978-1111346850 Lecture Note Part 3

subject Type Homework Help
subject Pages 14
subject Words 6000
subject Authors J. Dan Rothwell

Unlock document.

This document is partially blurred.
Unlock all pages and 1 million more documents.
Get Access
page-pf1
C. Allow about 15 minutes for jury discussion and final consensus decision (or super-
majority if consensus is not possible). Make sure that each jury realizes that it must
present justification for its decision based on evaluating the evidence by using the 5
criteria. VARIATION: seek a class consensus after each jury decides verdict.
D. Discuss the evidence with the entire class. Address each of the 5 criteria used to
evaluate the evidence. This is an especially engaging way to familiarize students
with the criteria discussed in the text for evaluating information critically.
E. Processing (evidence/information for discussion)
1. Credibility:
2. Relevance: How relevant is her wearing a sexy teddy under her clothing when
she visits her professor? Is it relevant that she has had frequent sex
partners? Had sex with 2 men on
the incident occurred? How rele
flirtations and sexual relations with his graduate students? Would it have
been relevant to know whether the accuser had a history with previous sex
3. Currency: Professor had no criminal complaints or charges, but did have a recent
sexual relationship with a graduate student. Accused had a lot of sex
partners in the past.
4. Representativeness: Charge of sexual harassment against the male police officer
rape victims.
5. Sufficiency: Was the accusation of rape sufficiently supported?
page-pf2
LAW AND ORDER SVU HANDOUT
Each group will act as a jury and decide the guilt or innocence of the defendant accused of
rape. Concentrate on two things: 1) evaluating the evidence presented, and 2) achieving a
consensus decision.
I. Evaluating the evidence
A. Credibility: discuss whether the evidence and information from both sides in this
trial are believable and reliable. Which side has the most credible evidence?
Evaluate the main pieces of evidence. Be prepared to defend your conclusion with
specific examples.
B. Relevance: is all the evidence presented relevant to the charge of rape? Was there
any irrelevant evidence or information presented? Be prepared to provide examples.
C. Currency: was there any evidence and information presented either before or during
the trial that was not current? Does it matter?
D. Representativeness: was there any evidence or information presented that was
officers involved?
E. Sufficiency: did the prosecution meet its burden of proof by providing sufficient
evidence to warrant a finding of guilty on the rape charge? If yes, list the key
evidence that was sufficient for a finding of guilty. If no, in what ways did the
prosecution fall short?
A.
communication patterns and use supportive communication patterns.
B. Discuss all concerns of group members and attempt to resolve every issue.
C. Avoid adversarial, win-lose argumen
Discuss differences of opinion calmly and approach this activity as a problem to be
solved, not a contest to be won.
page-pf3
III. METROPOLIS ORDINANCE CIVIL SUIT MOCK TRIAL exercise
A. Purpose
1. Provide participants with experience in the consensus method of
decision making.
2. Reveal the primary strengths and drawbacks of consensus decision
making.
3. Permit a discussion of criteria for evaluating information in groups
B. Time required: 60-75 minutes
C. Instructions
1. Divide class into those who wish to be on juries (small groups of 5-7) and
those who wish to play parts in the mock trial: plaintiff team (2-4 members),
defense team (2-4 members), and witnesses (5 total).
2. Everyone involved in the mock trial who is NOT on a jury should be given a
copy of the handout provided below. Jurors should not be given the handout.
3. Allow the plaintiff team to prepare its two witnesses (Michael Kramer and
Brandon Broomfield) and the defense team to prepare its three witnesses
4. Conduct a trial with brief opening statements from both teams, all 5 witnesses
examined and cross-examined, and brief closing statements presented.
5. Jury groups will then deliberate openly in class among themselves for about
15 minutes to decide the case. Trial participants will listen in silence.
6. Each group will explain its decision and justify it on the basis of criteria
offered in the text for evaluating information.
D. Processing: discuss the case, the decisions by jurors, the criteria for evaluating
evidence and how it applies to this activity, and whether consensus was
difficult. POSTSCRIPT: this case is ba
page-pf4
HANDOUT
LOCATION: Metropolis
HISTORICAL CONTEXT: Metropolis has been the target of numerous mass
demonstrations that have resulted in severe violence, even riots. The city council passed the
ordinance detailed below to keep the peace and to prevent further instances of mass
violence between protesters and police and between protesters and onlookers who disagree
dom of speech is a central issue: does the
ordinance place too many restrictions on free speech, or does it strike an acceptable balance
between the rights of protesters to exercise free speech and citizens of Metropolis to be
protected from violence and mass disruption.
