Lesson Plan: Art, Obscenity and Censorship

Subjects:

Civics/Government, AP U.S. Government & Politics

Lesson Duration:

• Two 50-minute class periods
• To reduce the amount of time dedicated to the lesson, teachers can eliminate the large-class discussion about the definition of art. Instead, it can be turned into a think-pair-share activity.

Essential Questions:

• What is art and who decides?
• What is the role of the government in deciding whether and how to regulate expressive conduct and artwork?

Lesson Objectives:

Students will:

• Define art individually and participate in a class discussion to reach a large group consensus about the definition.
• Examine First Amendment case law to determine the limits to governmental regulation.
• Determine the balance of power between the federal government and an individual’s right to free expression under the First Amendment.

Materials:

• Retro Report video “When Art Fuels Anger, Who Should Prevail?” (Transcript)
• Student Activity handout
• Articles relating to First Amendment cases from the Free Speech Center at Middle Tennessee State University:
  • Miller v. California (1973)
  • Federal Communications Commission v. Pacifica Foundation (1978)
  • National Endowment for the Arts v. Finley (1998)
  • Optional article for background information: Art Censorship
• Graffiti Wall: Post-it notes, markers, whiteboards, or digital tools like Jamboard or Padlet.

Procedure:

1. Prior to this lesson, students should be familiar with the basic understanding of the First Amendment and freedom of expression. Students should also have a basic understanding of the role of Congress concerning public policy and the federal court system’s role in interpreting the law.
2. Provide the activity handout to students and instruct them (individually or in small groups) to fill out the Activating Prior Knowledge & Consensus Building section. Tell them that the goal of the section is to create a strong definition of “art.”
3. Activating Prior Knowledge & Consensus Building (30 minutes): The students will begin individually, move to a collaborative activity, and conclude with consensus building.
4. Individual: (5 minutes) Students should define “art” using the Frayer Method. Students determine a definition based on their knowledge and experience. After settling on a definition, students should provide characteristics (or illustrations), provide examples and give non-examples for each term. If students complete the activity digitally, encourage them to find artwork visuals for the examples and non-examples.
5. Collaborative: (10 minutes) Using the strategy of a graffiti wall, students should share their definitions, characteristics, examples and non-examples with the class. According to Facing History & Ourselves, graffiti walls are “shared writing space[s]” that “help students ‘hear’ each other’s ideas.” The students will need a large space to write in the classroom, like a whiteboard or chalkboard. Or, the teacher can create a digital “board” using Jamboard or Padlet.
   1. Example: Using large Post-it notes or sections on a whiteboard, create a space for students to respond to the different prompts within the Frayer Method. Each Post-It note or section should be labeled. Students can write directly on the surface or use smaller Post-it notes. Provide enough time for students to read the work of others.
6. Consensus (15 minutes): Using the Fist-to-Five technique, as a class, determine one definition everyone can agree upon for art. Use the graffiti wall to start the conversation by grouping similar definitions, characteristics, examples and non-examples. (Source: Fletcher, A. 2002. FireStarter Youth Power Curriculum: Participant Guidebook. Olympia, Wash.: Freechild Project.) The procedure is as follows:
   1. The team leader will present the issue, in this case coming to a consensus about the definition of “art.”
   2. A volunteer or the teacher will write a definition of art using the graffiti wall. Make sure the definition is visible to the entire class.
   3. After establishing the first version of the definition, ask the class for their level of support. The following is included with the activity sheet:
   4. A fist = “I need to talk more about the proposal and require changes for it to pass.”
   5. 1 finger = “I still need to discuss certain issues and suggest changes that should be made.”
   6. 2 fingers = “I am more comfortable with the proposal but would like to discuss some minor issues.”
   7. 3 fingers = “I am not in total agreement but feel comfortable to let this decision or proposal pass without further discussion.”
   8. 4 fingers = “I think it’s a good definition.”
   9. 5 fingers = “It’s a great definition, and I will champion it/ be one of the leaders in implementing it.”
   10. Anyone who holds up fewer than three fingers should be allowed to state their objections, and the team should address their concerns. Note that these statements have been edited to reflect the activity. See the source for variations.
   11. Repeat the process until the class or small group achieves consensus. (All participants raise three or more fingers.)
   12. When a consensus is reached, write the agreed-upon definition for the students to write on the activity sheet.
7. Review Vocabulary (10 minutes): Have students review relevant vocabulary terms before watching the film. Based on the student’s level of understanding, you may need to spend more or less time on this portion of the activity. For consideration:
8. First Amendment: protections and limitations, particularly examples of protected speech and unprotected speech.
   1. For more information, see Amendment 1: Freedom of Speech and the Press | National Constitution Center.
9. Censorship: Suppression or prohibition of parts of books, films, news, etc., considered obscene, politically unacceptable, or a threat to security.
10. Blasphemy: Actions or speech that shows a lack of proper respect for a sacred (religious) person, place or object.
11. Obscenity (or Obscene): Sexually explicit and offensive or disgusting materials, speech, or actions, according to accepted standards of morality and decency.
12. Viewing and Discussion: (about 30 minutes) Watch the Retro Report film “When Art Fuels Anger, Who Should Prevail?” (Transcript) and have students answer, then briefly discuss the questions on the handout.
13. Possible discussion extension questions include:
    1. What role does cultural context play in determining whether art is considered offensive? Are there certain types of art that may be offensive in one culture but not in another?
    2. Should there be age-appropriate guidelines or ratings for art, similar to those used for movies and video games, to help individuals make informed choices about what they consume? If so, who should apply these guidelines?
    3. How does the concept of artistic intent affect discussions about obscenity and the First Amendment? Should an artist’s intent be a factor in determining the acceptability of their work?
    4. How do the internet and social media platforms affect the discussion about obscenity, art and the First Amendment? What challenges and opportunities does the digital landscape present for these issues?
14. Case Analysis (20 minutes): Students will examine Supreme Court cases related to regulation of expressive conduct and material. The teacher can have students examine all three cases, or opt to have groups of three engage in a jigsaw activity and explain the cases to one another.
15. Students will examine the following cases and demonstrate their understanding of the case and how the ruling may or may not apply to censoring or restricting an artwork.
    1. Miller v. California (1973)
    2. Federal Communications Commission v. Pacifica Foundation (1978)
    3. National Endowment for the Arts v. Finley (1998)
16. Summation (10 minutes): Based on their analysis of the provided cases, students will craft a statement that explains what the government can and cannot do when it comes to censoring or regulating art.
17. Next, students will explain how they believe society in general should balance free speech protections with the need or desire to regulate obscenity and potentially harmful content.

