Argument Essay Planning
Students planned (but didn't write) an essay about whether the Supreme Court made the right decision in one of four court cases that we studied in class.
Students planned (but didn't write) an essay about whether the Supreme Court made the right decision in one of four court cases that we studied in class.
The Constitution-Federalists v. Anti-Federalists and the Bill of Rights
Students were given an extra-credit opportunity to draw a cartoon depicting the views of the Federalists and the Anti-Federalists.
Students were given an extra-credit opportunity to draw a cartoon depicting the views of the Federalists and the Anti-Federalists.
Constitutional Principles essay task:
TASK: Writing Assignment Options
Write an article or argument piece for the newspaper in which you (choose 1):
TASK: Writing Assignment Options
Write an article or argument piece for the newspaper in which you (choose 1):
- Explain three of the four Constitutional Principles we have discussed in class by defining and explaining the principles and providing and explaining examples of each from the Constitution (maximum score of 3)
- Choose one of the four Constitutional Principles we have discussed in class-NOT the one you presented about. Define and explain the principle, provide and explain examples of the principle from the Constitution, and provide a current event that relates to (shows/contradicts) the principle and explain. (maximum score of 4)
- Choose a current event that relates to one or more of the Constitutional Principles we have studied and do the following (maximum score of 4):
- Describe the current event.
- Explain how it relates to the Constitution, using at least one example from the Constitution.
- Explain how it relates to one or more Constitutional Principle(s) we have studied.
- OPTIONAL: If you like, argue what the outcome/consequences of the event should be based on the Constitution and the Principles, if applicable.
There are 4 principles in the constitution that help guide our branches. Checks and balances is one of them. Checks and balances is a principle designed to keep each branch of government in check. This constitutional principle has kept our democracy intact for hundreds of years. -Cobe M.
One reason is the writers wanted a limited government is they didn’t want one branch of the government to have too much power, throughout the constitution the writers tell you what one branch of the government can do and that each branch is divided is between the the others. One example of this is congress can make a law but when it gets to the executive branch the president can veto it and send through the whole process again. Another, recent example is Trump's executive orders about refugees. Both of them have been unconstitutional and through many judges this was decided that the order will not be carried out. This shows that Trump’s overuse in power lead to the other branches stepping in and telling him he can't do that. -Gabe P.
Firstly, why the founders wanted to use federalism. They did not want to be like Britain with a unitary system. They wanted to be their own country because King George was a terrible leader. And they did not want to relive the years they spent under the Articles of Confederation, because those years were spent with the states having way more power than the government and that's not good. No other countries were using federalism at the time. They wanted a stronger central government and a strong state government. Federalism was meant to eliminate disadvantages from both sides. They wanted the power to be shared and to avoid tyranny. -Phife M.
Another principle is checks and balances. Checks and balances was made to make sure one branch was never more powerful than the other. Each branch is restricted by the other two. For example, the president can veto a law made by Congress. But Congress can override that veto with a vote of two thirds of both houses. The powers are balanced by the fact that the Supreme Court judges are appointed by the president but Congress has to approve his choice. These are just two examples. -Emily C.
The legislative branch is a special branch; because it is split in two, it can check itself. Bills must be passed by both houses, nither house can adjourn for more than three days without checking with the other house, and all journals have to be published. In the executive branch, They have the power to declare war, can approve to replace vice president, and the senate can hold a trial of impeachment. Their checks on the judicial branch include the power to change the size of the supreme court and the power to make courts smaller than the supreme court. -Haley M.
An example of a current event related to checks and balances is that democrats in the senate are trying to filibuster Trump’s Supreme Court nominee. In order for Trump’s Supreme court nominee to be elected he needs to get 60 out of 100 votes in the senate. But Democratic Senator Jeff Merkley claims that he is going to filibuster and is trying to get other senators to filibuster with him. “This is a stolen seat. This is the first time a Senate majority has stolen a seat; we will use every lever in our power to stop this,” said Senator Jeff Merkley in an interview, when asked about his plan to filibuster. To filibuster is to basically talk a lot to slow down progress in the senate, and it doesn’t even need to be a huge issue, your goal is to waste time so that, in this case, the voting of the new supreme court judge will be continually put off. Basically the democrats are trying to “bring down” Trump’s Supreme court nominee, no matter who it is. This relates to checks and balances because if Trump’s nominee doesn’t get the right amount of votes from the senate, who are checking his decision to see if they agree or not, then the executive branch’s nominee for the supreme court, isn’t going to be a supreme court justice. -Caroline N.
