UNIT 2: Song of Myself - Identity, Conformity, and Society

ESSENTIAL QUESTIONS FOR THIS UNIT:

• What is the role of the individual in society?
• What is good for the community? What are implications for individuals?
• Why do people conform? Why do others choose not to conform? What happens as a result of these choices?
• Who are the “witches” today, and how can you help them?

Thirty-Seven Who Saw Murder Didn’t Call the Police

New York Times                   Martin Gansberg                         March 27, 1964

For more than half an hour 38 respectable, law-abiding citizens in Queens watched a killer stalk and stab a woman in three separate attacks in Kew Gardens.

Twice their chatter and the sudden glow of their bedroom lights interrupted him and frightened him off. Each time he returned, sought her out, and stabbed her again. Not one person telephoned the police during the assault; one witness called after the woman was dead.

That was two weeks ago today.

Still shocked is Assistant Chief Inspector Frederick M. Lussen, in charge of the borough's detectives and a veteran of 25 years of homicide investigations. He can give a matter-of-fact recitation on many murders. But the Kew Gardens slaying baffles him--not because it is a murder, but because the "good people" failed to call the police.

"As we have reconstructed the crime," he said, "the assailant had three chances to kill this woman during a 35-minute period. He returned twice to complete the job. If we had been called when he first attacked, the woman might not be dead now."

This is what the police say happened at 3:20 A.M. in the staid, middle-class, tree-lined Austin Street area:

Twenty-eight-year-old Catherine Genovese, who was called Kitty by almost everyone in the neighborhood, was returning home from her job as manager of a bar in Hollis. She parked her red Fiat in a lot adjacent to the Kew Gardens Long Island Railroad Station, facing Mowbray Place. Like many residents of the neighborhood, she had parked there day after day since her arrival from Connecticut a year ago, although the railroad frowns on the practice.

She turned off the lights of her car, locked the door, and started to walk the 100 feet to the entrance of her apartment at 82-70 Austin Street, which is in a Tudor building, with stores in the first floor and apartments on the second.

The entrance to the apartment is in the rear of the building because the front is rented to retail stores. At night the quiet neighborhood is shrouded in the slumbering darkness that marks most residential areas.

Miss Genovese noticed a man at the far end of the lot, near a seven-story apartment house at 82-40 Austin Street. She halted. Then, nervously, she headed up Austin Street toward  Lefferts Boulevard, where there is a call box to the 102nd Police Precinct in nearby Richmond Hill.

She got as far as a street light in front of a bookstore before the man grabbed her. She screamed. Lights went on in the 10-story apartment house at 82-67 Austin Street, which faces the bookstore. Windows slid open and voices punctuated the early-morning stillness.

Miss Genovese screamed: "Oh, my God, he stabbed me! Please help me! Please help me!"

From one of the upper windows in the apartment house, a man called down: "Let that girl alone!"

The assailant looked up at him, shrugged, and walked down Austin Street toward a white sedan parked a short distance away. Miss Genovese struggled to her feet.

Lights went out. The killer returned to Miss Genovese, now trying to make her way around the side of the building by the parking lot to get to her apartment. The assailant stabbed her again.

"I'm dying!" she shrieked. "I'm dying!"

Windows were opened again, and lights went on in many apartments. The assailant got into his car and drove away. Miss Genovese staggered to her feet. A city bus, 0-10, the Lefferts Boulevard line to Kennedy International Airport, passed. It was 3:35 A.M.

The assailant returned. By then, Miss Genovese had crawled to the back of the building, where the freshly painted brown doors to the apartment house held out hope for safety. The killer tried the first door; she wasn't there. At the second door, 82-62 Austin Street, he saw her slumped on the floor at the foot of the stairs. He stabbed her a third time--fatally.

It was 3:50 by the time the police received their first call, from a man who was a neighbor of Miss Genovese. In two minutes they were at the scene. The neighbor, a 70-year-old woman, and another woman were the only persons on the street. Nobody else came forward.

The man explained that he had called the police after much deliberation. He had phoned a friend in Nassau County for advice and then he had crossed the roof of the building to the apartment of the elderly woman to get her to make the call.

"I didn't want to get involved," he sheepishly told police.

