31 10 345 https://native-history.sites.grinnell.edu/files/original/91044e5c481f58ddec0f53457fa27388.pptx 1435d39d2f3822a6b75f3783057038b6 Presentation Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Sand Creek Massacre Lesson 4 Presentation Description An account of the resource Presentation accompanying Lesson 4 Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Ben Binversie We Are Still Here Westward Expansion: Who and How https://native-history.sites.grinnell.edu/files/original/d90a520d780cda5df2f4af6b29668e99.pdf 430be33ec43f5e767b01fe7b67ae547d Worksheet Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Sand Creek Massacre Lesson 4 Worksheet Description An account of the resource Worksheet accompanying Lesson 4 Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Ben Binversie We Are Still Here Westward Expansion: Who and How https://native-history.sites.grinnell.edu/files/original/fb4c5adb3d34b707b262ff529f67a611.pdf 44c3d065342ee1e22bab5498d3a34783 Lesson Plan A resource that gives a detailed description of a course of instruction. Duration Length of time involved (seconds, minutes, hours, days, class periods, etc.) 2 Days Objectives Students will understand that treaties are difficult to negotiate, given the disparate interests of the parties, treaties are not necessarily binding, especially in the case of Native American-U.S. relations, and are difficult to enforce, reparations in the form of money alone cannot resolve the pain and damage caused by the Sand Creek Massacre. Students will also relate the Little Arkansas Treaty to the broader idea of reparations for Native Americans. Materials Lesson 4 Presentation, Lesson 4 Worksheet, Lesson 4 Little Arkansas Treaty Text Lesson Plan Text Sand Creek Unit Lesson 4: Treaty and Reparations This lesson will guide students through the process of reparations and encourage them to consider questions of justice as it relates to acts of war and genocide. It will build off of the discussions and understandings from the previous lessons in order to assess the appropriate response to the Sand Creek Massacre. The students will analyze the Little Arkanasas Treaty of 1865, which provided reparations for the Sand Creek Massacre, and discuss questions of justice as it relates to genocide and war. The discussion will connect to the broader theme of reparations and reflect on the United States' attitude toward reparations and indigenous communities. This lesson is planned to take 2 days. However, if you are pressed for time, give preference to the first activity of reparations/ treaty-making, as it is a particularly insightful exercise for demonstrating their understanding of the massacre and encouraging them to tackle difficult questions related to justice and war. Allow for dissent and debate in class discussions during this activity. Essential Questions: How can a treaty resolve differences between Native Americans and the U.S. government? Are treaties an effective way to maintain peace and improve relations between settlers and Native Americans? Can monetary reparations ever atone for the damage done by the military at Sand Creek? What role do reparations play in historical memory as it relates to U.S. - Native relations? Desired Results Understandings Students Will Know/Will be Able To: • Treaties are difficult to negotiate, given the disparate interests of the parties • Treaties are not necessarily binding, especially in the case of Native American-U.S. relations, and are difficult to enforce • Reparations in the form of money alone cannot resolve the pain and damage caused the Sand Creek Massacre • Make a treaty to achieve goals of peace and resolve differences • Analyze a treaty and summarize its contents • Relate the Little Arkansas Treaty to the broader idea of reparations for Native Americans Assessment Evidence • Students will create a Treaty in groups • Students will discuss their treaties as a class • Students will summarize to the class the section of the Little Arkansas Treaty they analyze • Students will draft a resolution for the U.S. Congress regarding the Sand Creek Massacre Key Terms • Reparations • Treaty • Little Arkansas Treaty of 1865 Materials Needed: Reparations/ Treaty worksheet Little Arkansas Treaty (images and text included) Powerpoint Presentation Lesson Activities: Introduction (~5-7 minutes) • Introduce the concept of reparations to the class and solicit input on what sort of elements could be included in reparations. When are reparations necessary? (Use Lesson 4 Powerpoint Slide 2) Body Activity (~40 minutes) • As a class, discuss important elements of what should be considered in a treaty to address the Sand Creek Massacre and solicit students' thoughts on different aspects of the treaty/reparations o Students can take notes from this discussion on the front page of the Lesson 4 Worksheet • (Powerpoint Slide 3) Divide the students into small groups to complete the Lesson 4 Worksheet. Explain that the goal is to create a suitable treaty, including reparations for the Sand Creek Massacre. Give them approximately 20 minutes in groups to work. o Convene as a class to