Another non-linguistic mode of teaching

I am preparing a lesson plan for teaching the Vietnam War during the Nixon era. I want especially to highlight how Nixon was able to break the New Deal coalition to his own advantage. Here are the plans. Any thoughts are welcome.

I am going to recreate the atmosphere surrounding the "Hard Hat Riot" of 1970. I am going to divide the room up into three theaters. The left side of the room (student's perspective) will have a Vietnam War-era musician singing Country Joe McDonald's I Feel Like I'm Fixin' to Die. The right side of the room will have men dressed as construction workers carrying an American flag and chanting "USA! USA! USA!" and "Love it or Leave it!" The center portion of the room will have footage of President Richard Nixon giving his "Great Silent Majority" speech. I will have each group perform their part separately, then I will play them altogether, with it culminating in an imitation riot at the end between the VN singers and the construction workers (a mild one, to be sure :).

After this little bit of socio-political theater, I am going to have the students write out whom they sympathized with the most. Even more, I want them to write out three similarities and three differences of all the different factions by using a three part Venn diagram. I think it will help give them some perspective on the idea of civil dissent in America.

Thoughts? Compliments? Snide remarks?

Instructional Video Storyboard

Enclosed is my storyboard for my instructional video.

Storyboard

View more presentations from russellwades.

Wedding in Vegas

So I just had what could well be a once-in-a-lifetime experience. Wedding. in. Vegas. On the sidewalk. Lots of people around. Phil Collins music in the background. Random people walking by cheering as my relatives said I-do. A Shrek impersonator approximately 100 feet away. Yet in the midst of this mayhem, the happy couple had forgotten one key element: the marriage certificate. So we, the happy-go-lucky-wedding-party sat by while the best man ran back to the car so the Reverend could proceed with the ceremony. Awkward.

Those of you who know my teaching style know that I have tendencies towards the unorthodox. I'm proud of it; call me the House of history teaching. So this Vegas experience resonated with my mischievous side, the side that likes to see unconventionality, kitsch, and edginess. But the reality remained the same: all the edginess in the world could not compensate for following protocl, getting the paperwork, and making sure the trains run on time.


I see my role as a history teacher in the same way. I could be innovative, funny, and mind-blowing, but if I can get their papers back in a timely manner, if I can't keep the classroom under control, and if I can't play to "the man" and his never-ending thirst for more paperwork, then I might as well get a new job.

Just one lesson learned in Vegas.

YouTube analysis

This is my analysis of YouTube video clips.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BMIcCY1mB3E">Video #1

Purpose and Character:

The purpose and character of this clip is the broadcasting of his/her friend's innovative wedding procession. The original purpose of the wedding processional was largely for the entertainment of the audience; the recording was intended to extend the entertainment value of the procession to the YouTube viewing community.

The question: did the wedding procession derive its routine from the music or did it seek to co-opt it for personal gain? Given that the content of the music is romantic in nature, their decision to use it as a backdrop for a wedding routine fits with the original intent of the music. It meets the need for the promotion of the public good and does not garner a profit from it. In my estimation, this situation falls under the Fair Use doctrine.

Nature of the Work:

As a published song, the work is already in public dissemination. While it does not communicate facts, it communicates commonly expressed emotions. Therefore, since the wedding party was staying true to the fundamental nature of the work, their use of the music again fall under the Fair Use doctrine.


Amount and Sustainability:

On this point, the video is clearly more sketchy. It uses the song in its entirety. Since even samples need to now be licensed, the wedding party's use of the song wanders into the category of copyright violation.

Effect on Work's Value

This is regarding whether this kind of use of the song would undermine its value, if such usage were widespread. To the contrary, this kind of widespread usage would make the song more popular and therefore increase the musician's marketability. On this point, the song falls under the Fair Use doctrine.

Video #2
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lOfZLb33uCg&ob=av2e">Video #2

Purpose and Nature:

This Weird Al Yankovic music video is intended to parody "Gangster Paradise." Since it is derivative of the original music video and not transformative of the original material, Weird Al's work falls under the Fair Use doctrine (though Weird Al always gets the approval of the artists before he makes a music video).

