Posts Tagged ‘bill’
This use of you’re is not a typo.
Mnemonics — little catch phrases that work as memory aids — are a great way to help students memorize things.
These mnemonics are the creation of my master teacher. I take no credit for their merits or flaws.
First Amendment — because it’s first, it’s the most important amendment: speech, expression, religion, assembly, petition for a redress of grievances.
Second Amendment — you have two arms, so this is the right to bear arms.
Third Amendment — three o’s in “quartering trooops.”
Fourth Amendment — four syllables in search-and-sei-zure.
Fifth, Sixth, Seventh Amendments — these have to do with trials, and start with the most important trial rights.
Eighth Amendment — the numeral 8 looks like a hangman’s noose, so “cruel and unusual punishment.”
Ninth and Tenth Amendments — just remember: these deal with unenumerated rights and powers, respectively. Ninth is people, and Tenth is states.
This was just the beginning. Though we would attack each amendment in greater detail, this list of mnemonics worked as our introduction, conclusion and touchstone for the entire judicial branch unit.
The trick with mnemonics, though, is that students will sometimes fail to make the connection between the memory aid — quartering trooops — and the actual knowledge needed — “Troops cannot be quartered in a civilian’s house during peacetime.”
Mnemonics can only be intended as the foundation of knowledge, or to fill in gaps. Students should understand that other knowledge will still be needed, i.e. that the Sixth Amendment gives people lawyers, and the Seventh has to do with civil trials by jury in amounts greater than $20, even though the mnemonic groups those two in with the trial amendments.
Mnemonics are an excellent mortar, or even an excellent foundation, but they cannot replace more complex scaffolding or knowledge.
Be sure to check out more of my tips and tricks for teaching the Bill of Rights.
What follows is an excessively long comment I had made in a discussion with Sarah Hanawald, now made into a proper post. Also what follows is my understanding of the much-lauded Bloom’s Taxonomy which hopes to answer the modern question for Bloom: Does the ready availability of knowledge in the digital age change the importance of Knowledge?
Is it possible to have higher-level thinking without having been immersed and having memorized Knowledge, or should lists — formerly memorized by rote — be provided on tests to help out students who aren’t good at memorization?
My understanding of Bloom is that higher-level thinking first requires quite a lot of Knowledge. It is in an integral part of the way the mind works — easier access to this knowledge overall can’t replace rote memorization of the basic details. To make real analysis, synthesis and evaluation, students must draw on their internal databanks. Please: Correct me if I’m wrong.
That’s not to say that there shouldn’t be preparation. I had a whole Bill of Rights quiz that I insisted my students take. This quiz asked for answers from my students’ rote memorization. They should have been well-prepared for my exam because of that quiz, though I threw in some matching questions later on in the Big Test.
I do know that there is quite a variation in memory capabilities among all students.
Students should be encouraged to work on this by themselves, or with the guidance of another adult. This is a skill that cannot be underestimated, and should not be discouraged by providing lists on the test.
I believe students and teachers benefit when we design assessments that allow students to show us what they can do as well as identify what they cannot yet do.
Yet that that’s the realm of formative assessment, as in a quiz. This should not be the focus of a summative assessment, as in this unit test.
In our digital age, when quick information is a Google search away, is there meaning in memorization? I think there is, and I plan to continue this topic again on another day.
We’re about to cover the Bill of Rights. There’s so much to do with this section. Sure, we’ll make the chart. We’ll go further.
I have a documentary-style movie which, as it addresses police procedure under extraordinary circumstances and a modified version of the USA PATRIOT Act, will very nicely hit the Fourth through Sixth Amendments.
While the bruhaha over this movie blew over some time ago, I’m wondering about how best I should introduce it in my classroom.
“Death of a President” is a fictional documentary about the assassination of 43rd U.S. President George W. Bush. … The film covers topics of civil disobedience, racial profiling, the reduction of civil liberties, sensationalism and just-war theory.
It’s perfect for due process and freedom of assembly. It’s perfect for self-incrimination and the right to a speedy trial. Is it perfect for my classroom?
It isn’t like we’ve wholeheartedly avoided controversy. Remember which clip I’m using for the First Amendment. That’s already pretty hefty stuff.
Yes, I have approval from my master teacher. We’ll very carefully introduce The N-Word clip with a standard “This is meant to make you think” and the cursory “This does not represent the view of the establishment” and the relevancy-making “What do you understand about the First Amendment, now?”
Will this angle work on a movie about the assassination of the current president? This subject matter is potentially more sensitive. If the official movie blog is to be believed, Sen. Hillary Clinton (D — N. Y.) had this reaction:
I think it’s despicable.
I wonder if she even saw this movie. This movie isn’t about bashing Bush. In fact, most of the characters who are not suspects look up to the guy, nearly idolizing him.
The content is standards-based and, for once, the subject matter will immediately capture the attention of even my seniors. Why am I worrying, then?
Moral of the story? When in irreparable doubt, defer to your gut. What horrible advice.