D2.Civ.14.9-12: Historical, Contemporary and Emerging Means of Civic Change
In plain English: D2.Civ.14.9-12 is the C3 Framework civics indicator for grades 9-12 that asks students to analyze historical, contemporary and emerging means of changing societies, promoting the common good and protecting rights. Students examine how each means works, who can use it and what can go wrong, from petitions to agency complaints to online participation, usually in U.S. Government or Civics.
Analyze historical, contemporary, and emerging means of changing societies, promoting the common good, and protecting rights.
C3 Framework for Social Studies (NCSS) · Dimension 2: Applying Disciplinary Concepts and Tools · Discipline: Civics · Processes, Rules, and Laws · Official standard
Students learn to analyze historical, contemporary, and emerging means of changing societies, promoting the common good, and protecting rights, the skill named in D2.Civ.14.9-12. For each means they ask who can use it, who decides, whether it compels a response, what can go wrong and which goals it serves, and they compare how the answers change across eras.
The lesson follows one thread, how ordinary people make their voices count with government, through three primary sources: Angelina Grimké's 1837 defense of women's right to petition Congress, the EEOC's current instructions for filing a charge of job discrimination, and a 2021 federal recommendation on mass, computer-generated and falsely attributed public comments. In the homework, students analyze an invented city's online budget vote.
Learning Objectives
By the end of this lesson, students will be able to:
Distinguish historical, contemporary and emerging means of civic change, with examples of each
Analyze how a means works: who can use it, who decides, and whether it compels a response
Explain how a single means can change society, promote the common good and protect rights
Analyze the risks of an emerging means, such as false attribution and computer-generated participation, and ways to manage them
Write an analysis that compares means across eras using evidence from several sources
Prior Knowledge Required
Students should already be comfortable with:
Comparing historical and contemporary means of changing societies D2.Civ.14.6-8
Analyzing the role of citizens and changes in participation over time D2.Civ.2.9-12
Citing textual evidence from primary sources RH.11-12.1
"A federal agency proposes a new rule and invites public comment. It receives 2 million comments, and most of them are word for word the same. Should the agency count them? Read them? What if some were written by software or sent in the names of people who never wrote them?"
Take positions quickly and record the reasons on the board. Then tell students that the same question, how ordinary people make their voices count with government, runs from petitions in the 1830s to online comments today. The lesson analyzes how the means have changed and what each one is good for.
Direct Instruction15-20 minutes
Part 1: Three kinds of means, three goals. D2.Civ.14.9-12 asks students to analyze means that are historical (used in the past), contemporary (in established use today) and emerging (new and still taking shape, often because of technology). It names three goals: changing societies, promoting the common good (what benefits the community as a whole) and protecting rights. One means can serve more than one goal, and the same means can work differently in different eras. Diagram 1 is the lesson's analysis grid.
Questions for analyzing any means of civic change
Question
What to look for
Access
Who can use the means, and who is left out (by law, cost, skill or technology)?
Decision
Who decides the outcome: a legislature, an agency, a court, voters?
Power
Does the means compel a response, or only ask for one?
Risks
What can go wrong: retaliation, deadlines, fraud, being ignored?
Goal
Does it change society, promote the common good, protect rights, or several?
Part 2: A historical means. The First Amendment (1791) protects the right "to petition the Government for a redress of grievances." In the 1830s, antislavery societies sent Congress petitions with hundreds of thousands of signatures, many gathered by women, asking it to end slavery in the District of Columbia. In 1836 the House adopted a "gag rule" that tabled such petitions without discussion; it was repealed in 1844. In 1837 the writer Catharine Beecher argued that women should not petition Congress, and Angelina Grimké, an abolitionist from South Carolina, answered in a series of public letters. Glosses: partisans are fierce supporters of a side; to reprobate is to condemn; a redress of grievances is the correction of a wrong; to remonstrate is to protest; abridgement means cutting back.
