This lesson is based on the Annenberg Classroom video âA Call to …
This lesson is based on the Annenberg Classroom video âA Call to Act: Ledbetter v. Goodyear Tire and Rubber Co.,â which tells the law-changing story behind the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act of 2009. Students gain insight into law-making process, consider how statutory decisions made by the Supreme Court can prompt better laws, and learn about the rights and responsibilities they will have when they enter the workforce.
A challenging, fun card game that helps students learn about their rights …
A challenging, fun card game that helps students learn about their rights under the Bill of Rights, the first 10 amendments to the Constitution. The game offers three levels of play: Easy, Normal, Difficult.
We've all had that experience, the one where we start arguing with …
We've all had that experience, the one where we start arguing with someone and find that we disagree about pretty much everything. When two people have radically different background beliefs (or worldviews), they often have difficulty finding any sort of common ground. In this lesson, students will learn to distinguish between the two different types of background beliefs: beliefs about matters of fact and beliefs about values. They will then go on to consider their most deeply held background beliefs, those that constitute their worldview. Students will work to go beyond specific arguments to consider the worldviews that might underlie different types of arguments.
This game immerses students in the workings of our three branches of …
This game immerses students in the workings of our three branches of government. Players take on the roles of legislator, president and Supreme Court justice to get constitutional laws enacted. Players must juggle several bills at once while holding press conferences and town hall meetings.
This documentary tells the story of Lilly Ledbetter, whose fight for equal …
This documentary tells the story of Lilly Ledbetter, whose fight for equal pay for equal work eventually involved all three branches of government. Her U.S. Supreme Court case, Ledbetter v. Goodyear Tire and Rubber Co., turned on the interpretation of the 180-day statute of limitations for filing a discrimination complaint under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. After losing at the Supreme Court, Ledbetter urged Congress to start the 180-day clock for filing a complaint on the date an employee learned of the discrimination. The result was the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act of 2009.
This lesson will focus on the case Korematsu v. U.S. in comparison …
This lesson will focus on the case Korematsu v. U.S. in comparison with other times in U.S. history when the government was faced with the challenge of how to protect the country during war and, at the same time, protect individual freedoms. Using primary sources, students will examine five events in which U.S. citizens were forced to give up their civil liberties in times of war, highlighting the tension between liberty and security. Students will analyze these events to determine what groups were affected and the reasoning for and against the government action to decide if the government action was justified. Students will be able to form an opinion on the essential question: Is our government ever justified in restricting civil liberties for the security of the nation?
The Sixth Amendment's confrontation clause gives the accused the right âto be …
The Sixth Amendment's confrontation clause gives the accused the right âto be confronted with the witnesses against himâ at a criminal trial. This film uses the U.S. Supreme Court case Crawford v. Washington to help explain the history and importance of the confrontation clause and why the framers knew it would be crucial to an effective system of justice.â
This lesson plan focuses on the essential question: How does philosophy affect …
This lesson plan focuses on the essential question: How does philosophy affect the way a judge reads the Constitution and what is the effect of that? Teachers will use the Annenberg Classroom video âA Conversation on the Constitution: Judicial Interpretationâ in which Supreme Court Justices Antonin Scalia, a strict constructionist, and Stephen Breyer, an evolutionist, debate how the Constitution should be interpreted.
No restrictions on your remixing, redistributing, or making derivative works. Give credit to the author, as required.
Your remixing, redistributing, or making derivatives works comes with some restrictions, including how it is shared.
Your redistributing comes with some restrictions. Do not remix or make derivative works.
Most restrictive license type. Prohibits most uses, sharing, and any changes.
Copyrighted materials, available under Fair Use and the TEACH Act for US-based educators, or other custom arrangements. Go to the resource provider to see their individual restrictions.
