1.

The question students responded to and where it came from

Students were given twenty minutes to respond to the prompt Did you agree with the outcome, why or why not? Over the past few weeks, students studied numerous Supreme Court Cases background, constitutional questions, and rulings. As a class we then did a March Madness style bracket with all the cases. Students were all given one case and worked individually or in pairs to prepare arguments for why their Supreme Court case was the greatest of all time. They were given multiple days in class to prepare their arguments. During the last class before spring break, each class played out the bracket. For example, Loving v Virginia and Brown v. Board of Education would present their arguments about why their case was greater, and the class would vote. The winner would then advance to the next round. After the final winner was announced, students were then allowed to write their own opinions on the outcome of the bracket and if they agreed that the winner was the greatest. 2. What you were looking for in their responses (what would make a good response? a bad one?) In the responses, the student needed to demonstrate a clear understanding of the cases and why they were important. Students should understand both the long and short-term effects of not only the case that won, but also the case they believe was greater. Each student conceptualized great differently, but students should all engage in a thoughtful analysis of the impact of certain Supreme Court cases. Additionally, I informed students I wanted specifics in their answers. Their arguments needed to be supported by clear facts. Students needed to show a clear grasp of the constitutional issues of the cases they were using in their arguments. For example, students should note the Mapp V. Ohio case dealt with the fourth amendment and created the basis for a right to privacy. Students should demonstrate an ability to compare the different cases and evaluate which was the greatest. If students did not agree with the outcome, I was hoping they would contrast the one they picked to the winner. I categorized a bad response as one that was unclear or made unsound comparisons between the cases. For example, if a student said that Citizens United v. FEC dealt with rights of the accused when it actually deals with free speech. Responses needed to be well written, but because of the time constraint, I did not expect perfect grammar sentence structure or a completed product. The content of the students argument and how they valuated greatest were the foci of my grading.

3. An analysis of the three responses (providing the responses with names blacked out might be a good idea). o What kind of understanding does each student demonstrate? Most students seemed to dispute the result of their bracket even though the class as a whole voted for each case. Even though many disagreed, which case they chose as the most important varied along with their reasons for selecting the case. The differences in student understanding of the issue and material appeared in their varied responses. Students valued and noticed different things about cases. Additionally, students

conceptualized which case was the greatest differently. Some viewed the greatest to be the one that affected their current situation the most; others focused on the legal impacts of the case. Student 1 chose Marbury v. Madison as the most important case. For the argument, the student focused on the legal importance of the case. Centrally, s/he argued, Marbury was the case that established it all. As Marbury v. Madison created the process of judicial review, every court case would be useless if it were just a case and if the ruling didnt matter. This argument is interesting because the student admits, I myself vote[d] out this case from the bracket. The student displays an in-depth comprehension of both the Supreme Court and the effects of the cases. She quickly remarks on the background of the case, but reframes the effect as its central importance; Sure, Marbury was about a guy wanting his job, but it was also about the Supreme Court getting to interpret the Constitution. This demonstrates an understanding of both the short and long term effects of this case The student denotes that the process of judicial review granted from Marbury v. Madison is the cornerstone of the courts power. Additionally, that this legal precedent is the root of the every other case, every landmark case ever in US history came to exist because of Marbury. While Student 1 focused on the legal reasonings for the greatness of a case, Student 2 instead focused on the immediate and personal impact of the case. Student 2 chose Brown v. Board of Education as the winner because it gave students equality and people in general their civil rights- if not for this case half of this class would not be here to debate this topic at all. Student 2 recognizes the immediate and everyday impact of Brown v. Board of Education. Additionally, the student recognizes this cases was the foundation for future Civil Rights legislation and action, without it, separate but equal would still exist. This student then turn to directly analyze why Brown v. Board of Education was more than the winner of the bracket US v. Nixon. The student recognized that the question asked him to directly state not only which case s/he thought should have won, but also why it was greater that the original winner. The student argued US v Nixon had a limited scope, those powers have not been sued again by the court, especially not for the President. He acknowledges a long-term effect in that Nixon might have remained president. However, the student also conceptualizes greatness on a more personal note. S/he comments that without Brown V. Board of Education I wouldnt be in this school. Student 3 also disagrees with the outcome of the bracket, but focuses on the direct relevance and application of the cases decision. To this student, the greatest case is the one that has the most relevance to everyday life. She believes that Tinker v. Des Moines was the most important because the first amendment applies to our everyday lives while the winner in her class, Gideon v Wainwright, applies to people who would get in trouble with the law mostly.

What might each of the responses tell you about the degree to which the student has or has not grasped the material? What gives rise to your assumptions here? (use evidence) For the most part, it is clear student grasped the basics of the assignment. They were able to make a case for why they believed one case was more important than the designated winner in each of their classes. However, further analysis demonstrates that

some deeper understandings of the constitutional questions and rulings of cases may exist. Student 1 makes an intelligent and well thought out argument for her choice of Marbury v. Madison as the most important case. However, it is not clear s/he understands why s/he thinks the case is more important than Gideon. S/he never ties her argument back into why Marbury would be better than Gideon, and never includes the argument that Gideon specifically never would have happened if not for Marbury. Similarly, student 2 did not demonstrate a specific understanding of why Brown v. Board of Education ended segregation and created the start of Civil Rights. S/he did not mention the 14th amendment or Equal Protection clauses that are crucial to understanding the effects of the case. Additionally, the student makes a vast assumption about Brown v. Board of Education. Specifically, this case established true equality among the races, and gave real Civil Rights to everyone. The student missed that it took many more court cases and legislation to give full legal rights to all races. Additionally when s/he says everyone, the student did not fully grasp the extent of everyone, as there were still numerous instances of discrimination of numerous groups. Finally, the student may not understand the importance of his word choice in using true equality. The student claims Brown v. Board of Education leads to true equality, but if thats the case then is there no inequality in America? Although Student 3 takes a valid stance in her arguments, it is not clear if she grasps the true impact of the case she chose to win, Tinker v. Des Moines. The student argues Tinkers first amendment focus is more important because If I wanted to wear a certain shirt or say a certain thing no one may infringe upon that right. However, the ruling of Tinker v. Des Moines served to limit free speech. Its ruling targeted insidious speech meant to incite violence and rebellion, which not only does not apply to her analogy, but actively works against it. It is clear the student did not fully grasp the details and ruling of Tinker v. Des Monies even though s/he understood the constitutional question the case was debating. Finally, she argues that Gideon involves those who get in trouble with the law, but fails to mention its effect, which is to provide legal representation to those people. It fails to cover the specific constitutional question of the case that was over the rights of the accused.