The upcoming unit (beginning on ) will be lots of fun and hard work. The
expectations for this unit, like all others, will be high. There will be a lot of in class work as
well as group work, for this reason it will be extremely difficult to make up missed days. I
strongly encourage you to make all reasonable attempts to participate. Only under dire
circumstances will late work be accepted. We will also spend a few days in either the
library or computer lab doing research. All papers are expected to be typed and free of
grammatical and spelling errors as well as turned in on time.
Products/Evidence of Learning:
Part A Perspectives and Proposal
Individual introduction into issues (read and record 12 players—10 pts.)
Timeline (15 sites categorized including the human origin—30 pts.)
Perspective paper (problem, issue, players, beliefs, and values—80 pts.)
Part B Deciding the Outcome
Presentation at the trial of your evidence (oral presentation —30 pts.)
Trial notes (15 pts)
Outcome evaluation/personal reflection paper (30 pts.)
Individual and group evaluation (5 pts.)
Overview: Students will do a simulation involving the Kennewick Man. The assessment is
divided into two parts, Part A Perspectives and Proposals and Part B Deciding the Outcome
Part A Perspectives and Proposals: PREPARING FOR THE TRIAL
You will do preliminary research to identify the key concerns surrounding the Kennewick man.
1 As an individual read and then record fifteen key players and their positions and beliefs on
the issue. (Who were the first Americans?) Number each of them 1-12 clearly. (10pts.)
2 Prepare an organized formal timeline of at least 15 sites, both human and material sites,
organizing them from oldest to youngest including: 1) date 2) name 3) site location 4)
human/site origin. (30 pts.)
3. As a class we will clearly define the main issue, and the potential problems that may exist
within this issue. Also we will discuss the range of points of view involved with this issue.
Next we will dissect a video on who the first Americans were.
4. Having defined the issue and range of view points, individually prepare a typed paper
addressing 8(eight) perspectives: 1) the player, 2) group affiliation and credentials 3)
position (what do they believe) 4) supports (why do they believe it) 5) value and any bias.
(An example will be given.) (10 pts. each 8x10=80pts. Total) FOLLOW THESE STEPS
5. Next you will be assigned a law team. Each team will break up into two or three focus
groups in which to concentrate on for further research. Within these small focus groups
choose a leader who will eventually be one of two senior partners in the law firm. Choose
someone who is assertive and can pull your team together. They will be responsible for
organizing the teams, their data, the opening and closing remarks and to help shape the
6. As a group categorize the major players that you have been introduced to into the two sides of
the case. (Native Americans-NAGPRA and the scientists). With the entire group we will
check for accuracy. From this list you need to brainstorm two or three main areas in which
your case can be shaped. (Ex. Expert testimony, scientific evidence) Next, talk about what
criteria would be important to you if you were decision-makers examining and ruling on this
issue. Two of the leaders, one from each team, at this time will lead the class in deciding
what criteria is most important when deciding the credibility of testimony.
7. Within your small focus groups, identify groups or individuals or evidence that has a stake in
your teams point of view and concerns. Each of the team members will need to choose
from this list an individual or group or evidence that can be researched.
8. RESEARCH SECTION: AS YOU DIVIDE UP THE AREAS TO RESEARCH MAKE
SURE THAT EACH ONE OF YOU HAVE A DEFFINATE PLAN AS TO THE
FOCUS YOU NEED TO TAKE IN ORDER TO MAKE YOUR CASE SOLID, WELL
ROUNDED, AND STRONG. Gather research information from appropriate resources
including books, articles, Internet, audio-visual, etc. that answers the questions that will be
outlined on the board. Your information should include identification of: author credibility
(credentials); the evidence, and the value that this evidence holds to your case, but also the
value/ or bias the experts might bring to their testimony. (i.e. economic, social, prestige,
educational) Make notations about accuracy of data and appropriateness of logic
used/decisions reached. (Example: DNA testing—both sides may wish to bring this
evidence in. One for proof in identification and the other side to show its inaccuracies
especially with ancient DNA.) The presentation is worth 30 pts
9. Senior partners meet with your work team regularly during your information search. Revisit
your initial decision about the possible interest groups involved. Based on developing
information, you should redefine and refocus your position to reflect findings and the
available research. It may become necessary to redefine “players” if your work team shifts
perspectives. In that case, you will have to design and execute another line of research.
10. Senior partners in a final preparation meeting with your small group, summarize their
findings orally. Does everyone in the group understand their perspective and do they help to
strengthen the case. As each member summarizes the leader will produce a short graphic
organizer to keep track of the strengths and weaknesses of the case. All students will orally
summarize relevant evidence that speaks to the interest group’s perspective on the issue.
Part B: Deciding & Evaluating the Outcome: THE TRIAL
1. As a class, set up the decision-making forum. Delegates from each team should meet to
decide rules for running the simulation: (The senior law team will lead this discussion and
choose a moderator (this student has a dual role. He/She must moderate the forum and also be a
participant –but not the spokesperson for a group. (Nominate the most unbiased individual to be
our class moderator) Also, he/she must keep control of the process including the time allowed for
each presentation. The five of us will eventually make this decision.
establish the order of presentations-AND GIVE A COPY TO ME
determine who gets to vote (if simulating a historical event, use the same process used in that
event) we will discuss this depending on availability of outsiders.
how will you dress (extra pts for professionalism) we are video taping the court case.
2. On a Graphic Organizer, outline the focus groups and witnesses that will testify. Include a
short summary of their expertise. (a sample will be provided) This must be done in a timely
manner days before the trial begins so the opposing team may view it. This is always done.
This needs to be neat and easy for all of us to see. I will need my own copy typed before the
trial begins—also the moderator will get a copy of this outline as well as any individual that
we have agreed upon to help us.
3. The moderator convenes the assembly. All class members are part of the process, however,
only the selected senior partner from each team presents opening statements. At this time all
members of the group must orally present the evidence that they have to contribute to the
strength of their case. The senior team may not cross-examine during the testimony for time
sake but record any questions or disputes for the rebuttal. The moderator/judge will control
the process at all times. As each delegate presents, record all perspectives and supporting
evidence of opposing groups. Put it into outline form and identify the areas of
agreement and disagreement between the cases. (So you may gather material for your
rebuttal) A trial notes format will be provided. This will be handed in at the end of the
trial-trial notes 15 pts.
4. After the first part of the trial, team members should compare trial notes. (Use them to back
up your position—every good lawyer gathers support no matter how insignificant). As a
team, develop strategies for your rebuttal. The more evidence you can refute the stronger your
case, thus victory! At this time you must also prepare a strong summation for your closing
5. The moderator will call for part two of the trial. Senior lawyers will present altered
proposals/evidence to refute other’s stands. Once each group has had a chance to rebut, then
each will have closing arguments. As a class we will analyze the evidence before us.
6. The moderator should call for a vote according to the simulation decisions made earlier in
Step 1. (The class decision-making forum)
7. Personal evaluation of the group process (5pts).
8. Prepare your personal reflection and evaluation, in written form, of your decision/solution
you most agree with. It should include:
Introduce the issue at hand. Introduce the controversy about this issue. Introduce the
perspective that you presented. Add in both how you agree or disagree with other
Discuss the credibility of the players/groups/evidence (use your notes, research, and
discussions) that are involved in this case.
Any bias that you detect in the perspectives presented and personal thoughts about the
strengths and weaknesses of either side. Give your personal opinion on the case.
Reflect also on the “actual” decision reached, and the simulation’s decision.
This paper is worth 30 pts.