The Witch of Blackbird Pond
The Witch of Blackbird Pond Menu Project (ELA/social studeies)
Side Dish: Vocabulary Through Novel (ELA grade due Nov. 11)
You will be given 20 vocabulary words from our novel. There is a tic tac toe board and a prefix/suffixes activity that go with these terms. You must complete all of these activities by the end of the unit. (see the vocabulary assignments button above)
Main Dish: Work with your group to create a restaurant and menu that represents New England or Barbados cuisine and lifestyle during the Colonial Era. You should use knowledge gained through the Columbian Exchange Activity, The Witch of Blackbird Pond, and other resources to help guide your food and atmospheric choices. (Social Studies grade)
THE FOLLOWING IS SUBJECT TO CHANGE PLEASE WAIT FOR THE ASSIGNMENT SHEET FROM MRS. BALLEW
Make a courtroom sketch of a main character, depicting the character’s emotions during this part in the plot. The court room sketch must be in color. Then pretend to be a member of the court and write a paragraph describing the majority opinion/ concurring opinion (agreeing with the verdict of the case). If you did not agree with the court's opinion you may add the dissenting opinion (disagreeing with the verdict of the case). See attached paper for examples. The format of the opinions must be:
You will be given 20 vocabulary words from our novel. There is a tic tac toe board and a prefix/suffixes activity that go with these terms. You must complete all of these activities by the end of the unit. (see the vocabulary assignments button above)
Main Dish: Work with your group to create a restaurant and menu that represents New England or Barbados cuisine and lifestyle during the Colonial Era. You should use knowledge gained through the Columbian Exchange Activity, The Witch of Blackbird Pond, and other resources to help guide your food and atmospheric choices. (Social Studies grade)
THE FOLLOWING IS SUBJECT TO CHANGE PLEASE WAIT FOR THE ASSIGNMENT SHEET FROM MRS. BALLEW
- 1 physical copy of a menu
- Needs to include at least 3 pictures of menu items
- Cost of items
- Description of items
- 1 electronic website about the restaurant
- The website must reflect the style and atmosphere of the restaurant (homepage)
- Background information of the restaurant (separate page)
- Have a virtual menu (separate page)
- 1 representative food a sample
- Be creative in what item you choose to bring in to share with the class
- All food items must be pre-packaged
- Opening Pitch to Invest in the Restaurant
- You will be evaluated on how persuasive you are in gaining an investor.
- You must include a detailed financial breakdown to start up your restaurant
Make a courtroom sketch of a main character, depicting the character’s emotions during this part in the plot. The court room sketch must be in color. Then pretend to be a member of the court and write a paragraph describing the majority opinion/ concurring opinion (agreeing with the verdict of the case). If you did not agree with the court's opinion you may add the dissenting opinion (disagreeing with the verdict of the case). See attached paper for examples. The format of the opinions must be:
- Background: History of case or relevant facts to the case
- Questions: State the law that the defendant is on trial for breaking.
- Analysis: Precedent (previous cases that have been trialed in the same law) and discussion of the law and background to the case.
- Answer: The conclusion as to if the defendant is guilty or not.
Character Sketch: Explained through the eyes of Mona Shafer Edwards
According to Michelle Nati’s article “8 Fascinating Courtroom Sketches,” “Although the practice is slowly going out of style in many court districts, courtroom sketch artists are still widely utilized around the world.
In the U.S., courtroom sketches date all the way back to the Salem witch trials (1692-1693). [The photo above is a sketch depicting 1692’s Giles Corey trial.] Trial sketches were the only reliable visual records of what went on in the courtroom, right up until the late 19th century.
During the 1950s, the publication of news photos had reached an all-time high. Newsgroups used flash photography to cover every major story, which often included court cases. That worked for only a little while—many court districts viewed photographers as a major distraction inside the courtroom and banned them until the mid-1980s. It was then that the first cameras (and some camcorders) were allowed to be used in a courtroom without restrictions. However, they are still prohibited in some court districts, and only sketch artists are allowed where cameras and camcorders are strictly prohibited.
Sketch artists are not court-mandated or affiliated with any part of the legal system itself.”
According to Michelle Nati’s article “8 Fascinating Courtroom Sketches,” “Although the practice is slowly going out of style in many court districts, courtroom sketch artists are still widely utilized around the world.
