The Common Core and Historical Investigations: Reading History and The Panama Canal - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

slide1 n.
Download
Skip this Video
Loading SlideShow in 5 Seconds..
The Common Core and Historical Investigations: Reading History and The Panama Canal PowerPoint Presentation
Download Presentation
The Common Core and Historical Investigations: Reading History and The Panama Canal

play fullscreen
1 / 75
The Common Core and Historical Investigations: Reading History and The Panama Canal
77 Views
Download Presentation
martena-boyer
Download Presentation

The Common Core and Historical Investigations: Reading History and The Panama Canal

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript

  1. The Common Core and Historical Investigations: Reading History and The Panama Canal Bruce A. Lesh Franklin High School Reisterstown, Maryland

  2. Myths about Primary Sources • Primary sources are more reliable than secondary • Primary sources can be read as arguments about the past • Historians use a “sourcing heuristic to evaluate bias and reliability • Using primary sources engages students in authentic historical inquiry • Students can build up an understanding of the past through primary sources • Sources can be classified as primary or secondary Keith Barton. Primary Sources in History: Breaking Through the Myths. 2005

  3. Uses for historical sources To motivate historical inquiry To supply evidence for historical accounts To convey information about the past To provide insight into the thoughts and experiences of people in the past Keith Barton. Primary Sources in History: Breaking Through the Myths. 2005

  4. “As every teacher knows, few students have the skills necessary to conduct inquiry on their own. Although inquiry is essential to education, simply assigning such tasks won’t guarantee meaningful results. Most students need direct help to make the most of their experiences, and teachers’ most important responsibilities is to provide them with the structure they need to learn—a process known as scaffolding.” Linda Levstik and Keith Barton Doing History (2005)

  5. USING APPARTS TO ANALYZE DOCUMENTS AUTHORWho created the source? What do you know about the author? What is the author's point of view? PLACE AND TIMEWhere and when was the source produced? How might this affect the meaning of the source? PRIOR KNOWLEDGEBeyond information about the author and the context of its creation, what do you know that would help you further understand the primary source? For example, do you recognize any symbols and recall what they represent? AUDIENCEFor whom was the source created and how might this affect the reliability of the source? REASONWhy was this source produced at the time it was produced? THE MAIN IDEAWhat main point is the source trying to convey?  What is the central message of the document?  SIGNIFICANCEWhy is this source important? What inferences can you draw from this document? Ask yourself, "So what?"  What should a student of history or politics take away from the analysis of this document? 

  6. Defining First/Second/and Third-Order Documents First-Order - The most essential primary source for the teacher on a particular topic in history. Second-Order - Three to five primary or secondary sources that challenge or corroborate the central idea in the First-Order document. These documents, selected by the teacher, provide a nuanced understanding of the topic by offering multiple perspectives. Third-Order - Additional primary or secondary sources that students find to challenge or corroborate the First-Order document. Ultimately, students should select a Third-Order document to serve as their First-Order document. Fred Drake and Sarah Drake Brown. A Systemic Approach to Improve Students’ Historical Thinking

  7. SCIM-C Strategy A tool to help students develop skills to analyze primary sources Goal- to help students have a more “precise, recursive, and thoughtful approach to historical inquiry”

  8. Summary Quick examination of the source What type of document is the source? What specific information, details and/or perspectives does the source provide? What is the subject area and/or purpose of the source? Who was the author and/or audience of the source?

  9. Contextualizing Locating the source within time and space When and where was the source produced? Why was the source produced? What was happening within the immediate broader context at the time the source was produced? What summarizing information can place the source in time and place?

  10. Inferring Revisiting initial facts to begin reading the subtexts and developing an understand of the context What is suggested by the source? What interpretations may be drawn? What perspectives or points of view are indicated? What interferences may be drawn from absences or omissions in the source?

  11. Monitoring Reflect upon what has been discovered based upon the historical question What additional evidence beyond the source is necessary to answer the historical question? What ideas, images, or terms need further defining? How useful or significant is the source for its intended purpose in answering the historical question? What question from the previous stages need to be revisited in order to analyze the source satisfactorily?

  12. Corroborating Once a series of sources have been analyzed students can now begin to determine similarities and differences between the interpretations What similarities and differences between the sources exist? What factors could account for these similarities and differences? What conclusions can be drawn from the accumulated interpretations? What additional information or sources are necessary to answer more fully the guiding historical questions?

  13. Sourcing Before reading the document ask yourself: Who wrote this? What is the author’s point of view? Why was it written? When was it written? (A long time or short time after the event?) Is this source believable? Why? Why not?

  14. Contextualizing What else was going on at the time this was written? What was it like to be alive at this time? What things were different back then? What things were the same? What would it look like to see this event through the eyes of someone who lived back then?

  15. Close Reading What claims does the author make? What evidence does the author use to support those claims? How is this document supposed to make me feel? What words or phrases does the author use to convince me that he/she is right? What information does the author leave out?

  16. Corroboration • What do other pieces of evidence say? • Am I finding the same information everywhere? • Am I finding different versions of the story? (If yes, why might that be?) • Where else could I look to find out about this? • What pieces of evidence are most believable?