discuss the decisions students made for their treaties (~20 mins). o Attempt to bring in different viewpoints about how to resolve the different interests o If a consensus can be reached on certain elements, emphasize it, and you can write it on the board or projector. However, disagreement is also acceptable. Wrap-Up/Conclusion Day 1 (5 minutes) • Wrap up class discussion of treaty/reparations (Last question on the worksheet): Are our group treaties feasible and enforceable? o How can we ensure that both parties follow the terms of the agreement? o Can you think of enforcement mechanisms? o Keep in mind the history of treaty negotiations, the willingness of the U.S. Government to go back on their word, and the misunderstandings that resulted from ambiguous treaties between Native peoples and the U.S. government. Introduction Day 2 (5 minutes) • Remind the class of the treaties they made and introduce the Little Arkansas Treaty of 1865, which was supposed to do what the students’ treaties accomplished (see PPT Slide 4) o Emphasize that the treaty only lasted 2 years. Encourage the students, when they read the treaty, to look for parts of the treaty that might have caused it to fall apart. Body Activity Day 2 (~35 minutes) • In pairs or groups of 3, assign students to read 1 article** of the Little Arkansas Treaty of 1865 and write a short summary (a few sentences) to report to the class (complete worksheet Part 2) (10 minutes) o Regarding reparations, encourage students to think about whether these reparations are enough, given the damage done at Sand Creek. What do the reparations/ treaty accomplish? o **Articles 5 and 6, and 7, 8, and 9 should be grouped together. • Report back to class- go through the whole treaty, article by article (25 minutes) o Suggested important elements of each article of the treaty (as a guideline) o Article 1: promise of peace between the Native American tribes and the U.S. Government, as well as peace between the tribes themselves. Arbitration process (rather than resorting to fighting) in the case of breaking the treaty (through hostile acts or depredations) which goes through the President (a supposed impartial arbiter). o Article 2: sets the boundaries for their reservation land- for the “absolute and undisturbed use and occupation of the tribes who are parties to this treaty, and of such other friendly tribes as they may from time to time agree to admit among them, and that no white person, except officers, agents, and employees of the Government, shall go upon or settle” within that area (unless the tribes permit it). The tribes of this treaty accept this as their permanent home and will not leave the reservation for hunting purposes or other purposes without written consent from their Government agent. o Article 3: Until they are able to move to the designated Reservation (until the Government clears other Indian tribes off the land), the tribes are permitted to reside upon and range at pleasure throughout the unsettled portions of that part of the country they claim as originally theirs (between the Arkansas and Platte Rivers) provided that they report to the commander of the nearest military post if they see or hear of any hostile bands of Indians whatsoever. o Article 4: The U.S. Government may lay off and build through the reservation, such roads or highways as may be deemed necessary and may also establish military posts if necessary to preserve peace among Indians. Any injury or cost to the Indians coming from such building and occupancy will be ascertained and they will be compensated through judgment of the U.S. Congress. o Article 5: Per special request of the Cheyenne and Arapaho, the U.S. grants permits in fee simple of 640 acres of land to the following people… [list of names] o Article 6: Wishing to express its condemnation and repudiate the outrages perpetrated against certain bands of Cheyenne and Arapaho at Sand Creek on November 29th, 1864, the U.S. Government agrees to make reparations for the injuries done. They will grant 320 acres of land by patent to the following chiefs of said bands… and to each other person who lost a spouse or parent 160 acres. Lands will be selected by the Secretary of the Interior and shall be within the reservation established in Article 2. The U.S. will also pay in securities, animals, goods, provisions, or other useful articles as compensation for property belonging to them [people who suffered at Sand Creek]. o Article 7: The United States agree to annually give 20 dollars per person entitled to participate in the beneficial provisions of this treaty until they move to the reservation and 40 dollars per person after that, for the next 40 years. The aggregate number at the time of this treaty of people who are eligible for such provisions is 2,800. o Article 8: The tribes party to this treaty will do their best to unite the other bands of their tribes to join them in this treaty, which shall be made binding on all parties whenever such absentees have participated in the beneficial provisions of this treaty (ie- if they receive money, they are agreeing to the terms of