Group Analysis of a Monograph

So you're a history instructor, and you want your students to know how a book is put together. But for crying out loud, the book is 300 pages long and far too dense for your cute little high school juniors to digest.

The solution...

Break it down according to chapters. Have the students form the same number of groups as there are chapters in the books. Then have each students present the essence of the book to the rest of the class. Walk them through how/why the book is structured as it is. Emphasis the role of each chapter in forming the argument or key elements/turning points of the narrative. This allows the students to see how a book works in scholarship, and it also teaches them how to distill a complex argument in simple terms to an audience.

Haunting Moral Questions

The more I think about how best to teach history, the more I realize that if our history doesn't *haunt* the students, then it's not very effective. By haunt, I only mean that the lesson material resonates in their bones, that it isn't merely the cold analysis of a science or math class. After all, most who teach history would suggest that at some level, we're teaching students how to be good citizens, how to be active thinkers. In essence, we're teaching them a kind of morality (and those involved in education know that that's hardly right-wing nuttery--the quasi-socialist Goodspeed made a name for himself by discussing the "Moral Foundations" of education).

So how to break that resonance barrier The key is that students need to *actually* see how the topic they're studying is part of contemporary discourse. I've considered a few ways. I'll use specific history units to illustrate, but these techniques can be applied across the board with a little ingenuity.

1) Re-enact the Salem Witch Trials without informing the students before hand. Have one of your more dramatic students play the role of Bridget Bishop, for example. Make sure she does a *good* job, enough to scare her fellow students a little (you might also want to pick someone who has a pretty strong rapport with her fellow students--the kind that endure one class period of insanity :). After about 5-10 minutes of that, inform the students what just happened. Have them write down a "journal account" of what they saw.

2) Have students compile a soundtrack to a favorite war--the Civil War, the Vietnam War, etc, using contemporary songs to illustrate various battles, episodes in the war. They form groups and must agree on the final song selections (requiring that they sharpen their debating skills). Have them present their soundtracks to the class and defend their song choices. This helps them to conceptualize the wars in ways that they genuinely understand.

3) Model a totalitarian government. One student is chosen as a chairman who exacts all control over the grades of other students. If they are late, fail to tell the chairman where they will be at a particular time, or do not pay due deference to the state, then they lose points. The teacher acts as the #2 man, basically advising the chairman on how best to maintain control over his people. And make sure you're *serious* about this. Send people to check up on where each student says they're going to be. It's complicated, but it provokes the students into understanding exactly what the 20th-century totalitarian experience was about.

This, in my mind, is the best way for students to start asking the great moral questions about human nature, the role of government, and the reality of war. Just some Saturday morning thoughts.

Free Market/Home Schooling vs. State-run Education

My sister-in-law has recently decided to her homeschool her children. Being the free market man I am (more on a gut level than an intellectual level, to be sure), I'm generally all for a mother taking hold of her children's education. There's something to be said for wanting to devote your personal lifetime not only to your child's moral education but to their cognitive education as well.

But...

Let's face it: those who embrace home-schooling often do it out of semi-ideological reasons. They don't trust those corrupted school districts. They view the home as a kind of "Fortress Zion" (which it should be), but transfer that model to how they see *everything* else around them. Their home is under siege, and a key weapon in defending it is a strange faux history that pays almost no attention to the complexities of the documentation. Books on the Constitution can't be trusted unless written by David McCullough. Thomas Jefferson's extensive involvement in slavery is bypassed: "he was merely a man of his time" while his words in the Declaration are fawned over as transcending time itself. Add to this that the curricula used, while claiming to be LDS-friendly, is more Calvinist through its dogged insistence in the absolute predestination of all things rah-rah-rah American (at least for white landholders). I do not believe my sister-in-law fits into this category. I pray that she does not.

Academics tend to simply curl their lips in sneering at these types. But I firmly believe that there is a way to build bridges between the homeschoolers and the academic historians. Any tips?