Social Science Models

Washington's Presidency: Overview

Lesson One (One 97 min. class period)

Introductory Grabber: Instructor begins by introducing a local newspaper article discussing proposed restrictions on teenage drivers. Students are instructed to identify proposed changes (i.e., a graduated license, no midnight - 6 a.m. driving, no more than 3 passengers, no violations to be eligible for full license) and arguments that might be presented by advocates and opponents  (i.e., Advocates: public safety; protection of immature youth; Opponents: burden on parents; limits job opportunities). The class discusses whether the proposed changes would be good policy (Expect students to claim policy discriminates against the young). As part of the discussion, the instructor asks the class to interpret a chart on driving fatalities (shows a disproportionate number of fatal accidents involve teen drivers). The instructor introduces this scenario: Teen driving restrictions are becoming a national issue, and Congress is close to passing a national law that would drastically restrict teen driving. Some states are opposed to a national driving policy because they think it is too harsh. The class discusses whether a uniform federal law would be the best solution. The instructor plays devil's advocate to ensure that arguments for both sides are considered (For example, Congress is protecting the common good of all U.S. citizens [i.e., Citizens traveling through a state without these regulations would be endangered by young drivers; Insurance costs might come down if young drivers were not included in the risk pool]. Do conditions differ so much from place to place that this decision should be left to each state or even each locality?  [i.e., law would hurt some teens more than others: Alabama teens may need to drive to a job as opposed to teens in more urban areas with mass transit]). 

Introduce the Central Question: The instructor relates the teen driving issue to issues faced by the Washington administration: Both cases issues involve conflicts between individual liberty or minority rights versus the common good. These issues raise a question that the U.S. has dealt with throughout its existence: When is the federal government justified in imposing its will on American citizens? As the first leader of the new government, the decisions that Washington makes will affect the sort of country that Americans have then and now.

Lecture: Instructor presents an overview lecture of Washington's presidency using picture and chart transparencies to focus student attention on pivotal events (choice of cabinet, national finances, Whiskey Rebellion, French Revolution and war in Europe, rise of political parties).  The class completes a data retrieval chart summarizing the opposing positions taken on these key issues by Washington's principal advisors, Hamilton and Jefferson. Students are informed that for the next several days they will be examining these differences and the actions taken by the Washington administration that affect the amount of power the federal government has over its citizens. In the end, student will decide when they believe the government is justified in imposing its will on citizens.

Lesson Two (One class period)

Review:  The instructor reminds students that yesterday they discovered that issues of governmental power can have a direct effect on their daily lives. The class reviews the controversy raised by Hamilton's financial plan  (fairness of and justification for assumption of states' debt, the excise tax, and the National Bank) and relates it to the issue of interpreting the Constitution: What powers were given to the federal government and which rights were to be left to the states and individual citizens?

Document Analysis:  The instructor introduces letters that Hamilton and Jefferson submitted to Washington regarding the chartering of the National Bank. Pairs of students are given copies of the letters and a document analysis sheet. They read the letters in order of their receipt by Washington (Jefferson, then Hamilton), refer to relevant sections of the Constitution, and answer the analysis questions for each document. After each letter, the class pauses for discussion. Once the two documents have been discussed individually, the students consider a final set of questions that compare the letters and their ideas (Jefferson interpreted the Constitution strictly; worried that a strong federal government would rob the states and individuals of liberty; Hamilton interpreted Constitution broadly; believed a strong national government was necessary for a secure, prosperous nation). The instructor makes an analogy with students' interpretation of the student handbook prohibition of students being in the parking lot during school hours. (Students broadly interpret the handbook to mean they may be on the sidewalk as long as they are not literally in the parking lot.)

Evaluation Activity: Students pairs are assigned to support the viewpoint of one of the authors. They complete two products: a letter to the editor and an editorial cartoon conveying their assigned author's position on the National Bank and the constitutional powers of the federal government. An instruction sheet provides construction and assessment criteria. Students are reminded of the examples of editorial cartoons that they used in an exercise in the American Revolution unit.

