Freedom of Speech
Argument Performance Task
Task:
After you have reviewed these sources, you will answer some questions about them. Briefly
After you have reviewed the sources, you will answer some questions about them. Briefly scan the sources and the three questions that follow. Then, go back and read the sources carefully so you will have the information you will need to answer the questions and finalize your resources.
In Part 2, you will write speech on a topic related to the sources.
Directions for Beginning:
You will now examine several sources. You can re-examine any of the sources as often as you like.
Research Questions:
After examining the research sources, use the remaining time in Part 1 to answer three questions about them. Your answers to these questions will be scored. Also, your answers will help you think about the research sources you have read and viewed, which should help you write your speech.
Part 1
Source #1
Henry, Peaches. “The Struggle for Tolerance: Race and Censorship in Huckleberry Finn.” Satire and
Evasion: Black Perspective on Huckleberry Finn. 1992. Print.
The Struggle for Tolerance: Race and Censorship in Huckleberry Finn.
By Peaches Henry
The following is excerpted from a book on censorship
The debate surrounding the racial implications of Huck Finn and its appropriateness for the secondary school classroom gives rise to myriad considerations. The actual matter and intent of the text are a source of contention. The presence of the word "nigger," the treatment of Jim and blacks in general, the somewhat difficult satiric mode, and the ambiguity of theme give pause to even the most flexible reader. Moreover, as numerous critics have pointed out, neither junior high nor high school students are necessarily flexible or subtle readers. The very profundity of the text renders the process of teaching it problematic and places special emphasis on teacher ability and attitude. Student cognitive and social maturity also takes on special significance in the face of such a complicated and subtle text.
The nature of the complexities of Huck Finn places the dynamics of the struggle for its inclusion in or exclusion from public school curricula in two arenas. On the one hand, the conflict manifests itself as a contest between lay readers and so-called scholarly experts, particularly as it concerns the text. Public school administrators and teachers, on the other hand, field criticisms that have to do with the context into which the novel is introduced. In neither case, however, do the opponents appear to hear each other. Too often, concerned parents are dismissed by academia as "neurotics" (14) who have fallen prey to personal racial insecurities or have failed to grasp Twain's underlying truth. In their turn, censors regard academics as inhabitants of ivory towers who pontificate on the virtue of Huck Finn without recognizing its potential for harm. School officials and parents clash over the school's right to intellectual freedom and the parents' right to protect their children from perceived racism….
The factor of racial uncertainty on the part of Twain, its manifestation in his best loved piece, and its existence in American society should not be a barrier to Huckleberry Finn's admittance to the classroom. Instead, this should make it the pith of the American literature curriculum. The insolubility of the race question as regards Huckleberry Finn functions as a model of the fundamental racial ambiguity of the American mindset. Active engagement with Twain's novel provides one method for students to confront their own deepest racial feelings and insecurities. Though the problems of racial perspective present in Huckleberry Finn may never be satisfactorily explained for censors or scholars, the consideration of them may have a practical, positive bearing on the manner in which America approaches race in the coming century
Source #2
Doe, Jane. Letter to teacher. 10 Sept. 2012. Print.
Letter to Teacher
By Jane Doe
The following is an excerpted section from a letter submitted by a community member
…The freedom of speech and the written word in our country should in no way be abused or misconstrued as to prevent parents from making conscious decisions about what their children are exposed to.
Several of the images, scenes and content of this book if made into a movie would likely be given a rating of Restricted to over age 17. In elementary school children must get permission slips to watch PG rated movies. In middle school they are required to have parental permission to watch PG-13 movies. Parental permission is required for children to hear sex education in schools. I see this as a highly similar situation and am appalled at the staff's lacking sense of responsibility, respect and sensitivity to the parents and the value those parents have a responsibility to teach to their children…
Source #3
Island Trees School District Board of Education v. Pico. No. 80-2043. Burger Ct. of the US.
25 June 1982. Print
The following is the court ruling dealing with the censorship issue
Island Trees School District Board of Education v. Pico
Facts of the Case
The Island Trees Union Free School District's Board of Education (the "Board"), acting contrary to the recommendations of a committee of parents and school staff, ordered that certain books be removed from its district's junior high and high school libraries. In support of its actions, the Board said such books were: "anti-American, anti-Christian, anti-Semitic, and just plain filthy." Acting through his friend Francis Pico, and on behalf of several other students, Steven Pico brought suit in federal district court challenging the Board's decision to remove the books. The Board won; the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit reversed. The Board petitioned the U.S. Supreme Court, which granted certiorari.
