Imperialism in the grade 7 Social Studies classroom: Rethinking the relationship between Aboriginal Peoples and Europeans pre-1814

Lesson Plan topic: Imperialism

Subject: Grade 7 Social Studies

Time: Approximately five 45-minute periods

Author: David Scott with help from EDUC 535

These lessons respond to explicate curriculum directives in the front matter of the Alberta Social Studies Program of Study. As outlined in the program “the infusion of current events, issues and concerns is an essential component of social studies” (p 5). Further, elements of these lessons help students “construct meaning in the context of their lived experience through active inquiry and engagement with their school and community” (p. 5).  Additionally, the new program states, as reflected in the aspiration of these lessons, that for historical and constitutional reasons, an understanding of Canada requires an understanding of Aboriginal and Francophone perspectives, experiences, and their “particular needs and requirements” (Alberta Education, 2012, p. 4). 

The lessons outlined in this post would additionally directly address the following learning outcomes from the grade 7 program of study:

Historical thinking: Analyze selected issues and problems from the past, placing people and events in a context of time and place

7.S.7.2 Draw conclusions based upon research and evidence

7.S.2.3 Explain the historical contexts of key events of a given time period

7.1.1 Appreciate the influence of diverse Aboriginal, French and British peoples on events leading to Confederation

7.1.6  assess, critically, how political, economic and military events contributed to the foundations of Canada by exploring and reflecting upon the following questions and issues:

How was the Royal Proclamation of 1763 an attempt to achieve compromise between the 
Aboriginal peoples, the French and the British? (PADM, TCC)

What was the role of Chief Tecumseh in the War of 1812? (PADM, TCC)

How did the War of 1812 contribute to defining Canada’s political boundaries? 
(LPP, TCC, I)

By exploring the concept of imperialism, the stage would be set for then taking up the following learning outcomes:

What were the social and economic factors of European imperialism? (CC, I, TCC)

In what ways did European imperialism impact the social and economic structures of 
Aboriginal societies? (ER, GC, PADM, TCC)

How was European imperialism responsible for the development of Acadia, New France and 
British settlements? (I, GC, PADM) 

Guiding inquiry questions: 

Based on the primary sources provided, would you describe the relationship between Aboriginal peoples and Europeans during the 1600’s to the early 1800’s as an imperial relationship or more of a fairly equal partnership?

How should the nature of this historical relationship inform our relationship with Aboriginal people in the present?

Segment 1) Introduction (15-20 minutes): Begin by projecting the guiding inquiry question on a PowerPoint slide. Additionally, have the guiding inquiry question written down in big letters on a poster paper to be displayed throughout this extended lesson. Explain to students that we will be looking at this question over the next few classes, and at the end of our inquiry they will have an opportunity to respond to this question either in written form or orally through a podcast.

To introduce the two key concepts of imperial relationship versus a more equal partnership, begin by projecting the definition of imperialism, as defined in the grade 7 textbook, on the Smart Board:

Imperialism: the policy of extending the rule or authority of an empire or nation over foreign countries or territories. Imperialism is closely connected to the concept of acquiring colonies where a foreign power creates a settlement of its own people in a foreign land that marginalizes and sometimes displaces the people that formally lived on this land.

Explain to students that we will be working with this concept today and therefore they need to take notes as we go. Distribute the graphic organizer to each student (decide if you are going to let them use computers or if they should do this on written paper). The graphic organizer will have the definition left blank for them to write down. Explain that they will receive a completion mark for responding to the various questions in the graphic organizer in jot note form. Ask students to begin filling out the graphic organizer by writing down the definition of imperialism.

***We will need two people to lead this session and create the portion of the PowerPoint along with the graphic organizer needed for this section.

Segment 2) Learning the key concepts (20-25 minutes): Once they have written down the definition, to help them move from a place where this concept is an abstract definition to one that could reflect relationships with peers and authority, pose the following scenario to the class:

If your pod had an imperial relationship with the other pod, what would this relationship look like? Specifically, consider the following questions.

1.    If you were the imperial power, how would decisions be made? (Who would make the decisions? How much consultation would take place with the other pod around important decisions?)

2.    What kinds of decisions might you make? (How might you distribute resources like school lunches, laptops? How might you decide who gets to go on cool field trips?)