MAIN ORDINANCE:
A. All protests and public demonstrations shall be limited to one such
demonstration per day
LAW SUIT PLAINTIFF CLAIMS: The Metropolis ordinance violates the civil rights of
citizens living in this "free country." Michael L. Kramer was unlawfully and
unconstitutionally denied his freedom of speech and is suing the city of Metropolis,
the police department, and the city council for $5 million.
page-pf5
MAIN WITNESSES TO BE CALLED
Plaintiff
A. Michael L. Kramer--plaintiff who has filed suit.
B. Brandon Broomfield tropolis police during a
melee that broke out between demonstrators and onlookers.
Defense
A. Anthony Milpitas
maintaining law and order during the demonstration
B. Violet Jones occurred when onlookers attacked
demonstrators during the march; she suffered a gash to her head, bruises, and a
strained back requiring long-term therapy.
C. James Kilpatrick--Metropolis city councilman who helped pass the ordinance
DEPOSITIONS
Anthony Milpitas
Report of the Chief of Police
On July 5th, Michael L. Kramer led a march of approximately 10,000 demonstrators who
were specifically protesting the Metropolis ordinance passed on March 31st of this year
that places some limitations on public demonstrations in the streets of Metropolis. Mr.
Kramer never attempted to secure a permit for his march. Another legally sanctioned march
of approximately 700 people took place on the very same day. Mr. Kramer led his march
into several neighborhoods and locations in direct violation of the Metropolis ordinance.
The march began at 5PM, during rush hour, and lasted two hours past sundown. When Mr.
Kramer was confronted by me regarding his violations of the city ordinance, he sought to
justify his violations on freedom of speech grounds. I repeatedly asked him to cease his
demonstration and to encourage his followers to disperse. He refused. I ordered him
arrested and taken into custody, whereupon he posted bail.
page-pf6
Violet Jones
My name is Violet Jones and I was present during the mass demonstration on July 5th of
this year. I was not personally participating in the demonstration. I heard the noise created
by what appeared to be thousands of demonstrators, and I came to see what was happening.
Although I sympathize with the protesters' viewpoint, I didn't appreciate becoming
involved in the violent confrontations between some protesters and a few onlookers. The
fight that broke out appeared to be provoked by the onlookers. The demonstrators were
engaging in a peaceful, although noisy, protest. A few onlookers apparently disliked the
demonstrators' point of view and they began taunting some demonstrators. Within a minute
or two, a couple of onlookers physically attacked some demonstrators, and a frightening
melee occurred. It seemed as though hundreds from both sides became involved. Police
quickly came to the scene and attempted to break up the violence, but with little success.
There were many injured in the encounter, including me. I suffered a severe gash to my
head, bruises in several places, and a strained back when I was thrown to the ground by
police.
James Kilpatrick
My name is James Kilpatrick. I am currently a member of the Metropolis City Council. I
voted to pass the ordinance Mr. Kramer is accused of violating. The basic justification for
the ordinance is to keep the peace and protect all of our citizens. When a march takes place
without adequate notice to the city and police, when it becomes overly large, and when it
intrudes on the peace and tranquility of neighbors uninterested in obtrusive and noisy
demonstrations in our city, the ability of authorities to enforce the law is jeopardize. Large,
unregulated demonstrations place a heavy burden on the resources of the city and on the
police department. Large demonstrations can easily get out of control, as did this one in
question. The police cannot adequately protect innocent bystanders from becoming
ensnared in violence when demonstrations become larger than about 1,000 individuals.
When police resources are stretched to the limit to control one large demonstration, they
cannot control any other demonstration on the same day occurring elsewhere in the city.
Crime rates increase when large demonstrations occur because police cannot enforce laws
and protect citizens when concentrating on a demonstration in one part of the city.
page-pf7
Michael L. Kramer--defendant
My name is Michael L. Kramer. I live in Ontario, California. I organized the march in
question because I feel strongly that the Metropolis ordinance is an unconstitutional
restriction on freedom of speech. I oppose this ordinance and sought to violate it directly to
make the following points:
1. Limiting demonstrations to 1,000 people is unduly restrictive, and impossible to enforce
(ever tried to count the size of a crowd?). A march's success is largely determined by the
size of the crowd demonstrating. A thousand people march is not nearly as influential as a
march of 10,000. The "Million Man March" would have been ignored if it had become the
"Thousand Man March." Plus, preventing anyone over 1,000 demonstrators from
participating denies them their freedom of speech.