Lesson Three  (Two class periods)

Introduction:  The instructor reviews issues that were discussed in the two previous lessons (the different interpretations of the constitutional powers of the federal and state governments and how these influence the issues facing President Washington's administration). The students are informed that they will look at some of the decisions that President Washington had to address and will place themselves in Washington's role to decide what he should do about a crisis known as the Whiskey Rebellion.

Lecture: The instructor presents an introductory lecture to establish the historical context for the decision that students will make. A timeline displaying events occurring in both the United States and France is displayed on the overhead to assist students' understanding of cause and effect relationships among events. The lecture includes: Washington's awareness of the precedent-setting role of his decisions, the discontent of frontier citizens (importance of whiskey production, the excise tax on whiskey, conflicts with Native Americans, the impact of the Northwest Ordinance on land ownership), the effects of the French Revolution on American politics (parallels between farmers' complaints and common man's discontent in France, early American support of Fr. Rev. as a fight for liberty, concerns over Reign of Terror, involvement of Citizen Genet in U.S. politics, disagreements between Republicans and Federalists over Whiskey Rebellion and France). The lecture concludes with the Whiskey uprising and the need for Washington's decision about how to respond to the insurgents.

Activity: The instructor introduces an Internet-based Think Aloud activity. Students put themselves in the place of George Washington as he decides whether to use force to put down the Whiskey Rebellion. Links embedded in Washington's think aloud lead students to background information and to the perspectives of different citizens that Washington might consider in making his decision. Student pairs work in the computer lab as the instructor monitors and guides student thinking. Students use data retrieval charts to record the arguments for and against using troops (Arguments For: Danger of mob rule as in French Rev.; Attacks on government agents; Establish rule of law; People have elected representation for grievances. Arguments Against: Gov't. has not responded to peaceful protests; Use of force against protests similar to British actions against colonists; Gov't. not representing interests of farmers fairly). When work is completed the class returns to the classroom, and students compose individual essays in which they make Washington's decision and explain why their decision is a better choice of action than those favored by others. The instructor leads a discussion comparing the variety of solutions and supporting reasons that students have developed. He concludes by informing the students that President Washington decided to send in troops to end the Whiskey Rebellion.

Lesson Four (Three class periods) 

Introduction: When students enter the classroom, the desks have been set up for group work, and students' names and role assignments are placed on the desks in which they are to sit. The instructor explains that students will participate in a Washington era press conference after an overview of the rise of political parties.

Lecture: In a brief lecture, the instructor explains the rise of political parties (definition of political parties, role of today's political parties, Washington's desire to avoid factions contrasted to pragmatic considerations over policies and political survival). The class examines a chart contrasting the Federalist and the Republican positions (Federalists: rule by the elite, powerful federal government, loosely interpreted Constitution, pro-business economic policy, pro-British foreign policy;. Republicans: rule by common man, weak federal government, strictly interpreted Constitution, agricultural society, pro-French foreign policy). The instructor reviews Washington's decisions to side with the Federalists on three major issues of his term (the National Bank, the French Revolution, and the Whiskey Rebellion) and asks students to consider whether his decisions were motivated by politics or principle. Students will debate this issue as part of the Washington press conference.

Activity Overview: Students participate in a press conference that examines two questions: Did actions taken by the Washington administration exceed its constitutional powers? When is the government justified in imposing its will on citizens? Students form seven groups who represent historical figures with differing perspectives on the issues of the day (Washington, Jefferson, Hamilton, whiskey rebel, tax collector, southern farmer, northern merchant). Each student has a role with individual responsibilities: The Public Relations Agents will open the press conference with an introduction of the Actors. Actors present opening responses to the central questions of the press conference and field questions from other participants and the audience. Investigative Reporters question those who disagree with their character. Historians ask questions that support the views of their Actors. 

Preparation for Conference: The instructor begins by reviewing procedures and expectations for the Press Conference activity. Students are given a character summary sheet to help them identify the perspectives that will be represented at the conference. They are also given a detailed biographical overview of their character with guiding questions to prepare them for the press conference. Students are reminded that they can access the on-line Think-Aloud to review examples of arguments by some 1790s citizens. Groups discuss their character, prepare the Actor for assuming the role, anticipate questions that are likely to be posed to their character, develop questions to ask others, and identify likely supporters and opponents on the conference panel. Each group also designs a nameplate with a graphic that symbolizes its position. 
As the groups complete preparations, the instructor visits each group to monitor progress and check the questions prepared by the Investigative Reporters and Historians. Based on his review, the instructor may suggest developing questions in areas that might have been overlooked and suggest additional questions that their Actor may be asked by others. 