1Another objection to woman’s petitions is, that they may ‘tend to bring females, as petitioners and partisans, into every political measure that may tend to injure and oppress their sex.’ As to their ever becoming partisans, i.e. sacrificing principles to power or interest, I reprobate this under all circumstances, and in both sexes. But I trust my sisters may always be permitted to petition for a redress of grievances. Why not? The right of petition is the only political right that women have: why not let them exercise it whenever they are aggrieved? Our fathers waged a bloody conflict with England, because they were taxed without being represented. This is just what unmarried women of property now are. They were not willing to be governed by laws which they had no voice in making; but this is the way in which women are governed in this Republic. If, then, we are taxed without being represented, and governed by laws we have no voice in framing, then, surely, we ought to be permitted at least to remonstrate against ‘every political measure that may tend to injure and oppress our sex in various parts of the nation, and under the various public measures that may hereafter be enforced.’ Why not? Art thou afraid to trust the women of this country with discretionary power as to petitioning? Is there not sound principle and common sense enough among them, to regulate the exercise of this right? I believe they will always use it wisely. I am not afraid to trust my sisters--not I.
2Thou sayest, ‘In this country, petitions to Congress, in reference to official duties of legislators, seem, IN ALL CASES, to fall entirely without the sphere of female duty. Men are the proper persons to make appeals to the rulers whom they appoint,’ &c. Here I entirely dissent from thee. The fact that women are denied the right of voting for members of Congress, is but a poor reason why they should also be deprived of the right of petition. If their numbers are counted to swell the number of Representatives in our State and National Legislatures, the very least that can be done is to give them the right of petition in all cases whatsoever; and without any abridgement. If not, they are mere slaves, known only through their masters.
Angelina Emily Grimké, Letters to Catherine E. Beecher, Letter XI (Source 1: the right of petition; two consecutive paragraphs, no cuts) (1837; this edition 1838). Public domain (published 1838). Source text.
Guided Practice15-20 minutes
A contemporary means of protecting rights. Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 created the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC), a federal agency that enforces laws against job discrimination; it opened in 1965. Source 2 is the EEOC's own instructions. Glosses: remedial action is action to correct a wrong; a charging party is the person who files the charge; a worksharing agreement divides work between two agencies.
1A charge of discrimination is a signed statement asserting that an organization engaged in employment discrimination. It requests EEOC to take remedial action. The laws enforced by EEOC, except for the Equal Pay Act, require you to file a charge before you can file a lawsuit for unlawful discrimination. There are strict time limits for filing a charge.
[...]
2Where the discrimination took place can determine how long you have to file a charge. The 180-calendar-day filing deadline is extended to 300- calendar days if a state or local agency enforces a state or local law that prohibits employment discrimination on the same basis. The rules are slightly different for age discrimination charges. For age discrimination, the filing deadline is only extended to 300 days if there is a state law prohibiting age discrimination in employment and a state agency or authority enforcing that law. The deadline is not extended if only a local law prohibits age discrimination.
[...]
3As a first step, we ask you to access the EEOC Public Portal to submit an inquiry about the issue you wish to discuss. You will be asked to schedule a telephone interview, interview by video, or an in-person interview at one of our 53 EEOC offices. As noted above, there are strict deadlines for filing a charge of discrimination. If your filing deadline is fast approaching, please contact 1-800-669-4000 to ask for an immediate interview. You may also visit an EEOC office to discuss your matter.
[...]
4Many states and localities have agencies that enforce laws prohibiting employment discrimination. EEOC refers to these agencies as Fair Employment Practices Agencies (FEPAs). EEOC and some FEPAs have worksharing agreements in place to prevent the duplication of effort in charge processing. According to these agreements, if you file a charge with either EEOC or a FEPA, the charge also will be automatically filed with the other agency. This process, which is defined as dual filing, helps to protect charging party rights under both federal and state or local law. If you file a charge at a state or local agency, you can let them know if you also want your charge filed with the EEOC.
U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, How to File a Charge of Employment Discrimination (Source 2; cuts marked [...]) (2026). US government work (17 U.S.C. 105). Source text.
An emerging means. Under the Administrative Procedure Act of 1946, federal agencies must publish proposed rules and accept public comments before most rules take effect. Agencies must consider the relevant matter in the comments before issuing a final rule. Since the E-Government Act of 2002, comments can be filed online, and anyone can read them in an online docket (the public file of a rulemaking). Source 3 is a 2021 recommendation of the Administrative Conference of the United States (ACUS), a federal agency that studies how agencies work. Glosses: substantively identical means the same in content; attributed means credited to a person; appropriated here means taken and used without permission; to augment is to add to; to ameliorate is to make better.
