Build Trust · Introduce a Topic · Reflect & Reset
Evidence or Instinct?
Find the beliefs beneath a school plan and decide which ones need evidence first.
Time15–25 minutes
Group size3–50 people
FormatSmall groups, Table groups
MaterialsSticky notes or a shared board, Ten imaginary budget points per group
What this accomplishes
Educator teams identify beliefs sitting underneath an instructional plan, student-support decision, or school initiative, then use a limited budget to prioritize which assumptions deserve evidence first.
- Surface hidden assumptions
- Prioritize questions that need evidence
Before you begin
Materials
- Sticky notes or a shared board
- Ten imaginary budget points per group
Preparation
- Name the instructional decision, student-support plan, or school initiative to examine
What to say
“Every plan rests on assumptions. We have ten imaginary dollars to spend on the ones most worth testing—not the ones we most enjoy debating.”
How to run it
- 1
State the plan or decision clearly.
- 2
Groups write one assumption per note.
- 3
Combine duplicates and clarify wording without debating truth yet.
- 4
Give each group ten budget points to distribute across assumptions.
- 5
Identify the top two assumptions and name one piece of evidence that would test each.
Prompts to use
What must be true for this plan to work?
What are we treating as a fact without evidence?
Which assumption would be most costly if wrong?
Adapt it to the room
Small group
Use one shared list and silent dot voting.
Large group
Have tables auction independently, then compare their top choice.
Virtual
Use a collaborative board with ten dots or emoji votes per group.
Accessibility & inclusion
- Allow silent idea generation before discussion.
- Read all assumptions aloud before voting.
- Separate critique of an assumption from critique of the person who voiced it.
Debrief, if useful
What assumption attracted the most investment?
What is the smallest credible test we could run?
Why it works—and what can go wrong
Why it works
A constrained budget shifts the conversation from endless critique to prioritization and makes uncertainty discussable without demanding immediate consensus.
Watch out for
- Do not use voting to declare an assumption false.
- Avoid letting seniority determine which assumptions are allowed onto the list.