Role Play: Actors and Public Relations representatives sit in two rows in the front of the room. Investigative Reporters and Historians form the audience in the center of the room. Each student receives a data retrieval chart for summarizing each character's views on Washington's actions. The conference opens with the Public Relations representatives introducing their figures. After the Actors state their positions, the floor is opened to questions. The instructor moderates the discussion by recognizing student questioners and asking questions when needed to keep the discussion focused and to have students reflect upon Constitutional issues concerning Washington's decisions. The instructor also prompts allies of Actors when the Actors have difficulties articulating their arguments. After the issues have been examined fully, the instructor brings the press conference to a close.
 

Debriefing: Following the press conference, students review the data retrieval charts and compare and contrast positions taken by panelists. The instructor clarifies any misrepresentations of the historical figures' positions. The class discusses what political motivations influenced each of the panelists' actions and positions. The class also discusses personal experiences and historical and current events that shaped the panelists' perspectives (For example, Thomas Jefferson was a Republican who put great emphasis on individual liberties and opposed a strong central government.  Jefferson's early life on the frontier led him to believe that an agricultural society with power in the hands of the local governments was most effective form of government. Jefferson's diplomatic tenure in France reinforced his belief that rule by a central government controlled by the elite led to corruption and abuse). Finally, students read Washington's Farewell Address to the nation. discuss its key features (neutral foreign policy, warning against political parties, advocacy of separation of powers), and relate those to the issues that Washington faced in his presidency. The instructor concludes by observing that many of the dilemmas that Washington faced concerning the power of the federal government have persisted over time. The question of the government's power has arisen during the Civil War, the Great Depression and New Deal, the Civil Rights Movement, and continues today. In the next lesson, the class will look more closely at another event that raised the issue of the federal government's power: efforts to integrate Central High School in Little Rock, Arkansas in 1957.

Lesson Five (One class period)

Review: The instructor reviews the central unit question and how students applied it during the press conference activity.  Today the class will apply the central question to a similar but more recent situation in Little Rock, Arkansas. The instructor presents the historical background necessary to understand the context for this event (for example, Jim Crow laws, Plessy v. Ferguson, effects of WWII on African-American expectations, Brown v. Board of Education).

Activity: The students view a video clip from "Eyes on the Prize, Fighting Back" (efforts to integrate Central High School, resistance by the governor and local citizens, President Eisenhower's decision to send in troops enforce the court order). Before the film, students are provided with a viewing guide that asks them to summarize the key events and issues in Little Rock and judge actions by local citizens, Governor Faubus, and Eisenhower. After the film, the class discusses the case. (Discussion focuses on Faubus' claim that "each school district is . . . selected by the people, and if we're to have any democracy in this country, then the people must have some say in their own affairs." When does local authority end and individual liberty begin? What should be the role of the federal government in such matters? How would Jefferson and Hamilton respond to Faubus?) The class is asked to compare similarities and differences in the dilemmas of Presidents Washington and Eisenhower (i.e., Similarities: Defiance of federal authority; violence against citizens and property; claims of unconstitutional actions & discriminatory treatment; Differences: Degree of encouragement by local/state officials; economic vs. social issue). The students speculate about how Washington's decision might have influenced that of Eisenhower. Students dissect the actions leading to both presidents' decisions and evaluate whether one president was more justified than the other in using the power of the federal government to enforce laws that were unpopular with sizable groups of citizens. Students are asked to create a list of actions that they believe would justify such use of federal force (Factors to be considered should include: violations of civil liberties or other rights, violence by protesters, threats to national security or community welfare, alternatives to force have failed to produce results).

Closure: The instructor reviews the objectives and activities of the unit with the students and reiterates the central question: When is the government justified in imposing its will on American citizens? Students are reminded that the essay test that they will take the following day will require them to take a position on the central question and defend it with sufficient evidence drawn from unit content.