From the first, which discusses differences between a AAA road map that omits “Indian Country” sites and one that is specifically for “Indian Country”:
The issue doesn’t seem to be resolution. The Arizona and New Mexico map has a higher resolution than the one for Indian country. I somehow doubt that anyone hatched a plot to hide Tsaile from Ken. My guess, is that the criteria for selecting what to put on each map simply differs, and that the difference was enough to make Tsaile disappear (along with quite a few other things, actually).
And from the second, which discusses how various maps visualize Native American culture areas:
This placement on teh map isn’t from time immemorial; it begins at the cusp of the 1400s, give or take a bit, and that enables us to place their entrance into a sequence of events for the region. They were still settling into the total territory on this map when the Spanish began exploring the region, arriving well after their Pueblo neighbors. Knowing that helps to put the map in perspective. Not knowing that invites an a-historical reading of the map.
Questions to discuss with students: What do the maps you use in class omit? What do your mental maps omit? When you’re designing a data visualization, what are the most important factors to consider? Do click through to read the entire posts, if only to see the maps in question!
“For me, despite my love of cool new gadgets, I always try to start from a place of what do I want my students to learn and what do I want them able to do. If the cool-to-play-with Google Glass or Apple Watch or other gadget isn’t the most efficient way to answer those questions then I don’t bring it into the class. I can’t promise I won’t get one for myself though.”
New for 2017, WorldView Software’s U.S. Government: An Interactive Approach has new resources for learning more about how judges and justices makes decisions.
The overview of Chapter 11: The Judiciary contains a new discussion of the doctrine of originalism, along with ancillary factual and conceptual questions and glossary terms that support learning and assessment:
Use a video capture tool like Recap for formative assessment: have students describe the readings in their own words, using the Questions for Thought as prompts.
New for 2017, WorldView Software’s U.S. Government: An Interactive Approach has new resources for learning more about the president of the United States.
Chapter 9: The Presidency has a new image with introduction and questions called Graph: Executive Orders, which shows the use of these orders in comparison by president from FDR through Obama:
Chapter 9: The Presidency also has an updated overview and revised conceptual questions that reflect President Trump’s use of social media, and new glossary terms (which are linked from their context in the overview).
Use our databank of study questions in a polling service such as in Google Classroom to do quick mid-stream assessments.
New for 2017, WorldView Software’s U.S. Government: An Interactive Approach has resources for learning about how to distinguish real news from fake.
Chapter 5: The Media overview section “Newer Media” has been updated to discuss the propaganda phenomenon, with corresponding factual and conceptual questions for assessment as well as additional vocabulary terms in the glossary.
And that’s not all! The Tutorial: Social Media has been updated to include information on how to evaluate news articles, including the handy flowchart from the Featured Image for instant appraisal (this updated tutorial is also available in American History II: Reconstruction to the Present).
Finally, the Graph: Primary Sources of News has been updated to show how online news sources overtook other mediums:
Art images can be used to discuss the differences between visual and textual sources.
Watters discusses the narratives of social transformation in which technology and its putative capacity for ‘innovation’ and ‘disruption’ has become embedded:
What interests me are the stories that the businesses tell about “disruptive innovation” because this has become a near sacred story to the tech sector. It’s a story of the coming apocalypse –destruction and transformation and redemption, brought to you by technology.
By now, many of you have no doubt seen more presidential polling results than you ever wanted to see! But too many people equate internet polls such as the one featured above (from cheezburger.com) with scientific polls conducted by major news organizations. How can you tell which of them are valid measures of public opinion, and which are not?
Start with Project: Conducting a Poll in WorldView Software’s U.S. Government. Try it out, and then critically evaluate the results. Here are some guiding points for questions students should be asking about their data:
What was the difference between the total population of people whose opinion they wanted to know and the number of people who actually answered the poll?
Did people have a choice to take the poll or not?
Could people respond to the poll more than once?
Was one group of people more represented in the poll than another? Why or why not?
How were the questions asked — did they notice they got a better response rate from one method over another, such as internet over in-person?
How were the questions asked — did the questions use loaded language that hinted at the “right” answer?
How were the questions asked — were they yes-or-no, multiple choice, etc.?
and so on…
Then apply this methodology to the polls out there. Count the differences between this poll from Breitbart (warning: overlay popup ad):
For a deeper dive into how polling works, visit the Pew Research Center’s Methods page. There, you’ll find all sorts of information, such as how to figure out a poll’s margin of error. Especially recommended reading: the overview “Flashpoints in Polling” by Claudia Deane, Courtney Kennedy, Scott Keeter and Kyley McGeeney.
UPDATE 12/06/2016: Very nice video from Scientific American explaining the math behind polling.
Study questions can be used for formative assessment in the beginning of a lesson or for summative assessment at the end.