2. The provision that a demonstration cannot occur at night and must not occur during rush
hour is ludicrous. How can you have a candlelight vigil to protest a war, for example,
during daylight hours. The rush hour provision is far too general. Our demonstration in no
Brandon Broomfield
My name is Brandon Broomfield. I am a resident of Metropolis. I participated in the
peaceful demonstration that occurred on July 5th. When counter-demonstrators began
physically assaulting me and many of my fellow protesters, I fought back. A huge fight
ensued and I was seriously injured and spent time in the hospital. I can say without
qualification that none of the demonstrators provoked violence. Our mere presence seemed
to be enough excuse for counter-demonstrators to attack us.
page-pf8
MOCK TRIAL JURY ANALYSIS
Each group acting as a jury will concentrate on two things: 1) evaluating the evidence
presented, and 2) achieving a consensus decision.
I. Evaluating the evidence
A. Credibility: discuss whether the evidence and information from both sides in this
trial are believable and reliable. Which side has the most credible evidence?
Evaluate
the main pieces of evidence. Be prepared to defend your conclusion with specific
examples.
evidence that was sufficient for your finding. If no, in what ways did the
plaintiff fall short?
A.
communication patterns and use supportive communication patterns.
B. Discuss all concerns of group members and attempt to resolve every issue.
C. Avoid adversarial, win-lose argumen
Discuss differences of opinion calmly and approach this activity as a problem to be
solved, not a contest to be won.
D. Avoid conflict-suppressing techniques such as coin flipping or swapping. Seek
er if he/she is the only one preventing
consensus (unanimity). A stand aside means a group member continues to have
reservations about the group decision, but, when confronted, does not wish to block
the group preference.
F. If consensus is impossible, seek a supermajority (at least two-thirds majority vote).
This should come only after unanimity cannot be achieved.
page-pf9
IV. "Brainstorming" exercise
A. Purpose: To acquaint participants with the brainstorming technique for
generating creative ideas in groups.
B. Time required: 25-30 minutes
C. Instructions:
1. Pick a campus problem (e.g., parking, cost of textbooks).
2. Define the problem, offer information explaining why the problem
exists, and indicate the effects of the problem. Some printed material
on the problem could be disseminated for students to read.
3. Tell students one class period in advance of group brainstorming to
generate individual lists of ideas for solving the problem. Have each
student bring his or her list of ideas to class.
4. Divide the class into groups
term groups).
5. Explain the guidelines for brainstorming.
6. Task for groups: generate ideas for solving the campus problem.
7. After 15 minutes of brainstorming, using individual lists as a
launching point, give groups 5-10 minutes to decide what is their best
idea, worst idea, and most humorous idea.
8. Have one member of each group report to the class how many ideas
they generated, then their best, worst, and most humorous ideas.
D. Processing the exercise
1. Explain when to use brainstorming in the Standard Agenda format.
2. Discuss the merits and demerits of brainstorming as a procedure for
generating creative ideas.
6 as a problem-solving task.
V. "Egg Drop" exercise
NOTE: This exercise can be used here or later as a part of "The Power Carnival"
A. Purposes:
1. To demonstrate reframing process of creative problem solving
2. To demonstrate the value of examining possible negative outcomes
3. To show the advisability of exploring the nature of the problem
before devising solutions.
4. To again emphasize that cooperation (sharing resources) can work
better than competition (hoarding limited resources).
page-pfa
B. Time required: 45 minutes
C. Instructions:
1. Divide class into groups of 5-7 members. Each group chooses an
uncooked egg.
2. Display the following materials: paper in 2 separate sets of 3 sheets
per set (different colors per set work well), a set of 4 index cards
(3 by 5), 2 rolls of scotch tape in dispensers, two yard-long strands of
twine or string, one set of 6 rubber bands in a paper envelope, a letter-size
envelope with about a dozen large paper clips in the envelope; 1 piece
of cardboard (8" by 11"), 2 manila file folders, and 1 set of flex straws
(6 in the set).
3. Task: protect an egg from cracking when dropped from two stories
landing on pavement below. (Many colleges have walkways on
second stories of classroom buildings. Three stories would make an
even bigger challenge). The egg must be dropped by one member of
the group starting at chest high and it must be a free fall (no strings
attached to the protected egg to ease it down slowly). No one may
catch the egg; it must hit the ground unobstructed with whatever
protection that surrounds it.
4. Groups must bid for materials (see #2) in order to accumulate the
necessary items to protect their egg from breaking. Each group is
given 30 points. Begin bidding on any one of the items (paper,
cardboard etc.). The team that bids the highest number points gets the
protect their egg.
