Wednesday, April 20, 2016

The Marketplace of Ideas

Here are the instructions for The Marketplace of Ideas.

Here is the form to use to submit your issue proposal: Marketplace Proposal Form

IMPORTANT DATES:
4/24: Blog Post One Due
4/27: Proposal Due
5/1: Blog Post Two Due
5/5: Publicity Flier Due
5/6: One page program description due
5/8: Blog Post Three Due
5/10: Project (Bookstore Lobby) and Bibliography (turnitin) Due

BRAINSTORMING LINKS
Room Schedule

Per. One
Per. 6
Wed. 4/20 (56)
Q118
xxxx
Thu. 4/21 (34)
Q118
Q118
Fri. 4/22 (12)
xxx
Q118
Mon. 4/25 (LS)
D106
G102
Tue. 4/26 (78)
D106
Q118
Wed. 4/27 (56)
D106
xxxx
Thu. 4/28 (34)
Q118
G102
Fri. 4/29 (12)
xxxx
G102
Mon. 5/2 (LS)
D106
G102
Tue. 5/3 (78)
D106
Q118
Wed. 5/4 (56)
D106
xxxx
Thu. 5/5 (34)
Q118
G102
Fri. 5/6 (12)
xxxx
G102
Mon. 5/9 (LS)
Q118
Q118
Tue. 5/10 (78)
Bookstore Lobby
Bookstore Lobby

Thursday, April 14, 2016

More Thoughts on Race and Unit Assessment

After discussing If I Were a Poor Black Kid and the responses to it, your task is to choose one of these articles to explore.
Time Person of the Year #4: Black Lives Matter
Race and Reality in America: Five Key Findings
Worst States for Black Americans
This week's blog post (4/17) should be connected to issues about race relations in America. It should specifically reference and make connections between the articles read in class today and the article you selected to read from the links above.

To finish this unit, we'll return to where we started, the Fisher v. The University of Texas-Austin case. Your assignment is to write a 1-2 page editorial, arguing how the Court should rule and why. This is your final piece of formal writing for the year, so make it your best.  Make sure that your assertion is clear and that it is supported by specific evidence. Evidence should come from the materials provided in class or if researched, should be properly cited (footnoted).  Your editorial is due to be submitted to turnitin.com prior to the start of your last class period next week (either 4/21 or 4/22).

Wednesday, April 13, 2016

Reactions to the Michigan Cases

Today in class, we'll continue to examine reactions to the University of Michigan affirmative action cases. With a partner, you'll examine these political cartoons: Drawing a Mixed Reaction and complete the following:

Analyze the cartoon below in terms of its meaning related to the Michigan affirmative action cases, Grutter v. Bollinger and Gratz v. Bollinger.
  1. What do you see in the cartoon? Make a list. Include objects, people, and any characteristics that seem to be exaggerated.
  2. Which of the items on the list from Question 1 are symbols? What does each symbol stand for?
  3. What is happening in the cartoon?
  4. What is the cartoonist's message?
  5. Do you agree or disagree with the message? Explain your answer.
Then, you and your partner will work to create your own political cartoon in response to the Michigan cases. You may use any of the information that we've looked at as a resource for your point of view. 

Friday, April 8, 2016

U. of Califorinia-Davis v. Bakke

We closed the week by looking at the Regents of the University of California-Davis Medical School v. Alan Bakke. We looked at the background of the case, the arguments, a summary of the decision and key excerpts. All can be found in this packet: Bakke and Affirmative Action Cases . At the end of class we looked at the next activity in the packet which is comparing the Harvard and Michigan admissions policies that were developed as a result of the Bakke decision. Finish the Venn Diagram in the packet as that's the first thing we'll look at on Monday.

Tuesday, April 5, 2016

Affirmative Action in College Admissions

After reading and discussing this article that describes the Fisher v. University of Texas-Austin case currently being decided by the Supreme Court, we participated in the college admissions process by completing the activities in this packet: College Admissions Game.