Question
Did the Board of Education's decision to ban certain books from its junior high and high school libraries, based on their content, violate the First Amendment's freedom of speech protections?
Conclusion
Decision: 5 votes for Pico, 4 vote(s) against
Legal provision: Amendment 1: Speech, Press, and Assembly
Yes. Although school boards have a vested interest in promoting respect for social, moral, and political community values, their discretionary power is secondary to the transcendent imperatives of the First Amendment. The Court, in a 5-to-4 decision, held that as centers for voluntary inquiry and the dissemination of information and ideas, school libraries enjoy a special affinity with the rights of free speech and press. Therefore, the Board could not restrict the availability of books in its libraries simply because its members disagreed with their idea content.
Source #4
Orwell, George. 1984. New York: Penguin Books Ltd, 1961. Print
1984
By George Orwell
The following is an excerpt from the novel.
When Oldspeak had been once and for all superseded, the last link with the past would have been severed. History had already been rewritten, but fragments of the literature of the past survived here and there, imperfectly censored, and so long as one retained one’s knowledge of Oldspeak it was possible to read them. In the future such fragments, even if chanced to survive, would be unintelligible and untranslatable. It was impossible to translate any passage of Oldspeak into Newspeak unless it either referred to some technical process of some very simple everyday action, or was already orthodox (good-thinkful would be the Newspeak expression) in tendency. In practice this meant that no book written before approximately 1960 could be translated as a whole. Prerevolutionary literature could only be subjected to ideological translation – that is, alteration in sense as well as language. Take for example the well-known passage from the Declaration of Independence:
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among men, deriving their powers from the consent of the governed. That whenever any form of Government becomes destructive of those ends, it is the right of the People to alter or abolish it, and to institute new Government…
It would have been quite impossible to render this into Newspeak while keeping to the sense of the original. The nearest one could come to doing so would be to swallow the whole passage up in single word crimethink. A full translation could only be an ideological translation, whereby Jefferson’s words would be changed into a panegyric on absolute government (255-256).
Source #5
U.S. Constitution
U.S. Constitution
CONGRESS SHALL MAKE NO LAW RESPECTING AN ESTABLISHMENT OF RELIGION, OR PROHIBITING THE FREE EXERCISE THEREOF; OR ABRIDGING THE FREEDOM OF SPEECH, OR OF THE PRESS; OR THE RIGHT OF THE PEOPLE PEACEABLY TO ASSEMBLE, AND TO PETITION THE GOVERNMENT FOR A REDRESS OF GRIEVANCES
Source #6
“Words Hurt.”” Cartoon. The Atlantic. 7-13 July 2010:6. Web. 1 Oct. 2012.
The following is a visual representation of a censorship related issue
Research Questions:
After examining the research sources, use the remaining time in Part 1 to answer three questions about them. Your answers to these questions will be scored. Also, your answers will help you think about the research sources you have read and viewed, which should help you write your argumentative speech.
1. All of the sources provide information about censorship. According to the sources, what important factors should schools consider before using a particular text in curriculum and instruction? Support your response with two details from two sources. Justify your answer and support it with information from the sources.
2. Source #1examines the factors for the inclusion of a controversial text in the curriculum. Paraphrase the claim and counterclaim examined in Source # 1 without plagiarizing.
3. Using the table below, check the boxes to show the claim(s) that each source supports. Some sources will have more than one box selected.
Source #1The Struggle for Tolerance: Race and Censorship in Huckleberry Finn. / Source # 2
Letter to Teacher / Source # 3
Island Trees School District Board of Education v. Pico / Source # 4
1984l Excerpt / Source #5
U.S. Constitution / Source #6
“Words Hurt” Cartoon
Censorship violates the First Amendment.
Freedom of speech and the written word in should not be abused.
Schools should promote respect for social, moral and political community values.
The power of words can both segregate and integrate social tolerances.
Student Directions for Part 2
Freedom of Speech Argumentative Performance Task
You will now review your sources, take notes, and plan, draft, revise, and edit your writing. You may use your notes and refer to the sources. Now read your assignment and the information about how your writing will be scored; then begin your work.
Your assignment:
Argumentative Scoring
Your speech will be scored using the following:
1. Organization/purpose: How well did you state your thesis/controlling idea and maintain your thesis/controlling idea with a logical progression of ideas from beginning to end? How well did your ideas thoughtfully flow from beginning to end using effective transitions? How effective was your introduction and your conclusion?
