Once the statement is posed, one student will begin writing their response, after about 1 minute the paper is swapped to the partner. The partner then has two minutes to read the entry and write a response. This will continue for three exchanges. Have students end the conversation on an oral note: “What would you like to talk about now with your partner?” Finally, ask the partners if they would like to share some of their conversation with the class. Check for Understanding Students will choose one of the two questions below and answer in CSQT format. C: Claim (State your opinion) S: Set-up (Introduce your quote-from the reading, tell how it fits into the text) Q: Quote (Share a quote that illustrates your opinion) T: Tie-in (Tell your reader how your quote shows your opinion is right) How have voting laws restricted the rights of minorities? Support your answer with historical evidence. Is it, or when is it, to limit the rights individuals are guaranteed by the Constitution? Rubric (First Question) 2 – This response gives a valid explanation with accurate and relevant historical evidence. 1 – This response gives a valid explanation with an inaccurate, irrelevant, or no historical evidence. Strategy 5: Extending and Refining Online Simulation Students are asked to work in cooperative groups to research historical . In this strategy, the class will participate in an online, interactive simulation to give them background information on the role of the Supreme Court. It is highly recommended the teacher preview the site prior to teaching the lesson. The students are responsible for analyzing the situation and discussions by the justices. Strategy 6: Application Case Studies – Moot Courts In groups of 3-4, students will research and present a summary of the court cases below. Gideon v. Wainwright (1963) New Jersey v. T.L.O. (1985) Texas v. Johnson (1989) Brown v. Board of Education (1954) Miranda v. Arizona (1966)
Once the statement is posed, one student will begin writing their response, after about 1 minute the paper is swapped to the partner. The partner then has two minutes to read the entry and write a response. This will continue for three exchanges. Have students end the conversation on an oral note: “What would you like to talk about now with your partner?” Finally, ask the partners if they would like to share some of their conversation with the class. Check for Understanding Students will choose one of the two questions below and answer in CSQT format. C: Claim (State your opinion) S: Set-up (Introduce your quote-from the reading, tell how it fits into the text) Q: Quote (Share a quote that illustrates your opinion) T: Tie-in (Tell your reader how your quote shows your opinion is right) How have voting laws restricted the rights of minorities? Support your answer with historical evidence. Is it, or when is it, to limit the rights individuals are guaranteed by the Constitution? Rubric (First Question) 2 – This response gives a valid explanation with accurate and relevant historical evidence. 1 – This response gives a valid explanation with an inaccurate, irrelevant, or no historical evidence. Strategy 5: Extending and Refining Online Simulation Students are asked to work in cooperative groups to research historical . In this strategy, the class will participate in an online, interactive simulation to give them background information on the role of the Supreme Court. It is highly recommended the teacher preview the site prior to teaching the lesson. The students are responsible for analyzing the situation and discussions by the justices. Strategy 6: Application Case Studies – Moot Courts In groups of 3-4, students will research and present a summary of the court cases below. Gideon v. Wainwright (1963) New Jersey v. T.L.O. (1985) Texas v. Johnson (1989) Brown v. Board of Education (1954) Miranda v. Arizona (1966)
Expansion%20of%20Freedom.docx