One reason is the writers wanted a limited government is they didn’t want one branch of the government to have too much power, throughout the constitution the writers tell you what one branch of the government can do and that each branch is divided is between the the others. One example of this is congress can make a law but when it gets to the executive branch the president can veto it and send through the whole process again. Another, recent example is Trump's executive orders about refugees. Both of them have been unconstitutional and through many judges this was decided that the order will not be carried out. This shows that Trump’s overuse in power lead to the other branches stepping in and telling him he can't do that. -Gabe P.
Firstly, why the founders wanted to use federalism. They did not want to be like Britain with a unitary system. They wanted to be their own country because King George was a terrible leader. And they did not want to relive the years they spent under the Articles of Confederation, because those years were spent with the states having way more power than the government and that's not good. No other countries were using federalism at the time. They wanted a stronger central government and a strong state government. Federalism was meant to eliminate disadvantages from both sides. They wanted the power to be shared and to avoid tyranny. -Phife M.
Another principle is checks and balances. Checks and balances was made to make sure one branch was never more powerful than the other. Each branch is restricted by the other two. For example, the president can veto a law made by Congress. But Congress can override that veto with a vote of two thirds of both houses. The powers are balanced by the fact that the Supreme Court judges are appointed by the president but Congress has to approve his choice. These are just two examples. -Emily C.
The legislative branch is a special branch; because it is split in two, it can check itself. Bills must be passed by both houses, nither house can adjourn for more than three days without checking with the other house, and all journals have to be published. In the executive branch, They have the power to declare war, can approve to replace vice president, and the senate can hold a trial of impeachment. Their checks on the judicial branch include the power to change the size of the supreme court and the power to make courts smaller than the supreme court. -Haley M.
An example of a current event related to checks and balances is that democrats in the senate are trying to filibuster Trump’s Supreme Court nominee. In order for Trump’s Supreme court nominee to be elected he needs to get 60 out of 100 votes in the senate. But Democratic Senator Jeff Merkley claims that he is going to filibuster and is trying to get other senators to filibuster with him. “This is a stolen seat. This is the first time a Senate majority has stolen a seat; we will use every lever in our power to stop this,” said Senator Jeff Merkley in an interview, when asked about his plan to filibuster. To filibuster is to basically talk a lot to slow down progress in the senate, and it doesn’t even need to be a huge issue, your goal is to waste time so that, in this case, the voting of the new supreme court judge will be continually put off. Basically the democrats are trying to “bring down” Trump’s Supreme court nominee, no matter who it is. This relates to checks and balances because if Trump’s nominee doesn’t get the right amount of votes from the senate, who are checking his decision to see if they agree or not, then the executive branch’s nominee for the supreme court, isn’t going to be a supreme court justice. -Caroline N.
Limited Government essay task:
TASK: As we have seen through our work in class, the founders wanted a limited federal government for many reasons. Explain why the founders wanted a limited government. Choose three examples of limitations that the founders placed on the federal government and explain why they would have wanted to place these limitations on the federal government.
TASK: As we have seen through our work in class, the founders wanted a limited federal government for many reasons. Explain why the founders wanted a limited government. Choose three examples of limitations that the founders placed on the federal government and explain why they would have wanted to place these limitations on the federal government.
An excerpt:
The Hunger Games essay task:
As we have seen in both The Hunger Games and the present-day governments that we have studied, totalitarian governments restrict the human rights of their citizens in order to stay in power. Choose three examples of policies or laws in both Panem and present-day governments and explain how the governments’ actions are designed to prevent the people from rebelling and/or keep the government in power.