Six days later, the police arrested Winston Moseley, a 29-year-old business machine operator, and charged him with homicide. Moseley had no previous record. He is married, has two children and owns a home at 133-19 Sutter Avenue, South Ozone Park, Queens. On Wednesday, a court committed him to Kings County Hospital for psychiatric observation.

When questioned by the police, Moseley also said he had slain Mrs. Annie May Johnson, 24, of 146-12 133d Avenue, Jamaica, on Feb. 29 and Barbara Kralik, 15, of 174-17 140th Avenue, Springfield Gardens, last July. In the Kralik case, the police are holding Alvin L. Mitchell, who is said to have confessed to that slaying.

The police stressed how simple it would have been to have gotten in touch with them. "A phone call," said one of the detectives, "would have done it." The police may be reached by dialing "0" for operator or SPring 7-3100.

Today witnesses from the neighborhood, which is made up of one-family homes in the $35,000 to $60,000  range with the exception of the two  apartment houses near  the railroad  station, find it difficult to explain why  they didn't call the police.

A housewife, knowingly if quite casually, said, "We thought it was a lovers' quarrel." A husband and wife both said, "Frankly, we were afraid." They seemed aware of the fact that events might have been different. A distraught woman, wiping her hands in her apron, said, "I didn't want my husband to get involved."

One couple, now willing to talk about that night, said they heard the first screams. The husband looked thoughtfully at the bookstore where the killer first grabbed Miss Genovese.

"We went to the window to see what was happening," he said, "but the light from our bedroom made it difficult to see the street." The wife, still apprehensive, added: "I put out the light and we were able to see better."

Asked why they hadn't called the police, she shrugged and replied: "I don't know."

A man peeked out from a slight opening in the doorway to his apartment and rattled off an account of the killer's second attack. Why hadn't he called the police at the time? "I was tired," he said without emotion. "I went back to bed."

It was 4:25 A.M. when the ambulance arrived to take the body of Miss Genovese. It drove off. "Then," a solemn police detective said, "the people came out."
 

The above reported events are true and took place on March 14, 1964. The brutal murder of Kitty Genovese and the disturbing lack of action by her neighbors became emblematic in what many perceived as an evolving culture of violence and apathy in the United States. In fact, social scientists still debate the causes of what is now known as "the Genovese Syndrome." 

Take time to carefully consider each question being asked below and respond in well-developed, complete sentences.

DEFINITIONS:

• Social Norm:         Expectations about what behavior, thoughts, or feelings are appropriate within a given group

within a given context.

• Conformity:         Yielding to, or "going along with," a perceived social norm.

1. Is conformity a good thing, or a bad thing? Why?

2. List 10 social norms, and if they are specific to a certain group or context, describe it. Feel free to ask others or consult the internet to help you come up with your list of social norms.

3. For norms listed above, how many of them do you think are positive, negative, or neutral?

Positive _______        Negative _______        Neutral _________

4. What determines whether a particular norm is good or bad?

5. Can you think of five social norms that you are glad they exist? Describe them.

6. What would social life be like if there were no social norms?

7. In your opinion, why do people conform?

SOURCE: Adapted from Professor Joe Mueller’s psychology handout

But we don't have to be. Dacher Keltner and Jason Marsh explain why we sometimes shackle our moral instincts, and how we can set them free.

Excerpt taken from: The Greater Good. Volume 3, Issue 2: Fall/Winter 2006-2007.

http://greatergood.berkeley.edu/greatergood/archive/2006fallwinter/keltnermarsh.html

For more than 40 years, Peggy Kirihara has felt guilty about Stewart.

Peggy liked Stewart. They went to high school together. Their fathers were friends, both farmers in California's Central Valley, and Peggy would always say hi when she passed Stewart in the hall.

Yet every day when Stewart boarded their school bus, a couple of boys would tease him mercilessly. And every day, Peggy would just sit in her seat, silent.

"I was dying inside for him," she said. "There were enough of us on the bus who were feeling awful "we could have done something. But none of us said anything."

Peggy still can't explain why she didn't stick up for Stewart. She had known his tormentors since they were all little kids, and she didn't find them threatening. She thinks if she had spoken up on his behalf, other kids might have chimed in to make the teasing stop.

