Imperialism Debates Project Manual

805 views

Published on

Published in: Education, Technology
0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total views
805
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
2
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
6
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Imperialism Debates Project Manual

  1. 1. 1 | T h e I m p e r i a l i s m D e b a t e s SOCIAL SCIENCE 2: ASIAN STUDIES SEMESTER 2 – THE EMERGENCE OF MODERN ASIA THE IMPERIALISM DEBATES Mock trials on the legacy of European imperialism in Asia By Martin Benedict S. Perez Philippine Science High School, Main Campus PROJECT MANUAL / November 2010 revision THE AGE OF IMPERIALISM was a turbulent time for the Asian continent. Change was the status quo of the time as states gave way to colonies, proud empires became protectorates, and whole civilizations splintered into spheres of influence – all under the sway of the many competitive mercantile powers from Europe. In order to survive, whole societies had to reform themselves; that is, if they even had a say in the matter. Nonetheless, their transformations were subject to rigorous debate, conflict, and even war. Thus, your objective in this activity is to revive those arguments in a modern setting while staying true to the ethos of the time. Mimicking a court room drama, your class will work with primary source documents and re-enactments of historical figures in order to make your case. This guide is written for students of SS2 Asian Studies undertaking this activity for their lesson on Imperialism. This is a comprehensive guide detailing the time table, tasks and roles, grading system, and activity mechanics. SECTION A: PROJECT TIME TABLE (Note: This revision refers to SY 2010/11, and the sections here refer to the classes of the author. A similar time table is recommended for others adopting this activity.) TRIAL PROPER Section Preparation Trial 1 Trial 2 Trial 3 Verdict Camia Nov 8 to 24 25 Nov 30 Nov 2 Dec 6 Dec Champaca Nov 8 to 24 26 Nov 1 Dec 3 Dec 6 Dec Dahlia Nov 9 to 24 26 Nov 30 Nov 2 Dec 3 Dec Ilang-Ilang Nov 9 to 24 26 Nov 30 Nov 1 Dec 3 Dec Jasmin Nov 8 to 24 25 Nov 1 Dec 2 Dec 6 Dec All trials will be held at the SHB Seminar Room. TRIAL EXAMS AND REQUIREMENTS Section Pre-trial Test (LT, part 1) Post-trial Paper (LT, part 2)* Camia 23 Nov 7 Dec Champaca 24 Nov 7 Dec Dahlia 25 Nov 4 Dec Ilang-Ilang 24 Nov 4 Dec Jasmin 24 Nov 7 Dec *Due in my e-mail 24 hours after delivery of verdict. Notes on the Time Table The preparation period is divided into two main phases: (a) the introductory lectures and (b) the pre-trial proper. The introductory lectures consist of four talks that cover the fundamental concepts essential to understanding the topic. In addition, there will be discussions of Mughal India, Qing China, and Tokugawa Japan that will provide the necessary context for the trial proper. The pre-trial proper is when the lawyers build their case with the client, and together they gather witnesses to solidify their position. During this time they are free to research at the library and consult with the teacher. In the event of class suspensions or holidays, the scheduled session will be moved to the next available date. It is imperative however, that all verdicts are delivered before the SS2 3rd quarter periodic examination.
