Oklahoma Social Studies AWH.P.1.2

AWH.P.1.2 is a cluster heading. These are the individual standards under it.

• AWH.P.1.2.A

  Develop, investigate, and evaluate plausible answers to essential questions that reflect enduring understandings across time, real world circumstances, and soci...

• AWH.P.1.2.B

  Evaluate points of agreement and disagreement from reliable information and expert interpretations used to answer supporting questions related to content knowle...

• AWH.P.1.2.C

  Reinforce critical thinking by evaluating and challenging ideas and assumptions, analyzing and explaining inconsistencies in reasoning.

• AWH.P.1.2.D

  Demonstrate understanding of content through the development of self-driven inquiries and the completion of multi-staged, authentic tasks and assessments.

01

What Students Need to Do

Students ask a question about an issue that appears in more than one time period. They check sources, compare experts’ answers, and build their own answer from evidence. They revise it when they find a weak assumption or conflicting fact.

02

What Mastery Looks Like

A student can explain where two reliable accounts agree and disagree. They can cite evidence for their answer, explain why they trust it, and show how they changed their thinking after checking another source.

03

Common Misconceptions

Students may treat an expert’s opinion as proof without checking the evidence behind it. They may think disagreement means neither account is reliable, or assume similar events in different periods had the same causes.

04

How to Assess It

Give students two brief historian claims about why the French Revolution began and an excerpt from a 1789 grievance list. Ask where the historians disagree, which claim the excerpt supports, and what evidence they still need.

1. 01

   Give pairs a 1789 grievance excerpt, a bread price graph, and two historian claims; have them sort the sources by which claim each supports.

2. 02

   Ask, “Did bread prices or political exclusion matter more in 1789?” Require evidence for each answer and a reason to trust one source.

3. 03

   Play claim-check: teams draw a source card, find an unsupported leap in a proposed explanation, and rewrite the claim.

4. 04

   Compare school board meeting minutes with a news report about one vote; mark a verified claim and a claim that still needs evidence.

• 7.P.1.2

  Develop practices which demonstrate an understanding that social studies involves the evaluation of evidence.

• 8.P.1.2

  Develop practices which demonstrate an understanding that social studies involves the evaluation of evidence.

• 1.P.1.2

  Develop practices which demonstrate an understanding that social studies involves the evaluation of evidence.

• 6.P.1.2

  Develop practices which demonstrate an understanding that social studies involves the evaluation of evidence.