the treaty). o Article 9: Upon the ratification of this treaty all former treaties are abrogated. The parties to this treaty, representing the U.S. and the aforementioned tribes, agree to the treaty, and sign their names below. o Discuss whether it is adequate and whether it will make peace. What are the goals of this treaty and the role of reparations? How do the students' treaties they made compare to the Little Arkansas Treaty of 1865? (PPT Slide 6) Wrap-Up/Conclusion Day 2 (15 minutes) • (use PPT Slide 7) Reparations Resolution o Hannah Arendt quote about historical memory o (Slide 8) Show students example of resolution from 2009 o (Return to Slide 7) Students will draft a resolution for the U.S. Congress regarding the Sand Creek Massacre  After they write their resolutions, ask a few students to share their resolutions with the class. Then, ask the students to consider, and discuss as a class, whether a resolution by the U.S. Congress matters. • Is it too late to do anything about Sand Creek? • Do words matter when so many lives were lost in such a brutal way? • Is there a need for reparations on a big scale? Lesson Sources: Treaty of Little Arkansas River, October 14, 1865 (Ratified Indian Treaties #341, 14 STAT 703) between the U.S. and Arapahoe and Cheyenne Indians (Black Kettle Band) granting lands in reparation for the Sand Creek Massacre, November 29, 1864. Compiled and edited by Charles J. Kappler, Clerk to the Senate Committee on Indian Affairs. Washington, DC: Government Printing Office, 1904. Accessed on: http://digital.library.okstate.edu/kappler/vol2/treaties/che0887.htm Themes Westward Expansion: Who and How We Are Still Here Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Sand Creek Massacre Lesson 4 Description An account of the resource This lesson will guide students through the process of reparations and encourage them to consider questions of justice as it relates to acts of war and genocide. It will build off of the discussions and understandings from the previous lessons in order to assess the appropriate response to the Sand Creek Massacre. The students will analyze the Little Arkanasas Treaty of 1865, which provided reparations for the Sand Creek Massacre, and discuss questions of justice as it relates to genocide and war. The discussion will connect to the broader theme of reparations and reflect on the United States' attitude toward reparations and indigenous communities. This lesson is planned to take 2 days. However, if you are pressed for time, give preference to the first activity of reparations/ treaty-making, as it is a particularly insightful exercise for demonstrating their understanding of the massacre and encouraging them to tackle difficult questions related to justice and war. Allow for dissent and debate in class discussions during this activity. Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Ben Binversie We Are Still Here Westward Expansion: Who and How https://native-history.sites.grinnell.edu/files/original/056fcb27d1805e894f8c31a15141826f.pdf 43692ae5fde0f0075e512b2e2b883bfc Worksheet Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Sand Creek Massacre Lesson 3 Worksheet Description An account of the resource Worksheet accompanying Lesson 3 Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Ben Binversie We Are Still Here Westward Expansion: Who and How https://native-history.sites.grinnell.edu/files/original/db71e5b5e3e15bd939dd31ce903a18cf.pdf 2c5191c780a881b0f2b8e3b80ce5c263 Lesson Plan A resource that gives a detailed description of a course of instruction. Duration Length of time involved (seconds, minutes, hours, days, class periods, etc.) 1 Day Objectives Students will understand that bias shapes our understanding of historical events, historical events are framed by people and other entities with a purpose or agenda, the U.S. Government's acknowledgement of Sand Creek as a "massacre" was noteworthy and unique. Students will analyze different reactions to the massacre and uncover their biases and relate Sand Creek and the U.S. government to the present day. Materials Lesson 3 Worksheet Lesson Plan Text Sand Creek Unit Lesson 3: Reactions to the Massacre This lesson will enable students to understand how the interpretations of historical events shape the way we remember them. They will understand the importance of framing a historical event within a narrative and why the classification of Sand Creek as a "massacre" by the U.S. Government was notable. By looking at various responses to the event in local newspapers, editorials and government reports, students will discover how the legacy of the Sand Creek Massacre formed and whose voices were included in this process. Essential Questions: How do historians decide on the correct interpretation of events when there are conflicting accounts? Whose voices are included in history? Desired Results Understandings Students Will Know/Will be Able To: • Bias shapes our understanding of historical events • Historical events are framed by people and other entities with a purpose or agenda • The U.S. Government's acknowledgement of Sand Creek as