SOCIAL STUDIES TEN DIGITAL HANDBOOK

SIMPLIFIED CONFEDERATION GLOSSARY

SOURCE

Acadian:
A person who comes from or lives in the French-speaking areas of the Maritime Provinces.

Boer War:
A war fought in South Africa from 1899-1902 between the Boers (people of Dutch descent) and the British. Over 7000 Canadians served in this war, which was the first time that Canada sent troops to an overseas war.

Britain:
The group of countries comprised of England, Wales, Scotland and part of Ireland. In the past Britain created a great empire that explored and claimed land around the world as colonies. Some of the British colonies eventually became the provinces of Canada.

British North America:
After the United States broke away from Britain, the remaining British colonies in North America were together called British North America. These were the colonies that later came together to form Canada.

British North America Act:
When the British North American colonies of Nova Scotia, New Brunswick and the Province of Canada joined in 1867 they first had to discuss how the new country would be run. They wrote up the rules for the new country in a document they called the British North America Act. The British Government approved of this Act on March 29, 1867. This led to the creation of the Dominion of Canada on July 1, 1867. In 1982, the BNA Act was renamed the Constitution Act, 1867.

Canadian Pacific Railway (Transcontinental railroad):
The first transcontinental railway in Canada, linking the east and west coasts. It was built to connect British Columbia with the eastern Canadian provinces. It was started in 1881 and took five years to build. It ended at Port Moody, B.C.

Charlottetown Conference:
The first meeting of leaders from the Province of Canada and the Maritime colonies to discuss the idea of Confederation. It took place at Charlottetown, Prince Edward Island, in September of 1864. At first the meeting was meant only to talk about a union of the Maritime colonies, but leaders from Canada asked that they be able to propose a larger union.

Colony:
A settlement of people who leave their country to go live in a new land. The British and French governments both set up colonies in North America hundreds of years ago. The British won control of these colonies in the Seven Years War.

Confederation:
The coming together of the colonies in British North America. Three colonies were made into four provinces. These were Ontario, Quebec, Nova Scotia and New Brunswick. They became the Dominion of Canada on July 1, 1867. The other provinces and territories joined later.

Conference:
A meeting. There were many meetings necessary for all the colonies to agree to form Canada. The government of each colony wanted to get the best deal for its citizens.

Document:
Written information.  For example, the British North America Act document set down the information on how the governments in Canada would work.

Economy:
The combined business and work done by a community. When people are buying a lot and businesses are getting richer, the economy is said to be good. At the time of Confederation, the fur trade, farming, logging, mining, shipbuilding and the railway industry all helped contribute to Canada's economy.

European:
Someone originally from the continent of Europe.

Fathers of Confederation:
The political leaders from the British North American colonies who went to the conferences to discuss Confederation.

Federal government:
The Government of Canada.

First Nations:
The Native peoples who have been living in North America before and since the Europeans came, except the Inuit. Europeans called them "Indians" at first because they had darker skin than the Europeans, and because the Europeans thought they had reached India.

Fur trade:
The fur trade started in the 1600s when Europeans began to trade their metal and cloth goods for the furs that the Native people had. Fur traders earned a lot of money when fur hats became popular in Europe.

Gold rush:
Rapid movement of people into an area where gold has been discovered. In the case of the Fraser River gold rush in British Columbia, and the Klondike gold rush in the Yukon, the population of both areas increased greatly in a very short period.

Hudson's Bay Company:
This company began in the fur-trading business in 1670, when the King of England gave it a huge area of land known as Rupert's Land. In 1870 the Government of Canada bought this land from the company. The land was divided to create the provinces of Manitoba, Alberta, and Saskatchewan. The company name still exists in "The Bay" department stores.

Independence:
A situation in which a country has its own government, and rules itself. The Americans fought a war of independence against Britain because they no longer wanted to be ruled by the British.

Industry:
The business of making goods, and selling those goods to make money. Some industries at the time of Confederation were shipbuilding, railway and canal construction, and the production of farming tools.

Intercolonial Railway:
A railway started shortly after 1867 and finished in 1876. It went from Truro, Nova Scotia, through northern New Brunswick to Rivière-du-Loup, Quebec. It was built to connect the Maritime Provinces with Quebec and Ontario.