But perhaps most surprising, and distressing, to Peggy is that she considers herself an assertive and moral person, yet those convictions aren't backed up by her conduct on the bus.

"I think I would say something now, but I don't know for sure, she said. Maybe if I saw someone being beaten up and killed, I'd just stand there. That still worries me." Many of us share Peggy's concern.

We've all found ourselves in similar situations: the times we've seen someone harassed on the street and didn't intervene; when we've driven past a car stranded by the side of the road, assuming another driver would pull over to help; even when we've noticed litter on the sidewalk and left it for someone else to pick up. We witness a problem, consider some kind of positive action, then respond by doing... nothing. Something holds us back. We remain bystanders.

Why don't we help in these situations? Why do we sometimes put our moral instincts in shackles? These are questions that haunt all of us, and they apply well beyond the fleeting scenarios described above. Every day we serve as bystanders to the world around us not just to people in need on the street but to larger social, political, and environmental problems that concern us, but which we feel powerless to address on our own. Indeed, the bystander phenomenon pervades the history of the past century.

"The bystander is a modern archetype, from the Holocaust to the genocide in Rwanda to the current environmental crisis," says Charles Garfield, a clinical professor of psychology at the University of California, San Francisco, School of Medicine who is writing a book about the psychological differences between bystanders and people who display moral courage.

"Why", asked Garfield, "do some people respond to these crises while others don't?"

In the shadow of these crises, researchers have spent the past few decades trying to answer Garfield's question. Their findings reveal a valuable story about human nature: Often, only subtle differences separate the bystanders from the morally courageous people of the world. Most of us, it seems, have the potential to fall into either category. It is the slight, seemingly insignificant details in a situation that can push us one way or the other.

Researchers have identified some of the invisible forces that restrain us from acting on our own moral instincts while also suggesting how we might fight back against these unseen inhibitors of altruism. Taken together, these results offer a scientific understanding for what spurs us to everyday altruism and lifetimes of activism, and what induces us to remain bystanders.

Altruistic Inertia

Among the most infamous bystanders are 38 people in Queens, New York, who in 1964 witnessed the murder of one of their neighbors, a young woman named Kitty Genovese.

A serial killer attacked and stabbed Genovese late one night outside her apartment house, and these 38 neighbors later admitted to hearing her screams; at least three said they saw part of the attack take place. Yet no one intervened.

While the Genovese murder shocked the American public, it also moved several social psychologists to try to understand the behavior of people like Genovese’s neighbors.

One of those psychologists was John Darley, who was living in New York at the time. Ten days after the Genovese murder, Darley had lunch with another psychologist, Bibb Latané, and they discussed the incident.

"The newspaper explanations were focusing on the appalling personalities of those who saw the murder but didn't intervene, saying they had been dehumanized by living in an urban environment," said Darley, now a professor at Princeton University. "We wanted to see if we could explain the incident by drawing on the social psychological principles that we knew."

A main goal of their research was to determine whether the presence of other people inhibits someone from intervening in an emergency, as had seemed to be the case in the Genovese murder. In one of their studies, college students sat in a cubicle and were instructed to talk with fellow students through an intercom. They were told that they would be speaking with one, two, or five other students, and only one person could use the intercom at a time.

There was actually only one other person in the study a confederate (someone working with the researchers). Early in the study, the confederate mentioned that he sometimes suffered from seizures. The next time he spoke, he became increasingly loud and incoherent; he pretended to choke and gasp. Before falling silent, he stammered:

If someone could help me out it would it would er er s-s-sure be sure be good... because er there er er a cause I er I uh I 've got a a one of the er sei-er-er things coming on and and and I could really er use some help... I'm gonna die er er I'm gonna die er help er er seizure er...

Eighty-five percent of the participants who were in the two-person situation, and hence believed they were the only witness to the victim’s seizure, left their cubicles to help. In contrast, only 62 percent of the participants who were in the three-person situation and 31 percent of the participants in the six-person situation tried to help.

