D2.Soc.14.9-12: How In-Group and Out-Group Membership Shapes Life Chances, Norms and Values
In plain English: D2.Soc.14.9-12 is the C3 Framework sociology indicator for grades 9-12 that asks students to explain how in-group and out-group membership influences the life chances of individuals and shapes societal norms and values. Students trace how belonging, or being shut out, changes access to standing, work and citizenship, using a 1922 etiquette book and the Chinese Exclusion Act.
Explain how in-group and out-group membership influences the life chances of individuals and shapes societal norms and values.
C3 Framework for Social Studies (NCSS) · Dimension 2: Applying Disciplinary Concepts and Tools · Discipline: Sociology · Social Relationships: Self, Groups, and Socialization · Official standard
D2.Soc.14.9-12 asks students to explain how in-group and out-group membership influences the life chances of individuals and shapes societal norms and values. An in-group is a group a person belongs to and identifies with, a "we"; an out-group is a group the person does not belong to, a "they." The American sociologist William Graham Sumner used the pair "we-group, or in-group" and "others-groups, out-groups" in his 1906 book Folkways (section 13). Life chances are a person's chances, given his or her position in society, of getting what that society values: health, schooling, work, income, safety, respect and, for immigrants, the right to stay and become a citizen.
The lesson uses three historical sources and one invented case. Emily Post's 1922 Etiquette (Source 1) shows an in-group, "Best Society," describing its own boundaries and the steeper road for outsiders. The Chinese Exclusion Act of 1882 (Source 2) shows a national law turning one group into an out-group, and a National Archives summary (Source 3) traces what followed, from the law's extensions to its repeal and Congress's later condemnation of it. An invented hiring case (Source 4) shows how an in-group's networks and unwritten rules shape who gets a job today.
Learning Objectives
By the end of this lesson, students will be able to:
Define in-group, out-group and life chances, and identify how a group marks its boundaries
Explain how in-group membership opened doors in Post's 1922 account of "Best Society," and how outsiders faced a steeper road
Explain how the Chinese Exclusion Act made Chinese laborers an out-group in law and limited their life chances
Explain how in-groups and out-groups shape a society's norms and values, and how those values can change
Compute and interpret rates that compare in-group and out-group outcomes, noting the limits of the data
Prior Knowledge Required
Students should already be comfortable with:
Characteristics of groups and the effects of groups on individuals D2.Soc.13.9-12
Norms and values as components of culture D2.Soc.6.9-12
Reading a law or historical document closely RH.9-10.1
"A company fills most of its jobs through tips from its own workers. Two people with the same skills apply: one knows a worker there, one does not. Predict who is more likely to be hired, and give two reasons why."
Collect reasons on the board: the insider hears about the job first, gets vouched for, and already knows the unwritten rules. Tell students that each reason is a way that belonging to a group, or not belonging, changes a person's chances. Sociologists call those chances life chances, and the groups involved in-groups and out-groups.
Direct Instruction20 minutes
Key terms. A boundary is the line, written or unwritten, between those who belong and those who do not. Gatekeeping is the work of deciding who crosses it. Norms are shared rules for behavior, and values are shared ideas about what is good, proper or important. The table is a summary written for this page.
Four ways membership shapes life chances (summary written for this page)
Way
How it works
Where it appears in this lesson
Access
Insiders hear about chances first or are let in more easily
Letters of introduction (Source 1); job referrals (Source 4)
Vouching
An insider's word stands in for proof of a stranger's worth
Source 1, paragraph 4; Source 4, paragraph 5
Unwritten rules
Insiders already know norms that outsiders must learn
"Credentials" of manner (Source 1); the warehouse's rules (Source 4)
Law
Rules backed by the state define who may enter, stay or become a citizen
The Chinese Exclusion Act (Sources 2 and 3)
Reading 1. Emily Post's Etiquette was first published in July 1922, and the edition page of the 1922 book records a second edition two months later. "Best Society" is her name for the most socially respected circles. Terms to know: cultivation means refined education and taste; gentle-folk and people of position mean socially respected families; and letters of introduction were letters from a known person presenting a newcomer to his or her friends. These are 1922 class terms, not neutral descriptions. Read for one question: how does a person get into Best Society, according to Post?
1"Society" is an ambiguous term; it may mean much or nothing. Every human being--unless dwelling alone in a cave--is a member of society of one sort or another, and therefore it is well to define what is to be understood by the term "Best Society" and why its authority is recognized. Best Society abroad is always the oldest aristocracy; composed not so much of persons of title, which may be new, as of those families and communities which have for the longest period of time known highest cultivation. Our own Best Society is represented by social groups which have had, since this is America, widest rather than longest association with old world cultivation. Cultivation is always the basic attribute of Best Society, much as we hear in this country of an "Aristocracy of wealth."
[...]
