Constitutional Crisis

Today, a landmark case in the history of Constitution High School was heard by the Teacher Student Court. This case involved a challenge to the recent Student Presidential election. Todd Latimore's status as a candidate was called into question because it was discovered that he did not meet the qualifications to be president. After giving an amazing speech at the National Constitution Center, I was a believer in the Todd Latimore campaign. However, my support was based on the fact that I believed Todd was eligible for election. During the court trial, Andrew Howard represented Todd. Andrew gave a very strong argument by using a Supreme Court case involving a judge from Texas. The sense of history in the making was very palpable in the room as Andrew spoke. Also, I was really impressed with the Judges. Inkiera and Felicia asked probing questions to get to the bottom of this case. The issue was not whether Todd or Dr. Davidson had made mistakes, but rather would the judges uphold the letter of the law in our school's constitution.

If I had to make a decision today, I would have ruled in favor of our school's Constitution. The Constitution clearly states what the qualifications are for office. It's pretty cut and dry. If you don't meet the qualifications, you aren't eligible to hold office. Unfortunately, this might mean Todd can't serve in the student government this year. After his amazing performance at the National Constitution Center, I think he could be a great leader. Hopefully, he'll get his chance next year. These are my own thoughts? I would love to hear what you think?

Debating the American Revolution

In today's class, students are debating the question: Were the colonists justified in rebelling against British rule? Students are divided into 6 groups: Patriots (2), Moderates (2), Loyalists (1), and King George and the British Parliament (1). I enjoyed the debates because students seem engaged and entertained. The format is very structured: Group introductions and slogans, Opening comment, Presentation of Arguments, and then a General Discussion. Students in American History 3 are very energetic and loquacious. During the debate they were respectful of one another. The Patriots, led by Charniece Huff offered very strong arguments. During American History 2, Juliene Jimenez and Felicia Green became entangled in controversy over whether or not the British government had provided anything to the colonists. Juliene made a strong argument by asking Felicia, "Who provided the chair you sit on?" Felicia had to answer the School District of Philadelphia, which Juliene pointed put was a public institution supported by the United States of America. However, Felicia countered that during colonial times, Great Britain was the government that supported the colonies. It was an entertaining exchange. The most powerful arguments were often in the students' own words and then supported by a short quote as evidence. Overall, I think this has been a productive debate. It has given me incentive to create more lessons in which students can voice their opinions.

2011 Blogs

http://conhigh2011.blogspot.com