Darley and Latané attributed their results to a diffusion of responsibility: When study participants thought there were other witnesses to the emergency, they felt less personal responsibility to intervene. Similarly, the witnesses of the Kitty Genovese murder may have seen other apartment lights go on, or seen each other in the windows, and assumed someone else would help. The end result is altruistic inertia. Other researchers have also suggested the effects of a "confusion of responsibility," where bystanders fail to help someone in distress because they don't want to be mistaken for the cause of that distress.

…

The passive bystanders in this study succumbed to what's known as "pluralistic ignorance"—the tendency to mistake one another's calm demeanor as a sign that no emergency is actually taking place. There are strong social norms that reinforce pluralistic ignorance. It is somewhat embarrassing, after all, to be the one who loses his cool when no danger actually exists. Such an effect was likely acting on the people who witnessed the Kitty Genovese incident; indeed, many said they didn't realize what was going on beneath their windows and assumed it was a lover's quarrel. That interpretation was reinforced by the fact that no one else was responding, either.

A few years later, Darley ran a study with psychologist Daniel Batson that had seminary students at Princeton walk across campus to give a talk. Along the way, the students passed a study confederate, slumped over and groaning in a passage- way. Their response depended largely on a single variable: whether or not they were late. Only 10 percent of the students stopped to help when they were in a hurry; more than six times as many helped when they had plenty of time before their talk.

Lateness, the presence of other people—these are some of the factors that can turn us all into bystanders in an emergency. Yet another important factor is the characteristics of the victim. Research has shown that people are more likely to help those they perceive to be similar to them, including others from their own racial or ethnic groups. In general, women tend to receive more help than men. But this varies according to appearance: More attractive and femininely dressed women tend to receive more help from passersby, perhaps because they fit the gender stereotype of the vulnerable female.

We don't like to discover that our propensity for altruism can depend on prejudice or the details of a particular situation—details that seem beyond our control. But these scientific findings force us to consider how we'd perform under pressure; they reveal that Kitty Genovese's neighbors might have been just like us. Even more frightening, it becomes easier to understand how good people in Rwanda or Nazi Germany remained silent against the horrors around them. Afraid, confused, coerced, or willfully unaware, they could convince themselves that it wasn't their responsibility to intervene.

But still, some did assume this responsibility, and this is the other half of the bystander story. Some researchers refer to the "active bystander," that person who witnesses an emergency, recognizes it as such, and takes it upon herself to do something about it.

Who are these people? Are they inspired to action because they receive strong cues within a situation, indicating It's an emergency. Or is there a particular set of characteristics—a personality type—that makes some people more likely to be active bystanders while others remain passive?

Why people help

…

Research has been conducted by sociologist Samuel Oliner. Oliner is a Holocaust survivor whose work has been inspired by the people who helped him escape the Nazis. With his wife Pearl, a professor of education, he conducted an extensive study into the altruistic personality, interviewing more than 400 people who rescued Jews during the Holocaust, as well as more than 100 non-rescuers and Holocaust survivors alike. In their book The Altruistic Personality, the Oliners explain that rescuers shared some deep personality traits, which they described as their capacity for extensive relationships—their stronger sense of attachment to others and their feelings of responsibility for the welfare of others. They also found that these tendencies had been instilled in many rescuers from the time they were young children, often stemming from parents who displayed more tolerance, care, and empathy toward their children and toward people different from themselves.

"I would claim there is a predisposition in some people to help whenever the opportunity arises," said Oliner, who contrasts this group to bystanders. "A bystander is less concerned with the outside world, beyond his own immediate community. A bystander might be less tolerant of differences, thinking 'Why should I get involved? These are not my people. Maybe they deserve it?' They don't see helping as a choice. But rescuers see tragedy and feel no choice but to get involved. How could they stand by and let another person perish?"

Kristen Monroe, a political scientist at the University of California, Irvine, has reached a similar conclusion from her own set of interviews with various kinds of altruists. In her book The Heart of Altruism, he writes of the "altruistic perspective," a common perception among altruists "that they are strongly linked to others through a shared humanity."

But Monroe cautions that differences are often not so clear cut between bystanders, perpetrators, and altruists.

"We know that perpetrators can be rescuers and some rescuers I've interviewed have killed people," she said. "It's hard to see someone as one or the other because they cross categories. Academics like to think in categories. But the truth is that it's not so easy."

