Constitution Coloring Book Images Exploration V3.0

Links to video guides for this assessment (must watch):

>>> CCB Terms Explore Assessment V3.0 How to Post video <<<

>>> CCB Terms Explore Assessment V2.0 How to video <<<

Your task is to explore a topic from the list below and:

Possible topics for exploration: (let me know if you have other ideas)

Three Strikes Laws                    Electoral College                        Death Penalty

Equal Protection                        Right to Bear Arms                    Freedom of Speech

Freedom of Religion                   Freedom of the Press                 Freedom of Assembly

Prohibition                                Search & Seizure                       States’ Rights

Miranda Rights                          Double Jeopardy                        Referendums

Pardons                                     Elastic Clause                             Life Terms for Federal Judges

Impeachment                             Term Limits                               Super PACs

Eminent Domain                        Excessive Bail & Fines                Budget Choices: taxes v. services

1) Use at least three sources to create and relate at least five facts to your topic.

2) Informally demonstrate to me your understanding of what your topic is about and how it might affect society.

3) Follow the posting format to create a post that communicates a claim related to your topic.

4) Follow the posting format to create a counter post that challenges a peer post.

Scoring:

Score

1

2

3

4

Guidelines

use three or more sources to demonstrate understanding of related facts

AND demonstrate understanding of term as a concept

AND communicate understanding of term as a concept

AND
counter post demonstrating understanding of term as a concept


Resources for Scores 1 and 2:

Internet queries for information

Paper and Pen(cil) for record keeping

Resources for Score 3:

Link to CCB v3.0 Threaded Chat Space (posts not placed in the appropriate thread will be deleted—refer to the task video or ask if you need assistance)

>>> CCB Terms Explore Assessment V3.0 How to Post video <<<

Here is the format to use for Score 3:

TOPIC:

DEFINITION:

CLAIM: 

FOR SOURCE 1: (1 - 5 scale with 5 being highest/best rating)
URL:
1) ACCURACY: # STARS –
2) DEPTH: # STARS –
3) BIAS: # STARS –
4) DESCRIPTION:
5) SUPPORT:

5) SUPPORT:
FOR SOURCE 2: (1 - 5 scale with 5 being highest/best rating)
URL:
1) ACCURACY: # STARS –
2) DEPTH: # STARS –
3) BIAS: # STARS –
4) DESCRIPTION:
5) SUPPORT:

AGAINST SOURCE 1: (1 - 5 scale with 5 being highest/best rating)
URL:

1) ACCURACY: # STARS -
2) DEPTH: # STARS –
3) BIAS: # STARS –
4) DESCRIPTION:
5) AGAINST SUPPORT:

REASONING:  (1+ paragraph detailing your arguments and evidence)

 

EXAMPLE POST:

TOPIC: Eminent Domain

DEFINITION: Eminent Domain is the power of the government to force the owner of land to sell it to the government for public use—the government can make you sell them your land (and anything on it) if it will be used for the good of the community.

CLAIM:  Eminent Domain is a good idea because it stops people from blocking projects that would be good for their community.

FOR SOURCE 1: (1 - 5 scale with 5 being highest/best rating)
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2014/04/16/colo-eminent-domain-case-settled-with-115000-sale.html
1) ACCURACY: 5 STARS – The information is accurate and provides both sides of the specific case.
2) DEPTH: 4 STARS – All the basic details of the case are covered and there is some connection to broader issues.  There is also enough information to make it possible to look deeper into this case or search for similar ones.
3) BIAS: 2 STARS – The source is likely intended as an anti-Eminent Domain argument but it also provides some support for the ways the outcome of the case will have a positive impact on society as a whole.
4) DESCRIPTION: This source presents a specific case involving Eminent Domain in Colorado and it includes background information and the views of people on both sides of the issue. 
5) SUPPORT: The information includes evidence that Eminent Domain provides protections for the general good of society in cases where individuals might not have the same priority.

FOR SOURCE 2: (1 - 5 scale with 5 being highest/best rating)
http://homeguides.sfgate.com/positive-negative-effects-eminent-domain-49409.html
1) ACCURACY: 3 STARS – The information is accurate but it is very basic and general which means it does not tell the viewer very much about individual cases involving Eminent Domain.
2) DEPTH: 2 STARS – There is not enough depth to really understand the issue from a benefits for society or loss of land perspective.
3) BIAS: 4 STARS – There is no obvious bias in the content.  The author is a business writer and he does not appear to take any position on the issue.  The sponsored links involved home sales which makes sense because people looking at Eminent Domain are likely to be selling their property.
4) DESCRIPTION: This is a decent question and answer website.  It provides some general information about the process and the good and bad of this government power.
5) SUPPORT: The website supports my claim by presenting responses that show the good side of Eminent Domain.