Extension Activities:

1. In an A.P. U.S. Government and Politics class, have students complete the following:
2. When Art Fuels Anger, Who Should Prevail? – Concept Application FRQ
3. Students can research additional Supreme Court cases linked to the definition of obscenity and track how the definition has changed (or not changed) over time. Possible cases include:
   1. Roth v. United States (1957): Defined obscenity and clarified that the First Amendment does not protect obscenity.
   2. Miller v. California (1973): Refined the definition of obscenity and established the Miller test.
   3. New York v. Ferber (1982): Addressed child pornography and ruled that it could be banned despite not meeting the criteria in the Miller test.
   4. United States v. American Library Association (2003): Addressed the Children’s Internet Protection Act (CIPA), which required libraries to install computer filters to restrict access to explicit material.
4. Have students construct a table to compare and contrast the actions individuals and groups may take when seeking to censor artwork or other materials.
   1. Parents/Guardians
   2. Employers
   3. Private School Administrators or Teachers
   4. Public School Administrators or Teachers
   5. Local Government
   6. State and Federal Government
   7. Tribal Government
   8. Debrief: Students might have misconceptions about the reach of the U.S. Constitution, believing it applies to everyone and everything. The Constitution only applies to actions taken by a federal, state or local government actor.
      1. For more information, see: “Identifying and Teaching against Misconceptions: Hess, Diana E. 2006. “Six Common Mistakes about the Supreme Court” Social Education: National Council for the Social Studies 70(6), pp 337-342.)
   9. Debrief: Tribal Nations are sovereign. As tribal powers come from their own inherent sovereignty and not from the United States Constitution, the U.S. Bill of Rights does not apply to the activities of the tribal governments. However, Congress passed the Indian Civil Rights Act in 1968 which applies to all tribes in the United States.
      1. For more information, see: Tribal Governance: General Principles of Federal Indian Law | University of Alaska Fairbanks
5. Have students investigate other Supreme Court tests like the one created in the Miller case. A Supreme Court test is a standard to guide future decisions. Some other “tests” include:
   1. Lemon Test (Lemon v. Kurtzman, 1971), which determines whether a government action or the law violates the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment, which prohibits the government from establishing or promoting a particular religion.
   2. Clear and Present Danger Test (Schenck v. United States, 1919) determines whether speech or expression can be restricted. (You can’t falsely yell “fire!” in a crowded theater.)
   3. Tinker Test (Tinker v. Des Moines, 1969) is applied to cases involving free speech rights in public schools. School authorities can restrict student expression if it substantially disrupts the educational process.

About the Author:

Jaclyn Jecha has been in education for over 13 years, both in a formal classroom and as a museum educator. She teaches AP Comparative Government and Politics, AP U.S. Government and Politics, government, modern American history and philosophy at New Berlin West Middle and High School in New Berlin, Wisc.

Standards

College, Career, and Civic Life (C3) Framework for Social Studies

• D2.Civ.1.9-12. Distinguish the powers and responsibilities of local, state, tribal, national, and international civic and political institutions. 
• D2.Civ.4.9-12. Explain how the U.S. Constitution establishes a system of government that has powers, responsibilities, and limits that have changed over time and that are still contested.
• D2.Civ.5.9-12. Evaluate citizens’ and institutions’ effectiveness in addressing social and political problems at the local, state, tribal, national, and/or international level.
• D2.Civ.12.9-12. Analyze how people use and challenge local, state, national, and international laws to address a variety of public issues. 
• D2.Civ.13.9-12. Evaluate public policies in terms of intended and unintended outcomes, and related consequences. 

Common Core Literacy Standards

• CCSS.ELA-LITERACY.RH.11-12.3 Evaluate various explanations for actions or events and determine which explanation best accords with textual evidence, acknowledging where the text leaves matters uncertain.
• CCSS.ELA-LITERACY.RH.11-12.6 Evaluate authors’ differing points of view on the same historical event or issue by assessing the authors’ claims, reasoning, and evidence.
• CCSS.ELA-LITERACY.RST.11-12.2 Determine the central ideas or conclusions of a text; summarize complex concepts, processes, or information presented in a text by paraphrasing them in simpler but still accurate terms.

AP U.S. Government and Politics CED Alignment

• Topic 2.1: Congress – The Senate and the House of Representatives 
  • EK 2.1.A.4 (vii. Conducting oversight of the executive branch, including federal agencies in the bureaucracy. 
• Topic 2.9: The Role of the Judicial Branch
  • LO 2.9.A (Explain the role of legal precedent in judicial decision-making.)
• Topic 2.14: Holding the Bureaucracy Accountable
  • LO 2. 14.A (Explain how Congress uses its oversight power in its relationship with the executive branch.)
• Topic 3.3: First Amendment: Freedom of Speech
  • EK 3.3.A.2 (ii. Limitations on some obscene and offensive communication.)