Most Recent Articles
Ancillary: Morse persuasive letter
Morse Persuasive Letter
Through discussion with the students, determine the best recipient for a letter about the Morse decision—should it be administrators/school board? Judges? Someone else? Consider your publication’s needs as you make this decision.
- If the publication is or has already experienced legal issues with administrators, perhaps they should be the recipient of the letter.
- If the publication has not experienced legal issues, consider sending the letter to judges or legislators who could benefit from a better understanding of Morse’s original intention of only applying to illegal drug use.
Before starting the letter, discuss what the content should be:
- Disputing current rulings (judges/legislators)?
- Keeping administrators (or judges) from interpreting Morse broadly?
- Something else?
One group of junior staff members should research proper letter format and take care of the format, salutation and closing. Another group should develop the opening section for the letter (its purpose statement). A third group must present the information necessary for understanding Morse (the premise for the argument). The final group must write the brief argument itself.
Assign the editor-in-chief the task of turning the letter into a coherent piece with singular focus and style.
Read MoreAncillary: Role playing
Role Playing
Background: Students will engage in a roleplaying scenario based a fictional set of circumstances. Federal courts have not cited Morse in any student media cases yet, so the circumstances of this case are intended to provide a plausible example.
Instructions (read aloud or provide to students): Students will play one of the following roles in this example court case:
- The editors
- Media adviser (1)
- Judges (2-3)
- School administrators
For the sake of simplicity, the editors and school administrators will represent themselves in court. It’s imperative to remember that every role must be played to the best of students’ abilities. Playing an administrator, especially, will require the ability to play devil’s advocate and see the arguments on both sides. Playing an editor will also require the ability to play devil’s advocate; you will have to anticipate the other side’s arguments and attempt to counteract them using legal precedent and logical arguments. The judges and adviser have a responsibility to decide the case impartially, and the adviser must somehow balance his/her responsibilities to the school, to the program’s staff, and to the law.
Scenario: One of your staff members, with the blessing of the editors, writes an editorial about the economic and medicinal benefits of marijuana use. The adviser thinks the editorial is well written and logical, and the staff decides to go to print. The administration finds out in advance and censors the edition. The students sue. (Tailor the publication medium to your school)
Procedure:
Activity 1 (10 minutes): Introduce the roleplaying scenario using the Roleplaying document. Read the page and follow the directions.
Activity 2 (35 minutes): Each group must come up with arguments. During this time, the judges should review the four relevant Supreme Court cases using the Supreme Court Case Facts document in the Ancillary Materials folder. The adviser must determine a proper course of action for him/herself since the students make content decisions, not the adviser. Have students consult the SPLC’s tip sheet for student media advisers (http://www.splc.org/article/2014/08/splc-tip-sheet-for-student-media-advisers).
Activity 3 (20 minutes): The editors present their case to the judges. The administrators then defend their case, and the adviser must determine whether or not to support the students.
Activity 4 (15 minutes): Judges should deliberate in private and decide the case. They must provide justification for their answer by citing Tinker, Hazelwood, Fraser, or Morse. Whichever case they cite, Morse must be interpreted either narrowly or broadly. The judges need to explain why they interpreted Morse the way they did.
Closing (10 minutes): Discuss as a group:
- How could the staff have protected against this issue in the first place?
- Does our statement properly cover this?
