This unit will complement or begin study on the First Amendment of the Constitution as it relates to freedom of religion. Students have the opportunity to use their argumentative writing and presentation skills as attorneys. “Attorneys” write briefs and present orally in the court of appeals regarding an actual case involving students from the Sikh religion who contend that their First Amendment rights have been violated by the school district.
Democracy calls for rights and responsibilities of citizens. The judicial branch is an impartial interpreter of the Constitution.
12.2: Students evaluate and take and defend positions on the scope and limits of rights and obligations as democratic citizens, the relationships among them, and how they are secured.
Write arguments to support claims in an analysis of substantive topics or texts, using valid reasoning and relevant and sufficient evidence.
*Note: Content standards in theatre that call for Creative Expression, and Connections, Relationships and Applications that apply within this unit of study.
Students will be evaluated through informal checks for understanding, teacher observation, and written performance on the amicus curiae brief as guided by the Rubric Checklist for this end of the unit assessment.
|Goal||To represent your clients successfully in the case, Cheema v. Thompson (Principal of school)|
|Role||Attorneys from ACLU representing plaintiff, the Cheema’s, or attorney representing the defendants, Livingston School District, Principal Thompson.|
|Audience||The Justices of the US Court of Appeal|
|Situation||This case has been taken to appeal after a decision by the district court favoring the school district.|
|Performance||You will submit a written brief to the court and present oral arguments for the case in the U.S. Court of Appeals.|
|Standards for Success||Your brief and oral arguments will include claims, evidence, counter evidence, and cite the law.|
|Written Brief Quality Criteria||Absolutely||Almost||Not Yet|
I made a strong claim and supported my reasons very clearly with credible sources (law) and with evidence and details.
I recognized the counter claims and gave good arguments against them.
I used transition words like for example, another example, for instance, specifically, when giving evidence. I also used in addition to, also, and another when I wanted to make another point.
I emphasized important points and provided valid reasons for my claims and counterclaims. I also did this in a logical sequence, using transitions. I gave a conclusion, summarizing the argument.