The purpose of this research was to explore how effective the bottom-up approach to producing and shaping educational legislation is in Ukraine and to identify what observed changes take place in students if the bottom-up approach is simulated in the classroom. Qualitative instruments and observational data were used to yield the data. Those were a survey questionnaire, semi-structured interview questionnaire, and focus group discussion observation checklists and moderators’ and facilitators’ reports. The data were processed using IBM SPSS Statistics 25.0.0.1. Software. The results of the study suggest the bottom-up approach to shaping educational legislation can be considered an option or an alternative to the conventional law-making procedure, at least in the sphere of education, in Ukraine. The use of mock policymaking experience has proven to be an efficient teaching tool. The application of the simulation of the bottom-up approach in the courses entitled “Educational policy” and “National Education Policy” was found to have the potential to encourage students to participate in the processes of shaping education policy, legislation, and regulation. The approach accelerated the desire of the students to participate in the processes of shaping education policy, legislation, and regulation. It also brought a change to the students’ vision of the school structure, the content of education, and the way the teacher is motivated. The intervention also brought a positive change to the students’ behaviour as citizens and their motivation as teachers-to-be.

The purpose of the study was to identify how debates effected the analytical thinking abilities of tertiary students and how the debates as an instructional approach were perceived by the students. The study used quantitative data collection methods such as tests and observation checklists and qualitative data collection methods such as a focus group discussion. The data was yielded from the measurements of students’ analytical thinking, critical thinking, problem-solving skills, and decision-making skills. The pretest and posttest measurements were administered using the test of analytical skills, the quiz entitled “Get Ready to Test Your Analytical Skills!”, and the problem-solving test. The study found that the debates improve the students’ analytical thinking abilities and are perceived positively by them. The pretest and posttest measurements results, observation reports, and a focus group discussion showed that the debate-driven instructional model brought positive change to students’ analytical thinking, critical thinking, problem-solving skills, and decision-making skills which are supported by the statistically significant Mean differences in all the variables. The findings from observations implied that the lessons were organised in a way that could sufficiently challenge the students, engage them in the search of information, and presenting their findings based on the facts and statistics. The results obtained from the students’ responses in the outline focus group discussion found that the students appreciated participation in the debates as they associated the experience with job benefits, the practical value of the debates, learning engagement, and research.