3.    How would you respond if the other pod didn’t like your decisions?

4.    How might this relationship look with the other pod if it wasn’t an imperial relationship, but more of an equal partnership?

To facilitate this discussion, divide students into groups in a way where each group has a pre-service teacher who can act as a discussion facilitator. Projecting the definition and questions behind you on the PowerPoint, ask students to discuss these questions in their group writing down possible responses in the graphic organizer.

Once students have had about five-seven minutes to discuss these questions in their groups, ask representatives (perhaps not all in the interest of time) to share with the class as a whole possible responses to the questions. Creating a chart on the board with imperial relationship on one side and more equal partnership on the other side, write their responses on a white board as they share their ideas. As you are going, remind them they will be receiving a completion mark for providing jot note responses to these questions in their graphic organizer.

***We will need two people to lead this section of the lesson, and complete the portion of the graphic organizer needed for this part of the lesson. 

Segment 3) Engaging issues of historical interpretation to the present (20 minutes):

Once students have had a chance to discuss the characteristics of an imperial relationship versus a more equal partnership, explain that there is currently a great deal of controversy around the nature of relationships between Aboriginal peoples and Europeans during the 1600’s to the early 1800’s. Explain that this can be seen, for example, by a recent news conference by Shawn Atleo, national chief of the Assembly of First Nations (this position is elected by Aboriginal people from across Canada):

The Global News link is here.

This link speaks to the fact that Canadians know very little about our shared history with Aboriginal people.

Breaking the clip into segments, show each segment and then ask each group to consider the following questions. Consider doing this as a whole class in the interests of time; however, you may want to drop back into the format where they share ideas that came up in their small groups with the whole class.

Segment 1 (until 53)

1.    What is the central message Shawn Atleo seeks to communicate to Canadians?

2.    What reasons does he give to explain why it is so important for the government to act now?

Segment 2 (from 53-2:20)

3.    What are three issues Shawn Atleo has with the current relationship between Aboriginal people and the Canadian government or what he calls the Crown?

Segment 3 (2:20-end)

4.    What are two issues Aboriginal people currently face that Shawn Atleo feels the Crown/Canadian government has not provided an appropriate response? 

5.    How does he describe the original relationship between Aboriginal people and Europeans? What agreements does he speak to support his position?

As students are sharing their thoughts, track their responses on the white board and ask them to take jot notes in their graphic organizer as students are sharing. 

***We will need two people to lead this discussion. They will also need to add these questions to the graphic organizer.

Segment 4) Engaging students with primary source documents to respond to the inquiry question (15-20 minutes each):

In the next phase of the inquiry unit, we will work through a series of primary source documents to help us reflect on our central inquiry question:

Based on the primary sources provided, would you describe the relationship between Aboriginal peoples and Europeans during the 1600’s to the early 1800’s as imperial relationship or more of a fairly equal partnership?

How should the nature of this historical relationship inform our relationship with Aboriginal people in the present?

At each stage, you will read or look at the primary source you are introducing to the class as a whole and then ask the groups with their discussion leaders to consider what this source can tell us about the nature of the relationship. Distribute copies of the primary source to each group. Again, ask students to take jot notes in the section of the graphic organizer dedicated to this primary source. In this phase rather than having groups share their thoughts with the whole class, allow the discussion leaders in each group to help lead the discussion.

Artifact One:

To enable students to richly respond to the overarching inquiry question, ask students to consider the following questions:

1.   What might this 1911 painting of Samuel Champlain  ––one of the first leaders of the first French Colony in New France (modern day Quebec) trading with  the Algonquin or perhaps the Wendat people (called Huron in French) –– tell us about the relationship between the French and Aboriginal peoples during the 1600's?
     What specific clues in the painting would you use to justify your opinion? 

Artifact Two:

The Haudenosaunee and the Guswentah or Two-Row Wampum Belt:

When the Haudenosaunee peoples first negotiated a Treaty with the Dutch in the early 1600’s, the Guswentah wampum belt was created after the Treaty to serve as recorded memory of what was agreed to at that time. The Guswentah shows two parallel but disconnected purple lines alongside three white parallel lines. The three rows of white symbolize peace, friendship and respect. The two purple rows symbolize the routes that two different canoes would travel when going down the same river. One row is the Haudenosaunee route and the other is the route of the newcomers. While both travel side by side down the river in the same direction, and are subject to the same conditions while floating in the same water, they do not cross in front or interfere with the other. This is understood to be a Treaty lasting into infinity.

