In the past, I have tried to do too much, too fast. I have pushed myself too hard and expected too much of my students, who were not familiar with the inquiry process. I have also tried to assign too much to my students who were skilled researchers, though did not have the independent skills to be able to carry out an inquiry completely on their own.
I tend to dive into the deep end when I try something new. Sometimes this works out, but the vast majority of the time, I realize that I needed more planning. This summer I am taking advantage of the time that I have to plan ahead and I am trying hard not to bite off more than I can chew.
For example, in trying inquiry in the past, I have tried to make a whole inquiry unit without enough time to think it through. I ended up ending the unit with a traditional test, despite the inquiry that my students were doing. They weren't producing an end project and were really only analyzing the essential question and completing the research. Many students noticed this and asked me why they were doing a bunch of work that didn't go anywhere. I didn't have a good answer! I just hadn't planned the unit thoroughly enough to have a reason for all of the work that they were doing. Sure, they were practicing research skills, but without an end project, this seemed like a giant waste of time for them. I can't blame them for that perspective.
During the school closure this year, I had a student teacher. We continued distance learning online but gave students a much lighter workload. With the extra time that would have been spent planning traditional lessons, she and I worked through an inquiry unit. We took the time (the whole quarter, actually) to work on the unit bits at a time. It was great to have someone to bounce ideas off of and to bring forward some excellent ideas of her own. In addition, we took our time and planned out all parts of the unit, starting with the historical thinking skill and its corresponding standard (Wisconsin State Social Studies Standards):
CausationStandard SS.Hist1: Wisconsin students will use historical evidence for determining cause and effect.
These are the applicable sub-standards:
SS.Hist1.a.hEvaluate multiple events from different perspectives using primary and secondary sources, and analyze intended and unintended causes from both long- and short-term perspectives; evaluate how different groups and individuals contributed to the event or cause.SS.Hist1.b.hEvaluate multiple events from different perspectives using primary and secondary sources, and analyze intended and unintended effects from both long- and short-term perspectives; evaluate how different groups and individuals contributed to the effect.
To narrow down the focus (as these standards are whopping), we chose to focus on using primary and secondary sources to analyze cause and effect and evaluate how different groups and individuals contributed to the causes and effects. We decided against focusing on short- and long-term perspectives, as we could focus on perspective in another unit. Tackling too much during one unit can lead to overwhelm, confusion, and possible failure of the inquiry, and we knew we needed to start smaller.
Then we wrote some compelling questions to narrow the focus to the time period under study, considering European exploration.
What made European exploration possible? (Innovation, motivations)What impact did European exploration have on Europeans? on the people of the Americas? on Africans?
Here are some of our other learning targets, though these will have to be narrowed down to help our focus:
Part one (included in the above link): European Exploration
Part two (not completed yet): Empires (Asia, Africa, the Americas) -- Might be taught before European exploration, as that is the logical chronology.
We decided that writing a MelCon essay and/or completing an exam would be the best way to end this particular unit. Though these are more traditional approaches, again, we felt that introducing too many new tasks at one time would simply be overwhelming. It's better to focus on one new thing at a time until the students are used to it, but more importantly until the teachers are used to it. We teachers have to be prepared and confident in teaching the tasks before we can expect students to be comfortable with them.
We then decided to focus on the impact of European exploration on the people of the Americas and Europeans, as we will have a separate unit to discuss African empires and the impact of globalization on the diverse people of Africa.
As this unit will be used in the classroom, I am not prepared to provide the questions on the exam here (though my students will have them in advance to prepare), as I am not sure if the questions will change. Essentially, the exam includes questions about the following:
- Continuity and change during the Age of Exploration
- Contributions of individuals during the Age of Exploration
- Causes and effects of the Columbian Exchange
This unit tends to be very Eurocentric, and looking at the unit at a glance, it certainly seems Eurocentric. I can assure you that the resources used will provide a variety of viewpoints concerning exploration as well as provide a well-rounded idea of how various groups reacted to exploration. My goal is to approach empires such as the Maya, Aztec, Inca, as well as the nations of North America with the understanding that they were successful, independent, sovereign, and strong populations. The peoples of the Americas were incredibly diverse. In addition, they did not just step aside and let the Europeans take over. Often, this part of history (at least in "western civilization") is taught with the story that Europeans waltzed in with their superior weapons and cunning and took over without a fight. This is not true, as there are many factors as to why Europeans were able to colonize. We will approach these in our daily lessons, though many of those lessons have not been developed yet. If you have suggestions for me, I am willing to hear them! The last thing that I want to do is teach students, yet again, the same old narrative about Europeans taking the land and now here we are in the United States, as it is a highly inaccurate portrayal that leaves out many voices.
I also find terms such as "Columbian Exchange" to be problematic, but I am unsure of how to approach this. So far, when teaching this concept, we go into a discussion about why the term received this name, and have a mini-debate about whether it is a "good" name for the exchange of goods during this time period. I find that this is a very interesting conversation.
No comments:
Post a Comment