Social 10
You had most of the period to work on reading the chapters in Canada: A Nation Unfolding that cover WWII (Chapters 12-14). You should be compiling your list of key terms from WWII over the course of the next few days. I'll have these key terms due early next week (I haven't set a due date yet). Please make sure that you do a little reading everyday from Chapters 12-14.
Social 20
You handed in your board game projects today. They look amazing! On Friday, Social 20-3 will be testing (playing) Social 20-4's board games, and vice versa. In small groups you will be playing and marking another groups' board game. I will also have you do a peer evaluation of people in your group. Please complete the Industrial Revolution booklet that I gave you in class today for tomorrow. I will be doing a homework check to see if you completed the task. I also gave you the results of the Nationalism Unit Final.
15 comments:
Mr. G, I was wondering if there is a version 2 of the powerpoint "Canada's role and contribution to WWII."
Didn't I send it?
you only sent the one with the black background.
I just sent out the second version. That was weird. I spent time on my prep switching it to white background and then I didn't even send it out. You should have it in your inbox now.
ok, thanks!
was operation sea lion on the terms list?
social 10-1
what is the final solution?
social 10-1
Anonymous said...
was operation sea lion on the terms list?
no sea lion is not one but operation barbarasso i think is the one your lookin for
what do we do if we dont have a current event and we are up tomorrow
what is the final solution?
social 10-1
-----------------
The "Final Solution" was the Nazis' plan to exterminate all the Jews in Europe (it was their "solution" to the "Jewish problem").
what do we do if we dont have a current event and we are up tomorrow
-----------------------
Watch the news tonight, and then research one of the news items.
Anonymous said...
was operation sea lion on the terms list?
no sea lion is not one but operation barbarasso i think is the one your lookin for
------------------
Operation Barbarossa was on the list, Operation Sea Lion wasn't.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nanjing_massacre
a part of the war you didnt quite learn about
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nanjing_massacre
a part of the war you didnt quite learn about
--------------------
That's because you're in Social 10. Maybe in Social 30 your teacher would talk about it. But I doubt it. Most teachers cover WWII in about 4 days, there's too much to cover in Social 30. I'd be interested to see how this particular event is reported at Wikipedia, or whether the page had been "vandalized" recently. Wikipedia is a great resource, as I said in class, but there are people out there who can be mischevious, or have a political axe to grind so they tamper with pages. Have you ever looked up George W. Bush on Wikipedia? You can't make changes to it (unless you have a Wikipedia account)because it has been "edited" (hacked) so many times. Remember, Wikipedia is not the only source out there!!! There is something a little bit wrong with the whole anonymity aspect of it.
You should actually read the "talk" section of that article. You'll see that the article has gone through what Wikipedia refers to as "edit wars", in all likelihood between Chinese and Japanese perspectives on this incident. Differences in numbers, how to refer to the event, etc. If you read the "talk" page it is far more interesting than the actual article, because you can see the true danger of Wikipedia in the wrong hands. It becomes a place of "rewriting history" or "editing history". I know you may think that I'm being over-serious on this topic, but I am first and foremost a historian (that was my first degree). If I were in university today, writing a history paper I would NEVER use Wikipedia as a reference, just because of the potential unreliablity of the information. For example, if I were researching the "rape of Nanking" and I wanted accurate numbers, and I happened to visit Wikipedia during one of these "edit wars" I could potentially get unreliable information. Especially if one side or the other wants to inflate the numbers or reduce the numbers to suit their purposes. Like I've said, Wikipedia is a good place to start, but it's not the only place on the web where you can find information. When it comes to Wikipedia, or the Internet for that matter, you have to be critical of what you're reading. Just because it's on the web, doesn't make it true. If someone writes something for publication on the web, and they don't put their name on it, you should be asking, why?
Post a Comment