Dakota Pipeline Lesson

Unit 1: Regents Prep
Time: 50 minutes
Subject:
English Language Arts
Lesson:
Socratic Seminar

Grade level of lesson:
11th & 12th
Description of Unit
This is an a unit that is geared towards students understanding the components of the Regents exam.


Students have reviewed the concept of central ideas by working in groups in the form of a game to list appropriate central ideas from well known films. Students have also begun understanding central ideas of texts. From our observations students are ready to learn the content behind 3 strategic literary elements. We choose to teach students an in depth understanding of tone, conflict, and imagery because these rhetorical devices will appear on any piece of text that they are given. Once students understand the elements through direct instruction, we will work on understanding the Part 3 rubric that they will be assessed on and what responses will earn what scores. Then we will give students a sample of a passing (level 3) response and work with them on a format for the text analysis response. When students perfect writing at a level 3, we will work on elaboration skills in order to get students to write at a level 4 on the rubric. We will do this by having think alouds with students on how to construct paragraphs effectively. From there, we will work on the other components of the Regents exam, multiple choice and the argumentative essay. We will do this using games, blogs, puzzles, and other games.

The argumentative essay will focus on students reading and analyzing 4 different texts that examine multiple sides about the Dakota Access Pipeline debate. The essay will extend in students participating in a socratic seminar with their peers using respectful and accountable talk and fostering productive peer to peer discussion as discussed in our POP (problem of practice) inquiry. Students will utilize their research and discussion to create a well written argument essay in preparation of Part 2 of the regents exam.


Texts
Articles:
The View From Two Sides of the Standing Rock Front Lines Part 1
The View From Two Sides of the Standing Rock Front Lines Part 2
Tribe files emergency request to stop Dakota Access Pipeline
Army Corps of Engineers rules against planned Dakota Access pipeline route
Essential Question
How do we understand how to elaborate on complex ideas?
Focus Question
How do we participate in a respectful socratic seminar with our peers?
Pivotal Questions
Checking for understanding questions:
What are the ground rules for a socratic seminar?
What’s the difference between this and a debate?

Pivotal/Discussion questions:
At any point did the seminar revert into a debate/discussion rather than dialogue? If so, how did the group handle this?
What evidence did you see of people actively listening and building on others' ideas?
How has your understanding of this text been affected by the ideas explored in this seminar?
What would you like to do differently as a participant the next time you are in a seminar?

Expected Outcome or Student Learning Objectives
Students will be able to:

Know…
The positive and negative implications of building the oil pipeline through a Native American reservation.

Understand…
That in order to have a successful socratic seminar students must listen effectively to one another and participate in discussion.

Do…
Speak respectfully to one another, referencing sources, elaborating on key ideas, and arguing a particular claim.

Common Core Standards Addressed

(CCSS.ELA-LITERACY)
SL.11-12.1
Initiate and participate effectively in a range of collaborative discussions (one-on-one, in groups, and teacher-led) with diverse partners on grades 11-12 topics, texts, and issues, building on others' ideas and expressing their own clearly and persuasively.

SL.11-12.1.A
Come to discussions prepared, having read and researched material under study; explicitly draw on that preparation by referring to evidence from texts and other research on the topic or issue to stimulate a thoughtful, well-reasoned exchange of ideas.

SL.11-12.1.B
Work with peers to promote civil, democratic discussions and decision-making, set clear goals and deadlines, and establish individual roles as needed.

SL.11-12.1.C
Propel conversations by posing and responding to questions that probe reasoning and evidence; ensure a hearing for a full range of positions on a topic or issue; clarify, verify, or challenge ideas and conclusions; and promote divergent and creative perspectives.

SL.11-12.1.D
Respond thoughtfully to diverse perspectives; synthesize comments, claims, and evidence made on all sides of an issue; resolve contradictions when possible; and determine what additional information or research is required to deepen the investigation or complete the task.
Materials Used
Teacher will previously provide:
PowerPoint Presentations
Graphic Organizers
Essay Outlines
Multiple videos on Socratic Seminars
Videos on update of the Dakota Access pipeline
Rubric
Contract

Student will provide:
Notebooks/binders
Writing Utensils

Differentiation
Small group work
Scaffolded questioning
Entry point for all levels of students
Mixed level grouping
Graphic Organizers
Essay Outlines
Assigned roles based on students strengths
Mixed media
Rubric

Vocabulary
Pipeline
Sioux Tribe
Standing Rock Reservation
Natural resources
Social/Racial/Class injustice
Do Now
Take out the 4 articles about the pipeline you have read, your graphic organizer and any notes that may assist you in your discussion.

Role Assignments
*Students with assigned roles are not proficient in the English Language, are cognitively low level and/or have expressed that they don’t feel comfortable participating.

