Overall “big idea” learning goal
Students will investigate the ups and downs of the Olympic Games across history and in the 2026 Winter Olympics, using core Olympic ideals (excellence, respect, friendship, peace) as a lens to analyse human stories, political and ethical controversies, and official Olympic rhetoric, and then communicate nuanced, evidence‑based views in writing and discussion.
Aligned, combined learning objectives
By the end of the unit, students will be able to:
- Use evidence from multiple decades of Olympic history to describe at least two inspirational and two controversial Olympic moments, separating verifiable facts from their own interpretation.
- Explain the core Olympic ideals as set out in the Olympic Charter (excellence, respect, friendship and the broader goal of a peaceful, better world) and identify how these appear in ceremonies, symbols, speeches and media coverage.
- Compare “highs” and “lows” from the 2026 Winter Olympics, including both human‑interest stories and institutional controversies, and take a reasoned stance in discussion that acknowledges counter‑arguments.
- Apply a double‑entry journal (two‑column notes: event/quote on the left, reflection/analysis on the right) to texts, videos and other media about real Olympic events, not just fictional narratives.
- Analyse how individual athletes’ experiences (e.g., resilience, protest, exclusion, displacement, gender equity struggles) can both confirm and challenge official Olympic narratives about peace, inclusion and fair play.
- Write and speak with nuance by building clear claims about the Olympic Games, supporting them with sources, and explicitly acknowledging uncertainties and counterclaims (for example, the tension between inspiring stories and recurring scandals).
Essential questions
- What does the Olympic Movement promise the world—and what does it deliver in practice?
- When the Olympics go wrong (politicization, scandal, violence), who pays the cost—athletes, hosts, viewers, or the institution?
- Are the Olympics an engine for peace and inclusion, or a stage where global conflicts simply become more visible?
- Should we judge the Olympics by the best moments (human excellence, inclusion) or by the recurring failures (corruption, propaganda, harm)?
1) The Olympic promise”
Prompt (project):
“The goal of Olympism is to place sport at the service of the harmonious development of humankind…”
Student task
- Quick-write: What would the world look like if that promise were true?
- Pair share: identify the values language (peace, dignity, respect, education, responsibility).
- Whole-class board: create a class definition of “Olympic idealism.”
2) Build background: “Ups and downs” timeline inquiry
Structure: Jigsaw with 6 stations. Each station has 2–4 short sources (one “institution voice,” one “outside/accountability voice,” one “human story” when possible).
Station A — War & cancellation (the Olympics don’t float above history)
-
IOC history on cancelled Games
Guiding questions: What does cancellation reveal about the limits of “sport unites the world”?
Station B — Boycotts (politics by absence)
- IOC reflection on Moscow 1980 boycott
- Athlete impact reporting (human cost)
Guiding questions: Who is empowered by a boycott? Who is harmed?
Station C — Violence (Munich 1972)
-
NPS historical article framing the tragedy/memorial
Guiding questions: How does terrorism change what the Olympics are?
Station D — Corruption & reform (Salt Lake bid scandal)
- Guardian reporting on expulsions/reforms
- Background explainer
Guiding questions: When is “reform” real vs. reputation management?
Station E — Doping governance (trust crisis)
-
WADA statement on manipulation + McLaren materials
Guiding questions: What happens to fairness when testing systems can be captured?
Station F — Inclusion “ups”: Refugees + gender parity
- IOC Refugee Team pages
- IOC women/gender parity factsheet + timeline
- Reuters on team size (connects to world events)
Guiding questions: Is inclusion a moral shift, a PR shift, or both?
Output
-
Each group contributes 3 entries to a shared class timeline:
- Event + year
- “What happened” (strictly factual)
- “Why it matters” (interpretation, labeled as such)
Task: “Controversy Files – Investigating the 2026 Winter Olympics”
Use five current controversies to practise critical reading, evidence‑based argument, and nuanced discussion.
Controversies:
- Ukrainian “helmet of memory” disqualification in skeleton
- “Crotchgate” – genital injections / suit‑size scandal in ski jumping
- Breaking medals and quality concerns
- Figure skating/ice dance judging doubts and off‑ice scandals
- Wider scandal climate: hacking, robbery of Israeli team, and other security/ethics issues
Part A – Fact vs interpretation (individual, 20–25 min)
For each controversy, students create a simple two‑column organizer:
- Left: “What is fact?” (only what can be verified: who, what, when, where, official decisions, quotations)
- Right: “What is interpretation?” (what people think it means: unfair, embarrassing, dangerous, hypocritical, etc.)
Prompt:
- “List 2–3 facts and 1–2 interpretations for each controversy.”
- “Highlight one fact for each case that you think is most important.”
Written position with counterargument (homework or 30 min)
Prompt:
“Do scandals like those at the 2026 Winter Olympics damage the Olympic Games in a way that outweighs their positive impact, or do the Games still have value despite these controversies?”
Requirements:
- One clear claim (thesis).
- At least two specific examples from different controversies.
- Reference to at least one positive aspect of the Games (e.g., inspiring performances, international cooperation).
- A short counterargument (“Some people might say…”) and a brief response.
- 300–400 words (or adjust to your level).