Indeed, much of the bystander research suggests that one’s personality only determines so much. To offer the right kind of help, one also needs the relevant skills or knowledge demanded by a particular situation.

As an example, John Darley referred to his study in which smoke was pumped into a room to see whether people would react to that sign of danger. One of the participants in this study had been in the Navy, where his ship had once caught on fire. So when this man saw the smoke, said Darley, He got the hell out and did something, because of his past experiences."

There's an encouraging implication of these findings: If given the proper tools and primed to respond positively in a crisis, most of us have the ability to transcend our identities as bystanders.

"I think that altruism, caring, social responsibility is not only doable, It's teachable," said Oliner.

And in recent years, there have been many efforts to translate research like Oliner's into programs that encourage more people to avoid the traps of becoming a bystander.

Dacher Keltner, Ph.D., and Jason Marsh are the co-editors of Greater Good.

What are your reactions to this article? Add your initial response below:

Once you’ve finished reading and responding to the Kitty Genovese article and “We Are All Bystanders,” please take the short reading quiz found HERE.

Before we discuss why people act differently in groups, we need to acknowledge the groups to which we belong and witness who else in the room also belongs to those groups. Look through the list below. Which groups do you belong to? Ms. Ward will ask students to stand if they feel comfortable acknowledging their membership with particular groups.  We will also connect with our peers who also belong to these groups.

As we complete this activity, reflect on which groups have privilege or power over others.

I am…

______        a member of a sports team.

______        a member of an club or religious organization.

______        someone who can play a musical instrument.

______        someone who has traveled to another country.

______        someone who has a large circle of friends.

______        someone who has siblings.

______        someone who works an after-school or weekend job.

______        someone who drives my own car.

______        someone who lives with a family pet.

______        someone who lives with both of my biological parents.

______        someone who has moved homes more than twice.

______        someone who lives in a home that my parents or guardian own.

______        someone who has felt insecure about the way I look.

______        someone who has lost a loved one or family member.

______        someone who lives with a parent or guardian that works more than one job.

______        someone who lives with at least one parent who has graduated college with an advanced degree (masters or

doctorate).

______        someone who lives with at least one parent who has graduated college with a bachelor’s degree.

______        someone who has felt silenced.

______        someone who has been teased because of my clothing.

______        someone who has felt discrimination because of the color of my skin.

______        someone who has felt discrimination because of a physical or medical condition.

______        someone who has felt discrimination because of my perceived sexuality or gender.

______        someone who has felt discrimination because of my religion and/or beliefs.

______        someone who has felt isolated at times.

REFLECTION:

In terms of our discussion, which “group” surprised you the most?

Why do people act differently in a group than as individuals?

Reflect on your reading of the Kitty Genovese story and the article titled “We Are All Bystanders.”

SIGNIFICANT POINTS: As a small group, discuss what you think are the most important points made about how

people act in a group.  What did you learn about the bystander effect?  List the most compelling ideas from the two articles below, making sure to note which article the idea comes from.

1.             

2.             

3.             

CONNECTIONS:                 Now make some connections to books, historical events, and your own life. How do some

of the ideas presented in the articles connect with what you already know?

1.

2.             

3.             

4.             

THEME:                             What is the comment about humanity that connects our reading of the two articles?  What

is a theme statement for how people act in a group versus alone.

Discussion Guidelines:

 Your job is to participate substantively in today's discussion. How do you do that?

1. INDIVIDUAL PREPARATION: Be ready to discuss: did you prepare by finishing your group's assignment reflecting on your reading and glossing your articles? Use ideas from your small group discussion during the large class discussion to further assist you.
2. USE OF EVIDENCE: Use direct quotations, paraphrases, and specific evidence from the texts to support your comments.
3. MOVE DISCUSSION FORWARD: Discussion involves challenging fellow students, asking others to clarify their assertions, and asking questions of your fellow students - this enriches the discussion and illustrates your knowledge of the material as well. Do not simply restate what others before you have already said.
4. RESPONSE AND REFLECTION NOTES: Take notes during the discussion to use in responding to elements with which you agree and/or disagree.

Your participation today is worth 20 points.

