Trevor Ivan

Subject Area: Modern America

Grade Level: 11th
Task: Analyzing the four main causes of WW1
A. Reaching Consensus about Proficiency:
a. Students were expected to collaborate with their group to answer four,
multiple part, questions based on the four main causes of WW1
(Militarism, Alliances, Imperialism and Nationalism). They were also
expected to connect topics in this era of history to real world/outside
examples.
b. Standards being met are understanding the cause and effect
relationships between the cause of World War One and relating content
to real world examples.
c. Students first need to address each part of the question as there are
multitude of different pieces for each one. From there, students need
to engage in higher level thinking in order for them to achieve
proficiency. To achieve proficiency students must write the
importance of a specific cause, the widespread impact it had on
society, how it was used and provide relevancy. Students need to
answer to common question of why and connect their answer to other
causes of WW1 bringing in multiple different perspectives on their
potential impact.
d. Yes, students were able to apply their knowledge of the four main
causes of WW1 in a setting that they were able to collaborate in and
expand their knowledge outwards to build connections and meaning.
B. Diagnosing Student Strengths and Needs
High
(Objectives Met)
One group in particular
knocked their responses
out of the park and
provided good
explanation/reasoning of
their responses. I was able
to see and track their
thinking as it filtered
throughout their responses.
They provided wellrounded explanations and
evidence and truly put
their full effort into the
questions. They saw the
bigger picture of each

Expected
(Objective Partially Met)
This fills the majority of
answers provided by
groups as they built
connections to the real
world and to other factors
during World War One but
they did not go into detail
of explaining the
significance of why that
was important in the
beginning of WW1. Most
of their answers just
needed more explanation
to justify their response
and provide more

Low
(Objective not met)
Some of the answers
groups provided were
straight up wrong in
terms of historical
accuracy and some
provided incredibly
simple/basic answers that
did not address the
question or reach for a
higher level of thinking.
Essentially, the answers
provided were not well
thought out and only
written to quickly answer
the question. For

question and linked the

connections together
between each topic.

clarification.

30% of class

60% of class

example, in the group of

Charlie, Sam, Sam, and
Jaiden, their response to a
question regarding the
benefits of forming an
alliance simply stated,
they can have support in
case of war. This is very
much a basic response
with no explanation of
why.
10% of class

C. Prerequisite Knowledge:

Students showed an indepth knowledge of the

interconnectedness of the
four main causes of war.
Which shows that they
understood the beginning
of WW1 and were able to
relate that knowledge to
provide real world
examples and analyze
their significance. They
showed a bigger picture
mindset in how each
cause affected the entire
international sphere as
well as in each individual
country. As an example,
they related their
understanding of
imperialism from the
Spanish-American war
(and its impact) to how it
relates to WW1.

EXPECTED
(Objective partially met)
Students showed that
they knew what the four
main causes were but
didnt go into any
explanation or analysis of
their significance. In turn,
students only showed a
basic understanding of
the beginning of WW1. For
example, students simply
provided the answer
defining nationalism, but
did not go into how it
could be used in society,
both positively or
negatively or its
overarching significance
during WW1.

LOW
(Objectives not met)
Again, students in this
section showed a very
basic knowledge of the
beginning of WW1.
Moreover, their answers
showed a very
broad/generalized
understanding of the four
main causes. Their
answers to me showed
any knowledge or ability
to connect information to
broader themes was not
present. Which requires
me to rethink how I can
teach students to be a
good historian.

D. Misconceptions, wrong information and what students did not demonstrate

that was expected:

HIGH
(Objectives met)
The misconceptions this
particular group provided
was that Serbia and the
Black Hand society were a
part of the AustrianHungarian Empire. Serbia
was its own independent
country and the Black
Hand Society was based
out of Serbia. I can see
where they may have
gotten confused as the
region we were talking
about where Franz
Ferdinand was
assassinated (Sarajevo,
Bosnia), there were a lot
of Serbian descendant
people. However, Bosnia
was under the control of
the Austro Hungarian
Empire and the people of
Serbia did want to see
their independence but it
is important to recognize
that they are two separate
entities.

EXPECTED
(Objectives partially met)
A big misconception this
group listed in their
justification of imperialism
is the fact that most
countries want to be taken
over or are enthusiastic to
the idea. Throughout
history that has not been
the case as most countries
are exploited against their
will. Additionally, this
group did not connect the
four main causes to one
another or to any
information they had
learned previously from
other lectures. There was
little to no analysis in the
answers they provided.

LOW
(Objectives not met)
To be up front, their
answers were not good.
No analysis, no
sequencing, basic
examples and relatively
no effort. Their answers
showed me they see WW1
through American-centric
mindset instead of a
global war that primarily
had its impact in mainland
Europe. While the US did
help, their impact was
relatively small compared
to European countries and
their sacrifices.

E. Identifying Instructional Next Steps:

a. What patterns or trends are noted for the whole class? There are
students who understand the content 100%, while at the same time
there are students in the middle who are the cusp of objective met
and then there are the students who have a very weak understanding
of the content. This means, there is a wide scale of student
understanding surrounding this topic. Additionally, it seems most
students do not understand the next step in how to be a good historian
which is analyzing information to find the significance of an event.
They showed they can understand the topic but not the why of an
event and how it relates to other countries and other events in history.
b. What instructional strategies will be beneficial for the whole class?
Number one: intentional group selection in which students are put into
groups with students who fully understand the topic, students who are
in the middle and students who are at the bottom. Number two: A

debrief period in which students are able to ask questions and talk
about their answers in order to provide closure. Number three:
Assigned roles within the group to maximize efficiency regarding time
and thoughts.
c. Chart:
HIGH
(Objectives met)
-Discussion: in which they
can share their thoughts
and have the opportunity
to ask questions to even
further their
understanding of a topic.
-Intentional group
selection: They can act as
the teacher of the group
to help guide discussion
and understanding while
at the same time
furthering their own
development.

EXPECTED
(Objectives partially met)
-End of class discussion to
clarify any misconceptions
and provide that next level
thinking so they
understand where their
answers should have
gotten. Also, this strategy
would have provided more
in depth knowledge for
them to process.

LOW
(Objectives not met)
-Intentionally selected
groups based on student
performance.
-More examples and
explanation provided by
the teacher (more
structure).