1Technological advances have expanded the public’s access to agencies’ online rulemaking dockets and made it easier for the public to comment on proposed rules in ways that the Administrative Conference has encouraged. At the same time, in recent high-profile rulemakings, members of the public have submitted comments in new ways or in numbers that can challenge agencies’ current approaches to processing these comments or managing their online rulemaking dockets.
2Agencies have confronted three types of comments that present distinctive management challenges: (1) mass comments, (2) computer-generated comments, and (3) falsely attributed comments. For the purposes of this Recommendation, mass comments are comments submitted in large volumes by members of the public, including the organized submission of identical or substantively identical comments. Computer-generated comments are comments whose substantive content has been generated by computer software rather than by humans. Falsely attributed comments are comments attributed to people who did not submit them.
3These three types of comments, which have been the subject of recent reports by both federal and state authorities, can raise challenges for agencies in processing, reading, and analyzing the comments they receive in some rulemakings. If not managed well, the processing of these comments can contribute to rulemaking delays or can raise other practical or legal concerns for agencies to consider.
[...]
4In contrast with mass comments, computer-generated comments and falsely attributed comments may mislead an agency or raise issues under the APA and other statutes. One particular problem that agencies may encounter is distinguishing computer-generated comments from comments written by humans. Computer-generated comments may also raise potential issues for agencies as a result of the APA’s provision for the submission of comments by “interested persons.” Falsely attributed comments can harm people whose identities are appropriated and may create the possibility of prosecution under state or federal criminal law. False attribution may also deceive agencies or diminish the informational value of a comment, especially when the commenter claims to have situational knowledge or the identity of the commenter is otherwise relevant. The informational value that both of these types of comments provide to agencies is likely to be limited or at least different from comments that have been neither computer-generated nor falsely attributed.
[...]
5New software and technologies to manage public comments will likely emerge in the future, and agencies will need to keep apprised of them. Agencies might also consider adopting alternative methods for encouraging public participation that augment the notice-and-comment process, particularly to the extent that doing so ameliorates some of the management challenges described above. Because technology is rapidly changing, agencies will need to stay apprised of new developments that could enhance public participation in rulemaking.
Administrative Conference of the United States, Recommendation 2021-1, Managing Mass, Computer-Generated, and Falsely Attributed Comments (Source 3: from the preamble; cuts marked [...]) (2021). US government work (17 U.S.C. 105). Source text.
Historical means, three parts (Source 1)
Grimké is defending a means and a right at the same time. Name the means, the right and the change the campaign sought.
Result: The means is the petition to Congress, gathered by antislavery societies (Direct Instruction). The right is women's right of petition, which Beecher's essay, quoted in paragraph 2, said fell "entirely without the sphere of female duty." The change sought was the end of slavery in the District of Columbia. So one campaign aimed to change society and, at the same time, to protect a right that critics wanted to narrow.
Contemporary means, how a person begins (Source 2, paragraph 3)
How does a person start the charge process today, and what choices do they have?
Result: The first step is online: "access the EEOC Public Portal to submit an inquiry." The person then chooses "a telephone interview, interview by video, or an in-person interview." A person facing a deadline can call or "visit an EEOC office." The process mixes an online portal with older ways of being heard, in person and by phone, which is typical of contemporary means.
Emerging means, the risks (Source 3, paragraph 3)
What does ACUS say can happen when the three new kinds of comments are not handled well?
Result: They "can raise challenges for agencies in processing, reading, and analyzing the comments," and "If not managed well, the processing of these comments can contribute to rulemaking delays or can raise other practical or legal concerns." A delay in a rule meant to protect health or safety is a cost to the common good, so an emerging means of taking part can work against the very goal it serves.
Comparing access (Sources 1 and 2)
Who may use each means, and what limits apply?
Result: Grimké argues that the petition should be open to women "in all cases whatsoever; and without any abridgement," so anyone with a grievance may petition on any subject. The EEOC charge is narrower: it covers employment discrimination under the laws the EEOC enforces, and "There are strict time limits for filing a charge." A broad means can reach any question but cannot force action; a narrow one has rules and deadlines but leads to an agency and a court.
Pair task: Fill the nine cells of Diagram 1 with evidence from Sources 1-3, then apply the five questions in the table to one historical, one contemporary and one emerging means.