Response and Reflection Notes:         

Discussion Topic- Do people act differently in a group than as individuals? Why?

Take note on the points and ideas that others bring up. What questions do you have about the ideas discussed? Keep track of who makes points you agree and disagree with so that you can respond directly to that person.

ESSENTIAL QUESTIONS FOR THIS UNIT:

• What is the role of the individual in society?
• What is good for the community? What are implications for individuals?
• Why do people conform? Why do others choose not to conform? What happens as a result of these choices?
• Who are the “witches” today, and how can you help them?

Reading Schedule:

        Act 1                Pages 3-48                Have read for Monday, November 16th

        Act 2                Pages 49-81                Have read for Wednesday, November 18th

        Act 3                Pages 83 - 120                Have read for Friday, November 20th

        Act 4                Pages 121 - 152                Have read for Monday, November 23rd

Objective Reading Test: Tuesday, December 1st

Historical Connections:

What do you believe?

Directions:         Read the following statements and write down whether you agree or disagree and explain why.

1. Confessing to a crime you didn’t commit in order to avoid punishment is wise.

2. The difference between right and wrong is clear.

3. It is better to die for what you believe in rather than to lie to save your life.

4. That which doesn’t destroy us only makes us stronger.

5. It’s more difficult to forgive yourself if the person you have hurt doesn’t forgive you.

6. Courage means doing something even though it can be difficult and fearsome.

7. A person is innocent until proven guilty.

8. Justice is best determined in a court of law.  

9. There are spirits, both good and evil, in the world that are unexplainable.

Source: Adapted from MrJeffery.com

Historical Notes:

Look up the historical significance and etymology of

• Hysteria

• Witch hunt

• Scapegoat

Literary Notes:

How Puritanical Are You?

Directions: For each statement, decide to what degree you personally agree or disagree. We will share our opinions and reasons in a respectful and open manner.

1                        2                            3                        4                        5

Strongly Disagree               Disagree                      Undecided                         Agree                  Strongly Agree

_____ 1. I welcome suffering only for the greatest good, be it your highest ideal or your God.

_____ 2. I am completely productive, as much as possible, all of the time.

_____ 3. I do everything with all of my effort, always.

_____ 4. I always live as if the present hour is my last.

_____ 5. I am most always looking for ways to be generous and give to others.

_____ 6. I have never and will never act or speak out of revenge.

_____ 7. I am extremely slow to anger and resolve to be as rational as possible most of the

_____ 8. I am very good at only opening my mouth to speak when I’m sure that the result of my

            speaking will be positive.

_____ 9. I eat only what I know is good for me and only the most minimal amount necessary.

_____ 10. I never act in a way that I would hate to see someone else act.

_____ 11. If I see some admirable quality in someone else, I try to emulate it.

_____ 12. If a tragedy occurs in my life, larger or small, I focus on what good may come from it

     and what I can learn from it.

The Puritan Moral Code

During the early 17th century (1600’s), the church was the center of life in New England. A great majority of the people living in Massachusetts were Puritans—colonists who left England searching for religious purity and tolerance. However, the Puritan code was far from tolerant.

What follows is a brief summary of some of the standards that the Puritans were expected to

1.         It was against the law not to go to church.

Men and women had to sit on opposite sides of the church when service was in session.

3.         People were expected to work hard and they were not allowed to express their own

Individualism was frowned upon. You had to conform to society’s norms or you would be

shunned.

The way Puritans dressed (in that dark and somber outfit) was controlled by the church.

6.         Puritans believed that all sins—even the most ‘minor’ to us nowadays—should be punished. Ex: If

you were having a good time (laughing or enjoying art, etc.) you were probably happy and it was

considered a sin.

7.         All songs had to have a moral lesson in them, or else they were sinful.

8.         They believed that God would punish sinful behavior.

9.         If a friend or neighbor suffered a misfortune (like a sick child or a bad farming year), Puritans

believed it was God’s will and they would not help.

10.         Puritans were true believers of both God and the Devil. They believed that all humans were in a

constant struggle between the powers of good and evil.

11.         They believed that Satan would select the ‘weakest’ individuals (women, children, and the elderly)

to carry out his evil work.