a "massacre" was noteworthy and unique • Analyze different reactions to the massacre and uncover their biases • Relate Sand Creek and the U.S. government to the present day Assessment Evidence • Group and class discussion of bias and how it impacts the sources • Students will complete worksheet comparing the sources Key Terms • Bias • Editorial • Narrative • Framing Materials: Lesson 3 Worksheet Lesson Activities: Introduction (~5-7 minutes) • Ask students: Consider how other people at the time might have reacted to the Sand Creek Massacre (for example, from the perspective of other settlers in Colorado, other Native American tribes, the U.S. Government). o Try to help them understand how someone's predispositions or positionality influences the way they interpret events. o Discuss the concept of ethnocentrism and how it relates to Sand Creek Massacre and the Civil War (quote on 1st page of worksheet)  Quote from John Chivington: "Damn any man who sympathizes with Indians. Kill and scalp all, big and little; nits make lice." • Ask students: How might his feelings toward the Cheyenne and Arapaho impact his military decisions and his interpretation of the so-called "battle"? Body Activity (~45 Minutes) • Split class up into groups of 3-4 students and give students ~5 minutes to read the first document o Fill out corresponding worksheet (See Lesson 3 Worksheet) • Class Discussion of first document (~10 mins) o Key elements to emphasize:  Opinion: This "battle" will stand among the "brilliant feats of arms in Indian warfare" history with "few rivals"  Language choice: "savages" and "enemy" to describe the Cheyenne and Arapaho, "battle " to describe the massacre,  Military emphasis: this text focuses on portraying the military movements and important elements of the "battle". The author makes sure to note the impressive feat of marching 260 miles in such a short time in deep snow and scanty forage. o What role does ethnocentrism play? How can we see it present here in the attitude towards the Cheyenne and Arapaho? • Give students ~5 minutes to read and take notes on the 2nd set of documents o Fill out corresponding worksheet • Class Discussion about Document set B (~10 mins) o Key elements to emphasize:  Opinion: Chivington and his soldiers committed unspeakable atrocities on a nonviolent and unsuspecting group of Cheyenne and Arapaho, which included many women and children  Language choice: extremely brutal scenes depicted; although accurate, the authors take care to describe in detail the atrocities • They use the word "massacre", which was normally reserved to describe actions by Native Americans toward settlers  Reliability: taken from investigation by Major General McCook  Emphasis: focus on the brutality of the massacre  Important Takeaway: • U.S. Committee on Conduct of War Report: a rare example of the U.S. Government condemning the actions of its military in such a harsh, public and quick manner. In this rare case, disagreement among white men (military leaders) about how to deal with the "Indian problem" led to the divulging of the true nature of the massacre, as Major Wynkoop's policy of peace with the Indians led him to call it a massacre (in his letter to his superiors which led to the investigation). • Give students 5 mins to answer the last question on the worksheet • Class discussion comparing the two sets of documents (~10 mins) o What do we know that can support either one of these views? o Whose views should we prioritize? o These two sets of documents portray the Sand Creek Massacre very differently: Is this just a matter of personal opinion and should both sides views be respected equally? If not, why? o Describe the contradiction evident in both of these sets of documents regarding the treatment of Native Americans:  Document A: The author demonstrates respect for Native Americans for their battle efforts ("their defense told terribly against our ranks"), but deride them as savages and laud the killing of them by the Army  Document set B: While condemning the acts of the Colorado volunteers, the authors compare the Army's actions to the "savage" Indians. As such, while criticizing the Army for their atrocious acts, they are simultaneously characterizing them as akin to the people they massacred ("foul and dastardly massacre which would have disgraced the veriest savage among those who were the victims of his cruelty"). Wrap-Up/Conclusion (~5 Minutes) • Ask students: Given what we have read about the Massacre and reactions to it. Evidently, there are strong feelings on both sides. The U.S. Government has called for an investigation into the Massacre: Who might want revenge? Peace? What should be done? o Hint at the role of reparations/treaties (which will follow in the next lesson) Lesson Sources: "The Battle of Sand Creek", Rocky Mountain News Editorial, December 17, 1864. Accessed on: http://www.kclonewolf.com/History/SandCreek/sc-reports/rocky-editorials.html “The Great Indian Massacre.” Macon Daily Telegraph, August 26, 1865. America's Historical Newspapers, Newsbank/ Readex (112CE71CB5EAE6F8). “Massacre of the Cheyenne