Inuit:
Native people who live in the arctic regions of Canada, and in Greenland and Alaska.

London Conference:
The last of the three Confederation Conferences. It took place in London, England in December of 1866. At this conference leaders from the Province of Canada, New Brunswick and Nova Scotia turned the rough draft of the Quebec Resolutions into the British North America Act.  Once this was done Canada officially became a country on July 1, 1867.

Lower Canada:
In 1791 Britain divided its property in North America into two parts and named them Lower Canada and Upper Canada. Most of the people in Lower Canada were French speaking. In 1840 these two colonies were once again joined to form the Province of Canada. At the time of Confederation in 1867 the area that had been Lower Canada became the province of Quebec.

Maritime:
A word that means "connected to the sea", or "found near the sea". In Canada we call New Brunswick, Nova Scotia and Prince Edward Island the Maritime Provinces, or just the Maritimes. This is because of their closeness to the ocean.

Maritime colonies:
The British colonies of New Brunswick, Nova Scotia and Prince Edward Island before they became provinces of Canada. These three provinces together are now called the Maritimes.

Métis:
A person whose ancestors were both European and Aboriginal. In western Canada most of the Métis had ancestors who were Aboriginal people and French Canadians.

Missionaries:
People sent to another place to spread a religion or do social work.

Native people:
People who have lived in an area of land over a very long time. First Nations and Inuit people are the Native people of Canada. They have been living in this land for thousands of years -- long before Europeans came here.

Negotiations:
Discussions between people who try to come to an agreement on something.

North America:
The continent that contains Canada, the United States, Mexico, Greenland, Bermuda and the French islands of St-Pierre et Miquelon.

North West Mounted Police:
A police force created in 1873 by the Government of Canada to keep law and order in the Northwest Territories. It came to be a symbol of Canada's control of the area. When gold was found in the Klondike in 1896 the North West Mounted Police helped Canada to police the Yukon. In 1919 the name of the police force was changed to the Royal Canadian Mounted Police.

Northwest Rebellion:
An armed uprising of Métis and other Native people who wanted the Canadian government to recognize their rights. It took place in what is now central Saskatchewan in 1885. Louis Riel was one of the Métis leaders of this rebellion.

North-Western Territory:
A huge area of land once owned by the British. It covered what is now the Yukon Territory, part of the Northwest Territories, and bits of northern British Columbia, Alberta and Saskatchewan. In 1870 Canada was given control of the North-Western Territory. It was combined with Rupert's Land to create the Northwest Territories.

Party:
In politics, "party" means a group of people who share the same opinions, and who come together in order to get elected and form a government.

Premier:
The first in importance or rank, the chief. In the past the leader of a colony was called a premier. Today the leader of a province or territory is called a premier.

Province:
Some Canadian provinces were originally colonies of Britain. Eventually all the colonies joined Canada and became provinces. The provinces and the federal government share power. The provinces are responsible for things like schools, hospitals, local government and keeping highways in order. There are ten provinces in Canada.

Province of Canada:
In 1840 the colonies of Upper and Lower Canada were joined to form the Province of Canada. Upper Canada was mostly English speaking, while Lower Canada was mostly French speaking. After Confederation Upper Canada became the province of Ontario, and Lower Canada became the province of Quebec.

Quebec Conference:
The second meeting where leaders from the Province of Canada, the Maritime colonies and Newfoundland came together to talk about Confederation. They met in Quebec City in October 1864 to create a document called the Quebec Resolutions. After this conference each colony brought these resolutions back to its legislative assembly to be voted on. Prince Edward Island and Newfoundland turned down the agreement.

Rebellion:
A revolt against the government that is in power. Often a rebellion involves combat between the government's army and the rebels who have organized to fight the government.

Red River Rebellion:
An armed uprising against the Canadian government by the Métis of the Red River Colony who were afraid of losing their lands and their way of life when Canada acquired Rupert's Land in 1870. Louis Riel was the leader of this rebellion. It eventually helped lead to the creation of the province of Manitoba.

Responsible government:
A type of government in which political decisions are made by leaders who are elected by the people. The political party that has the most people elected makes up the government. Before Confederation many of the colonies were run in part by leaders the British put in power, or by a few powerful rich people. The first responsible government in British North America was in Nova Scotia. Nova Scotia achieved responsible government in January 1848.

