Weekly Briefs—intended for student edification (as opposed to a primary tool to measure learning), not designed to be an exhaustive reading summary. The purpose is to focus on the key points learned and the key questions that surfaced in your study of text book reading assignment (normally not articles; however, you are not prohibited from including insights from there also).
Include the highlights that caught your attention as guided by the lecture-introduction to the chapter. To obtain credit the brief must demonstrate a reasonable grasp of the material in the text covering the areas introduced by the lecture (i.e. PowerPoint for the chapter), and be deposited in D2L on-time. Students are expected to be familiar and comply with the university policy on academic honesty, including plagiarism (http://www.savannahstate.edu/faculty-staff/academic-policies.shtml). Whenever copying text or using the work and ideas of another in a written document, utilization citation that gives the source.
It will not be returned unless it does not demonstrate a sufficient grasp of the material. THE FILE NAME IS TO BE IN THE FOLLOWING FORMAT: (name)_Ch_(number or article Author Name), for example: DavidBell_Ch_1 or DavidBell_Ch_Hawksley
300-500 words in a Word document (less than 1 page single spaced for each chapter).
IMPORTANT: Include the page number of the text for substantive thoughts (at the end of each paragraph at a minimum).
Examples of items to be included:
Define any key terms, theories, arguments, and concepts
Challenges, debates/controversies presented
Special focus should be on the sections of the reading introduced in the lecture (PowerPoint).
The key terms, theories, arguments, concepts, challenges, and debates to be included in this WB are as expressed in the following points (REMEMBER: Only 300-500 words):
What promise does Frederickson claim the government failed to keep? Describe the administrator’s job in running the government, including the issues that were not central and Fredrickson’s response to the glaring inadequacy? What were three main questions in the initial reasoning addressing this inadequacy?
Summarize the issue argued by Andrew Hawkins in 1968: what was gathered, what did the data show regarding providing municipal services, the constitutional 14th Amendment claim, what was the court’s decision on appeal, what was the role of Harvard-MIT’s Joint Center for Urban Studies in appeal (i.e., what did it do as part of the case?)?
What significantly limits the possible equalizing effects of the Brown v. Board of Education decision? When is this especially the case? How have state courts interpreted state constitutions to bring about greater equality?
Summarize how the U.S. Court of Appeals ruling regarding Jefferson City Board of Education addressed the two remaining questions from Brown v. Board of Education.
What did Judge Clark and the trial court require Kansas City and the State of Missouri to do regarding school funding? What was Judge Clark’s justification with respect to constitutional rights of a minority?