Independent Practice15-20 minutes
Analytical paragraph. Each student writes a 250-word analysis answering: "How have the means by which ordinary people make their voices count with government changed from 1837 to today, and what has stayed the same?" The paragraph must cite all three sources, use at least two of the five questions from the table, and name one risk of an emerging means and one way it could be managed. Diagram 2 places the key dates to scale.
Closure5-10 minutes
Exit ticket: "Which goal, changing society, promoting the common good or protecting rights, is hardest to reach through an emerging means? Give one reason from Source 3."
Teacher note: Source 1 uses Quaker forms such as "thou" and the word "slaves," the usual term of its time (many historians today write "enslaved people"); it is copied as published in 1838. Its last sentence compares women denied the right of petition to enslaved people. Grimké, an abolitionist, used the comparison to argue for women's rights; students can discuss what the analogy shows and what it leaves out, since enslaved people were denied far more than the right of petition. Source 3 discusses comment campaigns in general and names no rulemaking; the separate statements printed after the recommendation on the ACUS site, which discuss particular controversies, are not used. Keep the analysis on how the means work rather than on any pending rule or current campaign. Source 4 is invented.
Homework passage. Source 4 is an invented scenario about a city that lets residents vote online on part of its budget, an emerging means of promoting the common good.
1The city of Brookfield (an invented city) set aside $600,000 of next year's budget and let residents decide how to spend it. Any resident 14 or older could vote for up to three projects, either on the city's website or on paper ballots at the two libraries and the senior center. Voters online entered their address and either a library card number or a utility account number.
2In all, 6,000 ballots were counted: 5,100 online and 900 on paper. About 40,000 residents were old enough to vote. The results were:
3Park lighting ($250,000): 2,700 votes. Bus shelters ($180,000): 2,300 votes. Library laptops for lending ($120,000): 1,900 votes. Skate park ($300,000): 1,600 votes. Crosswalk signals ($90,000): 1,500 votes.
4The rules said projects would be funded in order of votes until the next project on the list no longer fit in the money left; any money left over would return to the general budget.
5Before the count, city staff noticed that 120 online ballots had been submitted from the same five email addresses within ten minutes, with library card numbers that did not match any account. The staff set those ballots aside and posted a notice explaining why. Two residents said that their names had been used on ballots they never cast. A council member asked whether next year's vote should require every online voter to create an account with a verified email address, but a librarian warned that some older residents and families without home internet might find that harder.
SVHS (invented scenario), Source 4: Brookfield votes on its budget online (invented scenario written for this page, for the homework; the city and all numbers are invented) (2026). Original passage written for this page.
Differentiation Strategies
For Struggling Students
Give Diagram 1 with one cell in each row already filled in, and a word bank for the five analysis questions
Pre-teach Grimké's style: "thou sayest" means "you say," and single quotation marks show Beecher's words
Provide frames: "In 1837, people used ___ to ___. Today, people use ___. The biggest change is ___ because ___."
For Advanced Students
Read the recommendations that follow Source 3 on the ACUS site and analyze which ones protect individual rights and which protect the agency's process
Compare the gag rule of 1836-1844 with an agency's decision to display only one copy of identical comments: are they the same kind of limit on petition? Argue both sides
Research how a state or local government in your area takes public comment, and analyze it with the five questions
Assessment Guidance
What to Look For
Strong analyses compare means on the same question across eras, for example who decides in 1837 and today, rather than describing each separately. They connect each means to at least one of the three goals and recognize that one means can serve several. Look for precise use of the sources, attention to who is left out of each means, and a balanced treatment of emerging means that names both what they open up and what can go wrong.
02
Classroom Activities
3 Activities
1
Means Sort: Era and Goal
12 minPairs
Pairs place 12 means on Diagram 1: first by era (historical, contemporary or emerging), then by the goal or goals each one serves. A card may serve more than one goal, but pairs must justify every goal they assign.
The 12 Cards
Signing a handwritten petition carried door to door
Forming a voluntary society with officers and a newspaper
Lecturing in town halls on a reform tour
Filing a charge with a federal agency
Filing a lawsuit in federal court
Testifying at a legislative hearing
Submitting a comment in an online rulemaking docket
A coordinated campaign of identical online comments
Using software to draft many comments at once
Voting on a city budget through a website
Sharing a video that documents a problem
Verifying online participants' identities with a code
Answer Key for the Teacher (era)
Historical: cards 1, 2, 3
Contemporary: cards 4, 5, 6, 7
Emerging: cards 8, 9, 10, 11, 12
Accept reasoned alternatives: lawsuits and hearings are also historical, and online comment has been in use since the early 2000s. Goals are open; grade the justification.