Rupert's Land:
A huge area of land once owned by the Hudson's Bay Company. It covered part of what is now northern Ontario and Quebec, as well as Manitoba, most of Saskatchewan, and parts of Alberta and the Northwest Territories. In 1870 this land was sold to the Canadian government.

Territory:
A piece of land in Canada that is not a province. In the past, a territory was governed by someone named by the federal government. Later, this person governed together with a group of leaders elected by the people. Now, all the leaders are elected. There are now three territories in Canada: The Northwest Territories, the Yukon and Nunavut.

Treason:
A crime against the government of a country. When citizens of a country try to set up their own government and get rid of the government in power, they are often charged with treason.

Union:
When people or governments join for a common reason or purpose. Confederation was a union of British colonies that believed that they would be stronger together than apart.

Upper Canada:
In 1791 Britain divided its property in North America into two parts and named them Upper Canada and Lower Canada. Most of the people in Upper Canada were English speaking. In 1840 these two colonies were once again joined to form the Province of Canada. At the time of Confederation in 1867 the area that had been Upper Canada became the province of Ontario.

           

FACTORS TO CONSIDER IN WEIGHING EVIDENCE

• The reliability of the evidence.
• The quality of the evidence
• Any information about the person who is the source of the evidence.
• The consistency of the information when compared to other reliable evidence.
• Circumstances surrounding the event or creation of a document
• Whether there is better evidence available
• Whether a secondary commentator is drawing reasonable inferences or is simply speculating
• Qualifications and knowledge of the subject of the commentator
• Whether the evidence is self-serving
• Whether the scientific methodology behind an analysis is sound
• The motives of the historical characters

On recognizing academic bias

Avoiding logical fallacies is a vital part of critical thinking

Logical Fallacies

History student learn to support strong arguments both orally and in their writing, with evidence. Faulty reasoning sometimes weakens their arguments and so it may he helpful to teach them how to  identify and eliminate fallacies in their writing and speaking. Here is an exhaustive list.

Typical fallacies as divided into five major categories: Misinformation, generalization, irrelevent connections, feelings and distraction from the argument.

---

MISINFORMATION

Sometimes, writers present questionable or ambiguous reasons to sustain their arguments.  A logical demonstration of a belief, however, must be conclusive and convincing to be effective;  any doubtful premises leads the audience to believe that the conclusion is weak.

From Ignorance:  The writer's argument is simply that the point has not been proven otherwise.  The fact that the counterclaim has not been proven does not make a claim correct.

I believe in God because no one can prove that a god doesn't exist.

False Cause:  The writer points out as the cause of an event something that is not the actual cause, or the writer has insufficient evidence for making a causal link.  If the identified cause is not the real cause, nothing assures that the point of discussion is true.

Bush was "determined to knock down Saddam Hussein" because of his "nuclear bomb potential."

Note:  Hussein did not have any nuclear weapons.

Questionable Premises:  The writer's reasons for holding a belief are not as obvious to the audience as they are to the writer, and the writer does not back up the claim with enough support.  This fallacy also occurs when the writer introduces an unsupported value judgment.

All judges are fair-minded individuals;  therefore, Judge Ito is fair in his decisions.

Ambiguity of Terms/Equivocation:  The writer uses two different senses of the same word in an argument, and this ambiguity allows a mistaken conclusion to be drawn by the writer.

It is immoral to kill an innocent human being.  Fetuses are innocent human  beings.  Therefore, it is immoral to kill fetuses.

Note:  In the first sentence, the writer uses "human being" in the sense of a  morally considerable being.  In the second, the writer could be using the term  "human being" to make the less controversial claim that a fetus is a genetically  human creature.

Simplifying:  When restating the opposition's view, the writer mistakenly ignores information which is relevant to the conclusion reached by the opposition.

Freud argued that women have penis envy because they want to be men.

Presuppositions:  The writer presupposes some information that supports his/her claim;  the writer does not confirm the assumed material.

All students who study on this campus want more computers available for their  use, so computer fees should be raised 50% to cover the costs of the expansion.

Hiding Information/Half Truth:  The writer, consciously or unconsciously, establishes conclusions without stating all of the facts relevant to the situation.