Indians,” Report on the Conduct of the War, 38 Cong., 2 sess., Washington, Government Printing Office, 1865. Themes Westward Expansion: Who and How We Are Still Here Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Sand Creek Massacre Lesson 3 Description An account of the resource This lesson will enable students to understand how the interpretations of historical events shape the way we remember them. They will understand the importance of framing a historical event within a narrative and why the classification of Sand Creek as a "massacre" by the U.S. Government was notable. By looking at various responses to the event in local newspapers, editorials and government reports, students will discover how the legacy of the Sand Creek Massacre formed and whose voices were included in this process. Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Ben Binversie We Are Still Here Westward Expansion: Who and How https://native-history.sites.grinnell.edu/files/original/30e2a2e22096149f4e0088f6e40a9e62.pptx c0b8530cd9781482210c74b5c1743958 Presentation Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Sand Creek Massacre Lesson 2 Presentation Description An account of the resource Presentation for Lesson 2 Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Ben Binversie Westward Expansion: Who and How https://native-history.sites.grinnell.edu/files/original/36eb3736249541acd3b7e137ac1dca08.pdf 34c32734947207d7650fe7231df279fe Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Native History Worksheet Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Sand Creek Massacre Lesson 2 Worksheet Description An account of the resource Worksheet to accompany Lesson 2 Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Ben Binversie Westward Expansion: Who and How https://native-history.sites.grinnell.edu/files/original/626de7d6d489e49701a62e5e7865fa95.pdf 4368ee46ac52113a46d35ed67c5454dd Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Native History Lesson Plan A resource that gives a detailed description of a course of instruction. Duration Length of time involved (seconds, minutes, hours, days, class periods, etc.) 2 Days Objectives Students should understand how to apply historical thinking skills to understand the causes and significance of events. Students will understand how the author/witness' perspective impacts the way they view an event, critically assess the authors’ biases and how they impact the reliability of the sources, compare different accounts of the same event, and corroborate evidence using different sources Lesson Plan Text Unit: Sand Creek Lesson 2: Comparing Accounts This lesson will explore various accounts of the Sand Creek Massacre and enable students to compare conflicting accounts to develop an understanding of what happened at Sand Creek. After reading the first account of the massacre by John Chivington, the students will form groups and analyze other accounts about Sand Creek and compare them critically. It is best to complete Lesson 1: Sand Creek Background beforehand, but if need be, the background information sheet can be used to supplant Lesson 1. This lesson is planned as a 2-day lesson. Look at this lesson in conjunction with lesson 3 to determine if they would fit better together or as separate lessons, depending on the familiarity of your class with primary source analysis and the concept of bias. Essential Questions: How can we use conflicting accounts of the same event to understand what happened at Sand Creek? How can we use the information about a source (author, purpose, date, etc.) to assess its usefulness for history? Desired Results Understandings Students Will Know/Will be Able To: • Students should understand how to apply historical thinking skills to understand the causes and significance of events • Students will understand how the author/witness' perspective impacts the way they view an event • Critically assess the authors’ biases and how they impact the reliability of the sources • Compare different accounts of the same event • Corroborate evidence using different sources Assessment Evidence • Students will engage in a class discussion about the reliability of the accounts • Students will complete the document analysis worksheet for their account • Students will describe which word (Battle, Massacre, Tragedy) best captures what happened at Sand Creek Key Terms • Bias: prejudice in favor of or against one thing, person, or group compared with another, usually in a way considered to be unfair or partial in that it does not tell the whole story • Corroboration: comparing different pieces of evidence/different sources to evaluate what is reliable. Historians do this when they find evidence from lots of different sources so that they can form a balanced opinion • Primary source: a source of information that was created at the time under study and provide direct or firsthand evidence • Secondary source: a source that was created later by someone who did not experience first-hand or participate in the events or conditions you're researching • Sourcing: the act of questioning a piece of evidence and trying to