Discussion
Which emerging cards are tools for taking part, and which are tools for protecting the process? Why might an emerging means need both?
Which historical card has the closest emerging partner, and what changed between them?
2
Agency Design Lab
25 minGroups of 4
Each group is the comment-policy team of an invented federal agency that has just received 900,000 comments on a proposed rule about labeling on packaged food. The invented data card says that 850,000 are identical, 30,000 appear to have been written by software, and 400 people have reported that comments were filed in their names.
Tasks
Decide how to display, store and read each kind of comment, citing Source 3
Decide what to tell the 400 people who reported false comments, and how to protect them
Write one rule that protects every person's right to be heard and one rule that protects the agency's ability to find useful information
Present the policy and answer one challenge from another group
Debrief Questions
Did any of your rules make it harder for real people to take part? How did you weigh that cost?
How is your policy like, and unlike, the House gag rule of 1836?
3
Then, Now, Next: A Deliberation
15 minWhole class
The class deliberates on an invented proposal: a state legislature will accept online petitions, and any petition with 25,000 verified signatures must receive a public committee hearing. Students first list arguments on both sides, then hold a structured discussion and a classroom vote. This is a simulation; students do not sign or start real petitions.
Protocol
Two minutes of silent writing: one argument for and one against
Pairs share and choose their strongest argument on each side
Whole-class round: each pair states one argument, without repeating
Secret-ballot classroom vote, then each student writes which argument on the other side was strongest
Connecting to the Sources
Students must connect at least one argument to Grimké's defense of petitions (Source 1) and one to the risks described in Source 3. Either vote earns full credit when the reasoning is supported.
03
Diagrams & Visual Aids
2 diagrams
Diagram 1: Means of Civic Change, Three Eras and Three Goals
Rows are the three kinds of means in D2.Civ.14.9-12, each with this page's example; columns are its three goals. Each cell gives one way the example serves that goal, drawn from Sources 1-3 and Direct Instruction. Students use the grid to organize evidence.
Diagram 2: The Right to Be Heard, 1780-2030, Drawn to Scale
Key dates for petition and public comment placed to scale on a line from 1780 to 2030. The gaps show how long the historical means stood alone before the contemporary and emerging means appeared.
Directions: Use Source 4, the invented scenario about Brookfield's budget vote, printed in the Closure phase of the lesson plan. Problems 4 and 6 also use Sources 1 and 3. Cite paragraph numbers and show your arithmetic.
Part 1: The Means and Who Used It (Problems 1-2)
Is Brookfield's budget vote a historical, contemporary or emerging means? Which of the three goals does it serve most directly? Explain both answers.
What percent of ballots were cast online? What percent of the residents old enough to vote took part? What does each number suggest about who used this means?
Part 2: Applying the Rules (Problems 3-4)
Apply the funding rule in paragraph 4 to the results in paragraph 3. Which projects are funded, how much do they cost in all, and how much money returns to the general budget?
Which two problems in paragraph 5 match kinds of comments described in Source 3? Explain the match, and explain whose rights each problem threatens.
Part 3: Analysis (Problems 5-6)
The council member wants verified accounts; the librarian warns about access. Analyze this choice as a conflict between protecting rights and promoting the common good, and propose one rule that addresses both concerns.
Compare Brookfield's vote with the petitions Grimké defends in Source 1. Who could take part, who decided the outcome, and does each means compel a response from government?
Rubric
Criterion
Full Credit (2 pts)
Partial Credit (1 pt)
No Credit (0 pts)
Classifying means and goals
Classifies the means and goal with reasons from the source
Classifies without reasons
Missing or wrong
Arithmetic and rules
Percents and funding are correct and shown
One error
Several errors
Rights and the common good
Links each problem to a right and weighs both concerns
Names the problems without the link
Missing
Comparison across eras
Compares on access, decision and power with evidence
Compares on one point
No comparison
05
Quiz: 20 Questions
Interactive, with answers
Instructions
Questions 1-4 use Grimké's letter (Source 1), Questions 5-7 use the EEOC page (Source 2), and Questions 9-12 and 14 use the ACUS recommendation (Source 3). Questions 8 and 13 and the short-answer questions compare means across sources. All sources are in the lesson plan phases above. Choose the best answer, then check your work.