The Geo Metro is a superior car because it averages 43 miles per gallon.

Note:  The writer neglects to mention that this figure was derived in tests where the car was driven with 30 mile per hour tailwinds.

---

GENERALIZATION

Some writers stereotype and generalize their ideas to make a powerful statement.  To construct effective logical arguments, writers must avoid generalizations;  once an exception to a generalization is found, the argument that the generalization supports is discredited.

Popularity:  The writer bases the argument on the belief that if an idea is held by a large group of people, it is true.

Millions of people are Marxists, so Marxist economic and political theories are  correct.

Exception:  The writer applies a general rule to a case where the rule is inapplicable.

A year is 365 days long, so I celebrate my birthday every 365 days.

Particular Experiences:  The writer makes a rule out of particular experiences to support the claim.  As soon as an exception to the derived rule is found, the rule fails to support the argument.

All Greek food causes illness;  when I traveled through Greece, I got food  poisoning.

Property in the Whole:  The writer makes a claim based on the belief that a whole always possesses the characteristics of its parts, which is often untrue.  Although this belief is sometimes acceptable, it is not universally applicable, so the appropriateness of using this idea must be determined on a case by case basis.

Since many of the students at St. Cloud State University get A's, St. Cloud State must  be a top-rated school.

Property in the Parts:  Often, a writer who makes the above fallacy will also commit this one.  The writer erroneously assumes that because a whole has a particular property, the parts forming the whole have the same property.

IBM is a reputable organization, so all of its employees must be reputable.

False Alternative:  The writer only presents some of the alternatives for solving a problem when more possibilities exist because the writer assumes that the list of alternatives created is exhaustive.

In the United States, one can vote for either Democrats or Republicans.

---

IRRELEVANT CONNECTIONS

Some writers' arguments fail not because of the information given, but because of the type of connections established between the parts of the argument.  If the logical structures are not valid, the argument will fail, even if all of the premises are true and correct.

Consecutive Relation:  The writer assumes that because two events occur consecutively or concurrently, they are causally related.

I believe in supernatural beings because every time I drive past the cemetery where  my grandmother is buried, a light on my dashboard flashes.  Her spirit causes this because it never happens otherwise.

Slippery Slope:  The writer bases the claim on the assumption that if a particular event occurs, so will other undesirable events. However, there are no reasons to believe that the subsequent events will occur.  This fallacy is usually caused by fear.

If we put limits on the right to bear arms, soon all of our Constitutionally-given rights will be taken away.

Two Wrongs Make a Right:  The writer defends an action on the grounds that someone else has done something similar.

Residents of St. Cloud should not have to recycle plastics because those who live in Waite Park are not required to.

Wrong Analogy:  The writer reasons by analogy, using a similar, known situation as the basis for the argument.  Extended analogies tend to lose their direct connection with the actual topic of discussion, leading to erroneous conclusions.

Having a television rating system is like being in prison.  Both infringe on one's rights.

Circular Reasoning:  The writer defends the claim by using the conclusion as one of the premises to support the conclusion.

God exists because the Bible says so.  The Bible is a reliable source because it is the  word of God.

Affirmation of the Consequent:  The writer uses an If...then statement in the argument's reasoning.  Then, the writer confirms the then part of the statement and derives the If part, thereby committing a serious logical flaw.

If one is 16 years old or older, one can drive an automobile in Wisconsin. I saw  your niece driving through Wausau yesterday.  She must be at least 16.

Denial of the Antecedent:  Again, the writer employs an If...then statement, but in this case, the writer denies the If part so that the negation of the then part can be concluded.  However, just because the If part does not happen, it does not follow that the then part will not happen.  The then part could result for some other reason.

If the ozone layer is destroyed, many people will get cancer and suffer from other illnesses.  The ozone layer is being protected, not destroyed. So, many people will be spared the pain of cancer and other illnesses.

FEELINGS

Quite often, writers appeal to their audiences' feelings to attract attention to and elicit agreement with their ideas.  Although this can be effective, manipulating audience feelings is not employing logic, and it does not make a writer's argument stronger.  Logical thinking never involves feelings.