7. Take groups to the chosen place to
from each group, in turn, drops the protected egg to see if it breaks,
cracks, or remains unscathed.
D. Processing the exercise
1. This exercise requires groups to brainstorm possible solutions to the
problem before choosing one. What often happens, however, is that
one or two members just start wrapping the egg, taping it, or
whatever without thoroughly disc
problem solving technique.
page-pfb
2. Groups must engage in reframing as a creative problem solving
technique. The materials auctioned off to protect the egg are not
normally used for such a purpose. Group members must think of
these resources in completely different ways than normal
(reframing).
3. One common error made by groups is that they do not fully discuss
what could go wrong with their so
such discussion, serious flaws may be overlooked until it is too late
(time expires). Weighing the drawbacks of a solution as well as the
merits is step #5 of the Standard Agenda (see text).
4. Groups usually don't think to cooperate and share resources
(swapping a piece of paper for a half-piece of cardboard, for instance,
or some tape for a 3" by 5" index card). The lesson of cooperation can
again be reinforced here by pointing out that creative problem
solving requires that groups think beyond inferences (e.g., facilitator
won't allow sharing since resources were auctioned off).
VI. "The Marshmallow Challenge
A. Type Marshmallowchallenge.com into Google search window. You can now access
a TED talk by Tom Wujec (6:45 mins). He explains the creative problem solving
challenge and some interesting and amusing results. Show his brief talk after having
your class attempt the Marshmallow Challenge.
B. Have teams of four members do the marshmallow challenge.
C. Following the Egg Drop exercise, this can cement important points on teamwork,
cooperative problem solving, anticipating Murphy's Law, and moving beyond
mindsets requiring reframing.
D. Variation: after four-member teams attempt the challenge, have the entire class
work together on a single design. Give the class a box of spaghetti, 5 yards of tape
and 5 yards of string, and five marshmallows all that must be placed on the top.
Discuss the importance of prototypes (to account for Murphy's Law) before building
the final product. Does leadership emerge? What style?
A. Purposes:
1. To provide an opportunity for groups to use The Standard Agenda decision-
making process, with emphasis on the use of criteria.
2. To give groups experience using consensus decision making
3. To engage in a discussion of the merits and demerits of different group decision-
making methods.
page-pfc
4. To introduce discussion of ethics in group decision making.
5. To introduce value conflicts in group decision making.
B. Time required: 75 to 150 minutes (depending on version used)
C. Instructions:
1. Get a copy of the classic film Abandon Ship. The film is available
on videotape and can be ordered from amazon.com. This class
activity can be done without showing the film, but it will not have
the dramatic impact.
2. Divide class into small groups (symposium groups are best). Hand
out the materials describing the actual situation, the descriptions of
each survivor on board the lifeboat, the criteria page, the page for
listing who will be chosen to di
3. Begin showing the film when the Tyrone Power character becomes
captain of the lifeboat (about 20 minutes into the film). Play the next
35 minutes of the film until the captain decides that some survivors
will have to be put overboard. Stop the film. Do not show at this point which
survivors are chosen by the captain.
4. The groups will have 20-30 minutes to list and prioritize criteria for
deciding who will live and who will die. Emphasize that criteria
should be discussed and chosen separate from ANY discussion of
individual survivors. Once criteria have been chosen and prioritized,
groups will then discuss and choose which 12 survivors will be
thrown overboard to certain death.
5. When all groups have decided, indicate on a transparency listing
every survivor (see transparency master), which survivors each
group has decided will be thrown overboard. You may want each
group to rank from 1 to 12 the order in which survivors would be
thrown overboard.
page-pfd
D. Processing the exercise
1. Discuss the importance of criteria to effective group decision making.
2. Ask students how the decision should have been made and why. Emphasize the
importance of group discussion to effective decision making. Should the captain
have decided to pitch survivors overboard without any discussion or
from the new liver, she justified the d
much room in the lifeboats and a bun Santa
Cruz Sentinel, 11-15-96, p. A1).
page-pfe
ABANDON SHIP
The British film Abandon Ship is a dramatic depiction of a true story. Shortly
after World War II, the luxury ocean liner S.S. Crescent Star struck a floating
mine in the south Atlantic and sunk within seven minutes. There were more
than 1,000 passengers killed in the immediate sinking of the liner, with only 37
survivors. There were no lifeboats launched because the ship sank too rapidly.
Some of the crew and passengers, however, were able to board a small 18-foot
This small boat was designed to hold
only nine people, with maybe a maximum of fourteen people.