  2. 2. 2 | T h e I m p e r i a l i s m D e b a t e s SECTION B: STUDENT ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES I. JUDGE The judges will be responsible for hearing out their assigned case and delivering a verdict – guilty or not guilty – at the end. Before the trial, they are expected to study both sides of the case and assist the teacher in preparing the teams debating the topic. During the trial, they are expected to know all the rules and facilitate the flow of the activity. The delivery of their verdict will signal the end of the activity. At this point, judges present their evaluation of the teams and explain the decision in detail. II. LAWYERS There will be two attorneys per side, and together they constitute one law firm. Their primary task is to represent their side and argue their way to victory. For prosecutors, their goal is to prove the guilt of the defendant by presenting as many evidences and compelling witnesses as possible. For the defense, their goal is to protect their client and discredit the case made by the prosecution. As students, lawyers are free to study and simulate the rules of court as closely as possible, particularly when it comes to admitting evidence and raising objections. Lawyers are also expected to assist their clients and witnesses in developing their case. III. CLIENTS Clients are the key historical persons involved in the case. Not only were these figures extremely influential in how events unfolded, but they had relationships and linkages which students can exploit to find additional witnesses. The following are the six historical persons around which the cases and sides are anchored upon. Prosecution Defense Indian Mutiny Charles Canning Mangal Pandey 100 Days Reform Kang Youwei Empress Cixi Satsuma Rebellion Saigo Takamori Emperor Meiji Clients are free to pick the firm to represent them, and together they form a triad. This team will then strategize, build their case, and recruit one or two witnesses to their cause. Clients are expected to testify during the trial. IV. WITNESSES Teams can have another one or two witnesses called to the stand. This is a highly strategic role. Students playing witnesses are free to adopt any relevant historical character of their choice, and can thus be used to surprise the opposing side. Note however, a student can only be a witness once; playing multiple characters for multiple trials will not be allowed. Witnesses, and clients too, will be expected to cosplay (costume-play) their character. While I will not encourage heavy spending for the costumes, I do ask that effort be put into it. What’s more important though is that you get their character right. Hence, research and get in touch with primary sources and accounts in order to get a feel of the character. What is his temper? How did he view the world? What is his opinion about his opponent? Etcetera. Excellent witnesses are key to winning the trial. V. JURY * All students in the audience for the trial are automatically part of the jury. They will keep track of the arguments of both sides and suggest a winner by the end of the session. Their inputs will be kept confidential throughout and the judge will only be given some idea of what the jury says before he or she delivers the final verdict. The jury verdict may or may not be the same decision of the judge, as he or she is free to decide the case in any which way. * This is not a jury in the real sense of the term, but a simulated one. Their decision may not necessarily be the outcome of the trial, unlike in the real world where it is. Nevertheless, the jury will be given a worksheet which they will use in tracking the debate and this sheet will be equivalent to one 20- point quiz upon submission.
  3. 3. 3 | T h e I m p e r i a l i s m D e b a t e s SECTION C: GRADING AND REQUIREMENTS The following rubric will be my guide in grading your individual performance. The credit points on the left total 4.25 or A+ (110%). Exemplary performance in any category can merit you additional credits that can lift your grade to an A++ (125%). Pts JUDGES LAWYERS CLIENTS WITNESSES PRIMARY TASKS 1.0 Delivers a ruling that is well explained, justified, and thorough. Makes their case in a clear, convincing, and thorough manner. Makes their case in a clear, convincing, and thorough manner. Makes their case in a clear, convincing, and thorough manner. 