Those who were believed to follow Satan were automatically assumed to be witches and it was a

crime punishable by death.

Source: Adapted from S. Chaga and R. Feely

Understanding Motivation in Act 1

Crafting Questions:

Read the story below.

“The Oruncle and the Cravarian”

The oruncle was tubor and salinous but, alas, a cravarian mooked darfingly toward the oruncle, as he nerked and zombled along.

“Zeem!” shouted the dinglor cravarian, who cambled through the kirn to porrek at the narfed oruncle.

“Ah, Ha!” fozed the oruncle. “Menzy is neg.”

“Ha, Ah,” kinkled the cravarian as he vargolgoed and then fell into a vazam.

Questions:

1. How did the cravarian mook?
2. What did the cravarian shout?
3. What is Menzy?
4. What was the cravarian doing as he kinkled?
5. What is a vazam?

What does this exercise help us understand about questions? What makes a good discussion question?

Crafting your own discussion questions:

Small Group Discussions:

In your small groups, share your discussion questions for each act. Decide upon three questions that your group would like to further explore. Write those three questions down in the space below.  As your group discusses these questions, take notes.  In particular, be sure to jot down any evidence from the text that is brought into your discussion.  Each of your responses should be a minimum of four sentences.

Final Small Group Discussion

WRITE ALL ANSWERS ON A SEPARATE PIECE OF LOOSELEAF PAPER.

Directions:         You have approximately 30 minutes with your group to answer FIVE of the questions

below. Your answers will be written on a separate piece of paper and must be in complete

sentences and must be lengthy enough to answer the question fully. Use details, character

names, quotes, and evidence to support your answers. EVERYONE must write.

After the 30 minutes is up, you must be prepared to discuss the questions you

answered. Remember: you only need to complete FIVE.

1. What is the state of the community at the beginning of the play, as the play progresses, and at the end of the play? How are insiders and outsiders defined during these times?
2. What elements existed or were created within the community to allow Abigail and the other girls to gain power?
3. What role did fear play in creating authority? How did some people choose to resist authority? Who are they and what form did their resistance take?
4. John and Abigail's affair serves as a catalyst for the events of the play, yet historically no such affair ever took place. Why did Arthur Miller use his dramatic license to invent this relationship?
5. Give an example from The Crucible that demonstrates that certainty can be dangerous.
6. Judge Danforth says "a person is either with this court or he must be counted against it, there be no road between" (Act 3, Scene 1). What happens to a society where there is no "road between"?
7. At the end of the play, John Hale has changed his opinion of the trials. What brings about this change? How do you feel about his change of heart? Explain.
8. John Proctor comes very close to admitting guilt so that he may live, and it's at this moment that Reverend Parris tells him that his refusal to confess is vanity. John could lie, and confess, and stay alive for his wife and children. Do you agree with Parris?
9. How is it different reading the play, versus attending a performance on stage? How do Miller's comments within the text of the play inform the reading of it?
10. Discuss the title of the play. Why did Miller call it The Crucible?

Source: Adapted from S. Chaga and R. Feely

Vocabulary: ACT 1

Directions:  Add three synonyms and write an original sentence that uses the vocabulary word in the correct context for the following words from Act One of The Crucible by Arthur Miller.

Vocabulary: ACT 2

Directions:  Add three synonyms and write an original sentence that uses the vocabulary word in the correct context for the following words from Act One of The Crucible by Arthur Miller.

Vocabulary: ACT 3

Vocabulary: ACT 4

Directions:  Add three synonyms and write an original sentence that uses the vocabulary word in the correct context for the following words from Act One of The Crucible by Arthur Miller.

Character Analysis

Let’s take a closer look at the main characters of this play. What motivates each character? How do the behaviors of a few impact so many people? We’ll split into teams. Each team to be in charge of presenting their selected character to the class by crafting a detailed and creative visual aid that helps explain the assigned character.  

Each group’s visual aid must include:

• a creative visual depiction of the character (drawing, word art, 3-dimensional diorama, etc.),
• four significant quotations from the character with correct MLA parenthetical citation,
• an explanation of 5-7 major character traits/attributes/motivations, and
• a brief retelling of 5-7 major actions of the character (plot).