2. Elaboration/evidence: How well did you integrate relevant and specific information from the sources? How well did you elaborate your ideas? How well did you clearly state ideas using precise language that is appropriate for your audience and purpose?
3. Conventions: How well did you follow the rules of grammar usage, punctuation, capitalization, and spelling?
Now begin work on your Argumentative speech. Manage your time carefully so that you can
1. plan your multi-paragraph speech
2. write your multi-paragraph speech
3. revise and edit the final draft of your multi paragraph speech.
For Part 2, you are being asked to write a multi-paragraph speech, so please be as thorough as possible. Remember to check your notes and your prewriting/planning as you write and then revise and edit your argumentative speech.
4-Point Informative-ExplanatoryPerformance Task Writing Rubric (Grades 6-11)
Score / 4 / 3 / 2 / 1 / NS
Purpose/Organization / The response has a clear and effective organizational structure, creating a sense of unity and completeness. The response is fully sustained, and consistently and purposefully focused:
· controlling or main idea of a topic is clearly communicated, and the focus is strongly maintained for the purpose, audience, and task
· consistent use of a variety of transitional strategies to clarify the relationships between and among ideas
· effective introduction and conclusion
· logical progression of ideas from beginning to end; strong connections between and among ideas with some syntactic variety / The response has an evident organizational structure and a sense of completeness, though there may be minor flaws and some ideas may be loosely connected. The response is adequately sustained and generally focused:
· controlling or main idea of a topic is clear, and the focus is mostly maintained for the purpose, audience, and task
· adequate use of transitional strategies with some variety to clarify the relationships between and among ideas
· adequate introduction and conclusion
· adequate progression of ideas from beginning to end; adequate connections between and among ideas / The response has an inconsistent organizational structure, and flaws are evident. The response is somewhat sustained and may have a minor drift in focus:
· controlling or main idea of a topic may be somewhat unclear, or the focus may be insufficiently sustained for the purpose, audience, and task
· inconsistent use of transitional strategies and/or little variety
· introduction or conclusion, if present, may be weak
· uneven progression of ideas from beginning to end; and/or formulaic; inconsistent or unclear connections between and among ideas / The response has little or no discernible organizational structure. The response may be related to the topic but may provide little or no focus:
· controlling or main idea may be confusing or ambiguous; response may be too brief or the focus may drift from the purpose, audience, or task
· few or no transitional strategies are evident
· introduction and/or conclusion may be missing
· frequent extraneous ideas may be evident; ideas may be randomly ordered or have an unclear progression / · Unintelligible
· In a language other than English
· Off-topic
· Copied text
· Off-purpose
4-Point Informative-Explanatory
Performance Task Writing Rubric (Grades 6-11)
Score / 4 / 3 / 2 / 1 / NS
Evidence/Elaboration / The response provides thorough and convincing support/evidence for the controlling idea and supporting idea(s) that includes the effective use of sources, facts, and details. The response clearly and effectively elaborates ideas, using precise language:
· comprehensive evidence from sources is integrated; references are relevant and specific
· effective use of a variety of elaborative techniques*
· vocabulary is clearly appropriate for the audience and purpose
· effective, appropriate style enhances content / The response provides adequate support/evidence for the controlling idea and supporting idea(s) that includes the use of sources, facts, and details. The response adequately elaborates ideas, employing a mix of precise and more general language:
· adequate evidence from sources is integrated; some references may be general
· adequate use of some elaborative techniques*
· vocabulary is generally appropriate for the audience and purpose
· generally appropriate style is evident / The response provides uneven, cursory support/evidence for the controlling idea and supporting idea(s) that includes uneven or limited use of sources, facts, and details. The response elaborates ideas unevenly, using simplistic language:
· some evidence from sources may be weakly integrated, imprecise, or repetitive; references may be vague
· weak or uneven use of elaborative techniques*; development may consist primarily of source summary
· vocabulary use is uneven or somewhat ineffective for the audience and purpose
· inconsistent or weak attempt to create appropriate style / The response provides minimal support/evidence for the controlling idea and supporting idea(s) that includes little or no use of sources, facts, and details. The response is vague, lacks clarity, or is confusing:
· evidence from the source material is minimal or irrelevant; references may be absent or incorrectly used
· minimal, if any, use of elaborative techniques*
· vocabulary is limited or ineffective for the audience and purpose
· little or no evidence of appropriate style / · Unintelligible
· In a language other than English
· Off-topic
· Copied text
· Off-purpose
*Elaborative techniques may include the use of personal experiences that support the controlling idea.