1.0 Facilitates the trial efficiently, sticks to the rules of court, and promotes fairness throughout the trial. Shows knowledge of the rules of court by assisting witnesses in their testimonies, cross examining, and admitting evidence into court. Has mastery of their assigned person, from character and personality to look and habits. Must avoid impeachment at all costs. Has mastery of their chosen person, from character and personality to look and habits. Must avoid impeachment at all costs. SECONDARY TASKS AND REQUIREMENTS 0.5 Studies the rules of court and both sides of the case independently. Will submit a pre-trial essay that summarizes the merits of the case. (Pre-trial test) Studies the rules of court and adheres to them throughout the entire trial. Lawyers will take a test to determine their familiarity with the rules. (Pre-trial test) Studies the character in order to represent him/her faithfully. Writes an Affidavit summarizing their case and gives a copy to the judge and lawyers. (Pre-trial test) Studies the character in order to represent him/her faithfully. Writes an Affidavit summarizing their case and gives a copy to the judge and lawyers. (Pre-trial test) 0.5 Assists the teams in their preparation by ensuring they have credible arguments to make. (To be observed during the pre-trial.) Assists their client and witnesses in preparing for the trial. They can go through the major talking points and arguments together. Works with the lawyers and witnesses in forming a compelling and winnable case. Works with the lawyers and clients in forming a compelling and winnable case. 0.5 Submits to the teacher a hard copy of their verdict on the day of delivery. Will also submit an evaluation of the two teams and a summary of the trial. (Post-trial paper) Submits to the teacher a narrative report of how the trial went. This report encompasses their thoughts and insights from their preparation to their actual performance. (Post- trial paper) Submits to the teacher a narrative report of how the trial went. This report encompasses their thoughts and insights from their preparation to their actual performance. (Post- trial paper) Submits to the teacher a narrative report of how the trial went. This report encompasses their thoughts and insights from their preparation to their actual performance. (Post- trial paper) QUALITY INDICATORS 0.25 Shows confidence, authority, and poise in the conduct of the trial. Shows confidence, authority, and poise in the conduct of the trial. Acts convincingly, reverently, and communicates clearly. Acts convincingly, reverently, and communicates clearly. 0.25 Shows initiative and independence of mind in the preparation days leading up to the trial. Shows initiative, concern for the team, and focus in the preparation days leading up to the trial. Costume is economical yet of impressive quality and creativity. Shows initiative and hard work. Costume is economical yet of impressive quality and creativity. Shows initiative and hard work. 0.25 Submits all paper requirements completely and on time. Submits all paper requirements completely and on time. Submits all paper requirements completely and on time. Submits all paper requirements completely and on time. 4.50 4.20 4.00 3.75 3.50 3.00 2.75 2.50 2.00 1.75 1.5 1.00 < 1.00 A++ A+ A A- B+ B B- C+ C C- D F F2 Your score here will be your project grade for the 3rd quarter and will be equivalent to 40% of your Class Standing.
  4. 4. 4 | T h e I m p e r i a l i s m D e b a t e s SECTION D: SUMMARY OF TOPICS AND CLIENTS Trial 1 THE INDIAN MUTINY OF 1857 The Sepoys are charged with mutiny and insurrection against the British crown, whereas the Sepoys assert that they were fighting for independence. In this trial, the prosecutors are the British as represented by Charles Canning, the Governor General of India at the time. Standing accused is Mangal Pandey, a hero who rose up during the early stages of the rebellion. Therefore, the objective of the prosecution is to charge the Sepoys with mutiny. The defense will have to argue how that is not the case. Trial 2 THE FAILURE OF 100 DAYS OF REFORM The 100 Days of Reform have failed to transform China into a modern state, and there is much blame to be thrown around. Reformists, led by Kang Youwei, charge the conservatives of being beholden to old ways and to their selfish interest. Those from the court of Empress Cixi contest however, that Kang’s ideas were dangerous and he had no awareness of the complexities of imperial rule. Therefore, the objective of the prosecution is to pin the failure of the 100 Days of Reform on the Imperial crown. The defense will have to argue how that is not the case. Trial 3 THE SATSUMA REBELLION The Meiji Restoration brought upon immense change and progress in Japan. Its success is the envy of many other Asian civilizations struggling to adjust to the changes brought about by the West. However, not everyone in Japan is rejoicing. The samurai class, represented by the fiery and influential Saigo Takamori, charge the Meiji Emperor with selling out Japan’s culture and soul to Western ways. Moreover, his government has become corrupt and is therefore illegitimate. Therefore, the objective of the prosecution is to charge the Meiji government with treason against Japan itself. The defense will have to argue how that is not the case. SECTION E: FLOW OF THE TRIAL TIME COMMON PROSECUTION DEFENSE 0:00 All rise to recognize the judge, bailiff reads out the case and introduces the attorneys of the two sides 0:02 Attorney 1 delivers their