|
Deeper Learning Competencies
|
Critical Thinking & Problem Solving
|
- I can use given primary and secondary sources to make a claim about a French Revolution decision and explain at least one supporting piece of evidence
- I can point out one simple reason the evidence may be incomplete or biased (e.g., who wrote it and why).
|
- I can select relevant evidence from multiple sources (including contradictory information) to support my claim about whether a decision was justified at the time
- I can explain how limits in what people knew, urgency, and different perspectives affected leaders’ choices and outcomes.
|
- I can evaluate sources for perspective, limitations, accuracy, and historical context and use that evaluation to decide which evidence is stronger for my argument
- I can build a cause-and-effect explanation (economic, social, and cultural) over time and address counterevidence by refining my reasoning.
|
- I can synthesize complex, conflicting sources to construct and defend a historically grounded argument about the decision’s justification and lasting impacts
- I can independently weigh how context and present-day perspectives shape interpretation, and I can revise my argument to explain why my conclusions are the most convincing based on the evidence.
|
|
Deeper Learning Competencies
|
Effective Communication
|
- I can clearly state my claim in my speech and museum display and use source-based facts (from notes/evidence) to explain my reasoning about whether the French Revolution decision was justified at the time.
|
- I can communicate my historical argument with an organized structure (claim → evidence → explanation) and I can integrate both primary and secondary sources to support my points while addressing a limited counterpoint.
|
- I can deliver and defend a persuasive speech that uses multiple sources to show how perspective, missing information, and urgency shaped decisions, and I can respond to questions with specific evidence and accurate cause-and-effect connections over time.
|
- I can communicate with empathy and precision by anticipating audience questions and representing a realistic “at-the-time” perspective; I can synthesize contradictory evidence, explain how contemporary thinking could alter interpretation, and revise my presentation based on feedback so my argument stays convincing and well-supported.
|
|
Deeper Learning Competencies
|
Collaboration
|
- I can participate respectfully in collaboration by taking on a clear role (e.g., note-taker, evidence finder, timeline builder) and contributing at least one accurate, source-based point to our group’s decision timeline and cause-and-effect chart.
|
- I can collaborate to build a shared claim by comparing perspectives across primary and secondary sources, discussing contradictions, and helping the group revise our reasoning so our argument uses evidence consistently and clearly.
|
- I can collaborate by actively listening, asking clarifying questions, and negotiating tradeoffs when we disagree, then co-develop an evidence-based historical argument that addresses whether the decision was justified at the time and its lasting economic, social, and cultural impacts.
|
- I can collaborate as a leader by facilitating equitable discussion (including the voices and impacts on marginalized groups), using feedback from checkpoint conferences and historians to improve our collective argument, and independently synthesizing sources so our group presentation and Q&A are persuasive and well-defended.
|
|
Deeper Learning Competencies
|
Content Expertise
|
- I can select relevant details from one or more primary and secondary sources to support a claim about a French Revolution decision and identify what happened as a result over time.
|
- I can analyze how the information in my selected sources connects to my claim by comparing what different sources say, including any contradictions, and I can explain the historical context behind those claims.
|
- I can evaluate sources for perspective, limitations, and accuracy, and I can use that evaluation to justify why I trust certain evidence more when building a historical argument about whether the decision was justified at the time and its lasting economic, social, and cultural impact.
|
- I can construct and defend a nuanced historical argument that uses primary and secondary evidence to address contradictory information, critically explains how contemporary perspectives shape interpretations, and supports my conclusion with clear, defensible reasoning that I can explain in a showcase or forum.
|
|
Deeper Learning Competencies
|
Self Directed Learning
|
- I can use teacher feedback and my own checklist to revise my source notes and claim so they include required evidence from primary and secondary sources, keeping track of what I changed and why.
|
- I can independently monitor my work using rubric criteria to revise my timeline, cause-and-effect chart, and argument so my reasoning uses accurate historical context and addresses contradictions in the sources.
|
- I can seek and apply feedback from peers and invited historians to strengthen my historical argument by evaluating sources for perspective, limitations, and accuracy, and I can explain how my revisions improve justification at the time of the decision.
|
- I can direct my own learning by comparing multiple evidence sets (including conflicting viewpoints), proactively refining my persuasive display and speech to show how contemporary perspectives can shape interpretation, and I can defend my final choices with clear, source-based reasoning.
|