To enable students to richly respond to the overarching inquiry question, ask students to consider the following questions:

1.    How do the two parallel but disconnected lines reflect a particular kind of relationship between Aboriginal people and Europeans?

2.    Please explain this relationship in your own words?

Commentary by Dwayne Donald: The Two-Row Wampum Belt provides a powerful inspiration for a different kind imaginary that could serve as a guiding model for relationships between Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal people us today. It has been used to guide other Treaty negotiations that came after that. The Guswentah is often on display at different negotiations and events. I recently saw it being held high above the heads of the crowd back in December 2012 when First Nations leaders attempted to enter the House of Commons to talk to MPs about Bill C-45.

Artifact Three:

The Royal Proclamation of 1763

And whereas great Frauds and Abuses have been committed in the purchasing Lands of the Indians, to the great Prejudice of Our Interests, and to the great Dissatisfaction of the said Indians; in order therefore to prevent such Irregularities for the future, and to the End that the Indians may be convinced of Our Justice, and determined Resolution to remove all reasonable Cause of Discontent, We do, with the Advice of Our Privy Council, strictly enjoin and require, that no private Person do presume to make any Purchase from the said Indians of any Lands reserved to the said Indians, within those Parts of Our Colonies where We have thought proper to allow Settlement; but that if, at any Time, any of the said Indians should be inclined to dispose of the said Lands, the same shall be purchased only for Us, in Our Name, at some publick Meeting or Assembly of the said Indians to be held for that Purpose...

To enable students to respond to this question guide this activity through the following questions:

1.    Please identify two quotes that speak to the relationship between Aboriginal peoples and the Crown.

2.    What can each of these quotes tell us about the original relationship?

Note from an excerpt form the Royal Commission on Aboriginal People (2008, p. 106): The document makes no attempt to disguise its imperial ambitions. It gives de Monts the power to extend the King's authority as far as possible within the stated limits and to subdue the local inhabitants. Nevertheless, in the same breath, it acknowledges the independent status of indigenous peoples and recognizes their capacity to conclude treaties of peace and friendship. The commission portrays treaties as a principal means for enlarging the King's influence in America and mentions the possibility of "confederation" with the Indigenous peoples. De Monts is told to uphold and observe such treaties scrupulously, provided the Indigenous peoples and their rulers do likewise. If they default on their treaty obligations, De Monts is authorized to resort to war in order to gain at least enough authority among them to enable the French to settle in their vicinity and trade with them in peace and security.

Artifact Four:

The role of Tecumseh and the Shawnee led Confederacy in the War of 1812

In the early 19th century, tension mounted between the United States and Britain. Britain waged war against Napoleonic France and blockaded European ports, preventing neutral American merchants from reaching their European markets. As well, the Americans were pushing westward into Native lands of the Ohio valley, and coming into conflict with British garrisons in those territories where sovereignty was not defined. American sentiment was growing in support of a Canadian invasion that would remove the British from North America and defeat their Native allies. On June 18, 1812, the United States Congress declared war on Britain; its objective was Canada. The United States was a nation of seven million people; there were 500,000 Canadians.

The commander of the British forces in Canada was Isaac Brock, a general who commanded 300 soldiers and 400 militiamen. He allied with Shawnee chief Tecumseh, who wanted to hinder American expansion and organize a First-Nations confederacy. Tecumseh had 600 men whom he committed to join Brock's forces. At Fort Detroit in August, 1812, the two armies overcame the 2,000 American defenders and captured the fort.

The Americans were humiliated by this surprise defeat. At dawn on October 13, 1812, American forces under General Winfield Scott struck at Queenston Heights, downstream from Niagara Falls. The 6,000 American soldiers gained the upper hand, but Brock ordered a counterattack supported by a band of Mohawk under the leadership of John Brant. The Americans were pushed back towards the river and their retreat turned into a stampede. Although this was another major victory for Brock, he was killed on the battlefield.