Appeal to Force:  The writer threatens the audience, explicitly or implicitly, with negative consequences if the claim is not believed.

If you do not believe in God, you will go to hell.

Appeal to Pity:  The writer begs for the approval of the claim; the audience may agree because they feel sorry for the arguer.

I cannot get a job because the public education system failed me; I have to steal to  survive.  It is society's fault, not mine.

Appeal to Gallery:  The writer uses emotive language that will produce a desired effect on a group or "gallery" of readers.  By appealing to the fears or interests of the audience, the writer hopes to gain approval.

Same-sex marriage must be prohibited, or the family structure as we know it will  collapse.

Appeal to Authority:  The writer cites authorities to show the validity of the claim, but the authority is not an expert in the field, the authority's view is taken out of context, or other experts of that field disagree with the authority quoted.

I think that businesses should not have to limit the amount of pollutants they  release into the atmosphere because Rush Limbaugh says that there is no real  evidence for industrial pollutants causing the Greenhouse Effect.

Old is Better:  The writer relies on traditional wisdom to support the argument.  This is a logical pitfall because the argument does not consider that new ideas could apply.

People have believed that fish is "brain food" for decades, so I don't believe the  FDA when they claim that eating fish does not enhance the intellect.

New is Better:  The writer claims that a new discovery has better effects or is more applicable to a given situation simply because it is new.  However, being newer does not make an idea more correct.

Word processed papers are clearer and more error-free than typed papers because they make use of new technology.

---

DISTRACTION FROM THE ARGUMENT

This type of fallacy often happens when writers do not have strong support for their claims.  Distraction is also used if the opposition's view is strong and logical;  then, writers have a tendency to attack the context instead of the argument.

Attacking the Speaker:  The writer reduces the credibility of the opposition by attacking them personally for who they are and not for what they say.  The validity of logical reasoning does not depend on the morality of the speaker.

Oprah Winfrey's diet advice is useless;  she has had problems with maintaining her weight for most of her life, bouncing back and forth between being overweight and slender.

Irrelevant Material:  The writer introduces irrelevant material to distract the audience from the subject at hand.  Then, s/he draws conclusions based on the unrelated material presented.

Education is important for the future of the American people and our country.   So, you should choose to study at St. Cloud State University.

Shifted Burden of Proof:  The writer challenges those with an opposing view to defend their arguments;  this puts the writer in a position in which s/he can deny the opposition's assertions.

The author writes that animals shouldn't be killed because they can feel pain,  but  he doesn't prove that they can.  For his argument to persuade me, he has to give  me positive empirical evidence of animals' ability to feel pain.

Straw Man:  The writer does not attack the argument that the opposition sets forth.  The arguer may attack one of the opposition's points as if it were the whole argument, distort what the opposition is attempting to express, or exaggerate the opposition's argument to the point of satirizing it.

Al Gore's support of the discussion of sexual orientation issues on Ellen is  dangerous:  he advocates the exposure of children to sexually explicit materials,  which is wrong.

 

---

Sources

Kahane, Howard.  Logic and Contemporary Rhetoric:  The Use of Reason in Everyday Life.  7th ed.  Belmont, CA: Wadsworth, 1971.

Pitt, Jack.  Logic for Argument.  New York:  Random House, 1968.

Woodhouse, Mark B.  A Preface to Philosophy.  5th ed. Belmont, CA:  Wadsworth, 1994.

Inclusion of Relevant Historical Evidence

1. Supports all thesis statements (assertions, explanations, interpretations) with specific, warranted evidence (examples, illustrations, concrete historical actions).
2. Establishes direct links between events of the past and the writer's interpretation of those events.
3. Draws evidence (supporting examples) from ALL the required readings.
4. Includes appropriate primary source (firsthand) direct quotations from several differnt sources into each paragraph. Persons quoted clearly identified.
5. Includes statistical evidence, especially when making social or economic arguments (raw numbers, percentages, charts, graphs).

