Learning Goals & Products

Learning Goals

1

Students will be able to investigate Gilded Age urbanization, immigration, housing, labor, and public health as forces that reshaped neighborhoods and city life, with tasks broken into manageable chunks and extended time provided.

2

Students will be able to analyze primary and contemporary sources about neighborhood change to identify who benefited and who was excluded, using chunked source sets and extended time for processing.

3

Students will be able to compare Gilded Age urban patterns with present-day local development to trace continuity and change over time, with scaffolded comparison tasks and extended time.

4

Students will be able to synthesize user and community evidence into a fairness-focused problem statement about a local neighborhood issue, using step-by-step drafting and extended time.

5

Students will be able to ideate multiple neighborhood improvement strategies that address access, fairness, and community benefit, with options generated in chunks and revisited over time.

6

Students will be able to prototype and refine a visual policy pitch that connects historical evidence to a practical local recommendation, with revision time built into the process.

7

Students will be able to justify a neighborhood improvement proposal using historical evidence, community data, and civic reasoning, with extended time for rehearsal and response.

Products

individual

Gilded Age Neighborhood Change Research Portfolio

Each student creates an annotated research portfolio with source analyses, a comparative neighborhood map, and one individual concept prototype for a local improvement idea. The portfolio is completed in chunked checkpoints with flexible deadlines and extended time, and it shows how evidence shaped the student’s understanding of who benefited, who was excluded, and what need should be addressed.

team

Future City Neighborhood Improvement Proposal and Policy Pitch

Teams develop a shared problem statement and a higher-fidelity prototype or service solution, then present it at the Future City Forum with maps, data visuals, and a persuasive policy pitch. The product is built in stages with team roles, teacher check-ins, chunked deadlines, and extended time for drafting, rehearsal, and revision.

Rubric
Competency Progression Rubric Competency-first rubric
Category
Learning Goal
Stage 1
Stage 2
Stage 3
Stage 4
Deeper Learning Competencies
Critical Thinking & Problem Solving
  • I can explain a local neighborhood change by making a basic connection between one Gilded Age source and one piece of current community evidence, using clear details (who/what/where) from the materials I’m given
  • I can identify a likely cause and describe one group that benefited or was left out using historical vocabulary.
  • I can compare patterns from multiple Gilded Age sources with multiple current local data points (maps, photos, and statistics) to form a reasoned claim about how rapid growth reshaped neighborhoods
  • I can use at least two lenses (e.g., housing and public health or immigration and urbanization) to explain causes and consequences and to justify who benefited or was excluded.
  • I can evaluate competing explanations for neighborhood problems by weighing evidence across time and place and identifying which sources are stronger or weaker
  • I can develop a causal chain that includes institutions/policies and community responses, then communicate my argument with persuasive reasoning for an audience beyond the classroom (e.g., in a map annotation or pitch draft).
  • I can design and refine an evidence-based neighborhood improvement proposal by generating multiple options and assessing tradeoffs for fairness and the common good
  • I can use complex causal reasoning to connect historical parallels to today’s challenges, anticipate counterarguments about who benefits or is left out, and present an adaptation of my argument suited to a public forum audience.
Deeper Learning Competencies
Collaboration
  • I can contribute to my team by completing assigned tasks (research, map annotations, or slide work) on time and sharing relevant notes with my peers during check-ins
  • I can use group norms to listen respectfully and avoid blocking progress when teammates disagree.
  • I can collaborate to co-design our neighborhood improvement proposal by sharing ideas, building on teammates’ evidence, and revising our draft based on feedback from teacher checkpoints and weekly gallery walks
  • I can help the team make decisions by explaining my reasoning about who benefits or is left out and how that connects to historical patterns and today’s local data.
  • I can strengthen our team’s shared decision-making by facilitating discussion, resolving conflict using evidence and clear criteria (fairness, impact, and feasibility), and ensuring all voices are included in roles and responsibilities
  • I can coordinate interdisciplinary connections (history, civic reasoning, and community data) so our policy pitch and visuals present a coherent, audience-ready argument.
  • I can lead collaborative problem-solving by strategically distributing roles, mentoring peers who need support, and synthesizing multiple sources into a unified proposal and policy pitch for a public Future City Forum audience
  • I can reflect on our teamwork and collective action process, identify improvements for next steps, and adjust our plan to better protect rights and promote the common good.
Deeper Learning Competencies
Effective Communication
  • I can explain my neighborhood improvement idea clearly for a specific audience by using accurate historical and local information in my maps, visuals, and short oral/pitch
  • I can share my key message with supportive details and use appropriate vocabulary (e.g., fairness, benefits/left out) that matches my topic.
  • I can adapt my explanation and argument for different audiences by selecting evidence, examples, and perspectives from both Gilded Age sources and current local data
  • I can organize my presentation (claim–evidence–reasoning) and use print/digital tools (e.g., slides, posters, infographics, or maps) to make my reasoning understandable and persuasive.
  • I can present a multi-step, evidence-based policy pitch that uses disciplinary and interdisciplinary lenses to show causes and effects over time and place (then vs
  • now)
  • I can anticipate audience questions and address them with clear adaptations—such as reframing how different groups benefit or are left out—and I can justify my recommendations using fairness-focused reasoning.
  • I can communicate a sophisticated, audience-ready argument by skillfully integrating multiple sources, perspectives, and data to explain complex causes and tradeoffs in local growth and its impacts
  • I can deliver and refine my message through deliberative feedback (gallery-walk or partner input), respond thoughtfully during public Q&A, and clearly connect my proposal to civic action and the common good.
Deeper Learning Competencies
Content Expertise
  • I can use Gilded Age sources and local community evidence to describe how neighborhoods changed (urbanization, immigration, housing, and public health) and identify at least one group that benefited and one group that was left out using specific details from my materials.
  • I can connect Gilded Age patterns to current local development by explaining key causes and effects across multiple contexts, using accurate historical evidence and neighborhood data/visuals to support my comparisons about who benefits and who is excluded today.
  • I can apply disciplinary and civic lenses to evaluate trade-offs in neighborhood change over time, using complex causal reasoning to compare adaptations of institutions and policies (then vs
  • now) and to justify fairer development ideas with evidence from both eras.
  • I can synthesize Gilded Age and local findings into a persuasive, audience-ready explanation (for my Future City Forum) that assesses multiple action options, anticipates counterarguments, and recommends a community-improvement approach grounded in evidence and rights/common-good reasoning.
Deeper Learning Competencies
Academic Mindset
  • I can describe my role in our neighborhood improvement project and explain how the work connects to my community and identities, using at least one piece of evidence from our maps, photos, or partner-provided data.
  • I can reflect on what I learned and how it changed my thinking by making clear, evidence-based connections between the Gilded Age sources and today’s local development (including who benefits and who is left out).
  • I can set specific learning goals during revisions, choose strategies to strengthen my fairness-based reasoning and communication, and explain why my new approach is better using feedback from gallery walks and checkpoints.
  • I can independently sustain a productive civic mindset by evaluating multiple options for community action, identifying complex causes and tradeoffs, and articulating a next-step commitment grounded in both historical understanding and current local evidence.