In the U.S., courtroom sketches date all the way back to the Salem witch trials (1692-1693). [The photo above is a sketch depicting 1692’s Giles Corey trial.] Trial sketches were the only reliable visual records of what went on in the courtroom, right up until the late 19th century.
During the 1950s, the publication of news photos had reached an all-time high. Newsgroups used flash photography to cover every major story, which often included court cases. That worked for only a little while—many court districts viewed photographers as a major distraction inside the courtroom and banned them until the mid-1980s. It was then that the first cameras (and some camcorders) were allowed to be used in a courtroom without restrictions. However, they are still prohibited in some court districts, and only sketch artists are allowed where cameras and camcorders are strictly prohibited.
Sketch artists are not court-mandated or affiliated with any part of the legal system itself.”
Example of read opinions examples: United States Supreme Court: MARBURY v. MADISON, (1803)
http://caselaw.findlaw.com/us-supreme-court/5/137.html
http://www.latimes.com/local/abcarian/la-me-ra-sonia-sotomayor-affirmative-action-dissent-20140423-story.html
Example of Types of Court Opinions:
Case Study: There are 5 people in a group. They are all deciding if purple is the best color. Three of the group members say that purple is the best color because it is regal (the majority opinion most of the group agree ⅗). On of the group members says it is the best color, but not because it is regal, but because it is the color of grapes, a fantastic fruit (concurring opinion, agrees with the statement that it is the best color, but has a different reason why). One member of the group says no, purple is not the best color because it combines blue, and red and those are awful colors (dissenting opinion, does not agree with the group).
Court of Appeals Case Example (Majority Opinion):
RACHEL v. MRS. LACY
Mr. JUSTICE CLARK, with whom Mrs. JUSTICE KYLEE joins, delivered the opinion of the COURT.
Appellant, Ms. Rachel, stands convicted of having jeans with holes in violation of the school’s dress code policy. The lower court decided that there were holes in Appellant’s jeans above the knee, and Appellant appealed to this court.
On October 16, 2015, appellant arrived at school in a blue t-shirt and jeans, but upon entering the classroom, her teacher, Mr. Kingsley spotted multiple small holes near the knee. Mr. Kingsley immediately sent the Appellant to see the principal, Mrs. Lacy. Mrs. Lacy examined the jeans, and discovered that there were four holes on Appellant’s jeans, one of which was above the knee, three of which were on the knee. The holes on the knee were significant, large enough to fit a quarter through, but the top of the hole barely touched the kneecap. The hole above the knee was small, barely able to be seen unless closely examining the jeans. Mrs. Lacy then charged Appellant with violation of the school’s dress code policy and sent it to the lower court for trial, where Appellant was convicted and the case is before us now.
There are two issues at question in this case. First, is the hole above the knee actually a hole? Second, do the three holes on the bottom of the knee count as being on or above the knee?
Past instances of school dress code enforcement show a clear trend towards not considering holes that are not easily visible. The key case on point is Parker v. Mr. Lyle, where Mr. Parker, a student had a hole on his jeans just above the knee and was small enough to not be seen until closer inspection of other dress code violations. The court overturned the conviction regarding the hole in the jeans, but upheld his multiple other violations, including but not limited to the overall pink bunny outfit he wore that day. The hole above the knee in this case is comparable to the hole in Parker v. Mr. Lyle, as it cannot be seen from far away, and should not be determined to be violating the dress code policy.
The second question does not have any previous case on point, and asks the court to answer a new question. How much of the hole much be on the kneecap to constitute being above the knee? Three logical standards come to mind, 50% of the hole or more on the kneecap, any part of the hole on the knee cap, or the entire hole on the knee cap. A 50% standard is not a bright-line rule that may lead to more questions than answers due to holes being different shapes. There is a case that helps us decide this matter, Rodney v. Mrs. Irvine, where the court found that in cases where the rule is unclear, the court should favor the student. Thus, here, we find that the hole should be fully on the kneecap (but not above the kneecap) in order to violate the dress code policy. Appellant’s holes on the kneecap do not violate the dress code using this rule.
The decision of the lower court is reversed.
Example of Dissenting Opinion:
Mr. JUSTICE BURGUNDY, dissenting.
The court’s majority decision is concerning due to the jump to the conclusion that a hole is not above the knee cap unless it is fully on or above the knee cap. The rule clearly states that a hole is not allowed unless it is “below the knee.” There is no room for interpretation, any hole that touches the knee cap should be determined to violate the rule. The majority in Rodney v. Mrs. Irvine was correct in its ruling, however, it does not apply here as there is no ambiguity in the rule.