Multiple choice: pick an option to check it. Short answer: write your answer, then reveal the model answer.
0 of 20 answered · 0 correct
Question 1 of 20 · Multiple Choice
In Source 1, paragraph 1, why does Grimké say women should be free to petition whenever they are aggrieved?
Answer: A
Grimké writes, "The right of petition is the only political right that women have: why not let them exercise it whenever they are aggrieved?" Choice C contradicts the passage, which says women "are denied the right of voting for members of Congress." Choices B and D are not in the passage; the House at the time was in fact tabling such petitions under the gag rule.
Question 2 of 20 · Multiple Choice
Grimké compares unmarried women of property to the American founders. What do the two groups have in common, in her argument?
Answer: B
"Our fathers waged a bloody conflict with England, because they were taxed without being represented. This is just what unmarried women of property now are." Choice A takes the founders' war and applies it to the women, which the passage does not do. Choices C and D are not in the source.
Question 3 of 20 · Multiple Choice
How does Grimké answer the claim that "Men are the proper persons to make appeals to the rulers whom they appoint"?
Answer: C
"The fact that women are denied the right of voting for members of Congress, is but a poor reason why they should also be deprived of the right of petition" (paragraph 2). Choice A is wrong because she "entirely" dissents. Choice B reverses her logic: she argues for petition precisely because women cannot vote.
Question 4 of 20 · Multiple Choice
In paragraph 2, Grimké says women's "numbers are counted to swell the number of Representatives." What fact about the Constitution is she using?
Answer: A
House seats were apportioned by population, and women were counted in it, so they added to the number of Representatives without voting for them. Her point is that people counted for representation should at least keep the right of petition. Choice D confuses this with the Senate, whose members state legislatures chose at the time.
Question 5 of 20 · Multiple Choice
According to Source 2, paragraph 1, why must a person usually file a charge with the EEOC before going to court?
Answer: B
"The laws enforced by EEOC, except for the Equal Pay Act, require you to file a charge before you can file a lawsuit for unlawful discrimination." Choice C overstates the rule: the charge is a required step, but the passage does not say the EEOC approves lawsuits. Choices A and D are not in the source.
Question 6 of 20 · Multiple Choice
Source 2 says the 180-day filing deadline is extended to 300 days where a state or local agency enforces a similar law. How many extra days does the extension give?
Answer: C
300 - 180 = 120 extra days. Choice A is the full extended deadline, not the extension. Choice B adds the two deadlines, 180 + 300 = 480. Choice D is the original 180-day deadline, not the days the extension adds.
Question 7 of 20 · Multiple Choice
Source 2, paragraph 4 describes "dual filing." What does it do?
Answer: C
Under worksharing agreements, "if you file a charge with either EEOC or a FEPA, the charge also will be automatically filed with the other agency," which "helps to protect charging party rights under both federal and state or local law." Choice D confuses dual filing with the deadline extension in paragraph 2. Choices A and B are not in the source.
Question 8 of 20 · Multiple Choice
Which means on this page is built for one person's own claim under specific laws?
Answer: B
A charge "is a signed statement" by a person "asserting that an organization engaged in employment discrimination" under the laws the EEOC enforces (Source 2). Choice A is open to any subject and any number of signers, and Choice C gathers many people's comments on a proposed rule. Choice D is not written by a person at all.
Question 9 of 20 · Multiple Choice
Source 3 defines three kinds of comments. Which kind is a comment "attributed to people who did not submit them"?
Answer: D
ACUS defines falsely attributed comments as "comments attributed to people who did not submit them" (paragraph 2). Choice A is defined by volume and identical content, and Choice B by content "generated by computer software rather than by humans." Choice C is part of the definition of mass comments, not a separate kind.
Question 10 of 20 · Multiple Choice
According to Source 3, paragraph 1, what two effects has technology had on public comment?
Answer: B
Technology "expanded the public’s access" and "made it easier for the public to comment," but in "recent high-profile rulemakings" people have commented "in new ways or in numbers that can challenge agencies’ current approaches." Choice A reverses the effect on numbers. Choices C and D are not in the source.
Question 11 of 20 · Multiple Choice
Why, according to Source 3, might computer-generated comments raise an issue under the Administrative Procedure Act?