Some excerpts from these essays
INTROS AND A BODY PARAGRAPH TOPIC SENTENCE
By A. F.: Have you ever thought about about how the government in The Hunger Games is so heartless and how they do horrible things to the people of the country?Well there are governments like that in the real world they are called totalitarian governments where the government is centralized around dictatorship to keep the government in power.
By T. T.: Can you imagine killing someone you actually know and may even like? And being forced to by your government? In The Hunger Games, this happens. This is a book, but it happens in real life, too. In The Hunger Games and in North Korea totalitarian governments restrict the human rights of their citizens in order to stay in power.
The first way that Panem and NK control their citizens by restricting their rights is having them tired and hungry.
BODY PARAGRAPHS
By C. N.: One example of a policy in Panem and modern governments is control over communication. In Panem the government makes sure that there is no way for the districts to communicate. “We have so little communication with anyone outside our district… Gamemakers are blocking out our conversation… don’t want people in different districts to know about one another.”(Collins,203) Current governments do the same; for example in Russia the president, Putin, also controls communication. Putin does this by controlling the television stations so that they only broadcast what he authorizes. That way, if the government sends a bunch of people to jail, they can televise that the people started it, and that the government was just trying to protect them; when really it could have been the government that started it, or they ‘thought’ that the people going to jail were spies or rebels. Overall, controlling communication keeps a government in power by limiting information flow.
By Z. T.: One way totalitarian governments stay in power is by controlling media. In The Hunger Games, the tyrannical Capitol only shows either major, mandatory-to-watch events or government-glorifying programs on television in many of the 12 Districts (Collins, 42). Books also show the Capitol in a not-so-honest light and vilify the rebellion of the then-13 Districts nearly a century before the book takes place (Collins, 42). In North Korea and Russia, only government programs are broadcasted on TV, which prevents people from finding out about other countries’ lifestyles, governments, and opinions, and thereby getting doubtful about how great their government really is (Ioffe) (United Nations Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights).
BODY PARAGRAPHS AND PART OF CONCLUSION
By T. S.: One example of denying human rights is when a government keeps their people starving. In The Hunger Games not a single district was given enough food. “District 12. Where you can starve to death in safety.” (Collins, p. 6) This is from the point of view of the main character Katniss. Katniss spends all of her time in the woods hunting, or in the village trading things for food, because everyone in her family is being starved. This is like the government in North Korea who doesn’t provide food for the poor. There’s lots of starvation there. (United Nations Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights, ) This keeps the government in power because all the starving people are focused on trying to get food and get their next meal instead of figuring out how to make the government change the way they treat their people or figuring out how to rebel against the government....
...When a government is this cruel every person should care. If this was happening to any of us we would hope that some people who weren’t suffering would take action. This is why people have created a Declaration of Human Rights, so that in the real world life can be more than trying to survive.
As we have seen in both The Hunger Games and the present-day governments that we have studied, totalitarian governments restrict the human rights of their citizens in order to stay in power. Choose three examples of policies or laws in both Panem and present-day governments and explain how the governments’ actions are designed to prevent the people from rebelling and/or keep the government in power.
Some excerpts from these essays
INTROS AND A BODY PARAGRAPH TOPIC SENTENCE
By A. F.: Have you ever thought about about how the government in The Hunger Games is so heartless and how they do horrible things to the people of the country?Well there are governments like that in the real world they are called totalitarian governments where the government is centralized around dictatorship to keep the government in power.
By T. T.: Can you imagine killing someone you actually know and may even like? And being forced to by your government? In The Hunger Games, this happens. This is a book, but it happens in real life, too. In The Hunger Games and in North Korea totalitarian governments restrict the human rights of their citizens in order to stay in power.
The first way that Panem and NK control their citizens by restricting their rights is having them tired and hungry.
BODY PARAGRAPHS
By C. N.: One example of a policy in Panem and modern governments is control over communication. In Panem the government makes sure that there is no way for the districts to communicate. “We have so little communication with anyone outside our district… Gamemakers are blocking out our conversation… don’t want people in different districts to know about one another.”(Collins,203) Current governments do the same; for example in Russia the president, Putin, also controls communication. Putin does this by controlling the television stations so that they only broadcast what he authorizes. That way, if the government sends a bunch of people to jail, they can televise that the people started it, and that the government was just trying to protect them; when really it could have been the government that started it, or they ‘thought’ that the people going to jail were spies or rebels. Overall, controlling communication keeps a government in power by limiting information flow.
