Procedure and 10-Day Lesson Plan

Introduce and assign first quick write (see Appendix for quick writes description):

Questions (choose one):

What do you know about the death penalty?

What would you like to know about the death penalty?

Discuss what stu­dents wrote, keep­ing in mind that some stu­dents may have strong opin­ions about the issue. Consider using this time to explain the ratio­nale for the unit and its empha­sis on crit­i­cal­ly exam­in­ing the argu­ments for both sides and the respon­si­bil­i­ty of cit­i­zens in mak­ing informed deci­sions on the issue.

Explain what will take place dur­ing the course of the unit, includ­ing the cen­tral themes you choose to cov­er (see Themes and Rationale above for direction).

In addi­tion explain the following:

• Learning jour­nal
• Quick writes (as part of the learning journal)
• Quiz
• Group work research (See Days 6 – 8 for Criteria for group work presentations)
• Argument/​Rebuttal posters and presentations
• Final essay

Using the teacher overviews, briefly go over the entire site as a class. Either go over it direct­ly (if you are in the com­put­er lab) or cre­ate print­ed hand­outs of the overview site to review with the class (if you are in your classroom).

Give the stu­dents time to explore the site on their own.

As a class, turn to the his­to­ry sec­tion of the site. Have the stu­dents work in pairs. Each pair should be assigned one of the pages under History of the Death Penalty . They should com­pile the impor­tant dates from their page. Draw a time line on the board (or on poster board), begin­ning with The Code of Hammurabi in the18th cen­tu­ry BC and end­ing with the present. Have the pairs, in numer­ic order, come to the board, describe and place their sig­nif­i­cant times/​dates on the time line. This will take more than one class period. 

Plan on about 40 min­utes to com­plete this activ­i­ty. (If your lab doesn’t have a board, or if you are not sure it will still be there the next day, use poster board, chart paper or some oth­er media you can find.) This will give stu­dents a sense of his­tor­i­cal scope and high­light the past and present pub­lic con­cerns about the death penal­ty. As a class, iden­ti­fy the themes that appear to be sim­i­lar across time. (For exam­ple, the moral and eth­i­cal dimen­sions of the death penal­ty, or whether the death penal­ty is cru­el and unusu­al pun­ish­ment? Issues of fair­ness and equal­i­ty under law. Who lives? Who Dies? And for what reasons/​crimes?)

Complete the time line as a class. Have stu­dents copy it in their learn­ing jour­nal for future ref­er­ence (or post the poster boards around the class).

Learning jour­nal assign­ment in class and/​or as homework: 

What are your impres­sions of the death penal­ty as rep­re­sent­ed by the web site?

Where do you stand on the issue and what rea­sons can you give to sup­port your position?

Has the def­i­n­i­tion of Cruel and Unusual pun­ish­ment changed over time? If so how? If not why?

Provide each group with a blank map of the United States and have them turn to the state by state data in order to iden­ti­fy the states with and with­out the death penal­ty, and the meth­ods of exe­cu­tion employed in the states with the death penal­ty. Encourage stu­dents to inves­ti­gate the sta­tis­tics on race, gen­der, etc. Be sure to have them vis­it the state by state sum­ma­ry to see the his­to­ry with regard to your own state. (Keep in mind that some states have not had the death penal­ty in recent times, so there may not be as much infor­ma­tion about the death penal­ty in those states. 

Review the map and dis­cuss the fol­low­ing with the class.

What does the state by state data tell us about how the death penal­ty is used?

What might this data tell us about issues of equal­i­ty and how jus­tice is exercised?

What are the meth­ods of exe­cu­tion in your own state, if any?

Learning Journal assignment:

Is Justice equal for peo­ple across all 50 states? Why or why not?

Example: Students may write that it is equal because states have the right to choose for them­selves what pun­ish­ments are jus­ti­fied for par­tic­u­lar crimes, or that it is not equal because of the dis­par­i­ty between both lev­el of pun­ish­ment (death or not) or method of exe­cu­tion. Either way, it is impor­tant for stu­dents to start com­ing to their own con­clu­sions — this is a good first step for the final sec­tion of the unit.