Each group will present their character to the class.  The following rubric will be used to grade

your character analysis:

10=Exceptional     9=Well Done         8=Good         7=Average         6=Basic     5=Needs Improvement

 Performing a scene

Assignment:

Your assignment is to work with your group to interpret, rehearse, and perform a scene from The Crucible. Your group will analyzes the characters, their motivations, and actions in order to create a scene.

Step 1:         Read your selected scene several times to become familiar with it and to clarify

meaning.

Step 2:         Confirm who will play which roles. Each group member should play some speaking

role.

Step 3:         Decide how you are going to perform your scene.  Decide the time period: are you

using the original text, or are you rewriting the text to fit into another time

period/setting?

Step 4:         Write up your group’s performance plan, which will include a basic description of

the scene and when it is set, costume drawing/description for each character, description/drawing of set, and stage directions for your actors. This is called the Performance Record (see below).

Step 5.         Begin the rehearsal process—

a.         Say the lines naturally and clearly, with emphasis.

b.         Move with purpose. Use appropriate hand gestures and facial expressions.

Look at and interact with the other actors. Avoid turning your back to the audience.

c.         Use props, costume pieces, and background music.

d.         Pay attention to your distance from one another, your position on stage, the

pace of your speech, and the volume of your voice.

e.        Memorize your assigned lines.

Step 6:         Remember, the goal is to perform an interpretation of a scene to which everyone

in the group contributes. The test of the group’s success will be how well you work

together to create a polished performance.

Step 7:         Possibly ask another group to watch your dress rehearsal and provide feedback on

how you might improve your performance.

Step 8:         Perform your scene on Friday, December 4th.

Step 9:         After your performance, complete your self assessment.

Performance Record 

Company Members:

Play Title:

Act:                         Scene:                        Page(s):

After you have selected your scene as an acting company, answer the following questions together.

Scene Basics:

What happens in your scene? Outline the basic events.

What do you think are the key purposes of your scene? That is, why do you think this scene is included in the play? In what way(s) is it important to the story? (Keep these purposes in mind as you make decisions about blocking and characterization.)

What are your reactions to this scene?

Pre-writing/Performing Analysis:

Describe the characters from your scene. What are his/her personality, attitude, and emotions?

Describe some of your gestures, movements, voice, and facial expressions that you plan on using to capture some of what you identified for each character in the scene.

If you had no limitations on cost or time, describe the costumes, props and sets you might use for your scene. Please remember, though, that it is a stage production, not a film.

Describe the process of rehearsing and performing. What do you like/not like? Why? How does your group work together?

Costume Drawing/Description Character:

Either draw or provide a written description of the costume each actor/character will wear for your performance.  Provide a written explanation of why each character is wearing this particular costume.

Set Description:

How will you stage your performance? Draw or describe a diagram of the set (you can use the projector to show an image of your setting).  How will you use lighting and sound?

List of props:

Write an introduction for the scene:

You will present this introduction before your acting company performs. In addition, your teacher may expect you to be prepared to fill in for an actor (should one of the actors be absent on the day of the performance) or take an acting role (if there are a small number of players in your group). Be sure to tell the audience the time period in which your play is set (especially if it is different from the original).

Performance Self-Evaluation:

You will complete a self-evaluation of your performance following your performance using the rubric below.

10=Exceeds Expectations   8= Meets Expectations   6=Does Not Meet Expectations

ESSENTIAL QUESTIONS:

• Who are the “witches” today?
• What can I do to help them?

DIRECTIONS:

Take time to reflect and respond to the six questions below in complete sentences. We will discuss your responses in small groups and as a large group in our next class period. These questions will help us decide on who the “witches” are in our culture today and what we might do to intervene in support of them.

1. Who were the witches of Salem? As you consider this question, think about which characters were labeled and jailed for being witches.

2. Who are these characters? Describe their position in the town. How were they identified by witches and by whom?

3. How did the general population react to this particular group?

4. Who are the “witches” today?

5. How are they treated? Who treats them this way? You may respond with more than one group.

6. What can we do to help the “witches” of today?

Project Contract:

SIGNATURES:

All pieces due FRIDAY, JANUARY 8th

Source: Rubric adapted from the Buck Institute for Education