- We began the class by handing back Unit three exams to students to have a look through. Most were pleased by their effort.
- Students were then given back their question sheets from last week they completed after reading the handout titled “The Quiet Revolution”. We read through the questions together with students ellaborating on answers and asking questions of their own for clarification.
- Next, students were given the Unit Four typed notes. On the front page, they had to write four items that were demonstrated on the board. These four conceps basically summarize each of our units to date and show the progression of a similar theme, Canadian History, and how each unit relates and links to the next. This was meant to help students see the bigger picture and where in that picture Unit four begins.
- Next, we started reading through the notes with students listening carefully to fill in the missing answers. We had a good discussion about American aggression in wars, why they believe Canada has such a close relationship with our Southern neighbour, and whether we are in an equal relationship or a dominated one.
- We will continue with the discussion and notes tomorrow.
On a side note, I told the kids I would post this documentary on the blog. We discussed the idea that Canada is such a peaceful nation and only involved in peace-keeping in recent world wars. It is not always so well known, though, that Canada is a major arms manufacturer and creates a lot of the materials the Americans use in their warfare. For example, the now-famous Agent Orange that was used in the napalm that devestated the landscape and human lives in the Vietnam war was actually created by Canadian companies, not something Canada would like to see advertised. Do we have the right, still, to believe our hands are not dirty with blood from war?
Here is the documentary that compares the Napalm that has been banned by the Geneva Convention to the napalm the Americans used recently in the war in Iraq. (This new napalm is the exact same chemical formula but is missing one ingredient. The one, unfortunately, not missing is the oxidizing agent that feeds the chemical with oxygen to keep it burning through the flesh. Chemical warfare, happening today. What do you think? Necessary? Is the possible casualty loss worth the risk. Is the opportunity cost measured properly? (Ask me what opportunity cost means.) 😀
[kml_flashembed movie="http://www.youtube.com/v/pT2suKBHhLQ" width="425" height="350" wmode="transparent" /]
us of these deeds. Two different responses to their actions. Will they still feel the same later in the play? Perhaps. Perhaps not.