Curriculum  /  ELA  /  8th Grade  /  Unit 9: Twelve Angry Men (2020)  /  Lesson 4

Twelve Angry Men (2020)

Lesson 4
icon/ela/white

ELA

Unit 9

8th Grade

Lesson 4 of 11

Objective

Analyze the conflicts that emerge between the jurors. 

Define “reasonable doubt” and determine whether or not there is evidence of the defendant’s guilt/innocence. 

Readings and Materials

  • Book: Twelve Angry Men by Reginald Rose  pp. 10 – 21

  • Article: “Reasonable Doubt” by The Economist 

  • Video: “12 Angry Men (2/10) Movie CLIP - It's the Same Knife! (1957) HD” by Movieclips 

Fishtank Plus

Unlock features to optimize your prep time, plan engaging lessons, and monitor student progress.

Target Task

Writing Prompt

If you were a member of the jury, would you be convinced at this point of the defendant’s guilt “beyond a reasonable doubt?” Explain using evidence from the text.

Key Questions

  • Based on the article “Reasonable Doubt,” is there any reasonable doubt in this case? Are you convinced of the defendant’s guilt beyond a reasonable doubt? 

  • p. 13 – Pay attention to the pronouns used by Juror 10. Whom is he referring to here when he says “‘em” and “they’re”? What preconceived prejudices does he have? How might this influence his role as a juror? Make sure to use the word “impartial” in your answer. 

  • Every juror except the eighth seems to agree that the boy is guilty. What do they believe was the boy’s motive for killing his father?

  • p. 18 – Describe the relationship between Juror 3 and his son. How might this impact his belief about the defendant who is charged with killing his father? 

  • p. 18 –Juror 4 says, “Children from slum backgrounds are potential menaces to society” (p. 18). In response, Juror 5 rises and speaks loudly. What does Juror 5 say about his past in this moment?

  • When it’s Juror 8’s turn to explain his reasoning for voting “Not Guilty,” he says:

  • The weapon used by the murderer of the boy’s father was:

  • p. 20 – How is Juror 8 trying to emphasize the kid’s right to be proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt?

  • p. 21 – Identify the example of sarcasm on the top of p. 21. What does that reveal about Juror 3’s opinion? 

  • Optional deep-thinking question: Why does Reginald Rose call the play, Twelve Angry Men rather than Twelve Angry Jurors? Why does he exclude women in his title?

Notes

Students will question why the jury consists entirely of white men. It wasn’t until the Civil Rights Act of 1957 that women were officially given the right to serve on federal juries (although some states started earlier), and it wasn’t until 1973 that women could serve on juries in all fifty states. Minorities also had to fight for the right to serve on juries. In 1979, the Supreme Judicial Court ruled that race and gender could not be used to rule out potential jurors.

Common Core Standards

  • RL.8.3 — Analyze how particular lines of dialogue or incidents in a story or drama propel the action, reveal aspects of a character, or provoke a decision.

Next

Analyze how the playwright propels action in the plot. 

Evaluate Juror 8’s persuasion technique based on logic and rational, rather than emotion and gut feeling. 

Lesson 5
icon/arrow/right/large

Lesson Map

A7CB09C2-D12F-4F55-80DB-37298FF0A765

Request a Demo

See all of the features of Fishtank in action and begin the conversation about adoption.

Learn more about Fishtank Learning School Adoption.

Contact Information

School Information

What courses are you interested in?

ELA

Math

Are you interested in onboarding professional learning for your teachers and instructional leaders?

Yes

No

Any other information you would like to provide about your school?

We Handle Materials So You Can Focus on Students

We Handle Materials So You Can Focus on Students

We've got you covered with rigorous, relevant, and adaptable ELA lesson plans for free