opening argument 0:05 Attorney 1 delivers their opening argument 0:08 Attorney 1 introduces Prosecution Witness 1 and assists in the testimony 0:12 Attorney 2 cross-examines Prosecution Witness 1 0:15 Attorney 1 introduces Prosecution Witness 2 and assists in the testimony 0:19 Attorney 2 cross-examines Prosecution Witness 2 0:22 Attorney 1 introduces Defense Witness 1 and assists in the testimony 0:26 Attorney 2 cross-examines the Defense Witness 1 0:29 Attorney 1 introduces Defense Witness 2 and assists in the testimony 0:33 Attorney 2 cross-examines the Defense Witness 2 0:36 Judge calls for a final witness from either side At this point, either side presents a third witness if they have one. Both sides have four minutes to trade testimonies and cross examination. 0:40 Attorney 2 delivers their closing statement 0:42 Attorney 2 delivers their closing statement 0:44 Judge calls for a recess
  5. 5. 5 | T h e I m p e r i a l i s m D e b a t e s SECTION F: RULES OF COURT This section is adapted from the Washington DC Mock Trial Program. PART ONE – GENERAL GUIDELINES 1. Each witness is bound by the facts in their given statements. All participants agree that their statements are signed and sworn affidavits (a written declaration made under oath). If a witness is asked a question on cross-examination which is not dealt with in the witness's statement, the witness may invent an answer favorable to that witness's position. Students are encouraged to read other cases, materials, or articles in preparation for the mock trial. 2. If a witness testifies in contradiction of a fact in the witness statement or invents an answer that is likely to affect the outcome of the trial, the opposition must show this on cross-examination through correct use of the affidavit for impeachment. This procedure is spelled out in SPECIAL PROCEDURES. 3. Witnesses are not permitted to use notes during the trial. 4. All participants are expected to display proper courtroom decorum and collegial sportsmanlike conduct. The decisions of the judges with regard to rules, challenges, and all other decisions are final. PART TWO – RULES OF EVIDENCE To assure each side a fair trial, certain rules have been developed to govern the types of evidence that may be introduced, as well as the manner in which evidence may be presented. These rules are called the rules of evidence. The attorneys and the judge are responsible for enforcing these rules. Before the judge can apply a rule of evidence, an attorney must ask the judge to do so. The opposing side may object to this. When an objection is raised, the attorney who asked the question that is being challenged will be asked by the judge why the question was not in violation of the rules of evidence. (NOTE: Objections during the testimony of a witness must be made only by the direct examining and cross-examining attorneys for that witness.) Rule 1 – Leading Questions. A leading question is one that suggests the answer desired by the questioner, usually by stating some facts not previously discussed and then asking the witness to give a yes or no answer. Example: "So, Mr. Smith, you took Ms. Jones to a movie that night, didn't you?" Leading questions may not be asked on direct or redirect examination. Leading questions may be used on cross-examination. Objection: "Objection, Your Honor, counsel is leading the witness." Possible Response: "Your Honor, leading is permissible on cross- examination," or "I'll rephrase the question." For example, the question can be rephrased: "Mr. Smith, where did you go that night? Who did you go with?" (This would not suggest the answer the attorney desires.) Rule 2 – Narration. Narration occurs when the witness provides more information than the question called for. Example: Question - "What did you do when you reached the front door of the house?" Witness - "I opened the door and walked into the kitchen. I was afraid that he was in the house -- you know, he had been acting quite strangely the day before." Witnesses' answers must respond to the questions. A narrative answer is objectionable. Objection: "Objection, Your Honor, the witness is narrating." Response: "Your Honor, the witness is telling us a complete sequence of events." Rule 3 – Relevance. Questions and answers must relate to the subject matter of the case; this is called relevance. Questions or answers that do not relate to the case are irrelevant. Example: (In a traffic accident case) "Mrs. Smith, how many times have you been married?" Irrelevant questions or answers are objectionable. Objection: "Your Honor, this question is irrelevant to this case." Response: "Your Honor, this series of questions will show that Mrs. Smith's first husband was killed in an auto accident, and this fact has increased her mental suffering in this case." Rule 4 – Hearsay. Hearsay is something the witness has heard someone say outside the courtroom. Also, any written statement made outside the courtroom is hearsay.