Situation You will need to know the following information to evaluate the
challenge confronting the survivors:
The boat is holding 17 people and an additional 9 survivors are hanging
onto the sides of the boat.
The boat has an internal rowing mechanism that will allow the survivors to row the
boat.
page-pff
DECISIONS TO BE MADE BY THE GROUPS
I. Choose 12 survivors who will be pitched overboard and fed to the sharks.
A. List criteria (standards) for making choices BEFORE any decisions are
made concerning who will live and who will die.
B. Once the group has achieved a consensus regarding the 12
unfortunates, rank these 12 in the order of their departure from the boat
(1st = most expendable; 2nd = next most expendable, etc.). Be prepared
to justify the rankings in terms of your criteria.
II. Discuss the decision-making process that should have been used. Choose
from the options listed below that are also discussed in Chapter Seven of the
textbook.
A. Designated leader/authority (Captain Holmes) without any participation
from the group members affected by the decision.
and Major Barrington (or some other composition of committee
members)
Justify your choice of decision-making methods.
overboard, and the method he uses to
consultation with anyone.
B. In Mixed Company lists five standards for ethical group communication.
They are: respect, honesty, fairness, choice, and responsibility. Was Captain
these five standards? Discuss.
a better ethical choice?
2. Would you have made the same choice as the Captain or would you
have chosen another option (e.g., ride out the storm and hope for the
best; give all group members an opportunity to influence the final
decision; women and children remain, men go overboard)?
C. Should Captain Alec have been prosecuted and convicted of murder for
what he did? Justify your answer. Would Captain Alec have been guilty
of manslaughter in your judgment if
by trying to ride out the storm with all survivors hanging onto the boat?
page-pf10
WORKSHEETS
It is now the second day of e are 25 survivors left,
including the dog. There is no sign of a rescue ship and there is a real
possibility that the sinking of the S. S. Crescent Star is unknown to the outside
world. Therefore, it is likely that the survivors must row to the African coast for any
chance of survival. There is a storm brewing and the overloaded shore
boat could sink at any time. There are too many passengers.
You must select TWELVE (12) survivors to set adrift (the dog may count as one
survivor). It is certain death for those left in the cold waters of the South Atlantic. What
criteria will you use to make this life-and-death decision?
List your criteria below in order of importance. These criteria should be listed BEFORE
you make your decisions regarding who lives and who dies. Do NOT discuss individual
survivors until your criteria list has been completed.
CRITERIA:
1. __________________________________________________
2. __________________________________________________
3. __________________________________________________
4. __________________________________________________
5. __________________________________________________
6. __________________________________________________
7. __________________________________________________
page-pf11
LIST OF SURVIVORS ON THE SECOND DAY
ip and given command after the death
of the captain. Has never commanded a ship. Single, but has a romantic
s the only gun. Approximate age: 42
Approximate age: 40.
Once a famous opera singer, but
now retired. Widow, with grown children. Her children sent her on world
Has two broken wrists. Married,
with children. Very concerned about his own welfare; not much concerned
page-pf12
e ship. Commanded everything
from a squad to a division, but is now retired from the Army. Divorced.
Pompous and arrogant. Disagreeable person. Able-bodied. Approximate
age: 60.
Has a serious cut on her arm that
h. Single. Approximate age: 30.
Called a racketeer by one of the
other passengers. Has a large switchblade knife. Able-bodied. Married, with
children. Approximate age: 42.
small in size. Single. Age: 18.
rge poodle, weighing about 70 pounds.
page-pf13
CHOOSE 12 UNFORTUNATES WHO WILL BE THROWN OVERBOARD.
EXPLAIN WHY THEY WERE CHOSEN BASED ON CRITERIA USED
NAMES REASONS
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
page-pf14
Place check mark by each survivor chosen to die. (Transparency Master)
GROUPS: I II III IV V
1. Alec Holmes
2. Julie White
3. Mack McKinley
4. Sam
5. Cookie
6. Joe
7. Digger
8. Dorothy Newston
9. Merrick
10. Sparks
11. Sully Daniel
12. Audrey Clark
13. Major General Barrington
14. Ruth Spencer
15. Michael Ferrone
16. George Killgor
17. Mrs. Killgor
18. Peter Killgor
19. Professor Daniel Kane
20. Edith Middleton
21. John Haden
22. Willie Hawkins
23. Mario Pasqualle
24. Mickey Storks
25. Dog

Trusted by Thousands of
Students

Here are what students say about us.

Copyright ©2022 All rights reserved. | CoursePaper is not sponsored or endorsed by any college or university.