Analyzing Perspectives: Brown V. Board of Education
Inquiry Framework
Question Framework
Driving Question
The overarching question that guides the entire project.How can we use the author's diction and syntax in Brown V. Board of Education to uncover different perspectives and understand the historical impact of the case on narrative construction?Essential Questions
Supporting questions that break down major concepts.- How does the author’s use of diction and syntax reveal the perspective of Brown V. Board of Education?
- In what ways does the historical context of Brown V. Board of Education affect the narrative perspective?
- How can analyzing rhetoric and language choices help us understand different perspectives in historical texts?
Standards & Learning Goals
Learning Goals
By the end of this project, students will be able to:- Students will be able to analyze how diction and syntax are utilized by authors to establish perspective in historical texts.
- Students will be able to identify and explain the historical context of Brown V. Board of Education and its impact on the narrative perspective presented in the text.
- Students will develop skills to critically evaluate how authors use language to convey different points of view, specifically in significant legal texts.
Common Core Standards
Entry Events
Events that will be used to introduce the project to studentsDebate Challenge
Host a classroom debate where students argue both sides of the Brown V. Board of Education case. This entry event not only promotes critical thinking and public speaking but also challenges students to dissect the rhetoric and stylistic choices that underlie persuasive legal arguments, aligning perfectly with the project’s analytical goals.Interactive Timeline Creation
Students are tasked with creating an interactive timeline that traces the events leading up to and following Brown V. Board of Education. The process encourages students to delve into primary sources and analyze the language and intent behind influential documents, fostering a deeper understanding of how syntax shapes historical narratives.Historical Role Play
Students are invited to step into the shoes of key figures during the Brown V. Board of Education case, engaging in a role-play activity where they simulate courtroom arguments and decisions. This immersive experience connects directly to the project's goal by allowing students to explore the perspectives and rhetoric used in historical legal settings, encouraging them to consider how language can influence justice and society.Portfolio Activities
Portfolio Activities
These activities progressively build towards your learning goals, with each submission contributing to the student's final portfolio.Syntax Sleuths
In this activity, students scrutinize sentence structures and rhetorical devices to reveal how syntax contributes to establishing an author's purpose and perspective in the Brown V. Board of Education case.Steps
Here is some basic scaffolding to help students complete the activity.Final Product
What students will submit as the final product of the activityA collection of rewritten sentences with analysis notes.Alignment
How this activity aligns with the learning objectives & standardsAligns with ELA.7.R.2.3 - Focuses on syntax as a means to achieving an author's purpose.Perspective Panorama
This culminating activity asks students to bring together their understanding of diction and syntax to write an analytical essay on how these elements reveal perspectives in the Brown V. Board of Education case.Steps
Here is some basic scaffolding to help students complete the activity.Final Product
What students will submit as the final product of the activityAn analytical essay detailing how the authors use diction and syntax to convey perspectives.Alignment
How this activity aligns with the learning objectives & standardsMeets ELA.7.R.2.3 and CCSS.ELA-LITERACY.RI.7.6 by synthesizing analysis of diction and syntax to explore author perspectives.Diction Detective
Students will become 'Diction Detectives' to explore how specific word choices by authors reveal their perspective on the Brown V. Board of Education case. This activity sharpens their analytical skills in identifying the connection between diction and perspective.Steps
Here is some basic scaffolding to help students complete the activity.Final Product
What students will submit as the final product of the activityAnnotated excerpts demonstrating understanding of the usage of diction to establish perspective.Alignment
How this activity aligns with the learning objectives & standardsAligns with ELA.7.R.2.3 - Explain how an author establishes purpose through diction.Rubric & Reflection
Portfolio Rubric
Grading criteria for assessing the overall project portfolioBrown V. Board Syntax and Diction Analysis Rubric
Syntax Analysis
Evaluates the student's ability to identify and analyze syntactic choices to establish the author's purpose and perspective in the text.Syntactic Variety
Examines the student's ability to identify and explain the impact of various sentence structures on the meaning and emphasis of the text.
Exemplary
4 PointsIdentifies a wide range of sentence structures and provides a comprehensive analysis of how each contributes to the text’s meaning and impact.
Proficient
3 PointsIdentifies several sentence structures and offers appropriate analysis on how they affect the text’s meaning.
Developing
2 PointsRecognizes some sentence structures but analysis on their influence on meaning is inconsistent.
Beginning
1 PointsStruggles to identify or analyze sentence structures, with minimal connection to text's meaning.
Syntactic Manipulation
Assesses the student's ability to alter sentences to understand changes in meaning and perspective.
Exemplary
4 PointsEffectively rewrites sentences to demonstrate a sophisticated grasp of how syntactic choices shape meaning and perspective.
Proficient
3 PointsAble to rewrite sentences showing clear understanding of changes in meaning and perspective.
Developing
2 PointsAttempts to rewrite sentences but shows inconsistent understanding of their impact on meaning.
Beginning
1 PointsStruggles to manipulate syntax, showing minimal impact on meaning or perspective.
Diction Analysis
Assesses the student's capability to identify and interpret the author's diction to understand perspective within the text.Diction Identification
Evaluates the student's ability to identify key words and phrases that reveal the author's perspective.
Exemplary
4 PointsPrecisely identifies an extensive range of diction choices and meticulously explains their influence on author’s perspective.
Proficient
3 PointsAccurately identifies key diction elements with clear explanations on their influence.
Developing
2 PointsIdentifies some diction elements but provides inconsistent explanation of their impact.
Beginning
1 PointsStruggles to identify diction elements or their relevance to perspective.
Diction Interpretation
Assesses the student's ability to interpret and articulate the influence of diction on narrative point of view.
Exemplary
4 PointsProvides insightful interpretation of diction's impact on narrative point of view, showing exceptional critical analysis.
Proficient
3 PointsOffers clear interpretations of how diction shapes the narrative point of view.
Developing
2 PointsAttempts interpretation of diction’s impact but lacks depth and consistency.
Beginning
1 PointsMinimal interpretation, struggling to connect diction to narrative perspective.
Written Expression
Evaluates the quality of students’ written communication in their analytical essays concerning clarity, coherence, and depth of analysis.Clarity and Coherence
Assesses the student's ability to present ideas in a clear, logical, and structured manner.
Exemplary
4 PointsEssay is exceptionally clear, coherent, and well-structured, with logical progression of ideas and strong connections between analysis and evidence.
Proficient
3 PointsEssay is clear and logical, with coherent organization and adequate connections between analysis and evidence.
Developing
2 PointsEssay contains unclear or inconsistent organization, with some parts lacking coherence.
Beginning
1 PointsEssay is unclear with minimal logical flow and connections between ideas.
Depth of Analysis
Measures the student's capability to delve deeply into texts and draw meaningful conclusions.
Exemplary
4 PointsDemonstrates nuanced analysis with deep insights into the text, drawing sophisticated connections and conclusions.
Proficient
3 PointsShows thorough analysis with well-founded conclusions based on the text.
Developing
2 PointsProvides surface-level analysis with basic conclusions, lacking depth.
Beginning
1 PointsMinimal analysis and conclusions, with little engagement with the text.