source

Focus, Content, Ideas, Analysis, Interpretation

Focus, Content, Ideas, Analysis, Interpretation

1. Focuses on what the question asks. Does specifically what the question requires: Fulfills the demand of the action verb: compare, synthesize, critique, evaluate, etc.
2. Analyzes the actions and motives of people in the past (individuals and groups) and what they did.
3. Incorporates the actual words of historical actors (primary sources) into the essay.
4. Attempts to explain (interpret) key historical issues specified in the question, such as causation or comparison,
5. Briefly identifies the people mentioned, identifies sources quoted in the text, and defines specialized terms,

source

MODELS ESSAY QUESTIONS : Exploration, the Fur Trade and Hudson's Bay Company

SOURCE

Student Handout
This learning activity will give you the opportunity to view primary source materials online and learn about aspects of life in early Canada.
Choose one of the topics below to develop into an essay. Your essay should include:
* A title page with title, your name, course name, teacher name and date submitted
* A clear introduction with a thesis statement
* A body with proper citation (footnotes/endnotes or APA/MLA style, as decided by your teacher)
* A conclusion that follows logically from the thesis and ideas developed in the body, and makes a thoughtful generalization

Date due:
Length of paper:

Resources:
The Early Canadiana Online database contains many early Canadian texts - both primary and secondary sources - on exploration, the fur trade and HBC. Use these keywords in the subject search:

• Exploration
• Fur trade
• Hudson's Bay Company
• North West Company

..............................................................................................................................................................................................................................

Essay Topics:

Essay 1:

In the beginning of the 19th century, the fur trade was in crisis. Comment on the causes and reasons for this situation and make a reasoned statement about whether the situation was resolved to the benefit of all the people involved and to future Canadians. If not, how could it have ended differently?

Essay 2:

Statement: Hudson's Bay Company brought peace and stability to the Aboriginal peoples with which it dealt.
* Agree or disagree with this statement, using evidence from different sources.

Essay 3:

Statement: The fur trade acted as a brake on the westward expansion of European settlement.
* Agree or disagree with this statement, using evidence from different sources.

Essay 4:

Compare two short documents, both written in the 19th century, about the northwest and Hudson's Bay Company:

• Speeches on the Indian difficulties in the North-West
• Canada West and the Hudson's-Bay Company: a political and humane question…

In particular focus and comment on:

• Similarities/differences in bias
• Similarities/differences in attitudes toward HBC
• Similarities/differences in the description of the conditions in the North-West for: Settlers, Aboriginals, Fur traders
  

• Similarities/differences in attitudes toward Aboriginals
• Similarities/differences in attitudes on westward expansion of European settlement
• The reasons for these differences/similarities

Essay 5:

Read the biography of one of these people (or another) employed by Hudson's Bay Company:

• Robert M. Ballantyne
• Samuel Hearne:   (vol 1) (français)  (vol 2) (français)  (English)
• J. Long:  (français)  (English)
• John Horden

In particular, comment and focus on:

• His/her/their personal information as appropriate (birth date, education, life before becoming involved in the fur trade, life after becoming involved in the fur trade)
• What made them special
• What his/her/their great contributions were (places discovered, inventions, work done)
• How those contributions affected others

Essay 6:

Aboriginals and the Fur Trade: Prepare an essay on the interaction between Europeans and Aboriginals in the fur trade. Comment on:

• How contact with Europeans affected Aboriginals (health, trade)
• How Aboriginals helped Europeans survive
• How Aboriginals fit into the fur trade
• How the fur trade changed the lives of Aboriginal peoples

Try to see good and bad effects for all these points. For your conclusion, decide and explain why you think Aboriginal peoples would have been better or worse off without having met Europeans in the way they did. Consider: How could it have been different?

Resources
Early Canadiana Online: Exploration, the Fur Trade and Hudson's Bay Company
Hudson's Bay Company History Page (English)   (français)
The National Library of Canada: Pathfinders and Passageways
The Virtual Museum of New France   /  Musée Virtuel de la Nouvelle-France
 
General Sources
The Canadian Encyclopedia Online
 Timeline of Canadian History
 Discoverers Web

Group Activity Rubric

source

DIRECTIONS: This form is designed to help you evaluate student work in cooperative learning groups. Read each statement below. Then indicate from the following rating scale the score which best reflects your assessment of the group's work.