Assign a quick write with ref­er­ence to the map com­plet­ed the pre­vi­ous day: Is the death penal­ty fair? Why or why not?

Take time to dis­cuss their respons­es to the quick write.

Have stu­dents vis­it the Stages in a Capital Case sec­tion of the site in groups of 2 or 3. Have them read the infor­ma­tion, take notes, and con­struct a graph­ic rep­re­sen­ta­tion, flow chart or draw­ing of the stages. (These can lat­er be post­ed around the room.)

Learning Journal assignment: 

What aspects of the stages in a cap­i­tal case are designed to pro­tect the rights of the accused? Do you believe that this sys­tem is suf­fi­cient to guar­an­tee that only the guilty are convicted?

Review for quiz: 

Central themes; pur­pos­es of the death penal­ty through his­to­ry; chal­lenges and ques­tions con­cern­ing the death penal­ty; state by state data and issues of jus­tice; and stages in a capital case.

Review for quiz. Design a short quiz based on the themes you have select­ed or top­ics that have come up as a result of class dis­cus­sions, or state by state info includ­ing one short essay, address­ing at least one theme equal­i­ty, for exam­ple. (A sam­ple quiz is pro­vid­ed in the Appendix.)

Review the quiz and recap the salient issues to date. It will be instruc­tive for you to review the dai­ly les­son plans at the end of the unit to guide your instruction.

Review Stages in a Capital Case in light of civic stan­dards such as the pur­pos­es of gov­ern­ment, ideals of gov­ern­ment, and demo­c­ra­t­ic action drawn from the MEAP and NCSS stan­dards, in light of the themes you have cho­sen to empha­size (e.g., fair­ness, equal­i­ty, and justice).

Critical Thinking objectives:

Introduce and mod­el a method for per­sua­sive argu­ments, for exam­ple, estab­lish­ing claims, evi­dence, and recog­ni­tion of oppos­ing points of view. (An exam­ple of per­sua­sive argu­ments is pro­vid­ed in the Appendix.) You may choose to build on the writ­ing process from English or any oth­er per­sua­sive writ­ing cur­ricu­lum your school or dis­trict employs. Explain that under­stand­ing an oppos­ing point of view not only helps you under­stand that posi­tion but also helps you bet­ter under­stand and sup­port your own opinion.

Learning jour­nal assign­ment (select one):

What do you now know about the death penal­ty that you did not know before?

What new ques­tions do you have in light of what we have covered?

Where do you stand on the issue and why? 

What evi­dence have you dis­cov­ered that has either changed your mind or sup­port­ed your position? 

(Emphasize the pur­pos­es of revis­it­ing these ques­tions as strate­gies for build­ing a persuasive argument.)

(print an argu­ment, rebut­tal, and tes­ti­mo­nypack­et for each group)

Divide class into four groups. (The aver­age group will be com­posed of approx­i­mate­ly six stu­dents.) Each group will be respon­si­ble for research­ing and report­ing on one of the four prin­ci­pal ques­tions drawn from the site; how­ev­er, all groups will be respon­si­ble for famil­iar­iz­ing them­selves with all of the argu­ments, rebut­tals, and expert tes­ti­mo­ny for the final debate and assign­ment. Each group will post their work around the room.

• At least 1 group mem­ber research­es and takes notes on the argument.
• At least 1 group mem­ber research­es and takes notes on the expert tes­ti­mo­ny of the argument.
• At least 1 group mem­ber research­es and takes notes on the rebuttal.
• At least 1 group mem­ber research­es and takes notes on the expert tes­ti­mo­ny of the rebuttal.

• At least 1 group mem­ber research­es and takes notes on the argument.
• At least 1 group mem­ber research­es and takes notes on the expert tes­ti­mo­ny of the argument.
• At least 1 group mem­ber research­es and takes notes on the rebuttal.
• At least 1 group mem­ber research­es and takes notes on the expert tes­ti­mo­ny of the rebuttal.

• At least 1 group mem­ber research­es and takes notes on the argument.
• At least 1 group mem­ber research­es and takes notes on the expert tes­ti­mo­ny of the argument.
• At least 1 group mem­ber research­es and takes notes on the rebuttal.
• At least 1 group mem­ber research­es and takes notes on the expert tes­ti­mo­ny of the rebuttal.