AGAINST SOURCE 1: (1 - 5 scale with 5 being highest/best rating)
URL:
http://www.thorplaw.com/practice-areas/land-condemnation/kk
1) ACCURACY: 4 STARS - The information on the website is accurate although it is from a North Carolina law firm and eminent domain laws vary by  state.
2) DEPTH: 3 STARS – There is very good basics of Eminent Domain content but not a great amount of detail.
3) BIAS: 4 STARS – This is a website for a law firm that you can hire to fight the government in Eminent Domain cases but there presentation of the facts is neutral.
Provide the url for your information along with a statement of your rating of the site in terms of:
4) DESCRIPTION: This is a great website to get a basic introduction to Eminent Domain that you can use to dig deeper into the topic.
5) AGAINST SUPPORT: This website ends with contact information for a law firm that will represent landowners fighting Eminent Domain.  This shows that there are people against Eminent Domain and that there are legal ways to fight the process.

REASONING:  (1+ paragraph detailing your arguments and evidence)

Eminent Domain is a useful way to accomplish things that are needed for the good of society.  The case included in my example was decided in a way that will prevent damage to natural areas and protect a beautiful nature area from development.  It is true that owners of land do not always like the process; however, they have a right to hire lawyers to represent them and to have their case decided in a court of law.  The loss of Eminent Domain would make it impossible to complete projects that are needed in a community whenever any single person who owns land decides not to participate.

Resources for Score 4:

CLAIM CONCERN: What part of the claim do you disagree with?
COUNTERCLAIM: Describe your counterclaim.

CHALLENGED SOURCE URL: Paste the url of the source you are challenging
SOURCE COMPLAINT: Explain what you are challenging about the source.
REASON FOR REJECTING:
Explain why you are challenging the source.

COUNTERPOST SOURCE 1: (1 - 5 scale with 5 being highest/best rating)
URL:
1) ACCURACY: # STARS –
2) DEPTH: # STARS –
3) BIAS: # STARS –
4) DESCRIPTION:
5) SUPPORT:

REASONING:  (1+ paragraph detailing your arguments and evidence)

 

EXAMPLE COUNTERPOST:

CLAIM CONCERN: "good idea because it stops people from blocking projects that would be good for their community"
COUNTERCLAIM: Eminent Domain is a government power that can be abused and there is very little that individual students can do to stop the abuse.

CHALLENGED SOURCE URL: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2014/04/16/colo-eminent-domain-case-settled-with-115000-sale.html
SOURCE COMPLAINT:
"Eminent Domain provides protections for the general good of society in cases where individuals might not have the same priority"
REASON FOR REJECTING:
Mr. Wetzel has failed to fully represent what is happening in this case.  The taking of the cabin does not have any general good for society and the protections provided to citizens to fight Eminent Domain are limited and often not enough to make for a fair decision.

COUNTERPOST SOURCE 1: (1 - 5 scale with 5 being highest/best rating)
URL: http://www.inquisitr.com/1215409/colorado-eminent-domain-case-settled-property-owners-lose-land/

1) ACCURACY: 4 STARS – The information is accurate but there is some possibility the site is not telling the whole story.
2) DEPTH: 4 STARS -  The article provides additional details not included in the original article on this case used in Mr. Wetzel's claim.
3) BIAS: 1 STAR –
The source is very much against the use of Eminent Domain in this case and offers a broad warning about the danger of this to all landowners.
4) DESCRIPTION: This source provides new information about what facts led to the use of Eminent Domain, how the landowners were limited in their ability to fight the process, and a warning to others that they might be affected too.
5) SUPPORT: The evidence here shows that Eminent Domain is sometimes used in cases that don't have a broad public benefit and that it can be used against many landowners.

REASONING:  Mr. Wetzel's claim that everything worked out well is not accurate.  Two people bought a beautiful cabin to use as they chose and in a manner consistent with how it was used by the previous owner.  Unless there is a major need for the land, the government should not be able to force them to sell it.  If the government wants the land bad enough, it should have to pay whatever they want instead of being able to condemn the cabin and force them to sell.  The bigger issue here is the abuse of government power and the inability of the individual citizen to fight the process.  Individual citizens do not have the money or knowledge of the government and the final decision is made by government courts.