In the fall of 1813, the Americans were determined to retake Fort Detroit. An American naval victory on Lake Erie cut off the British supply routes to Detroit. An army of 3,000 men commanded by General William Henry Harrison marched on the fort. The 3,000 British soldiers, commanded by General Henry Proctor, defended the position. Tecumseh was at his side. However, Proctor decided to abandon Fort Detroit and double back up the Thames River. Tecumseh was furious and felt abandoned by his allies. On October 5, 1813, the two armies met. The British forces broke ranks and their defence disintegrated. With only 500 Natives, Tecumseh faced 3,000 American soldiers. When quiet finally descended on the battlefield, Tecumseh had been killed, and his dream of a great Indian Confederacy had been permanently shattered. Shortly after, the Native nations of the United States forged peace with the Americans. The Americans attempted to seize Montreal in October, 1813, but they suffered a major defeat on the Chateauguay River south of Montreal when 460 French-Canadian militiamen resisted an American army of 4,000. In August, 1814, Britain and the United States ended the hostilities.

To enable students to richly respond to the overarching inquiry question, ask students to consider the following questions:

1.    How did Tecumseh and his confederacy contribute to the British victory over the US to ensure Canada remained an independent country?

2.    What kind of relationship did this reflect between Aboriginal people and the British Crown?

Other primary sources could be included if you wished to extend the lesson.

Segment 5) Preparing students for the final research task (30 minutes):

Now that students have had the opportunity to explore a number of sources that provide insight into the relationship between Aboriginals and non-Aboriginal peoples throughout this historical time period, come back to the second inquiry question and discuss possible responses with the class? As you go make reference to the clip with Shawn Atleo articulating the need for a new relationship between Aboriginals and the Canadian government. 

inform students that they can respond to the inquiry question through a written reflection or orally in podcast form.

Based on the primary sources provided, would you describe the relationship between Aboriginal peoples and Europeans during the 1600’s to the early 1800’s as an imperial relationship or more of a fairly equal partnership?

How should the nature of this historical relationship inform our relationship with Aboriginal people in the present?

Tell them that their response should be at least 150-200 words in length for each of the two inquiry questions.  Explain that they will be evaluated based on the following assessment criteria:

·      Takes a clear stand: they clearly lay out their opinion for each of the two inquiry questions.

·      Thoughtful: for each of the two inquiry questions, they fully develop and explain their position on this question through at least a two-sentence elaboration.  

·      Strong supporting details: in relation to each question, they provide at least two well developed supporting details or examples, drawn sources they encountered in this lesson, or from elsewhere, to back up their opinion.

To support students in this process, lead a class discussion around their thoughts on the second inquiry question. Track their responses on the board. Once you have done this, run through a guided lesson showing them how to use the SES: state, explain, sentence framing format as follows.

In considering the question _____________ I believe that ______________________. Specifically, ____________.  By this I mean that ________________. For example the source _____________ shows that ________________________________. Additionally, in another source _______ we can see how ____________________________________________. In conclusion, _____.

In thinking about the second question I think that ______________________. More to the point. ___________________. For example, I think that we should __________________. In this way ________________. Finally, ______. 

When you have gone through this process as a class, assign class time to work on their response and communicate the due date for this assignment. 

SES (State, Explain, Support) Evaluation Rubric   

Criteria	Feedback for improvement
Takes a clear stand: writer clearly lays out their opinion in relation to question one.
Developed: the writer fully develops and explains their position on this question through at least a two-sentence elaboration. This elaboration includes why they believe what they do.
Strong supporting details: writer provides at least two well-developed details or examples to support their position.

Expanding these lessons into a full inquiry unit:

If you wanted to extend these lessons into a full inquiry unit, you could add another series of primary source documents, secondary sources, and images. Here you would want to go back to the Program of Studies and consider what historical events and people are highlighted in the bulleted outcomes. 

To then move to a full inquiry unit format as outlined in the Galileo Educational Rubric, we would need to consider what is a task or a medium that would allow students to richly represent their response to this question. To do this we could, for example, ask students to respond to the inquiry question through both a written response as well as a mural or collage that is divided into two parts. On one side they could create a collage that powerfully reflects the relationship between Aboriginals and Europeans pre-1814 and on the other side images that reflects the current state of the relationship. This could then be accompanied by a video log or podcast that explains the image. This video log or podcast would require a script 250 words long for each inquiry question (500 word total).

To prepare students for this task, they would be asked to create a google doc with their script where you could provide formative feedback. To support students in this process you would want to work with them on creating imagery rich pieces of writing where they develop and back up their thoughts with examples and supporting details. 

For the art component, this would provide an opportunity to link with the art teacher to help them create a powerful mural or collage.