Answer: C
Computer-generated comments "may also raise potential issues for agencies as a result of the APA’s provision for the submission of comments by ‘interested persons,’" since software is not a person with an interest. Choices A, B and D are not in the source; Choice B contradicts paragraph 1, which describes online dockets.
Question 12 of 20 · Multiple Choice
Which harm of falsely attributed comments does Source 3 name that most directly affects individual rights?
Answer: D
"Falsely attributed comments can harm people whose identities are appropriated and may create the possibility of prosecution under state or federal criminal law." A person's name is used to say something the person never said. Choice B describes a processing problem, which the source links mainly to mass comments, not a harm to an individual. Choices A and C are not in the source.
Question 13 of 20 · Multiple Choice
Which statement best compares the petitions Grimké defends with the mass comments in Source 3?
Answer: A
Petitioners in the 1830s sought many signatures to show Congress the scale of support. ACUS treats large volumes of identical comments mainly as a processing challenge, because in rulemaking an agency must consider the relevant information in comments rather than tally them. Choice B confuses the House gag rule, which tabled antislavery petitions, with a ban, and it never applied to agency comments. Choice C comes from Source 2.
Question 14 of 20 · Multiple Choice
According to Source 3, paragraph 5, what does ACUS expect in the future?
Answer: D
"New software and technologies to manage public comments will likely emerge in the future, and agencies will need to keep apprised of them." ACUS also suggests "alternative methods for encouraging public participation that augment the notice-and-comment process," which adds to the process rather than ending it, so Choice A is wrong. Choices B and C are not in the source.
Question 15 of 20 · Short Answer
Analyze how the petition campaign Grimké defends could serve all three goals named in D2.Civ.14.9-12: changing society, promoting the common good and protecting rights. Use Source 1 and Direct Instruction.
Model answer: Changing society: the petitions asked Congress to end slavery in the District of Columbia, a change in law and in the society around it. Common good: the right of petition lets every group, even people who cannot vote, bring grievances to government, and Grimké trusts that women "will always use it wisely." Protecting rights: by petitioning, women defended a right critics wanted to deny them; Grimké insists on it "in all cases whatsoever; and without any abridgement" (paragraph 2). One act served all three goals at once. Rubric: 1 point per goal with evidence, 1 for the point that one means served all three.
Question 16 of 20 · Short Answer
Compare an 1837 petition to Congress with an EEOC charge (Source 2) as means of protecting rights. Who decides, does the means compel a response, and what limits does each face?
Model answer: The petition went to Congress, which decided whether to act and, under the gag rule, could table it without discussion, so it asked for a response but could not compel one. An EEOC charge goes to an agency that enforces specific laws; it "requests EEOC to take remedial action" and is a required step before "a lawsuit," so it opens a path to a court that must decide. Its limits are legal: it applies only to job discrimination and must be filed within strict deadlines of 180 or 300 days. Rubric: 2 points for who decides, 2 for compelling a response, 1 for limits on each.
Question 17 of 20 · Short Answer
Using Source 3, explain one way online commenting promotes the common good and one way an emerging use of technology can work against it.
Model answer: Online dockets have "expanded the public’s access" and "made it easier for the public to comment," so more people can give agencies information that improves rules for everyone. But computer-generated and falsely attributed comments "may mislead an agency" and "diminish the informational value of a comment," so the agency may hear less clearly from real people with real knowledge, which hurts the quality of rules the whole public must live under. Rubric: 2 points for each side with evidence.
Question 18 of 20 · Short Answer
Why is false attribution a threat both to an individual's rights and to the right of petition in general? Use Sources 1 and 3.
Model answer: For the individual, a falsely attributed comment uses a person's name to say something the person never said; Source 3 says it "can harm people whose identities are appropriated." For the right in general, petitions and comments only work if government can trust that they come from the people named. Grimké argues that petition is how people without a vote make themselves heard; if fake names flood the process, real voices lose weight, and officials have an excuse to discount everyone. Rubric: 2 points for the individual harm, 2 for the general harm, 1 for using both sources.
Question 19 of 20 · Short Answer
Is the number of signatures or comments a good measure of what the public wants? Analyze both sides using Sources 1 and 3, then state your own conclusion.