Ancillary: Rubrics
Media Manual Statement
| 10 | 8 | 6 | 4 | 2 | |
| Knowledge of Morse | Media statement demonstrates deep knowledge of Morse and its implications for student journalism | Media statement demonstrates knowledge of Morse and its implications for student journalism | Media statement demonstrates some knowledge of Morse and its implications for student journalism | Media statement demonstrates little knowledge of Morse and its implications for student journalism | Media statement does not demonstrate knowledge of Morse and its implications for student journalism |
| Addresses potential limitations | Media statement superbly anticipates and addresses limitations Morse could have on the program | Media statement adequately anticipates and addresses limitations Morse could have on the program | Media statement attempts to anticipate and address limitations Morse could have on the program | Media statement does not adequately anticipate or address limitations Morse could have on the program | Media statement does not anticipate or address limitations Morse could have on the program |
| Addresses circuit decisions | Media statement addresses the implications of decisions from our circuit (if applicable) | Media statement mentions decisions from our circuit but does not address their implications (if applicable) | Media statement does not mention decisions from our circuit (if applicable) | ||
| Administrator Concerns | Media statement fully anticipates and addresses potential issues with school administration and/or school board | Media statement anticipates and addresses potential issues with school administration and/or school board | Media statement somewhat anticipates and addresses potential issues with school administration and/or school board | Media statement anticipates potential issues with school administration and/or school board but does not address them | Media statement does not anticipate or address potential issues with school administration |
| Writing | Media statement demonstrates excellent grammar and mechanics | Media statement demonstrates adequate grammar and mechanics (1-2 mistakes) | Media statement’s grammar and mechanics need work (3-4 mistakes) | Media statement’s grammar and mechanics are poor (5-6 mistakes) | Media statement’s grammar and mechanics are unacceptable (7+ mistakes) |
Group Project (Broadly Interpreted Cases)
| 10 | 8 | 6 | 4 | 2 | |
| Knowledge of case | Project demonstrates deep knowledge of the selected case and its implications for student journalism | Project demonstrates knowledge of the selected case and its implications for student journalism | Project demonstrates some knowledge of the selected case and its implications for student journalism | Project demonstrates little knowledge of the selected case and its implications for student journalism | Project does not demonstrate knowledge of the selected case and its implications for student journalism |
| Factors leading to a broad interpretation | Project utilizes multiple sources to list all factors that led to a broad interpretation of Morse | Project utilizes multiple sources to list multiple factors that led to a broad interpretation of Morse | Project utilizes one source to list some factors that led to a broad interpretation of Morse | Project utilizes one source to a few factors that led to a broad interpretation of Morse | Project does not address factors leading to a broad interpretation of Morse |
| Addresses potential issues | Project superbly anticipates and addresses how to avoid a similar situation | Project adequately anticipates and addresses how to avoid a similar situation | Project anticipates but does not address how to avoid a similar situation | Project does not adequately anticipate or address how to avoid a similar situation | Project does not anticipate or address how to avoid a similar situation |
| Presentation | Presentation dynamically teaches the staff about this topic in full detail | Presentation teaches the staff about this topic in full detail | Presentation teaches the staff about this topic in some detail | Presentation lacks detail | Presentation does not provide relevant details related to the case |
| Writing | Project demonstrates excellent grammar and mechanics | Project demonstrates adequate grammar and mechanics (1-2 mistakes) | Project’s grammar and mechanics need work (3-4 mistakes) | Project’s grammar and mechanics are poor (5-6 mistakes) | Project’s grammar and mechanics are unacceptable (7+ mistakes) |
Roleplaying Scenario
| 20 | 16 | 12 | 8 | 4 | |
| Portrayal of Role | Student demonstrates excellent understanding and portrays his/her role superbly | Student demonstrates solid understanding and portrays his/her role well | Student demonstrates adequate understanding and portrays his/her role adequately | Student demonstrates little understanding and portrays his/her role unconvincingly or inaccurately | Student inaccurately depicts his/her role |
| Quality | Student’s portrayal of role is backed up by quality research and sources | Student’s portrayal of role is backed up by research and sources | Student’s portrayal of role is backed up by some research and sources | Student’s portrayal of role is backed up by little research and sources | Student’s portrayal of role is not backed up by research or sources |
| 10 | 8 | 6 | 4 | 2 | |
| Presentation | Presentation dynamically teaches the staff about this topic in full detail | Presentation teaches the staff about this topic in full detail | Presentation teaches the staff about this topic in some detail | Presentation lacks detail | Presentation does not provide relevant details related to the case |