  6. 6. 6 | T h e I m p e r i a l i s m D e b a t e s Example: "Harry told me that he was going to visit Mr. Brown." Hearsay evidence is objectionable. However, there are two exceptions to the hearsay rule for purposes of the mock trial. If an exception applies, the court will allow hearsay evidence to be introduced. Exception: In a mock trial, hearsay evidence is allowed when the witness is repeating a statement made directly to the witness by one of the witnesses in the case. Hearsay is also allowed if one of the witnesses is repeating a statement made by an individual who is no longer alive. Note that this exception to the hearsay rule does not extend to witness testimony about what another person heard a witness say. This is "double hearsay." Example: Mary, the plaintiff, told me that Harry, the defendant was drunk the night of the accident. Objection: "Objection, Your Honor, this is double hearsay." Response: "Your Honor, since Harry is the defendant, the witness can testify to a statement he heard Harry make." Rule 5 – Firsthand Knowledge. Witnesses must have directly seen, heard, or experienced whatever it is they are testifying about. Example: "I know Harry well enough to know that two beers usually make him drunk, so I'm sure he was drunk that night, too." A lack of firsthand knowledge is objectionable. Objection: "Your Honor, the witness has no firsthand knowledge of Harry's condition that night." Response: "The witness is just generally describing her usual experience with Harry." Rule 6 – Opinions. Unless a witness is qualified as an expert in the appropriate field, such as medicine or ballistics, the witness may not give an opinion about matters relating to that field. Example: (Said by a witness who is not a doctor) "The doctor put my cast on wrong. That's why I have a limp now." Opinions are objectionable unless given by an expert qualified in the appropriate field. As an exception to this rule, a lay witness may give an opinion based on common experience. Objection: "Objection, Your Honor, the witness is giving an opinion." Response: "Your Honor, the witness may answer the question because ordinary persons can judge whether a cast was put on correctly." Rule 7 – Opinions on the Ultimate Issue. Witnesses, including experts, cannot give opinions on the ultimate issue of the case: the guilt or innocence of the defendant or the liability of the parties. These are matters for the trier of fact to decide. Example: "I believe that Mr. Smith was negligent in driving too fast in this case." Opinions on the ultimate issue in a case are objectionable. Objection: "Your Honor, the witness is giving an opinion on the ultimate issue -- the negligence of Mr. Smith." Response: "The witness is commenting that the driver was speeding. This is not the ultimate issue in this case." PART THREE – SPECIAL PROCEDURES Procedure 1 - Introduction of Documents or Physical Evidence. Sometimes the parties wish to offer as evidence letters, affidavits, contracts, or other documents, or even physical evidence such as a murder weapon, broken consumer goods, etc. Special procedures must be followed before these items can be used in trial. Step 1: Introducing the Item for Identification a. An attorney says to the judge, "Your Honor, I wish to have this (letter, document, item) marked for identification as (Plaintiff's Exhibit A, Defense Exhibit A, etc.)." b. The attorney takes the item to the clerk, who marks it appropriately. c. The attorney shows the item to the opposing counsel. d. The attorney shows the item to the witness and says, "Do you recognize this item marked as Plaintiff's Exhibit A?" Witness: "Yes." Attorney: "Can you please identify this item?" Witness: "This is a letter I wrote to John Doe on September 1." (Or witness gives other appropriate identification.) e. The attorney may then proceed to ask the witness questions about the document or item. Step 2. Moving the Document or Item into Evidence. a. If the attorney wishes the judge or jury to consider the document or item itself as part of the evidence and not just as testimony about it, the attorney must ask to move the item into evidence at the end of the witness examination. The attorney proceeds as follows: b. The attorney says, "Your Honor, I offer this (document/item) into evidence as Plaintiff's Exhibit A, and ask that the court so admit it." c. Opposing counsel may look at the evidence and make objections at this time. d. The judge rules on whether the item may be admitted into evidence.