Model answer: For: numbers show how many people care, which is why 1830s petitioners gathered many signatures, and Grimké stresses that women's "numbers are counted" for representation. Against: Source 3 shows that numbers can be inflated by "identical or substantively identical comments," software or false names, and that in rulemaking the agency weighs the information in comments rather than holding a vote. My conclusion: numbers are useful evidence of concern in a legislature but a weak measure in an agency, and in both they mean little unless the signers are verified. (Either conclusion earns credit if supported.) Rubric: 2 points per side, 1 for a reasoned conclusion.
Question 20 of 20 · Short Answer
Propose one emerging means, not on this page or a version of one, that could help ordinary people protect a right or promote the common good. Explain how it works, who might be left out, and one safeguard against misuse.
Model answer: A city could let residents report broken streetlights and unsafe crossings by photo through an app, with each report shown on a public map. It promotes the common good by getting repairs done faster and lets the city see which neighborhoods wait longest. People without smartphones or with limited English might be left out, so the city should also take reports by phone and in several languages. Safeguard: reports are tied to a verified phone number, and the map shows locations, not reporters' names, to protect privacy. Rubric: 1 point each for how it works, the goal, who is left out and the safeguard.
0 of 20 answered · 0 correct
06
Frequently Asked Questions
10 Questions
What does D2.Civ.14.9-12 mean?
D2.Civ.14.9-12 asks high school students to analyze the ways people work for change: means from the past, means in use today and new means that are still taking shape. Students examine how each one changes society, promotes the common good or protects rights, and what its strengths and risks are.
What counts as an "emerging" means of civic change?
An emerging means is new and still taking shape, often because of new technology. Online comment campaigns, software-drafted comments, digital petitions and online budget votes are examples. Because the rules for them are still being written, analyzing their risks is part of the standard.
How is D2.Civ.14.9-12 different from D2.Civ.14.6-8?
The 9-12 indicator adds emerging means and the goal of protecting rights, and it asks students to analyze rather than compare. Middle school students compare past and present means; high school students examine how means work, who can use them and what can go wrong.
Why start with petitions?
Because the right of petition is in the First Amendment and links every era on this page. The 1830s petition campaigns, the EEOC complaint process and online public comment are all ways ordinary people bring requests and grievances to government.
Who was Angelina Grimké?
Angelina Grimké was an abolitionist and women's rights advocate who grew up in a slaveholding family in Charleston, South Carolina, and moved north. In 1837 she toured New England speaking against slavery, and her letters to Catharine Beecher defended women's right to take part in public questions.
What is notice-and-comment rulemaking?
It is the process federal agencies use to make most regulations. An agency publishes a proposed rule, accepts written comments from the public, considers the relevant information in them and then issues a final rule. Today the proposals and comments are posted in online dockets.
How do I keep this lesson nonpartisan?
Keep the focus on how the means work, not on any current rule, campaign or party. Source 3 discusses comment campaigns in general, and the activities use invented agencies, proposals and data. In the deliberation, either vote earns full credit when it is supported.
Does this lesson ask students to file comments or petitions?
No. The activities are simulations: an invented agency, an invented petition proposal and a classroom vote. Students analyze real processes but are not asked to contact officials, sign petitions or post anything.
Is Brookfield's online budget vote real?
No. Brookfield and all the numbers in Source 4 are invented. The scenario is modeled on participatory budgeting, a process some cities use to let residents vote on part of a budget, and it raises the access and verification questions students meet in Source 3.
What standards connect to D2.Civ.14.9-12?
D2.Civ.12.9-12 asks how people use and challenge laws to address public issues, a close companion to this indicator. D4.7.9-12 asks students to assess options for individual and collective action, which applies the analysis of means to real choices.
07
Related Standards
5 standards
These standards connect to D2.Civ.14.9-12: prerequisites to review first, parallel standards at the same level, and next steps that build on it.
Before this lesson
D2.Civ.14.6-8Prerequisite
Compare historical and contemporary means of changing societies and promoting the common good
Assess options for individual and collective action using complex causal reasoning
Lesson coming soon
Standard text: National Council for the Social Studies (NCSS), The College, Career, and Civic Life (C3) Framework for Social Studies State Standards: Guidance for Enhancing the Rigor of K-12 Civics, Economics, Geography, and History (Silver Spring, MD: NCSS, 2013). NCSS was not involved in the production of this lesson and does not endorse it.