  17. Text: What is visible/readable--what information is provided by the source? Context: What was going on during the time period? What background information do you have that helps explain the information found in the source? Subtext: What is between the lines? Must ask questions about: Author: Who created the source and what do we know about that person? Audience: For whom was the source created? Reason: Why was this source produced at the time it was produced? Style: How does the author use language and rhetorical devices to convey meaning? Source work terms

  18. “As every teacher knows, few students have the skills necessary to conduct inquiry on their own. Although inquiry is essential to education, simply assigning such tasks won’t guarantee meaningful results. Most students need direct help to make the most of their experiences, and teachers’ most important responsibilities is to provide them with the structure they need to learn—a process known as scaffolding.” Linda Levstik and Keith Barton Doing History (2005)

  19. The truth A lie A half-truth An exaggeration Obfuscation (hiding the truth) What are the differences?

  20. 1850 Clayton-Bulwer Treaty : The United States and Britain agree to seek an independent canal. 1898 20-year French effort to build a canal fails after 300 million dollars and thousands of lives are lost 1901 Hay-Poncefote Treaty: British relinquish their rights to construct a canal 1903 : Convinced by French construction manager, Philippe Bunau-Varilla, the United States agrees to construct a Colombian canal rather than one in Nicaragua. • Hay-Herran Treaty: United States and Columbia agree to lease the United States a strip of land for 100 years for $40 Million. 1903 Rejected by the Colombian Parliament. 1904 Canal construction begins What happens between the treaties rejection and the construction of the canal? Philippe-Jean Bunau-Varilla

  21. President Theodore Roosevelt “No one connected with the American Government had any part in preparing, inciting, or encouraging the revolution, and except for the reports of our military and naval officers, which I forwarded to Congress, no one connected with the American government had any previous knowledge concerning the proposed revolution…” “From the beginning to the end our course was straightforward and in absolute accord with the highest of standards of international morality…I did not lift my finger to incite the revolutionists…I simply ceased to stamp out the different revolutionary fuses that were already burning…”

  22. What is Theodore Roosevelt doing in his autobiography Truth A lie A half-truth An exaggeration Obfuscation (hiding the truth)

  23. Examine your evidence and determine if it provides support for President Roosevelt's argument or challenges it. • Be sure to consider the context and subtext of your source

  24. "Panama or Bust," The New York Times, 1903Artist unknown

  25. Philippe Bunau-Varilla in a 1940 interview with reporter Eric Sevareid of CBS News “I called on Mr. Roosevelt and asked him point blank if, when the revolt broke out, an American warship would be sent to Panama to “protect American lives and interest.” The President looked at me; he said nothing. Of course a President of the United States could not give such a commitment, especially to a foreigner and private citizen like me. But his look was enough for me. I took the gamble.”

  26. WHAT DOES "I TOOK PANAMA" MEAN? The only straw at which their drowning calumny could clutch was the celebrated phrase: "I took Panama," which Theodore Roosevelt pronounced in California. When the sentence was reported by the papers I understood that it meant: "I took Panama because Panama offered herself in order to be protected against Colombia's tyranny and greed." Recently in speaking to a distinguished visitor to Oyster Bay---William Morton Fullerton, the eminent writer on international problems---Theodore Roosevelt explained the sentence in this familiar way: "I took Panama because Bunau-Varilla brought it to me on a silver platter." It is obvious that Theodore Roosevelt's own interpretation of his sentence harmonizes entirely with mine. It does not mean as the advocates of Colombia say: "I took Panama away from her mother country Colombia because the interests of the United States wanted it." It means: "I protected Panama, at her pressing request, from the tyrannical greed of Colombia, because her preservation and the world's interests wanted it." Philippe Bunau-Varilla. The Great Adventure of Panama: Wherein Are Exposed Its Relation to the Great War and also the Luminous Traces of The German Conspiracies Against France and the United States. Doubleday, Page & Company: Garden City, New York, 1920.

  27. Chicago TribuneNovember 6, 1903 “Panama Revolt Sets back Canal” Apparently the creation of a new republic on the Isthmus of Panama by means of a successful revolution was the only means of circumventing the greedy officials of Bogotá, who were always willing to sell themselves out to the highest bidder. It has been freely alleged that the United States officials on the Isthmus, while they did not actually participate in the revolution, allowed it to be understood that the United States would be friendly to a revolutionary move and would preserve the neutrality of Panama railroad so completely as to prevent the Columbian government from forwarding troops and munitions of war along that line. Such a charge is a serious thing from an international standpoint, and President Roosevelt’s administration will not be anxious to pose as a receiver of stolen property or as have having aided and abetted a revolution to secure to itself personal advantages.

  28. Philippe-Jean Bunau-Varilla Hay-Bunau-Varilla Treaty

  29. “Go Away Little Man and Don’t Bother Me” New York World

  30. “Uncle Sam has Already Collected the Philippines, Guam, and Hawaii and it Looks Like Panama is his Next Victim: The Anneser’ll Get You ef You Don’t Watch Out.” New York Times, 12/1903