By Z. T.: One way totalitarian governments stay in power is by controlling media. In The Hunger Games, the tyrannical Capitol only shows either major, mandatory-to-watch events or government-glorifying programs on television in many of the 12 Districts (Collins, 42). Books also show the Capitol in a not-so-honest light and vilify the rebellion of the then-13 Districts nearly a century before the book takes place (Collins, 42). In North Korea and Russia, only government programs are broadcasted on TV, which prevents people from finding out about other countries’ lifestyles, governments, and opinions, and thereby getting doubtful about how great their government really is (Ioffe) (United Nations Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights).
BODY PARAGRAPHS AND PART OF CONCLUSION
By T. S.: One example of denying human rights is when a government keeps their people starving. In The Hunger Games not a single district was given enough food. “District 12. Where you can starve to death in safety.” (Collins, p. 6) This is from the point of view of the main character Katniss. Katniss spends all of her time in the woods hunting, or in the village trading things for food, because everyone in her family is being starved. This is like the government in North Korea who doesn’t provide food for the poor. There’s lots of starvation there. (United Nations Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights, ) This keeps the government in power because all the starving people are focused on trying to get food and get their next meal instead of figuring out how to make the government change the way they treat their people or figuring out how to rebel against the government....
...When a government is this cruel every person should care. If this was happening to any of us we would hope that some people who weren’t suffering would take action. This is why people have created a Declaration of Human Rights, so that in the real world life can be more than trying to survive.
Analysis of The HUnger Games Movie
A sample of some of the thoughts of the 8th graders after comparing THG movie to the book:
Near the beginning of the movie it shows Katniss at the hob looking in a container with gears, pieces of scrap metal and little doodads, but in that small container she finds the iconic mockingjay pin. In the book, when Katniss is in a waiting room after she was chosen for The Hunger Games, Madge walks in and gives her a district token you are allowed to wear in the arena, the little gold mockingjay pin. I feel like the director made the right decision for Katniss to go in the hob, have the mockingjay pin given to her, and show how in the districts, its one for all, all for one, they help each other out. i also feel like it makes the pin more desirable and iconic in the movie.
One difference between the book and the movie is the hulusonationations that the tracker jackers brought to katniss. In the book it only said that the hulusonations were about home. In the movie it used the hulusonations from the tracker jacker venom to explain how her dad died in district 12. The movie showed the mine as it exploded and then a picture of her dad on a table. This was a clever way of telling people watching the movie how her dad had died because in the book she tells us in her mind.
One difference between "The Hunger Games" movie and book is at the end of the book when Katniss and Peeta are riding the train back to the capitol she tells him that part of their close relationship was just for the audience. At that point in the book their relationship sort of ends. In the movie all Katniss tells Peeta is that she wants to forget the Hunger Games. He tells her that he wants to remember the Hunger Games forever. After that all they do is wave to the crowd. The director of the movie might have chosen to make it different from the book so the movie would have a more happy ending. The director didn't make a good decision because that part is an important part of Katniss and Peeta's relationship. It also could be important for future movies and books id Peeta is more distant.
Near the beginning of the movie it shows Katniss at the hob looking in a container with gears, pieces of scrap metal and little doodads, but in that small container she finds the iconic mockingjay pin. In the book, when Katniss is in a waiting room after she was chosen for The Hunger Games, Madge walks in and gives her a district token you are allowed to wear in the arena, the little gold mockingjay pin. I feel like the director made the right decision for Katniss to go in the hob, have the mockingjay pin given to her, and show how in the districts, its one for all, all for one, they help each other out. i also feel like it makes the pin more desirable and iconic in the movie.