  7. 7. 7 | T h e I m p e r i a l i s m D e b a t e s Procedure 2 – Impeachment. On cross-examination, an attorney wants to show that the witness should not be believed. This is best accomplished through a process called "impeachment," which may use one of the following tactics: 1. asking questions about prior conduct of the witness that makes the witness' truthfulness doubtful (e.g., "Isn't it true that you once lost a job because you falsified expense reports?"); 2. asking about evidence of certain types of criminal convictions (e.g., "You were convicted of shoplifting, weren't you?"); or 3. showing that the witness has contradicted a prior statement, particularly the Affidavit. In order to impeach the witness by comparing information in the affidavit to the witness' testimony, attorneys should use this procedure: Step 1: Repeat the statement the witness made on direct or cross- examination that contradicts the affidavit. Example: "Now, Mrs. Burke, on direct examination you testified that you were out of town on the night in question, didn't you?" (Witness responds, "Yes.") Step 2: Introduce the affidavit for identification, using the procedure on admitting evidence into court. Step 3: Ask the witness to read from his or her affidavit the part that contradicts the statement made on direct examination. Example: "All right, Mrs. Burke,will you read paragraph three?" (Witness reads, "Harry and I decided to stay in town and go to the theater.") Step 4: Dramatize the conflict in the statements. (Remember, the point of this line of questioning is to demonstrate the contradiction in the statements, not to determine whether Mrs. Burke was in town or out of town.) Example: "So, Mrs. Burke, you testified that you were out of town on the night in question, didn't you?" "Yes." "Yet, in your affidavit you said you were in town, didn't you?" "Yes." Procedure 3 – Qualifying an Expert. Only a witness who is qualified as an expert may give an opinion as to scientific, technical, or other specialized knowledge in the area of his/her expertise. (Note: A lay witness may give an opinion about something related to one's common experience (see Rule 6).) Experts cannot give opinions on the ultimate issue of the case. Before an expert gives his/her expert opinion on a matter, the lawyer must first qualify the expert. The lawyer asks the expert to describe factors such as schooling, professional training, work experience and books he/she has written that make a person an expert regarding a particular field. SECTION G: CREDIT AND EXTRA CREDIT Students also have several opportunities to earn extra credit in addition to the grading scale on Section C. 1. MODEL, OUTSTANDING, AND BEST INDIVIDUAL HONORS. The following honors are up for grabs, and each one corresponds to a +0.50 in their final grade for the activity:  MODEL JUDGE (only one for all sections)  OUTSTANDING LAWYER (one per class)  OUTSTANDING WITNESS (two per class)  BEST CLIENT (this is per historical figure, ie. BEST MANGAL PANDEY, BEST CHARLES CANNING, etc.) These awards are determined through peer ratings and votes. 2. VICTORY. Winners in the mock trials will receive an incredible +1.00 advantage in the periodic exam for the quarter. 3. VOLUNTEER FOR CLERK AND BAILIFF. For each trial, the class will need two people to volunteer for clerk and bailiff. The clerk is in charge of labelling the evidences and keeping a record of key events and decisions in the trial. The bailiff is in charge of administering the oath and escorting out troublesome individuals. Judges and lawyers are not allowed to volunteer. The rest however can, though they cannot serve as clerk and bailiffs in their own trials for obvious reasons. 4. JURY DUTY. All non-debating students in the class will automatically serve as jury. They will accomplish a simple form that keeps track of arguments and points made. This form will be counted as one quiz; each student is expected to have accomplished two sheets by the end of the trials.

×