Munitions+Production

Usha's comments in Blue.

Your name: Tina Marroum

===**Initial Reading and Assessment of Textbook Treatment of the Topic** ===

Name of Gr. 10 Textbook examined: Canada: Face of a Nation

Name of more "scholarly" source examined: "Arms Canada: the deadly business of military exports," by Ernie Regehr

__Your Initial Thoughts:__ Please provide a **brief** (5-10 sentences) initial assessment of the textbook's treatment of the subject. We have not developed any particular criteria by which to assess the textbook so this is really simply you initial reactions, feelings, questions about what you have read. Thanks!

The textbook gives a fairly simplified version of the topic, which is quite appropriate for students in the Grade 10 Academic History class. It provides a brief explanation of the fact that Canada did indeed supply munitions as part of the war effort, but mainly focuses on the role women played in their manufacture. Although this was definitely an important step for women in the early twentieth century, the text seems to only convey the importance of Canada supplying munitions through the lens of womens' roles. "Arms Canada," on the other hand, provides a much more detailed account of Canada's support for Britain and some of the conflicts (monetary and otherwise) that evolved from the connection between the two countries. Womens' roles are not mentioned at all, and the brief paragraphs on munitions production during the first World War cause the reader to feel that there is a bit of a void with regard to some of the other factors that could have been discussed in relation to the topic.

Thanks, Tina. This is quite interesting that the text and the scholarly source actually include/exclude the same topic - i.e. the role of women. Fascinating - I wonder why that is. Critical Question: Who, in your opinion, provided the greater war effort on behalf of Canada - the workers in the munitions factories or the soldiers on the front? (Hmmm, on reflection this "judge the better or the best" question might bring up some intense gender-based debates between students too!) Great start, Tina. Clearly a "judge the better or the best". I think I would lose the "in your opinion" to make sure that there is no question that students are not being asked for their personal opinion but will be required to put forward a reasoned judgement based on criteria - which might mitigate against the kind of gender-driven debates that can derail a grade 10 class! I also wonder how deep this question will allow students to probe the issue. Will it turn into a circular argument ("Well the soldiers couldn't shoot without ammunition" vs. "Well, the ammunition would be useless without the soldiers")? It might be worthwhile, instead, to keep the structure of the question but look at different elements of munitions production. Or to look at different controversy within the sphere of munitions productions (e.g. women in the workforce, Ross Rifle, corruption within government contracts and Sam Hughes, etc.) Just some suggestions to consider - what do you think? I think you're absolutely right. Would a better critical "judging" question be: "Whose war efforts provided women with greater opportunities in the workforce - women working in munitions factories and organizing war efforts at home, or those employed as nurses and relievers of the injured in hospitals on the front?" I think this question is a little more open-ended than my previous one (i.e. it wouldn't really force a circular argument) and allows the students to use facts from the text as support for their arguments. However, it could also be argued that nursing has always been a predominantly female role during war and thus did not change the way women were seen in the workforce. Even though you are right that it could be argued that nursing was always a predominantly female profession, I don't think that undermines your new question. Students could argue that there were more opportunities in a predominantly female profession because of glass ceilings, prejudices, etc. I think this new one works well.

=**__Lesson Design - Initial Planning Stages__**= The large role Canada's people (especially women) played in support of the war through munitions production. Good start, Tina. Consider extending this just a bit to reflect what you want students to understand about the role women played - e.g. "They played a crucial role...", "there are different perspectives on the impact of their role...", etc.. The key learning should reflect what students will be believe/think about the topic when they leave your class.
 * __Identify Key Learning/ "Big Idea"/ Learning Target__**

Whose war efforts provided women with greater opportunities in the workforce - women working in munitions factories and organizing war efforts at home, or those employed as nurses and relievers of the injured in hospitals on the front?
 * __Frame Critical Challenge__**

Students will be writing a Letter to the Editor based on the issue of women in munitions factories. The lesson will help them recognize the factors involved with women in the workforce during war and allow them to form opinions based on this information.
 * __How will this lesson help students build skills they will need for the summative assessment task for the unit?__**

Students will be actively engaged in the dimension of Continuity and Change.
 * __What dimension of Historical Thinking will students actively engage in during this lesson?__**

Students will fulfill curriculum criteria found on page 47 of "The Ontario Curriculum Grades 9 and 10: Canadian and World Studies." More specifically, they will "assess Canada's participation in war, peace and security" and "Canadians' contributions to the war effort at home during World War I...as well as some of the effects the wars had on the home front."
 * __Background Knowledge__**

Students will have to adhere to the following criteria for judgement: a) - Criteria for a successful worker and/or workforce - Criteria for opportunities for women Just to clarify a bit: Your question is "Whose efforts provided women with greater opportunities..." The criteria is a bit sticky because of the wording of the question - it's a bit hard to figure out what you need criteria for. It seems to me that you're asking about which group of women had a greater impact on the opportunities for women overall. Is that right? If so, you are looking for criteria for determining who had a greater impact. So, it might help to try this: finish the following sentence: "A group has a significant impact if... ﻿Yup, I was confused! Thanks. I'll take your suggestions into account:  - Women have a presence and play an essential role in that workplace (i.e. the workplace cannot function without them) - Women hold positions of authority or have some sway in decisions - Women are changing already established ideas and/or customs (e.g. men's work vs. women's work). - Women in the workforce are treated as equally as their male counterparts Yes - this is good.
 * __Criteria for Judgement__**

Does that make sense?

b) - Criteria for a convincing Letter to the Editor - Criteria for using facts from a source - Criteria for justifying opinions with those facts - Criteria for remaining reasonable even when expressing emotion and opinion Similar to the comment above, you can streamline this a bit by finishing the following sentence: "A letter to the editor is convincing if it... - ﻿Criteria for stating facts in a written document clearly and concisely (.."if it communicates clearly and concisely")   - ﻿Criteria for expressing an opinion justified by facts ("...if it provides a clear judgment supported by relevant evidence")   - ﻿Criteria for remaining reasonable even when expressing emotion and opinion ("...if it remains reasonable even when expressing emotion and opinion")   I hope these are better. I felt that the last one was okay so I left it in there. Yes these are good - you had the right idea even the first time, just the wording was a bit awkward. You've definitely got the right idea. I was only trying to streamline your wording so it would seem clear to the kids. Thanks, Tina.

By writing their Letter to the Editor and understanding women's roles in munitions production, students will focus on becoming critically minded.
 * __Habit of Mind__**

Students will be faced with their own Egocentricity, as well as that of their classmates, when writing Letters to the Editor regarding women in the workforce. They will need to be wary of making judgements that are based solely on emotion without the facts to back them up.
 * __Thinking Strategies__**
 * __Critical Thinking Vocabulary__**


 * __Primary Document__:**
 * "Letter from Mark H. Irish of the Imperial Munitions Board to the Chief Censor, Lieutenant Colonel Ernest J. Chambers, Regarding the Use of Women as Workers in Munitions Factories, October 27, 1916:**
 * Source: []**