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