One difference between the book and the movie is the hulusonationations that the tracker jackers brought to katniss. In the book it only said that the hulusonations were about home. In the movie it used the hulusonations from the tracker jacker venom to explain how her dad died in district 12. The movie showed the mine as it exploded and then a picture of her dad on a table. This was a clever way of telling people watching the movie how her dad had died because in the book she tells us in her mind.
One difference between "The Hunger Games" movie and book is at the end of the book when Katniss and Peeta are riding the train back to the capitol she tells him that part of their close relationship was just for the audience. At that point in the book their relationship sort of ends. In the movie all Katniss tells Peeta is that she wants to forget the Hunger Games. He tells her that he wants to remember the Hunger Games forever. After that all they do is wave to the crowd. The director of the movie might have chosen to make it different from the book so the movie would have a more happy ending. The director didn't make a good decision because that part is an important part of Katniss and Peeta's relationship. It also could be important for future movies and books id Peeta is more distant.
Field Trip to Revolutionary Boston!
1. Scavenger hunt of the revolutionary North End
2. Lunch at Faneuil Hall
3. Walking tour of the southern part of the Freedom Trail with a guide from the Freedom Trail Foundation
4. Tour of Suffolk University
2. Lunch at Faneuil Hall
3. Walking tour of the southern part of the Freedom Trail with a guide from the Freedom Trail Foundation
4. Tour of Suffolk University
analysis of "Theseus and the Minotaur"
and "The lottery"
"Theseus and the Minotaur" and "The Lottery" are two stories that Suzanne Collins, author of The Hunger Games, cites as inspiration for that book. We analyzed these stories using the format of a story map, and after we read The Hunger Games we will revisit those story maps and the ideas in those stories to see whether that inspiration is evident in her book.
The Presidential Election
Skype with Train author dr. danny cohen
HW Essay: Constitutional Principles
The new writing techniques that were introduced and practiced in this essay were ways to write an introduction with an effective hook, helpful and necessary background information, and a clear focus statement. Check out these student samples below:
The white, crisp paper sat on the oak table, residing next to a quill and small ink jar, filled to the brim with dark black ink. Slowly, men stepped forward, picked up the quill, and signed their name at the bottom of the lengthy document. These men built this document from the ground up, and needed it to exemplify everything good and true that the United States of America had to be. They followed four principles while drafting this document, the constitution. Without the four principles, Separation of Powers, Checks and Balances, Federalism, and Limited Government, the constitution would look very different, and the world would be in a very different place. These four principles are all very important, and one of the most is separation of powers, which consists of vesting the federal government in three distinct branches, the legislative, executive, and judicial.
Checks and balances are not always just about money. When the constitution was written the founders wanted to make sure that no one part of the government got too powerful. They wrote the constitution to have three branches: executive, legislative and judicial. The executive branch consists of the president and the vice president. The legislative branch is made of Congress,who makes the laws. The judicial consist of the Supreme Court and all our other courts. Each branch has power over the two other branches. The principle of checks and balances makes sure power is distributed evenly.
The United States Constitution was created intentionally to secure the best possible democracy for the country's future. Every decision made and published in the Constitution served a purpose. Our federal government is made up of three main branches, the legislative branch, the executive branch, and lastly the judicial branch. These three branches each play separate roles in the government system, however to insure that one branch can not make a decision without the consent and input of others, they can check each other in different ways. This concept is known as checks and balances, because by giving each government branch a certain amount of power over the other, every law or decision must be very widely supported and agreed upon to be passed. This principle was therefore used when the writers of the Constitution thought of ways to make sure that the majority rules, and that one branch could not make decisions without being checked by the others. Without using the principle of checks and balances to create government structure, the entire United States Constitution and government system would work very differently. To this day, the principle affects the political environment and balance of this country and the people within it.
The founding fathers signed the Constitution on September 17, 1787. While they were writing the constitution, they were guided by four principles. One of the principles that the authors were guided by was separation of powers. Separation of powers is a way of dividing power among the three branches of government. Members of the House of Representatives, the Senate, and the federal courts are selected by and responsible to different constituencies. They didn’t want the government to be like England’s, with one person - the King - in power and making all of the decisions. Separation of powers is important to keep our country composed and organized, as well as keeping our government branches from having too much power.