1=Weak 2=Somewhat Weak 3=Average 4= Strong 5=Very Strong

1. Each member had a clear understanding of the group's task.

   

1

2

3

4

5

2. Each member was assigned a specific duty or job to do.

   

1

2

3

4

5

3. Group members listened willingly to one another.

   

1

2

3

4

5

4. There was strong leadership within the group.

   

1

2

3

4

5

5. Group members encouraged others to express opinions or contribute information.

   

1

2

3

4

5

6. Group members presented their information or ideas in a clear and logical manner.

   

1

2

3

4

5

7. Each member of the group fulfilled his or her responsibilities in the completion so the group's assignment.

   

1

2

3

4

5

8. The group fulfilled all the requirements of its assigned task.

   

1

2

3

4

5

9. Overall, the group worked well together.

   

1

2

3

4

5

10. The group performed to its full potential.

   

1

2

3

4

5

Additional Comments: ___________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________

Total Points: __________________

Using Primary Sources

thanks to source

Primary sources allow us to build and expand our understanding of the subject matter. To gain the most from a primary source, the interpreter must ask a number of questions while hypothesizing possible answers.

Students require the opportunity to work repeatedly with primary material in a structured learning environment. The teacher demonstrates ways to interpret primary materials, gradually giving students greater responsibility for their own interpretations. As the students develop their understanding, they must be able to explain their reasoning.

Questions Before Reading - Establish the Context

1. What type of source/document is it?

Is it part of a newspaper, magazine, or special interest publication?
Is it a letter, diary, family archival source?
Why was it saved if it was not published?

2.  Identify the author, photographer, etc.

What do you know about his/her background?
What connection does he/she have with the primary source (part of the group, political party, and newspaper article)?
What is her/his place in society?

3. Who was the intended audience?

Is it personal, for just a few people, or for a large audience?
What is at stake for the author?
Does the author have a thesis?
How do you know whom it was for?

Questions to Ask During Reading - Make notes

1. What information is presented?

List important facts presented in the primary source.
Does the author or photographer have first- or second-hand information about the event?

2. Intent of the primary source

What do you think the author or photographer hoped to do with the primary source? Inform, persuade, argue, or record an event?
What words, phrases, use of light, color, etc. convince you of his or her intent?
Can you identify a bias?  Record the explicit support for your interpretation.
Identify and record the source of the bias.

Questions After Reading  -  Reflective Thoughts

1. Identify the correlation between the primary source's ideas and values and modern society's.

What presumptions and preconceptions do you bring to the primary source?
How do the ideas and values in the primary source differ from today?
Provide examples.
How might the differences between our values and the source's values influence our understanding of the primary source?

2. Identify the correlation between primary and secondary sources.

Identify where the primary source could be used to support a secondary source you have read (as a footnote for your history textbook).
Identify where the primary source could be used to refute a secondary source you have read (as a footnote for your textbook).
What does the author/photographer reveal without explicitly stating it?

Additional concepts:

Students need their own working knowledge of the following concepts. All primary material needs to be interpreted with these concepts in mind.

Credibility
Can we trust the author or photographer's account of the truth? Does the author or photographer use a tone; does the author or photographer consistently present the truth; are there important events or details left out? Was the person there; what was his/her vantage point?

Reliability
Does the author or photographer consistently tell the truth? A reliable primary source offers verifiable evidence. Do other sources support the primary source? The verifiable parts lend credence to the unverifiable parts.

Neutrality
The creator of the primary material is connected to the item in some way. Thus, no primary source is neutral. What stake does the author or photographer have in the primary source? Most authors and photographers record their thoughts with a purpose or design in mind. Some authors and photographers are unaware of their special stake in the construction of the content. These resources are as close to being neutral as possible.

Objectivity
How successful was the author or photographer in conveying the truth without prejudice, bias, propaganda, underlying values, and cultural assumptions? No primary document will be completely objective because people are not free of their cultures. Likewise, secondary sources will also reflect the cultures of their creators. Subjectivity comes from two sources, the recorder and the interpreter. Credible sources acknowledge their values and identify these so the reader is aware and can account for the values where they appear.