Teaching Model
| 10 | 8 | 6 | 4 | 2 | |
| Knowledge of subject matter | Project demonstrates deep knowledge of the selected cases and their implications for student journalism | Project demonstrates knowledge of the selected cases and their implications for student journalism | Project demonstrates some knowledge of the selected cases and their implications for student journalism | Project demonstrates little knowledge of the selected cases and their implications for student journalism | Project does not demonstrate knowledge of the selected cases and their implications for student journalism |
| Medium | Students carefully selected the best medium for accomplishing their task | Students selected an appropriate medium for accomplishing their task | Students selected a somewhat appropriate medium for accomplishing their task | Students selected a somewhat inappropriate medium for accomplishing their task | Students selected an inappropriate medium for accomplishing their task |
| Purpose | The teaching model fulfills its intended purpose superbly | The teaching model fulfills its intended purpose adequately | The teaching model somewhat fulfills its intended purpose | The teaching model does not accomplish one of its intended tasks | The teaching model does not accomplish its intended tasks |
| Audience | The teaching model has a clearly defined audience | The teaching model has an adequately defined audience | The audience is not clearly defined | The teaching model has no clear audience | The teaching model lacks an audience |
| Writing | Teaching model demonstrates excellent grammar and mechanics | Teaching model demonstrates adequate grammar and mechanics (1-2 mistakes) | Teaching model’s grammar and mechanics need work (3-4 mistakes) | Teaching model’s grammar and mechanics are poor (5-6 mistakes) | Teaching model’s grammar and mechanics are unacceptable (7+ mistakes) |
Letter
| 10 | 8 | 6 | 4 | 2 | |
| Knowledge of subject matter | Letter demonstrates deep knowledge of the selected cases and their implications for student journalism | Letter demonstrates knowledge of the selected cases and their implications for student journalism | Letter demonstrates some knowledge of the selected cases and their implications for student journalism | Letter demonstrates little knowledge of the selected cases and their implications for student journalism | Letter does not demonstrate knowledge of the selected cases and their implications for student journalism |
| Purpose | The letter fulfills its intended purpose superbly | The letter fulfills its intended purpose adequately | The letter somewhat fulfills its intended purpose | The letter does not accomplish one of its intended tasks | The letter does not accomplish its intended tasks |
| Audience | The letter has a clearly defined audience | The letter has an adequately defined audience | The letter is not clearly defined | The letter has no clear audience | The letter lacks an audience |
| 20 | 16 | 12 | 8 | 4 | |
| Writing | Teaching model demonstrates excellent grammar and mechanics | Teaching model demonstrates adequate grammar and mechanics (1-2 mistakes) | Teaching model’s grammar and mechanics need work (3-4 mistakes) | Teaching model’s grammar and mechanics are poor (5-6 mistakes) | Teaching model’s grammar and mechanics are unacceptable (7+ mistakes) |
Read More
Ancillary: Supreme Court case facts
Supreme Court Case Facts
Tinker v. Des Moines (1969): http://www.oyez.org/cases/1960-1969/1968/1968_21/
Bethel v. Fraser (1986): http://www.oyez.org/cases/1980-1989/1985/1985_84_1667
Hazelwood v. Kuhlmeier (1989): http://www.oyez.org/cases/1980-1989/1987/1987_86_836
Read More
Ancillary: Teaching student First Amendment rights
Teaching Student First Amendment Rights
Determine the best method of teaching either Morse or all four major Supreme Court cases dealing with first amendment rights. The staff could create a handout, a website, a podcast, or an editorial or other feature for the publication itself. To determine the best medium, consider the following questions:
- Who is our intended audience?
- Administrators
- School board
- Legislators
- Judges
- The public
- Other students
- What is our purpose?
- Inform
- Persude
- What information is most important?
- Just Morse?
- All four Supreme Court cases?
- Which medium will best accomplish all these tasks?
The editor-in-chief of the publication should divide the class into groups. Each section editor could oversee one group. If the class decided to teach about all four cases, simply divide the groups by court case. If the class decided to teach about Morse, simply find a way of organizing the class into appropriate groups by task (research, design, writing, etc.).
The staff should work together in small groups to create whatever teaching model they chose. Ask the editor-in-chief to roam about the class helping groups in whatever capacity they require. Students should spend the vast majority of the class period properly researching and fact-checking (utilizing the SPLC and other reliable sources) as they create their assigned sections of the project in whatever medium they chose.
Come back together as a class and test the teaching model. Reiterate the original intentions set forth at the beginning of class:
- Intended audience
- Purpose
- Most important information
- Medium that best accomplishes the task