• At least 1 group mem­ber research­es and takes notes on the argument.
• At least 1 group mem­ber research­es and takes notes on the expert tes­ti­mo­ny of the argument.
• At least 1 group mem­ber research­es and takes notes on the rebuttal.
• At least 1 group mem­ber research­es and takes notes on the expert tes­ti­mo­ny of the rebuttal.

Criteria for group work presentations:

For the argu­ment and rebut­tal sec­tions, each group is respon­si­ble for iden­ti­fy­ing three argu­ments and rea­sons per­tain­ing to their par­tic­u­lar propo­si­tion and then post­ing and briefly pre­sent­ing them to the class.

One exam­ple of the three required: 

Proposition: The death penal­ty pre­vents future murders.

Argument (Claim):

Society has always used pun­ish­ment to dis­cour­age would-be crim­i­nals from unlawful action. 

Reason (Evidence):

In 1973 Isaac Ehrlich employed a new kind of analy­sis which pro­duced results show­ing that for every inmate who was exe­cut­ed, 7 lives were spared because oth­ers were deterred from com­mit­ting mur­der. Or, as Ernest van den Haag stat­ed, what­ev­er peo­ple fear most is like­ly to deter most. 

Rebuttal (Claim):

The over­whelm­ing con­clu­sion from years of deter­rence stud­ies is that the death penal­ty is, at best, no more of a deter­rent than a sen­tence of life in prison. 

Reason (Evidence):

Even most sup­port­ers of the death penal­ty now place lit­tle or no weight on deter­rence as a seri­ous jus­ti­fi­ca­tion for its con­tin­ued use. Some crim­i­nol­o­gists, such as William Bowers of Northeastern University, main­tain that the death penal­ty has the oppo­site effect: that is, soci­ety is bru­tal­ized by the use of the death penal­ty, and this increas­es the like­li­hood of more murder. 

For the expert tes­ti­mo­ny sec­tions each group is respon­si­ble for pro­vid­ing exam­ples drawn from the expert tes­ti­mo­ny and work­ing with the appro­pri­ate argument/​rebuttal group mem­ber to begin the con­struc­tion of an argu­ment for their poster.

Students should cre­ate posters with argu­ment and main points pro and con. These should be post­ed on the walls of the classroom. 

The posters will serve as mod­els and a liv­ing Web site for stu­dents to inter­act with the argu­ments as they delib­er­ate on the worth of the death penal­ty as public policy.

Group work on argu­ments, rebut­tals, and expert tes­ti­mo­ny – unlim­it­ed access to the site in order to con­struct posters and presentations.

Group pre­sen­ta­tions of argu­ments and expert tes­ti­mo­ny per­tain­ing to propo­si­tions. Remind the stu­dents that these argu­ments, rebut­tals, and expert tes­ti­mo­ny will serve as mod­els for their dis­cus­sion of a case and their final writing assignment.

Have stu­dents write an essay on the following question:

As a vot­er and a cit­i­zen, do you sup­port the death penal­ty? If so, under what con­di­tions? If not, why not? You will be grad­ed on the following criteria:

1. Clearly state position
2. Support with data
3. Support with basic democratic principles
4. Support with infor­ma­tion from cur­rent events or history
5. Present and refute the opposing argument

Pass out a case study. Have the class read the case sit­u­a­tion. Discuss with them the effi­ca­cy of the death penal­ty. You may find that the dis­cus­sion changes when a real per­son is involved. Be sure to touch on the following questions:

• What if the defen­dant was some­one you knew?
• How much of a chance is there that this per­son is innocent?
• Can you enact leg­is­la­tion to ensure that in the future the death penal­ty is a fair and effec­tive part of the judicial process?
• Is the death penal­ty good pub­lic pol­i­cy, in light of all available evidence?

It will be a chal­lenge for you, as a teacher, to ensure that all stu­dents can be heard and that their argu­ments are based in fact, not emotion.

Remember: This is an issue that extends beyond the walls of the class­room and has impli­ca­tions for their par­tic­i­pa­tion in a democratic society.