The white, crisp paper sat on the oak table, residing next to a quill and small ink jar, filled to the brim with dark black ink. Slowly, men stepped forward, picked up the quill, and signed their name at the bottom of the lengthy document. These men built this document from the ground up, and needed it to exemplify everything good and true that the United States of America had to be. They followed four principles while drafting this document, the constitution. Without the four principles, Separation of Powers, Checks and Balances, Federalism, and Limited Government, the constitution would look very different, and the world would be in a very different place. These four principles are all very important, and one of the most is separation of powers, which consists of vesting the federal government in three distinct branches, the legislative, executive, and judicial.
Checks and balances are not always just about money. When the constitution was written the founders wanted to make sure that no one part of the government got too powerful. They wrote the constitution to have three branches: executive, legislative and judicial. The executive branch consists of the president and the vice president. The legislative branch is made of Congress,who makes the laws. The judicial consist of the Supreme Court and all our other courts. Each branch has power over the two other branches. The principle of checks and balances makes sure power is distributed evenly.
The United States Constitution was created intentionally to secure the best possible democracy for the country's future. Every decision made and published in the Constitution served a purpose. Our federal government is made up of three main branches, the legislative branch, the executive branch, and lastly the judicial branch. These three branches each play separate roles in the government system, however to insure that one branch can not make a decision without the consent and input of others, they can check each other in different ways. This concept is known as checks and balances, because by giving each government branch a certain amount of power over the other, every law or decision must be very widely supported and agreed upon to be passed. This principle was therefore used when the writers of the Constitution thought of ways to make sure that the majority rules, and that one branch could not make decisions without being checked by the others. Without using the principle of checks and balances to create government structure, the entire United States Constitution and government system would work very differently. To this day, the principle affects the political environment and balance of this country and the people within it.
The founding fathers signed the Constitution on September 17, 1787. While they were writing the constitution, they were guided by four principles. One of the principles that the authors were guided by was separation of powers. Separation of powers is a way of dividing power among the three branches of government. Members of the House of Representatives, the Senate, and the federal courts are selected by and responsible to different constituencies. They didn’t want the government to be like England’s, with one person - the King - in power and making all of the decisions. Separation of powers is important to keep our country composed and organized, as well as keeping our government branches from having too much power.
THE PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION PROCESS
We have begun talking about the Presidential Election process, and students were shocked to learn that the Electoral College elects the President, not the popular vote. We will continue this conversation in the months to come!
Giving each other writing FEEDBACK
I am so proud of the high-quality feedback that the 8th graders give to each other about their writing via Google Classroom. Their feedback shows their commitment to good writing. Equally important, their comments showcase the growth mindset classroom culture that we have worked hard to develop.
Primaries and Caucuses
Students identified gun control as a top issue in the presidential election. They used that as one of the three top issues of a political party they created. We will use the political party they have created to do a simulation in order to explore how primaries and caucuses work.
political ideologies
We are exploring political ideologies as part of our study of government and in preparation for the upcoming presidential election.
MORPHEMES
A regular part of our routine in Humanities is the study of Morphemes, or word parts that have meaning. Below, 8th graders are reviewing some prefixes and suffixes by doing a sort, then combining them with roots to make words.
Constitutional Compromises
After researching a compromise that was made at the Constitutional Convention, students gathered in groups to share what they learned and listen to others share. Through this activity all students were able to achieve an understanding of both the Great Compromise and the Three-fifths Compromise.
storytelling with eshu bumpus
The eighth graders are working with Eshu Bumpus to adapt folktales. They will be developing their storytelling skills and tell their adapted stories to classes in the younger grades.
Mindset
Author and researcher Carol Dweck believes that the main factor that determines success in life is one's mindset. Specifically, she believes that the key is having a growth mindset (believing that intelligence can change and grow), as opposed to a fixed mindset (believing that intelligence levels are predetermined, or 'fixed', at birth. She presents her case, along with evidence that intelligence levels can, in fact, grow over time, in her book Mindset. We wrestled with her ideas in class during the first week of school-you can get a glimpse of our process below.