determine if it is reliable. How do biases and perspectives shape the source? • Battle: a general encounter between armies, ships of war, or aircraft • Massacre: the act or an instance of killing a number of usually helpless or unresisting human beings under circumstances of atrocity or cruelty • Tragedy: a disastrous event Materials: Powerpoint Presentation (Sand Creek Lesson 2 Introduction), Lesson 2 Worksheet Lesson Activities: Introduction (10 minutes) o Teacher will introduce the class to the concept of bias and explain a hypothetical, everyday situation in which bias might be applicable (Use Powerpoint: Sand Creek Lesson 2 Introduction): o Lunchroom Fight: Let's say Jalen and Kerry are in the cafeteria at lunch and they get into an argument about which is better, pudding or jello. This argument becomes the cause of a food fight and Jalen and Kerry get taken to the principal's office. The principal asks who started the food fight, but both Jalen and Kerry claim innocence. In order to understand who started the food fight, the principal interviewed Jalen, Kerry, and three other witnesses from the cafeteria. o Jalen: Kerry did it. I swear. o Kerry: I'm innocent of all wrongdoing. Jello is disgusting. o Witness 1, Mary, who is Jalen's best friend and was sitting next to Jalen in the cafeteria: Kerry throw her pudding at Jalen first, and the pudding flew over Jalen's head and hit Eric in the head, and then everybody started to throw food. o Witness 2, Cafeteria Supervisor, who monitors the tables during lunch, and was interviewed a week later: I saw both of those hooligans at lunch and they were yelling at each other about something and Jalen pushed Kerry's pudding towards her, spilling it on her shirt. Then, Kerry threw her jello at Jalen, and that's how it happened. o Witness 3, Lunch Lady Lucy, who was watching from the other side of the cafeteria and has notoriously bad vision: I saw that little boy Jalen throw something at Kerry, and then everybody started to throw food. I got hit by yesterday's mystery meat. o Discuss how students would assess these witnesses' accounts and using what criteria. Some possible questions to discuss include: o How could there be different stories of the same event if everyone is telling the truth? o Why would people see or remember an event differently? o What makes one person's story more believable than another's? o Who was standing where? o Do any of the witnesses have any interests in the determination of who started the fight? o Do stories change over time? How does the timing of the account matter? o Is there any physical evidence that could help determine who started the fight? o The teacher will explain that the job of the principal in this case is like the job of a historian. o The teacher will emphasize that bias is not inherently bad and does not necessarily imply lying, but can be used to better understand historical events by asking questions about the sources we use. Body Activity (35 minutes) • Read John Chivington Biography (8-10 mins): Now, the teacher will explain that the class will use the concepts they just started to explore (bias, sourcing, corroboration) to understand what happened at Sand Creek on November 29, 1864. The first account they will read is from Colonel John Chivington. If necessary, the teacher will lead them through this first account as a class. If done as a class, still give time for the class to read the biography and account on their own. • Students will read the biography of Colonel Chivington and the teacher will prepare students to read Chivington's account of Sand Creek, encouraging them to consider the information about Chivington as they read his account • Student Analysis (10-15 mins): Students should read the account of John Chivington (Document 1) and look at the worksheet questions • Teacher-guided discussion of worksheet questions (10 mins): Try to get multiple students' perspectives as a way of demonstrating how to corroborate evidence. Emphasize pinpointing textual evidence to answer the questions. Use a document projector to project the document for the class or have students number the lines in the document for easier reference. Ask students if, according to Chivington, Sand Creek was a massacre, battle, or tragedy. • Important ideas that teacher could suggest include:  Reasons Chivington attacked the Indians (desire for promotion/congressional seat, trying to avoid dangerous conflict elsewhere in the Civil War arena)  Reasons why his estimates of the number of Indians killed and the number of warriors present be skewed (trying to make his attack sound impressive, gain support from white settlers) Wrap-Up/Conclusion (5 minutes) • The teacher will conclude the discussion about the Chivington account and ask students what else they want to know about what happened at Sand Creek, emphasizing the importance of using multiple sources to tell an accurate story. • What perspectives are missing? • What information would be helpful to get a better idea of what happened? • How could we check the reliability of Colonel Chivington's account? • Conclude the discussion