2Thus Best Society is not a fellowship of the wealthy, nor does it seek to exclude those who are not of exalted birth; but it is an association of gentle-folk, of which good form in speech, charm of manner, knowledge of the social amenities, and instinctive consideration for the feelings of others, are the credentials by which society the world over recognizes its chosen members.
[...]
3A bride whose family or family-in-law has social position has merely to take that which is hers by inheritance; but a stranger who comes to live in a new place, or one who has always lived in a community but unknown to society, have both to acquire a standing of their own. [...]
[...]
4When new people move into a community, bringing letters of introduction to prominent citizens, they arrive with an already made position, which ranks in direct proportion to the standing of those who wrote the introductions. Since, however, no one but "persons of position" are eligible to letters of importance, there would be no question of acquiring position--which they have--but merely of adding to their acquaintance.
5As said in another chapter, people of position are people of position the world over, and all the cities strung around the whole globe are like so many chapter-houses of a brotherhood, to which letters of introduction open the doors.
[...]
6The outsider enters society by the same path, but it is steeper and longer because there is an outer gate of reputation called "They are not people of any position" which is difficult to unlatch. Nor is it ever unlatched to those who sit at the gate rattling at the bars, or plaintively peering in. The better, and the only way if she has not the key of birth, is through study to make herself eligible. Meanwhile, charitable, or civic work, will give her interest and occupation as well as throw her with ladies of good breeding, by association with whom she can not fail to acquire some of those qualities of manner before which the gates of society always open.
Emily Post, Source 1: Emily Post on Best Society, newcomers and outsiders (1922) (1922). Public domain (published 1922). Source text.
In-group membership by birth: Source 1, paragraph 3
Explain how Post's bride "whose family or family-in-law has social position" shows in-group membership shaping life chances.
Result: Post says such a bride "has merely to take that which is hers by inheritance," while a stranger must "acquire a standing of their own." The same social standing costs one woman nothing and the other years of effort, only because of the group she was born or married into. That difference in chances is what sociologists mean by in-group advantage.
The out-group's steeper road: Source 1, paragraph 6
What makes the road "steeper and longer" for Post's outsider?
Result: There is "an outer gate of reputation called 'They are not people of any position,'" and it is "difficult to unlatch." The barrier is a label the in-group attaches to the outsider before knowing her. Post also says the gate is never opened "to those who sit at the gate rattling at the bars": the in-group sets the terms for its own boundary.
An out-group made by law: Sources 2 and 3
Use Source 3, paragraph 1 and Source 2, paragraph 3 to explain why historians treat the 1882 Act as a turning point.
Result: The National Archives calls it "the first significant law restricting immigration into the United States" (Source 3, paragraph 1). Section 1 of the Act suspended "the coming of Chinese laborers to the United States" for ten years (Source 2, paragraph 3). A group was singled out by national origin and type of work, and the life chances of its members (to enter the country, or to stay in it) were limited by law.
Values can change: Source 3, paragraph 7
What does Congress's action in 2011-2012 show about how a society's values about membership can change?
Result: In 2011-2012 "Congress condemned the Chinese Exclusion Act and affirmed a commitment to preserve civil rights and constitutional protections for all people," with both chambers voting unanimously. A law that once expressed a national judgment about who belonged was later officially condemned, so the boundary itself had become a question of values.
Close the segment: Post writes about manners; Congress wrote a law. What do the two have in common? Students should see that both draw a line between insiders and outsiders, both decide who crosses it, and both shape the chances of the people on each side. They differ in force: Post's in-group could only refuse invitations, while the law was enforced by the government.
Guided Practice15 minutes
Read Source 4 together. It is an invented case with invented numbers, written for this page.
1Invented case with invented data, written for this page. Corliss Freight is an invented shipping warehouse in the invented city of Port Hadley. In 2024 it filled 60 entry-level jobs. The openings were not advertised: current workers told friends, neighbors and relatives about them, and the company paid a $200 bonus to any worker whose referral was hired.
2The company kept a record of the 300 people who applied. Of these, 80 had been referred by a current worker, and 36 of the 80 were hired. The other 220 applied on their own, mostly through a general jobs website, and 24 of them were hired.
3Most current workers lived in two neighborhoods near the warehouse, North Bank and Millrace, and 31 of the 36 referred hires lived there too. A shift supervisor explained: "People who get referred already know how things work here. They know you show up fifteen minutes early, you don't leave until the truck is loaded, and you call the lead, not the office, when you're sick. Nobody writes that down."
4In 2025, after the regional workforce board asked local employers to widen their hiring, the company posted its openings at the community college and the public library, wrote its unwritten rules into a one-page guide for every applicant, and added a short skills test for everyone. That year it filled 50 jobs, and 14 of the hires came through referrals.
5Not everyone liked the change. A worker with eleven years at the company said: "When I refer somebody, I'm vouching for them. If they don't pull their weight, that's on me. That's why referrals worked."
SVHS (invented scenario), Source 4: Who gets hired at Corliss Freight? (invented case with invented data) (2026). Original passage written for this page.
Share of hires (paragraphs 1-2). What share of the 60 hires in 2024 came through referrals? (36 / 60 = 0.6, or 60 percent.)
Applicants without a referral (paragraph 2). What share of them were hired? (24 / 220 is about 0.109, or about 11 percent.)
Who is the in-group? Using paragraph 3, describe the in-group in this case (current workers and the people they know, mostly in two neighborhoods) and the out-group (applicants with no tie to a worker).
What the data cannot show. The company did not record applicants' experience or skills, so the case cannot tell how much of the gap comes from the referral itself and how much from referred applicants being better prepared. It is also one invented company in one year. Treat the gap as a pattern to explain, not as a measured effect.
Diagram 2 shows the share of hires that came through referrals before and after the 2025 changes.
Independent Practice15 minutes
Students read Sources 2 and 3 on their own. Source 2 is the text of the 1882 law; Source 3 is the National Archives' summary of the law and its history. In the law, "Chinese" is used as a plural noun for Chinese people, an old usage; today we write "Chinese people" or "Chinese immigrants." A collector of customs was the federal officer in charge of a port of entry, and naturalization is the legal process by which an immigrant becomes a citizen.
The Chinese side. Sources 2 and 3 record the U.S. government's actions. The U.S. Department of State's Office of the Historian, in its summary "Chinese Immigration and the Chinese Exclusion Acts" (Milestones: 1866-1898), records how China responded. The 1880 Angell Treaty, the "treaty stipulations" in the Act's title, let the United States restrict Chinese immigration but not completely prohibit it. The Chinese Government considered the 1888 Scott Act, which barred re-entry even for long-term legal residents, "a direct insult," and the 1892 renewal and the 1902 expansion of exclusion passed "over strong objections from the Chinese Government and people." In 1905, merchants in China organized an anti-American boycott in response to the exclusion acts.
1An Act to execute certain treaty stipulations relating to Chinese.
2Whereas in the opinion of the Government of the United States the coming of Chinese laborers to this country endangers the good order of certain localities within the territory thereof: Therefore,
3Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, That from and after the expiration of ninety days next after the passage of this act, and until the expiration of ten years next after the passage of this act, the coming of Chinese laborers to the United States be, and the same is hereby, suspended; and during such suspension it shall not be lawful for any Chinese laborer to come, or having so come after the expiration of said ninety days to remain within the United States.
[...]
4SEC. 6. That in order to the faithful execution of articles one and two of the treaty in this act before mentioned, every Chinese person other than a laborer who may be entitled by said treaty and this act to come within the United States, and who shall be about to come to the United States, shall be identified as so entitled by the Chinese Government in each case, such identity to be evidenced by a certificate issued under the authority of said government, which certificate shall be in the English language or (if not in the English language) accompanied by a translation into English, stating such right to come, and which certificate shall state the name, title or official rank, if any, the age, height, and all physical peculiarities, former and present occupation or profession, and place of residence in China of the person to whom the certificate is issued and that such person is entitled, conformably to the treaty in this act mentioned to come within the United States. Such certificate shall be prima-facie evidence of the fact set forth therein, and shall be produced to the collector of customs, or his deputy, of the port in the district in the United States at which the person named therein shall arrive.
[...]
5SEC. 14. That hereafter no State court or court of the United States shall admit Chinese to citizenship; and all laws in conflict with this act are hereby repealed.
6SEC.15. That the words "Chinese laborers", wherever used in this act shall be construed to mean both skilled and unskilled laborers and Chinese employed in mining.
Forty-seventh Congress of the United States, Source 2: The Chinese Exclusion Act, May 6, 1882 (excerpts) (1882). Public domain (published 1882). Source text.
1The Chinese Exclusion Act was approved on May 6, 1882. It was the first significant law restricting immigration into the United States.
2In the spring of 1882, the Chinese Exclusion Act was passed by Congress and signed by President Chester A. Arthur. This act provided an absolute 10-year ban on Chinese laborers immigrating to the United States. For the first time, federal law proscribed entry of an ethnic working group on the premise that it endangered the good order of certain localities.
3The Chinese Exclusion Act required the few non-laborers who sought entry to the United States (such as diplomatic officers) to obtain certification from the Chinese government that they were qualified to immigrate. But this group found it increasingly difficult to prove their status because the 1882 act defined laborers as "skilled and unskilled...and Chinese employed in mining." Thus very few Chinese could enter the country under the 1882 law.
4The 1882 exclusion act also placed new requirements on Chinese who had already entered the country. If they left the United States, they had to obtain certifications to re-enter. Congress, moreover, refused state and federal courts the right to grant citizenship to Chinese resident aliens, although these courts could still deport them.
5When the exclusion act expired in 1892, Congress extended it for 10 years in the form of the Geary Act. This extension, made permanent in 1902, added restrictions by requiring each Chinese resident to register and obtain a certificate of residence. Without a certificate, they faced deportation.
[...]
6In 1943, when China was a member of the Allied Nations during World War II, Congress repealed all the exclusion acts. However, quotas remained, leaving a yearly limit of 105 Chinese immigrants. Foreign-born Chinese also won the right to seek naturalization.
[...]
7In 2011-2012, Congress condemned the Chinese Exclusion Act and affirmed a commitment to preserve civil rights and constitutional protections for all people: the Senate unanimously passed Senate Resolution 201 in 2011; and the House of Representatives unanimously passed House Resolution 683 in 2012.
National Archives and Records Administration, Source 3: The National Archives on the Chinese Exclusion Act and what followed (2023). US government work (17 U.S.C. 105). Source text.
Task: make a two-column chart. In the first column, list four life chances that the Act or the laws after it limited for Chinese immigrants, each with a source and paragraph number. In the second, write what each limit says about who the law treated as belonging. Then add one sentence on how Source 3, paragraphs 6 and 7 show the society's values changing, and one sentence on how the Chinese government and people responded, from the Office of the Historian summary above.
Closure5-10 minutes
Exit ticket: "Give one example of in-group membership improving a person's life chances and one example of out-group membership limiting them, each from a different source."
Teacher notes. (1) Post's "Best Society," "gentle-folk" and "people of position" are 1922 class terms; the lesson uses them as evidence of how an in-group described itself, not as standards. (2) The Chinese Exclusion Act is taught here by document analysis only; do not stage role-plays or simulations of exclusion or of immigration inspections. State the facts plainly: it was a federal law that barred a group by national origin, and Congress condemned it in 2011-2012 (Source 3). (3) Sources 2 and 3 are written from the U.S. government's side; the Independent Practice note on the Office of the Historian summary adds the documented response of the Chinese government and people, so the Chinese perspective appears alongside the law. Keep discussion historical. The lesson does not ask students to compare the 1882 law with any current immigration debate. (4) Source 4 is invented, with invented numbers. Its gap between referred and other applicants is not evidence about any real company, and the case lacks data on skills (see Guided Practice). (5) No task asks students to describe their own in-groups or out-groups.
Differentiation Strategies
For Struggling Students
Give the four-ways table with one example filled in for each row, and have students find a second example in Source 1 or 4
Pre-mark the sentence in each paragraph of Source 1 that names a way in or a barrier, and provide a glossary (cultivation, gentle-folk, letters of introduction, naturalization)
Provide a sentence frame: "Because ___ belonged to / did not belong to ___, their chance of ___ was greater / smaller, as shown in Source ___, paragraph ___."
For Advanced Students
Read sections 2-5 of the Act in the National Archives transcript and explain how the certificates for laborers already in the country affected their chance to visit family in China
Compare Post's claim that Best Society "is not a fellowship of the wealthy" with her account of letters of introduction, and judge whether her evidence supports the claim
Design on paper a fairer way for Corliss Freight (Source 4) to keep the benefits of referrals while widening access, and name one trade-off
Assessment Guidance
What to Look For
Strong answers define in-group, out-group and life chances accurately, name the specific mechanism at work (access, vouching, unwritten rules or law), and support each claim with a source and paragraph number. Watch for students who treat life chances as personal effort alone, who describe Chinese immigrants rather than the law as the cause of their exclusion, or who read the Source 4 gap as proof that referrals alone caused it. Full-credit answers on norms and values show a group's rules or laws spreading as a society's standards, and show those values changing over time (Source 3, paragraphs 6 and 7).
02
Classroom Activities
3 Activities
1
Doors and Gates: Sorting Post's Phrases
15 minPairs
Each pair gets eight cards, each with a phrase from Source 1. Pairs sort them into two piles, ways in (what helps a person join the in-group) and barriers (what keeps a person out), then write one sentence on what the two piles show about who controls the boundary.
The Eight Cards
"letters of introduction open the doors" (paragraph 5)
"unknown to society" (paragraph 3)
"chapter-houses of a brotherhood" (paragraph 5)
"an outer gate of reputation" (paragraph 6)
"the key of birth" (paragraph 6)
"those who sit at the gate rattling at the bars" (paragraph 6)
"charitable, or civic work" (paragraph 6)
"it is well to define what is to be understood by the term 'Best Society'" (paragraph 1)
Answer Key
Ways in: cards 1, 3, 5 and 7 (introductions, a worldwide network of people of position, birth, and civic work alongside insiders). Barriers: cards 2, 4 and 6 (being unknown, a reputation label, and the in-group's refusal of those who push). Card 8 is neither: it is Post claiming the authority to define the group, which is itself a sign of who controls the boundary. 4 + 3 + 1 = 8 cards. A strong summary sentence: the in-group decides both the ways in and the barriers, so outsiders must meet terms they did not set.
Discussion
Card 3 says people of position are linked across "all the cities strung around the whole globe." How does a network like that help an insider who moves to a new city, compared with an outsider who moves to the same city?
2
Reading a Law as a Sociologist
20 minGroups of 3
Groups analyze two sections of the Chinese Exclusion Act (Source 2) with a three-question chart, then use Source 3 to check how the law worked in practice. This is document analysis only: no role-play of officials or immigrants.
The Chart
For section 1 (paragraph 3) and section 14 (paragraph 5), answer: (1) Who is placed outside, and by what trait? (2) Which life chance does the section limit? (3) What does the section assume about who belongs in the nation? Then find one sentence in Source 3 that shows the section in action.
Answer Key
Section 1: Chinese laborers, defined by national origin and type of work; it limits the chance to enter, or "to remain within the United States" after the deadline, for ten years; it assumes that the nation may exclude workers of one origin. Source 3, paragraph 2: "an absolute 10-year ban on Chinese laborers immigrating." Section 14: Chinese people already in the country; it limits the chance to become citizens, "no State court or court of the United States shall admit Chinese to citizenship"; it assumes that membership in the nation could be closed by origin. Source 3, paragraph 4 restates it: Congress "refused state and federal courts the right to grant citizenship to Chinese resident aliens."
Step 2: Discussion
A law is backed by the state's power, while Post's in-group (Source 1) could only withhold invitations. Ask each group: which kind of boundary is harder for an outsider to cross, and why? Which is harder to change?
3
Referrals on Trial: A Structured Deliberation
15 minGroups of 4 (two pairs)
Groups deliberate on the invented company's choice in Source 4: should Corliss Freight keep filling most jobs through referrals? One pair builds the strongest case for referrals, the other the strongest case for the 2025 changes; then the pairs switch sides and the group writes a joint recommendation. The rubric scores reasoning, not the side chosen.
Steps
Pair A lists reasons for referrals, using paragraphs 1, 3 and 5 (4 min).
Pair B lists reasons for the 2025 changes, using paragraphs 2, 3 and 4 (4 min).
Pairs switch and each adds one point the other side missed (3 min).
The group writes a two-sentence recommendation that names one benefit and one cost for in-group and out-group applicants (4 min).
Points to Expect
For referrals: workers vouch for the people they refer and share responsibility for them (paragraph 5); referred hires already know the unwritten rules (paragraph 3). For the changes: referral hiring kept jobs mostly within two neighborhoods (31 of 36 referred hires, paragraph 3); writing the rules down and testing everyone gives outsiders the information insiders already had (paragraph 4). Either recommendation can earn full credit if it weighs both.
Variation
Give half the groups a version of the case in which the company also tracked how long each hire stayed, with referred hires staying longer, and compare their recommendations with the other groups'.
03
Diagrams & Visual Aids
2 diagrams
Diagram 1: A Legal Out-Group Over Time
Dates from Source 3, paragraphs 2, 5, 6 and 7, placed to scale (4.6 px per year). The shaded bar runs from the 1882 Act to the 1943 repeal. The timeline shows the law, not the lives of the people it excluded; Source 3 describes those effects.
Diagram 2: Referral Hiring Before and After the 2025 Changes
Invented data from Source 4, paragraphs 1, 2 and 4, drawn to scale.
04
Homework Assignment
~30 min
Homework: Inside, Outside and the Chances In Between
Directions: Source 1 is printed in Direct Instruction, Source 4 in Guided Practice, and Sources 2 and 3 in Independent Practice. Quote every source you use with its paragraph number. Problem 5 asks you to plan on paper only: do not survey or interview anyone.
Part 1: Reading the Sources (Problems 1-3)
Post says Best Society "is not a fellowship of the wealthy, nor does it seek to exclude those who are not of exalted birth" (Source 1, paragraph 2). Do paragraphs 3-6 support that claim? Answer in a paragraph with at least two quotations.
In Source 4, 31 of the 36 referred hires lived in North Bank or Millrace. Compute that share as a percent to one decimal place. Then explain how referral hiring can keep jobs inside an in-group even when no one intends to exclude anyone.
Source 3, paragraph 5 says the Geary Act required "each Chinese resident to register and obtain a certificate of residence." How many years passed between the 1882 Act and the year the extension was made permanent? Explain how the registration rule changed the life chances of Chinese residents who were already in the country.
Part 2: Using the Concepts (Problems 4-6)
Invented situation: a high school debate team takes new members only if a current member sponsors them, and its practices follow unwritten rules about dress and speaking order. Name the in-group and the out-group, identify two of the four ways in the lesson's table that are at work, and propose one change that would widen access without ending sponsorship.
On paper only, plan a study that could test whether a referral itself raises an applicant's chance of being hired, apart from the applicant's skills. Say which applicants you would compare, what you would hold the same, and what records you would need.
Write a paragraph comparing how Post's in-group (Source 1) and the 1882 law (Sources 2 and 3) shaped a society's norms and values. Which had the stronger effect on people's life chances? Support your answer with at least two quotations and answer one point on the other side.
Rubric
Criterion
Full Credit (2 pts)
Partial Credit (1 pt)
No Credit (0 pts)
Concepts
Uses in-group, out-group and life chances accurately and names the mechanism at work
Terms used loosely or one mechanism misnamed
Terms missing or confused
Evidence
Quotations carry source and paragraph numbers; Problems 2 and 3 are computed correctly
One claim unsupported or one computing error
No evidence, or several errors
Norms and values
Shows how an in-group's rules or a law spread or expressed a society's standards, and how they changed
Norms or values mentioned without a clear link
Not addressed
Reasoning
Problem 5 is a workable plan on paper; Problem 6 weighs evidence and answers the other side
Plan or argument incomplete
Plan or argument missing
05
Quiz: 20 Questions
Interactive, with answers
Instructions
Source 1 is printed in Direct Instruction, Source 4 in Guided Practice, and Sources 2 and 3 in Independent Practice. Source 1 is used in Questions 1-4 and 15; Source 2 in Questions 5-7 and 17; Source 3 in Questions 8-11, 16 and 17; and Source 4 in Questions 12, 18 and 19. Questions 13, 14 and 20 use new invented examples. Questions 1-14 are multiple choice; 15-20 are short answer.
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
According to Source 1, paragraph 1, what is Best Society abroad always made of?
Answer: C
Post writes: "Best Society abroad is always the oldest aristocracy." A is close to what she calls the American "Aristocracy of wealth," which she says is talked about, not what Best Society abroad is. B and D are not in the passage.
Question 2 of 20 · Multiple Choice
In Source 1, paragraph 2, which of these does Post list among the "credentials" by which society recognizes its chosen members?
Answer: D
The credentials are "good form in speech, charm of manner, knowledge of the social amenities, and instinctive consideration for the feelings of others." A contradicts her claim that Best Society "is not a fellowship of the wealthy." B is the press-agent fame she mocks elsewhere in chapter I, outside this excerpt. C is not in the passage.
Question 3 of 20 · Multiple Choice
According to Source 1, paragraph 4, what decides the rank of new people who arrive with letters of introduction?
Answer: A
Their position "ranks in direct proportion to the standing of those who wrote the introductions." In-group ties, not the newcomers' own qualities, set where they start. C confuses this with paragraph 5's remark about "all the cities strung around the whole globe," which describes the network of people of position, not the size of any city. B and D are not in the passage.
Question 4 of 20 · Multiple Choice
In Source 1, paragraph 6, what does Post call "the only way" into society for an outsider who "has not the key of birth"?
Answer: C
"The better, and the only way if she has not the key of birth, is through study to make herself eligible." B is the opposite: the gate is never opened "to those who sit at the gate rattling at the bars." A and D are not in this passage.
Question 5 of 20 · Multiple Choice
According to Source 2, paragraph 6 (section 15), whom did the words "Chinese laborers" cover?
Answer: D
Section 15 says the words mean "both skilled and unskilled laborers and Chinese employed in mining." A is too narrow: skilled workers and miners were included. B is broader than the definition: the Act treats other classes, such as those certified under section 6, separately. C is not in the passage.
Question 6 of 20 · Multiple Choice
Under section 6 of the Act (Source 2, paragraph 4), who had to issue the certificate for a Chinese person other than a laborer?
Answer: C
The person "shall be identified as so entitled by the Chinese Government," with "a certificate issued under the authority of said government." A sounds plausible, but the section gives the task to the Chinese Government and does not mention American consuls. B and D are not in the section either.
Question 7 of 20 · Multiple Choice
According to section 6 (Source 2, paragraph 4), to whom was the certificate to be shown when the traveler arrived?
Answer: D
The certificate "shall be produced to the collector of customs, or his deputy, of the port in the district in the United States at which the person named therein shall arrive." A, B and C are officials the section does not name.
Question 8 of 20 · Multiple Choice
According to Source 3, paragraph 2, what did federal law do "for the first time" in the Chinese Exclusion Act?
Answer: A
"For the first time, federal law proscribed entry of an ethnic working group on the premise that it endangered the good order of certain localities." D describes the later national-origin quotas of the Immigration Act of 1924, which Source 3's omitted paragraph covers, not the 1882 Act. B and C are not in the passage.
Question 9 of 20 · Multiple Choice
Source 3, paragraph 3 says very few Chinese could enter even as non-laborers. Why?
Answer: B
Non-laborers "found it increasingly difficult to prove their status" because of how widely the 1882 act defined laborers (Source 3, paragraph 3). C overstates the paragraph: it says certification was required and hard to obtain in practice, not that none were issued. A and D are not in the passage.
Question 10 of 20 · Multiple Choice
According to Source 3, paragraph 6, what yearly limit on Chinese immigrants remained after the 1943 repeal?
Answer: D
"However, quotas remained, leaving a yearly limit of 105 Chinese immigrants." A and B take numbers from the date 1943. C ignores the word "However": the repeal ended exclusion but kept a quota.
Question 11 of 20 · Multiple Choice
The Act was approved in 1882 (Source 3, paragraph 1), and Congress repealed the exclusion acts in 1943 (paragraph 6). For how many years were Chinese laborers excluded by federal law?
Answer: B
1943 - 1882 = 61 years. A and C are off by ten, a subtraction slip in the tens digit. D subtracts the 1902 date of the permanent extension from 1943 instead of the 1882 date of the Act.
Question 12 of 20 · Multiple Choice
In Source 4, 36 of the 80 referred applicants were hired. What percent is that?
Answer: A
36 / 80 = 0.45, or 45 percent. B is the share of all 60 hires that came through referrals (36 / 60), a different question. C reads the count as a percent. D is the hiring rate for applicants without a referral (24 / 220).
Question 13 of 20 · Multiple Choice
Invented situation: Dana plays in her town's youth orchestra but does not sing in its youth choir. From Dana's point of view, which term fits the choir?
Answer: B
The choir is a group Dana does not belong to, so for her it is an out-group; for its singers it is an in-group. A takes the singers' point of view instead of Dana's. C and D do not fit: the choir members interact regularly, so they are a group, not a category or an aggregate.
Question 14 of 20 · Multiple Choice
Invented situation: the members of a city's oldest rowing club decide that racing crews should wear white, and within a few years every rowing club in the region does the same. What does this example show?
Answer: B
The oldest club is an in-group with standing, and its custom spread until it became the region's norm: in-group membership shaping a society's norms. A reverses the groups and adds a law that is not in the example. C and D describe effects the example does not mention.
Question 15 of 20 · Short Answer
Use Source 1, paragraphs 3-6 to compare the chances of three newcomers to society: a bride of good family, a newcomer with letters of introduction, and an outsider with neither. Quote at least two paragraphs.
Model answer: The bride "has merely to take that which is hers by inheritance" (paragraph 3). The newcomer with letters arrives "with an already made position" (paragraph 4), because the letters open the doors of a worldwide network of people of position (paragraph 5). The outsider meets "an outer gate of reputation" and a road "steeper and longer" (paragraph 6). The three start at different places because of their ties to the in-group, not because of differences Post says they have in character. Rubric: all three positions described; at least two accurate quotations with paragraph numbers; the difference explained as in-group membership.
Question 16 of 20 · Short Answer
Source 3, paragraph 4 says Chinese residents who left the United States "had to obtain certifications to re-enter," and that courts "could still deport them." Explain how these two rules affected the life chances of Chinese residents and their families.
Model answer: A Chinese resident who wanted to visit family in China risked not being allowed back without the right papers, so travel to see parents, a spouse or children became a gamble with the person's home and job. Because courts could deport them but could not grant citizenship, residents lived in the country without the security citizens had. Both rules limited safety, family ties and a settled future, which are life chances, because of membership in a group the law singled out. Rubric: both rules explained; at least two life chances named; the link to out-group status made explicit.
Question 17 of 20 · Short Answer
The Act's preamble (Source 2, paragraph 2) gives a reason for the law. Explain how the law both expressed and shaped values about who belonged in the nation, and use Source 3, paragraph 7 to show how those values later changed.
Model answer: The preamble says "the coming of Chinese laborers to this country endangers the good order of certain localities." Written into law, that judgment treated one group as a threat by origin, and the government enforced it for decades, so the law both stated and spread a value about who belonged. In 2011-2012 Congress "condemned the Chinese Exclusion Act and affirmed a commitment to preserve civil rights and constitutional protections for all people" (Source 3, paragraph 7), so the nation's official values about membership had reversed. Rubric: the preamble quoted; the law's effect on values explained; the later change supported with Source 3.
Question 18 of 20 · Short Answer
In Source 4, paragraph 3, the supervisor describes rules that "Nobody writes down." Explain how unwritten norms give in-group applicants an advantage, and say whether the company's 2025 changes (paragraph 4) address it.
Model answer: Referred applicants learn from the worker who referred them that "you show up fifteen minutes early" and "call the lead, not the office," so they meet expectations that outsiders do not know exist. An outsider who calls the office when sick breaks a rule no one told them. The 2025 one-page guide writes the rules down for every applicant, which removes that particular advantage, though it does not change who hears about jobs first. Rubric: the quotation used; the mechanism (unwritten norms) explained; the 2025 change evaluated for this mechanism specifically.
Question 19 of 20 · Short Answer
Diagram 2 shows the share of Corliss Freight's hires that came through referrals falling from 60 percent in 2024 to 28 percent in 2025 (Source 4, paragraph 4). Does that show that out-group applicants' life chances improved? Explain what else you would need to know.
Model answer: Not by itself. The fall from 60 to 28 percent (36 of 60 hires, then 14 of 50) shows fewer hires through the in-group's network, but not who got the other 36 jobs: they might be people from the same two neighborhoods who applied directly. To judge the out-group's chances you would need the hiring rate for applicants with no tie to a worker, and where the new hires live, for both years. Rubric: a clear answer to the question; the limit of the share explained; at least one specific missing piece of data named.
Question 20 of 20 · Short Answer
Invented situation: in one town, the owners of most large businesses belong to the same private club, which admits a new member only if two members sponsor him or her. Explain how the club's admission rule could affect a newcomer's life chances, and give one way this in-group could shape what the town values.
Model answer: A newcomer without two sponsors cannot join, so he or she misses the conversations where owners hear about jobs, contracts and partnerships first, and must wait until enough insiders know him or her. That narrows the newcomer's chances in work and income. Because the owners have standing, the careers, causes and manners they reward can become what the town treats as respectable, for example by honoring at town events the kinds of work club members do. Rubric: one specific life chance tied to the sponsorship rule; a link to a source; one plausible way the in-group shapes the town's values.
0 of 20 answered · 0 correct
06
Frequently Asked Questions
10 Questions
What does D2.Soc.14.9-12 mean?
D2.Soc.14.9-12 asks high school students to explain how belonging to an in-group, or being placed in an out-group, affects a person's life chances and shapes a society's norms and values. It sits in the C3 sociology companion (Appendix C), in the cluster on social relationships: self, groups and socialization.
What is the difference between an in-group and an out-group?
An in-group is a group a person belongs to and identifies with, a "we"; an out-group is a group the person does not belong to, a "they." The same group is an in-group to its members and an out-group to everyone else. William Graham Sumner used the pair in his 1906 book Folkways.
What are life chances in sociology?
Life chances are a person's chances, given his or her position in society, of getting what that society values, such as health, schooling, good work, income, safety and respect. They are chances, not guarantees: individuals still make choices, but group membership changes the odds.
Why does this lesson use Emily Post's Etiquette?
Because it is an in-group describing its own boundaries. Post's 1922 book explains who belongs to "Best Society," how newcomers with letters of introduction enter, and why an outsider's road is "steeper and longer." Students analyze it as evidence of how an in-group works, not as a guide to manners.
How is the Chinese Exclusion Act taught on this page?
By document analysis only. Students read sections of the 1882 law and the National Archives' summary, which describes the law's extensions, its 1943 repeal and Congress's condemnation of it in 2011-2012, along with the State Department Office of the Historian's account of the protests by the Chinese government and people. There is no role-play or simulation, and the lesson does not compare the law with current debates.
How do in-groups shape a society's norms and values?
Groups with standing or power can turn their own customs into everyone's standards, as etiquette books and the copying of elite customs show, and laws can write a group's judgment about who belongs into national rules. When those boundaries are challenged, the norms and values can change, as the repeal and later condemnation of Chinese exclusion did.
Is the Corliss Freight hiring case real?
No. Source 4 is an invented case with invented numbers, written to show how referral networks and unwritten rules can favor insiders. Its data cannot show how much of the gap comes from referrals rather than from skills, and the page says so.
How does D2.Soc.14.9-12 connect to D2.Soc.15.9-12?
D2.Soc.14.9-12 explains how group membership changes individual life chances; D2.Soc.15.9-12 asks students to identify the patterns of inequality that result across a whole society, such as differences by income, education, age or sex.
Do students have to talk about their own groups?
No. Every task uses historical sources or invented cases. Students analyze how other groups draw boundaries, and no question asks them to describe their own in-groups, out-groups or experiences of exclusion.
What course teaches D2.Soc.14.9-12?
It is usually taught in a high school sociology elective, in the unit on groups and socialization. The Chinese Exclusion Act sources also fit U.S. History units on immigration in the late 1800s.
07
Related Standards
5 standards
These standards connect to D2.Soc.14.9-12: prerequisites to review first, parallel standards at the same level, and next steps that build on it.
Before this lesson
D2.Soc.13.9-12Prerequisite
Identify group characteristics and how groups, individuals and society affect one another
Interpret the effects of inequality on groups and individuals
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.