The court should have also used this opportunity to overturn Parker v. Mr. Lyle, as the decision rests upon the dissection of a hole. A hole is defined by Webster as “an opening into or through something.” There is no mention of whether or not it can be seen from afar. Again, I feel the court created an ambiguity where there is none.
This decision of the lower court should have been upheld.
http://caselaw.findlaw.com/us-supreme-court/5/137.html
http://www.latimes.com/local/abcarian/la-me-ra-sonia-sotomayor-affirmative-action-dissent-20140423-story.html
Example of Types of Court Opinions:
Case Study: There are 5 people in a group. They are all deciding if purple is the best color. Three of the group members say that purple is the best color because it is regal (the majority opinion most of the group agree ⅗). On of the group members says it is the best color, but not because it is regal, but because it is the color of grapes, a fantastic fruit (concurring opinion, agrees with the statement that it is the best color, but has a different reason why). One member of the group says no, purple is not the best color because it combines blue, and red and those are awful colors (dissenting opinion, does not agree with the group).
Court of Appeals Case Example (Majority Opinion):
RACHEL v. MRS. LACY
Mr. JUSTICE CLARK, with whom Mrs. JUSTICE KYLEE joins, delivered the opinion of the COURT.
Appellant, Ms. Rachel, stands convicted of having jeans with holes in violation of the school’s dress code policy. The lower court decided that there were holes in Appellant’s jeans above the knee, and Appellant appealed to this court.
On October 16, 2015, appellant arrived at school in a blue t-shirt and jeans, but upon entering the classroom, her teacher, Mr. Kingsley spotted multiple small holes near the knee. Mr. Kingsley immediately sent the Appellant to see the principal, Mrs. Lacy. Mrs. Lacy examined the jeans, and discovered that there were four holes on Appellant’s jeans, one of which was above the knee, three of which were on the knee. The holes on the knee were significant, large enough to fit a quarter through, but the top of the hole barely touched the kneecap. The hole above the knee was small, barely able to be seen unless closely examining the jeans. Mrs. Lacy then charged Appellant with violation of the school’s dress code policy and sent it to the lower court for trial, where Appellant was convicted and the case is before us now.
There are two issues at question in this case. First, is the hole above the knee actually a hole? Second, do the three holes on the bottom of the knee count as being on or above the knee?
Past instances of school dress code enforcement show a clear trend towards not considering holes that are not easily visible. The key case on point is Parker v. Mr. Lyle, where Mr. Parker, a student had a hole on his jeans just above the knee and was small enough to not be seen until closer inspection of other dress code violations. The court overturned the conviction regarding the hole in the jeans, but upheld his multiple other violations, including but not limited to the overall pink bunny outfit he wore that day. The hole above the knee in this case is comparable to the hole in Parker v. Mr. Lyle, as it cannot be seen from far away, and should not be determined to be violating the dress code policy.
The second question does not have any previous case on point, and asks the court to answer a new question. How much of the hole much be on the kneecap to constitute being above the knee? Three logical standards come to mind, 50% of the hole or more on the kneecap, any part of the hole on the knee cap, or the entire hole on the knee cap. A 50% standard is not a bright-line rule that may lead to more questions than answers due to holes being different shapes. There is a case that helps us decide this matter, Rodney v. Mrs. Irvine, where the court found that in cases where the rule is unclear, the court should favor the student. Thus, here, we find that the hole should be fully on the kneecap (but not above the kneecap) in order to violate the dress code policy. Appellant’s holes on the kneecap do not violate the dress code using this rule.
The decision of the lower court is reversed.
Example of Dissenting Opinion:
Mr. JUSTICE BURGUNDY, dissenting.
The court’s majority decision is concerning due to the jump to the conclusion that a hole is not above the knee cap unless it is fully on or above the knee cap. The rule clearly states that a hole is not allowed unless it is “below the knee.” There is no room for interpretation, any hole that touches the knee cap should be determined to violate the rule. The majority in Rodney v. Mrs. Irvine was correct in its ruling, however, it does not apply here as there is no ambiguity in the rule.
The court should have also used this opportunity to overturn Parker v. Mr. Lyle, as the decision rests upon the dissection of a hole. A hole is defined by Webster as “an opening into or through something.” There is no mention of whether or not it can be seen from afar. Again, I feel the court created an ambiguity where there is none.
This decision of the lower court should have been upheld.