           

© Historica 2003

by 7th Floor Media

Financial considerations

Exerpted from: The Constitutional Act, 1867, the Confederation Debates and Provincial Autonomy - Claude Bélanger

The fact that the federal government contributed, under two articles of the Constitution Act (ss. 118-119), financially to support the provinces is seen, by many, as a sign of the subservient nature of the provincial governments. Without financial autonomy, it is correctly argued, a province cannot be fully independent in discharging its responsibilities. However, the purpose for federal financial support for the provinces was not to subjugate the provinces. An examination of the literature available on the Quebec Conference, where these considerations were studied at length, demonstrates clearly that the Fathers of Confederation did everything in their power to match financial resources to legislative responsibilities. But the provinces, in necessarily yielding to the federal government the customs taxes, gave up about 2/3 of their former financial revenues. By no stretch of the imagination could the provinces discharge their responsibilities, limited as they were originally, except with the financial help of the federal government: It was felt that this was not a good solution as it would encourage irresponsibility in financial matters. These politicians were keenly aware that it is not politically wise for one level of government to raise money, and to become inevitably unpopular to have done so, only to see that government give it away to the other level of government. The solution of federal subsidies to the provinces was only accepted as an absolute necessity. Provincial governments were expected to develop their "direct taxes" power in the future to meet rising costs. The purpose of federal subsidies was to ease the pain in the meantime. Such subsidies were not left to the discretion of the federal government but were fixed forever by statutory enactment and written into the constitution. Thus, they were not meant to be a sign of a subordinate status for the provinces. In short, the Fathers of Confederation demonstrated, in financial matters, how federalist they were in trying to set up financially two independent levels of government.

WHAT IS HISTORICAL THINKING?

SOURCE

Historical thinking involves the following key elements:

Chronology
  [Chronological Thinking - time, continuity and change]

Place people, events and changes in the periods studied within a chronological framework (distinguish between past, present and future time); know what things were like in the past and how things changed and developed. Being able to read and reconstruct the pasts permits one to develop a historical viewpoint and to answer such questions as: Who am I? What happened in the past? How am I connected to those in the past? How has the world changed and how might it change in the future? Use dates, terms and conventions that describe historical periods and the passing time, e.g. Colonial, Victorian, Georgian.

Historical Comprehension
  [Range and Depth of historical knowledge and understanding]

Knowledge/ Understanding –knowledge of facts and terms; understanding of concepts, principles and theories; understand of relationships between concepts:

• Analyse characteristic features of particular periods and societies, including range of ideas, beliefs, and attitudes of people and experiences of men and women;
  
• Describe, analyze and explain reasons for and results of historical events, situations and changes in periods studied;
  
• Assess significance of main events, people, and changes studied;
  
• Identify central question(s) the historical narrative addresses;
  
• Read historical narratives imaginatively.

 

Analyses and Interpretations

Determine how and why some historical events, people, situations and changes have been interpreted differently;

• Analyse and evaluate interpretations;
  
• Compare and contrast differing sets of ideas, values, personalities, behavior, and institutions;
  
• Differentiate between historical facts and historical interpretations;
  
• Analyse cause and effect relationships;
  
• Compare competing historical narratives;
  
• Hold interpretations of history as tentative;
  
• Evaluate major debates among historians;
  
• Hypothesize the influence of the past.

 

Historical Inquiry
  [Research capabilities]

Thinking/Inquiry - critical thinking skills e.g. conducting analysis, detecting point of view, bias; creative thinking skills e.g., problem solving using multiple perspectives; inquiry skills e.g., formulating questions, organizing and conducting research, analyzing, interpreting and evaluating information, drawing conclusions.

• Ask and answer significant questions; collect and record information relevant to a topic and reach conclusions;
  
• Investigate independently aspects of periods studied, using a range of resources;
  
• Formulate historical questions;
  
• Obtain historical data;
  
• Interrogate historical data.

 

Organization and Communication
  [Historical Issues, Analysis and Decision-making]

Communication of information and ideas; written communication (e.g. reviews, short essays, letters) for different audiences and purposes.

• Recall, select and organize historical information, including dates and terms;
  
• Organize knowledge and understanding in order to describe and explain periods and topics studied;
  
• Communicate knowledge and understanding of history using a range of techniques, including extended narratives and descriptions and substantiated explanations;
  
• Identify issues and problems of the past;
  
• Marshal evidence contributing to problems and alternative courses of action;
  
• Evaluate alternative courses of action;
  
• Formulate a position or course of action on an issue;
  
• Evaluate the implementation of a decision.