in a classroom

Image Credit

法廷では、弁護士は明確な主張をし、証拠を提示することで依頼人を弁護します。主張の後には強力な弁護、つまり証拠が必要です。
このレッスンでは、主張と証拠がどのように役割を果たすかについて学習しましょう。

Introduction

Do you think having 4-day work weeks is good or bad for employees? Why?

From the previous lesson, students should see that this is a closed question: there are only two answers - good or bad. Then, they should give a reason (It’s good because... It’s bad because...)

Good (examples) → Rested employees, fewer health issues, increase in productivity, higher retention rates
Bad (examples) → Not all business models can adapt, longer work hours (40 hours in 4 days instead of in 5), more stress

Warm Up

A good answer starts with a strong response to a question. Look at the following answers. Are they strong or weak?

Yes, I think 4-day work weeks are effective because they allow people to better plan out their time and work more efficiently.
I don’t know.
The environment should be taken care of because humans need a healthy environment to survive.
It was great - we went to go see the cherry blossoms at the park.
Maybe.

1, 3 and 4 are strong answers. 2 and 5 are weak.

With skill, the student could potentially build a strong argument around 2 and 5. For example, a strong argument using “Maybe” or "I don't know" might introduce two (neutral) sides to the argument, and end with how it’s difficult to give a concrete answer. In any case, most people have a certain bias - it’s hard to stay completely neutral. It’s generally easier to pick a side and stick with it, building an argument around one opinion than two.

Language

Defense requires what we call evidence. Evidence is basically any example (statistics, study results, personal/other people’s experiences, facts, etc.) that can back up your claim. Good evidence demonstrates understanding of the question!

Let’s go back to the initial question: Do you think having 4-day work weeks is good or bad for employees? Why?

What kind of evidence can you use to prove your claim?

For:
- A pilot done by Microsoft Japan showed that 4-day work weeks actually boosted productivity of employees by 40%.
- Global pilots have shown a rise in work productivity in 4-day work weeks.
- People are happier when they have time to meal plan, participate in sport activities, and spend more time with their family.
Against:
- Companies that require 40 hours instead of 32 hours a week may not be able to adapt quickly to a new style.
- People might experience more work stress due to shorter work hours.

Remind the student that they do not have to “source” their evidence! They can be vague.

Ways to be vague: