Scan barcode
charlottedante's review against another edition
4.0
It could've used one more editing pass-through but it was a solid introduction to the topic for all ages.
beths0103's review against another edition
4.0
A book that reminds us that the U.S. Constitution is not just meant to be revered, but also openly criticized. After all, it is a living document that is always seeking to form a more perfect union.
amber_lea84's review against another edition
1.0
This book is dumb.
Instead of pointing out weaknesses, giving the historical context for why the framers made the choices they did, and then giving multiple examples of reasonable changes we might make to update the constitution, the authors just tell you what to think as if their opinions are the only opinions. Then the book continues on as if we've all agreed to the authors' solutions. Part of the reason this bothers me so much is that the book doesn't start out introducing the authors and their credentials and a break down of why you should listen to them, it reads like a history textbook.
To give you an example of why this is a problem...the authors think that age restrictions for office are dumb and should be eliminated. That if you can vote, you should be able to run for president. What? Are you not aware that 18 year olds are idiots? I am 100% on board with age restrictions. You should have to have some experience being an adult before you can run for senate or president. I very much want that built into the constitution.
This book also argues that presidents should be able to serve for more than two terms. Uhh, big fat no thank you on that one too. Sure, the authors argue that it should only be in times of war/crisis, but that's still incredibly stupid. That just creates the incentive for a president to create a crisis to hold on to their presidency.
And again, the authors act as if these "fixes" are obvious and just make sense and there's no other reasonable way to look at it.
Instead of pointing out weaknesses, giving the historical context for why the framers made the choices they did, and then giving multiple examples of reasonable changes we might make to update the constitution, the authors just tell you what to think as if their opinions are the only opinions. Then the book continues on as if we've all agreed to the authors' solutions. Part of the reason this bothers me so much is that the book doesn't start out introducing the authors and their credentials and a break down of why you should listen to them, it reads like a history textbook.
To give you an example of why this is a problem...the authors think that age restrictions for office are dumb and should be eliminated. That if you can vote, you should be able to run for president. What? Are you not aware that 18 year olds are idiots? I am 100% on board with age restrictions. You should have to have some experience being an adult before you can run for senate or president. I very much want that built into the constitution.
This book also argues that presidents should be able to serve for more than two terms. Uhh, big fat no thank you on that one too. Sure, the authors argue that it should only be in times of war/crisis, but that's still incredibly stupid. That just creates the incentive for a president to create a crisis to hold on to their presidency.
And again, the authors act as if these "fixes" are obvious and just make sense and there's no other reasonable way to look at it.
molly_dettmann's review against another edition
4.0
This book reads like the most interesting textbook about government I’ve ever read. I’d highly recommend teachers checking it out and incorporating chapters as supplemental lessons on the various topics this book covers. I like how it was organized and how it tied back to what is going on in government today. I’m not sure how many kids will just want to read this for fun, but I’d still recommend it for middle/high school libraries. Shoot, I would have loved to have read and discussed this in college for my gov class.
the_fabric_of_words's review against another edition
5.0
Constitution Day is tomorrow, September 17, so I thought I'd feature this awesome resource!
When I taught 8th grade Social Studies, one of the classes I taught was an "Influences on the U.S. Constitution" course in 9-weeks (!right?), that focused on the development of political thought contributing to the framing of the Constitution (think Magna Carta, Locke, Hobbes, Montesquieu, the Mayflower Compact, English Bill of Rights, etc.).
I cobbled together a bunch of resources for my students, relying heavily on (and still heartily recommending you utilize) iCivics free lessons plans and materials.
But it quickly became clear my students needed more than 1 to 2 day lessons and were having troubles linking the political thoughts of the1700s to decisions and the political arena today. They would have benefited from selected readings from Fault Lines greatly.
Where Fault Lines is strongest is in pointing out how conflicts (both in theory and practice) in the past shape and define our political system and decisions now. It's the answer to the "Why do I have to learn this?" question that inevitably comes up when you're asking an 8th grader to read a document from the 1700s. Sure, you can point them to the Constitution, but my students had a hard time reading that and understanding how it shaped their lives, now.
The publisher of Fault Lines offers a free 15-page Discussion Guide, author interview, and cool "I am Constitutionally literate" stickers for you to print for your students!
I don't know that I would teach the entire book, but excerpts -- such as "It Takes Two to Tango / Bicameralism" and "Taxation without Representation / The District of Columbia" -- are excellent reads for in-class instruction and discussion, depending on the specific objectives you're teaching.
Visit my blog for more great middle grade book recommendations, free teaching materials and fiction writing tips: https://amb.mystrikingly.com/
When I taught 8th grade Social Studies, one of the classes I taught was an "Influences on the U.S. Constitution" course in 9-weeks (!right?), that focused on the development of political thought contributing to the framing of the Constitution (think Magna Carta, Locke, Hobbes, Montesquieu, the Mayflower Compact, English Bill of Rights, etc.).
I cobbled together a bunch of resources for my students, relying heavily on (and still heartily recommending you utilize) iCivics free lessons plans and materials.
But it quickly became clear my students needed more than 1 to 2 day lessons and were having troubles linking the political thoughts of the1700s to decisions and the political arena today. They would have benefited from selected readings from Fault Lines greatly.
Where Fault Lines is strongest is in pointing out how conflicts (both in theory and practice) in the past shape and define our political system and decisions now. It's the answer to the "Why do I have to learn this?" question that inevitably comes up when you're asking an 8th grader to read a document from the 1700s. Sure, you can point them to the Constitution, but my students had a hard time reading that and understanding how it shaped their lives, now.
The publisher of Fault Lines offers a free 15-page Discussion Guide, author interview, and cool "I am Constitutionally literate" stickers for you to print for your students!
I don't know that I would teach the entire book, but excerpts -- such as "It Takes Two to Tango / Bicameralism" and "Taxation without Representation / The District of Columbia" -- are excellent reads for in-class instruction and discussion, depending on the specific objectives you're teaching.
Visit my blog for more great middle grade book recommendations, free teaching materials and fiction writing tips: https://amb.mystrikingly.com/
emeelee's review against another edition
4.0
This book addresses many of the pitfalls of the US Constitution, and gives historical context for why the Framers wrote the Constitution the way they did. I learned a lot that I didn't know before about the history of the US government, and the some of the ways that its inefficiencies might be improved.
Each chapter is broken up into four parts:
-Modern example of the Constitution failing
-"Meanwhile, back in 1787..." Historical context of the Constitutional Convention
-Explanation of the problem
-Examples of how the problem is addressed elsewhere in the world, and on the state level
This format really helped make the connection between the historical context of the Constitution with its influence on the politics of today, and highlighted the differences between the country that the Framers lived in and the one we live in now.
The authors, Cynthia and Sanford Levinson, emphasized the fact that the Framers intended for the Constitution to be a living document, to be reflected on and amended to keep pace with the needs of the country over time. They also showed how the Framers were not in complete agreement over everything that eventually got ratified-- much of our Constitution was born of weeks-long debates and last-minute compromises.
The weakest chapter was Chapter 15, about "lame ducks" (presidents who were not re-elected, during the time between election day and inauguration day of their successor). I don't believe the Levinsons made a clear argument here for why exactly this is a problem that needs to be fixed, nor do their suggested fixes seem likely to make much of a difference. And Chapter 19, in which the Levinsons "grade" the Constitution on effectiveness and argue amongst themselves in interview format, was unnecessary and indulgent.
The rest of the book was very informative and effective, however. I highly recommend it if, like me, you don't have strong background knowledge of US government, but want to learn more about it in an easily digestible way.
Each chapter is broken up into four parts:
-Modern example of the Constitution failing
-"Meanwhile, back in 1787..." Historical context of the Constitutional Convention
-Explanation of the problem
-Examples of how the problem is addressed elsewhere in the world, and on the state level
This format really helped make the connection between the historical context of the Constitution with its influence on the politics of today, and highlighted the differences between the country that the Framers lived in and the one we live in now.
The authors, Cynthia and Sanford Levinson, emphasized the fact that the Framers intended for the Constitution to be a living document, to be reflected on and amended to keep pace with the needs of the country over time. They also showed how the Framers were not in complete agreement over everything that eventually got ratified-- much of our Constitution was born of weeks-long debates and last-minute compromises.
The weakest chapter was Chapter 15, about "lame ducks" (presidents who were not re-elected, during the time between election day and inauguration day of their successor). I don't believe the Levinsons made a clear argument here for why exactly this is a problem that needs to be fixed, nor do their suggested fixes seem likely to make much of a difference. And Chapter 19, in which the Levinsons "grade" the Constitution on effectiveness and argue amongst themselves in interview format, was unnecessary and indulgent.
The rest of the book was very informative and effective, however. I highly recommend it if, like me, you don't have strong background knowledge of US government, but want to learn more about it in an easily digestible way.
keran's review against another edition
5.0
I read this for a project in 8th grade and was surprised by the depth. extremely informative and easy to digest.