As part of the Socials 11 curriculum, students are supposed to be able to assess Canada's role in WWII. You will work as a class to share the key information from each major battle that Canada/ Canadians participated in during WWII before attempting to assess Canada's role in the war on your own. Groups of 4-5 will be assigned one of the following battles from WWII to report on and deliver a presentation.
photo: courtesy U.S. National Archives.
Battle of Britain - Aircraft spotter on the roof of a building in London. St. Paul's Cathedral is in the background. 306-NT-901B-3
RESOURCES
CARTOONS
Steps in creating your project:
1) Everyone in your group should read about (don't put anything together yet):
a) Background to the battle (what events led up to the battle/goals of the battle?) - Causes
b) What happened during the battle? - Components
c) What was the outcome and effect of the battle? (significance?) - Consequences
d) What role did Canada or Canadians play in the battle?
2) After you are familiar with the event, assign group members the following research responsibilities:
a) Causes of the battle
b) Components of the battle
c) Consequences of the battle
d) Canada's role in the battle
e) Primary source analysis (explain how the source helps us understand the event)
-letter, political cartoon, video, newspaper article, photograph, etc.
f) Website creator
3) Consolidate your information and create a website/blog/wiki to share the information with your peers.
- Make sure the information is not too overwhelming for your peers to understand.
- Works cited should be at the end of each section
4) Use your website to present your battle to the class. Do not read out your website, students can do that on their own. Help your classmates understand the battle.
5) Email the link to your site to Mr Chan.
*Remember, these battles will be on your final exam so you need to understand your battle and help others understand it too.
No need to plagiarize either.
Assessment:
|
|
Does not meet |
Minimally meets |
Meets |
Exceeds |
|
Content (x3) |
Causes, components and consequences are presented as random facts.
|
Causes, components and consequences are not fully explained or one of the 3 is not explained.
|
Causes,components, and consequences clearly explained.
|
Causes, Components and consequences are explained in detail with careful consideration to the relevance of information. |
|
Presentation |
Components of the webpage impede an understanding of the event (poor layout, too much text, irrelevant images) Information is read out and appears to have no real understanding of what is being said. |
Simple webpage with text and images. Information is read out but shows an understanding of what is being said. |
Uses different types of media to provide an interesting and readable webpage. Information is presented with clarity and confidence. |
Uses different types of media with thought put into finding quality historical sources. Information is easily readable and promotes an understanding of the event. Makes the effort to help the audience understand the event and engages the audience. |
|
Primary Source Analysis |
Not presented, or Superficial description, does not account for perspective, does not add to the audience's understanding of the event. |
Superficial and brief description, perspective mentioned but not explained, little relevance to helping the audience understand the event. |
Described, perspectives explored, connection to how the source helps the audience understand the event better. |
Described, explains the purpose of the source, background to the source explained with a connection to the perspective, explores what the source reveals about the author, explains the effect on those viewing the source, connection to how the source helps the audience understand the event better. |
|
Citation |
Only once source used Improper citation |
Less than 5 sources used OR Improper citation |
At least 5 sources cited according to MLA standards Media sources given within the webpage |
At least 5 sources cited according to MLA standards with thought given to the credibility of the source. Media sources given within the webpage. |
|
Peer Assessment |
Canadian involvement is not included and the audience is not able to assess Canada's role. Audience will need to do a lot of research to assess Canada's role. |
Canadian involvement is touched upon but is not enough to help the audience assess Canada's role. Audience will need to do a little further research to assess Canada's role. |
Canadian involvement is clearly explained and significance is highlighted so that the audience is able to assess Canada's role. Webpage is is clear and useful for the basics. |
Canadian involvement and significance explained with details that connect the audience to the experience. Audience can easily assess Canada's role with the information presented. Webpage will be very useful for understanding the event. |
/60 marks
SOCIALS NINE