English for Law and Finance
Ms. Stern
EnglishforLawandFinance@yahoo.com
Grutter
v. Bollinger (2003)
Scenario:
Answer the following two questions
in your notebook:
Do Now: Answer
the following two questions in your notebook:
- When
you go to college, do you hope to be with people who are just like you
(similar culture, background, economic status, ethnicity, race, religion,
etc.) or do you plan to search for a college where you will meet lots of
people who are different from you?
Give two reasons for your answer.
- What
might be the advantage of going to school with people are different
from you?
Be sure to save your answer in
your notebook. Let’s see if, after
completing this project, your answers change or remain the same.
Introduction:
You and
your best friend have grown up in the same neighborhood all your lives and did
everything together. You went to the
same high school, took all the same classes and studied together. You achieved all A’s in every class because
you share the same drive and determination.
Together, you enrolled in Karate classes and are both 3rd
degree black belts. You were both
involved in the mock trial club as attorneys and the student council as co-representatives
of your class. You both It was no surprise to anyone that you both
shared the dream of going to Yale
University, a school that cites the pursuit of diversity as one
of its goals. Together you imagine all
the adventures you would have as college roommates. When you received your SAT scores you waited
to open the envelopes together and were elated to discover that you had both
received a PERFECT score of 1600. With
a certainty, you complete your “single-choice early action” applications to
That
magical day comes when you open your mailbox to find the “thick envelope”
granting you acceptance to
You try to
call your friend back but she isn’t picking up the phone. Knowing your friend’s weakness for PowerPoint
presentations, you decide to prepare one for her (which can be emailed to her
in attachment form) in which you will explain that the University’s decision,
while it might be painful for both of you, is not illegal and actually serves a
valuable purpose: the pursuit of
diversity in higher education. You
remember studying the case University of California Regents v. Bakke
(1978) in the mock trial club where you learned that it is
illegal to use quotas in an affirmative action program. Now you’re going to need to do some
additional research on the case Grutter v. Bollinger (2003).
Task:
IN
GROUPS: Create a 10 minute PowerPoint presentation using CompuLEGAL
and the websites listed below, that does the following:
Ø
Reviews the history of
affirmative action in the
Ø
Explains why Yale’s
affirmative action decision was legal AND
Ø
Explains the purpose
of Yale’s affirmative action policy.
INDIVIDUALLY:
Write an email to your friend that explains your answer to the question “Is
Affirmative Action Reverse Racism?”
Process:
- In your groups,
research the history of affirmative action in the
- Review the case University of California Regents v. Bakke (1978) including the
AND create one to
three slides that explain(s) the case, the reasoning and the Court’s decision.
- Review the case Grutter v. Bollinger (2003) including
the
- Facts of the
case
- The reasoning
- The decision
AND create one to
three slides that explain(s) the case, the reasoning and the Court’s decision.
- Review the Multicultural
Outreach Program on
- What is the
purpose of the program?
- Is the program
legal? Why or Why not? Be sure to mention BOTH University of California Regents v. Bakke (1978) and Grutter v. Bollinger (2003).
- Create
compelling introductions and conclusions to your presentation.
- Individually,
write an email to your best friend discussed in the introduction that:
- Showcases your
social skills and professionalism (be tactful and considerate).
- Responds to
your best friend’s comment that affirmative action is nothing but
“reverse racisim.” Do you agree or disagree and why?
- Support your position with
references to BOTH University of California Regents v. Bakke (1978) and Grutter v. Bollinger (2003).
Your presentation
should include:
1.
An introduction that
grabs your audience’s attention and explains what you will be trying to
convince them of.
2.
Text and pictures that
are
i.
Creative and
interesting,
ii.
Not distracting and
iii.
Easy for the audience
to read.
3.
A conclusion that
summarizes your main points and overall position and makes the presentation
memorable to your audience.
4.
Language that is
clear, professional and grammatically correct.
Resources:
MSN History of Affirmative Action in the United States
Americans
for a Fair Chance Affirmative Action Timeline
University of California Regents v. Bakke
(1978)
Evaluation:
|
CATEGORY |
4 |
3 |
2 |
1 |
|
Use of CompuLEGAL and Internet
resources 25% |
Utilized the CompuLEGAL resources
listed in the webquest as well as additional
Internet resources. |
Thoroughly explored and made use of the CompuLEGAL
resources listed in the webquest. |
Did not use all the CompuLEGAL
resources listed in the webquest. |
Did not use CompuLEGAL to complete
this assignment or depended upon others to navigate CompuLEGAL
for him/her. |
|
Email 25% |
Email shows excellent understanding of both cases. |
Email shows good understanding of both cases. |
Email shows some understanding of both cases. |
Email shows little understanding of either case. |
|
Presentation 25% |
Addressed all aspects of the task thoroughly in a creative, professional
manner that captured and held the audience’s attention. |
Contains most aspects of the tasks. in
a creative, professional manner that captured and held the audience’s
attention. |
Presentation addressed some aspects of the tasks in a creative,
professional manner that captured and held the audience’s attention. |
Presentation failed to address almost all aspects of the task
and was severely lacking in professional and creativity |
|
25% |
Helped to lead the group and tried to make sure that every group
member was equally involved in the assignment. Helped the group maintain focus. |
Contributed greatly to the assignment but did not try to make
sure that every group member was equally involved. |
Contributed to the group but lacked enthusiasm or effort. At times, may have distracted the group. |
Did not contribute to the group or exhibited behavior that made
it difficult for the group to work together. |
Standards
New York State Social Studies Standard #5:
Students can
take, defend and evaluate positions about dispositions that facilitate
thoughtful and effective participation in public affairs.
Students can understand how citizenship includes the
exercising of certain personal responsibilities, including voting, considering
the rights and interests of others, behaving in a civil manner, and accepting
responsibility for the consequences of one’s actions.
English Language Arts Standard #3
Students will
read, write, listen, and speak for critical analysis and evaluation.
As listeners and readers, students will analyze experiences,
ideas, information, and issues presented by others using a variety of
established criteria. As speakers and writers, they will present, in oral and
written language and from a variety of perspectives, their opinions and
judgments on experiences, ideas, information and issues.
Conclusion: Congratulations! You’ve tackled a subject that some of the
greatest legal minds have struggled with!
You have studied the cases of Grutter v. Bollinger (2003) and University of California Regents v. Bakke
(1978) and learned Equal Protection under the U.S. Constitution. You
can now apply these critical thinking, presentation and writing skills to your
other classes and assignments.
Congratulations!
