Learning Goals
Students will be able to analyze the Pentagon Papers and a specific post-Cold War whistleblower case to evaluate how secrecy, disclosure, and democratic accountability interact.
Students will be able to evaluate the credibility and limitations of primary and secondary sources about whistleblowing, including legal texts, news coverage, and historical documents.
Students will be able to construct a defensible claim about when revealing government secrets serves the public good using relevant historical and contemporary evidence.
Students will be able to explain the reasoning in constitutional and legal texts that shape whistleblower protections and press freedom.
Students will be able to compare competing perspectives on whistleblowing from journalists, government officials, and civil liberties advocates and address counterarguments fairly.
Students will be able to support a public argument with integrated evidence from multiple media formats, including redacted documents, headlines, case timelines, and expert commentary.
Students will be able to revise their argument after self-check conferences by identifying strengths, gaps, and next steps in reasoning and evidence.
Products
Publication-Ready Whistleblowing Argument Essay with Evidence Log
Each student writes an op-ed style argument that answers the project question with a clear claim, subclaims, sourced evidence, warrants, and a fair counterargument with rebuttal. The essay is submitted with an annotated evidence log showing source credibility analysis and citation notes.
Transparency Exchange Public Defense Symposium and Synthesis Brief
Teams deliver a 5–7 minute public defense of the strongest position on whistleblower protections or disclosure, using each member’s individual research as evidence. They also submit a collaborative synthesis brief comparing perspectives, identifying the strongest evidence, and explaining where concessions and trade-offs remain.
No rubric has been generated yet.