by telling students that next class they will use other sources with different interpretations of what happened and compare them to Chivington's account. Day 2 Introduction (8 minutes) o Teacher will remind the class of the previous lesson, asking for students' ideas about bias and why it matters and reminding them of the content of the John Chivington source. o Ask students: Last class, we talked about the role of bias when looking at historical sources. Can anyone tell me what they know about bias and why it matters within the context of Sand Creek? o Ask students: Look again briefly at the Chivington source; Can you suggest any possible biases in Chivington's interpretation of Sand Creek? How can we investigate these biases and explore other interpretations of the event? (Hint at looking at other peoples' interpretations of the event and corroborating the evidence) Body Activity (35 minutes) • Split up into groups of 3-4 students. (Each student should receive a packet with all of the sources, but will only be responsible for reading and reporting on 1 of them. They should have the others available for reference.) • Student Analysis (20-25 mins): • Students will read the biography of their respective account and answer questions about the document before reading it. They will discuss in their groups the important information they know about the document before reading it. • Students will then read their account and answer the questions about their source. • Teacher-guided discussion of worksheet questions (15 mins): • Ask students how their documents contradict, support, or complicate what they read in the Chivington account. • Try to get multiple students' perspectives as a way of demonstrating how to corroborate evidence. If possible, project the accounts for the whole class to see, and ensure that the follow along in their packets (they should all have all of the documents). Emphasize pinpointing textual evidence to answer the questions. Wrap-Up/Conclusion (5 minutes) • Ask students how they would categorize Sand Creek: battle, massacre, or tragedy. Ask them to justify their answer and write a short paragraph (4-5 sentences) about why they chose that word. Lesson Sources: United States Congress, House of Representatives. “Massacre of Cheyenne Indians,” Report on the Conduct of the War, 38th Cong., 2nd Sess. Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office, 1865, p. 48-50. George E. Hyde, Life of George Bent: Written from his Letters (Ed. by Savoie Lottinville.) Norman: University of Oklahoma Press, 1968. Pp. 151-152. United States Congress, House of Representatives. “Massacre of Cheyenne Indians,” Report on the Conduct of the War, 38th Cong., 2nd Sess. Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office, 1865, p. 6-9. United States Congress, Senate, “Sand Creek Massacre,” Report of the Secretary of War, Sen. Exec. Doc. 26, 39th Cong., 2nd Sess. Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office, 1867, pp. 50-51. Materials Lesson 2 Presentation, Lesson 2 Worksheet Themes Westward Expansion: Who and How Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Sand Creek Massacre Lesson 2 Description An account of the resource This lesson will explore various accounts of the Sand Creek Massacre and enable students to compare conflicting accounts to develop an understanding of what happened at Sand Creek. After reading the first account of the massacre by John Chivington, the students will form groups and analyze other accounts about Sand Creek and compare them critically. It is best to complete Lesson 1: Sand Creek Background beforehand, but if need be, the background information sheet can be used to supplant Lesson 1. This lesson is planned as a 2-day lesson. Look at this lesson in conjunction with lesson 3 to determine if they would fit better together or as separate lessons, depending on the familiarity of your class with primary source analysis and the concept of bias. Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Ben Binversie Westward Expansion: Who and How https://native-history.sites.grinnell.edu/files/original/5c25ba60285c3a03a417b3121cd25f20.pdf 864be841e60fef955305c4a715bb5a47 Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Native History Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. Original Format The type of object, such as painting, sculpture, paper, photo, and additional data Treaty Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Fort Wise Treaty Description An account of the resource Text of the Fort Wise Treaty for Lesson 1 Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource National Archives Westward Expansion: Who and How https://native-history.sites.grinnell.edu/files/original/9d4b380715a3b9009408851378eb148b.pdf 864be841e60fef955305c4a715bb5a47 Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Native History Worksheet Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Sand Creek Massacre Lesson 1 Worksheet Description An account of the resource Worksheet to accompany Lesson 1 Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Ben Binversie Westward Expansion: Who and How