Roles
Source Tracker-
Tally person -
Time person -
Accountable Talk Tracker -

Red = High talker

Group 1

Group 2

Lesson Outline
Time
Teacher Actions
Student Actions
Do Now/Set up
(10 minutes)



Socratic Seminar (Group 1)
(10 minutes)


Socratic Seminar (Group 2)
(10 minutes)


Wrap up/
Discussion
(14 minutes)


Exit Slip
(6 minutes)

TEACHER

1) Teacher will have a student read the Do Now and will organize students in setting up for the socratic seminar.
- All students will take out their necessary materials
- Group 1 will be in the “inner circle” sitting facing one another.
- Group 2 will be in the “outer circle”. They will be listening to the conversation happening in the inner circle. They cannot speak and are required to write notes on the conversation that happens in the inner circle.
- Students in the inner circle must reference texts and have a discussion on the argument and topic that students have been studying.
- The Source tracker will track the number of times students referenced a source and who the student is.
- The tally person will mark every time a person speaks in a full sentence or more, so that students can visually see if they are dominating the conversation or need to jump in.
- The time keeper(s) will let students know when they have 1 and 5 minutes left to the discussion.
- The accountable talk tracker will track when students use phrases like, (to add on to his point, I agree because, can you clarify, etc.).

2) The inner group will commence the seminar.


3) Once the timekeepers have announced it, the inner circle will become the outer circle and vice versa.


4) When both groups have had their time, teacher will ask if anyone has any last thoughts, questions or concerns. She will ask what the students thought of the seminar and if it helped develop their understanding of the argument in question.

5) Teacher will have students submit an exit slip based on the seminar.

STUDENTS

1) Students will divide themselves as necessary and take out their supplies. They will ask any questions if they need clarification.

2) Students will get their seminar questions by picking questions that they have created out of a hat. They will read them out loud to the group as it will also be projected from the board.

Once the group has exhausted the topic, they can choose another question out of the hat. If the group members decide that they don’t want to talk about a question at all, they can skip it altogether.


3) Groups will swap and the outer circle will have time to reference anything that they would like to discuss from the inner circle’s conversation.

4) Students will voice their thoughts on how the seminar went, and anything else they would like to share.


5) Students will submit an exit slip based on the seminar.
Exit Task
Students will hand in their group’s progress on the the assignment given.

Assessment/Task Evaluation
Informal:

Students ability to come to discussions prepared, having read and researched material under study; explicitly draw on that preparation by referring to evidence from texts and other research on the topic or issue to stimulate a thoughtful, well-reasoned exchange of ideas.

Students ability to work with peers to promote civil, democratic discussions.

Formal:
Students ability to participate effectively in a collaborative discussion while building on others' ideas and expressing their own clearly and persuasively.

Students ability to propel conversations by posing and responding to questions that probe reasoning and evidence; ensure a hearing for a full range of positions on a topic or issue; clarify, verify, or challenge ideas and conclusions; and promote divergent and creative perspectives.

Students ability to respond thoughtfully to diverse perspectives; synthesize comments, claims, and evidence made on all sides of an issue; resolve contradictions when possible; and determine what additional information or research is required to deepen the investigation or complete the task.



Period 4 Socratic Seminar Questions

Can you ever put a cost on basic human necessities like water, food, and shelter? Does this go against the “American Way”?

Is it worth walking and standing in the freezing weather to protest? At what cost would you go in order to fight for something? What lesson can we take from the Dakota protesters?

What will Trump do in regards to this? Will he keep the pipeline? How will his acts influence this situation?How can we make an educated guess on this?

If our country runs on oil, why would we stop for a few people? Is it feasible for us to change our entire way of life? What would it take for a big change like not using oil to happen in America?

Do the Native American tribes think they’ve won? Why or why not? Would you?

Do you see this issue with the pipeline being solved in the near future? What would be a solution? Is there any way that both sides can be happy?

What effect would not building the pipeline have on the american economy? Is not building it choosing Native rights over the rights of Americans or is this just the way that the argument is constructed? How do you know?

Will compromise at the risk of losing money?

How will the pipeline not being built affect the people who need oil or jobs?

If the company’s only option was to not build the pipeline or build it through a white populated area, which do you think they would do?

Why doesn’t Obama just end the situation so that it doesn’t come up again? Why did he wait so long to intervene? Does he have the power to do these things?

What would be some of the short term and long term effects if the pipeline ruptures or breaks?

Is there any chance that more pipelines could be built in other areas? At another time? What if this becomes the norm if nothing is done about it?

Does this make Trump, racist if he approves the pipeline? Would this mean that anyone who approves the pipeline is racially unjust?

Are the Natives being selfish in caring about their drinking water and their children? Is there a problem with people who can even ask this question?

What would happen if the millions of dollars spent on having military at the protest site were put into finding an alternative route to the problem? Are we using our funds in the right way in this situation? As a country?





Socratic Seminar Contract
Socratic seminars have rules that may not apply to other forms of discussion, so before beginning the seminar, it is important that everyone is aware of the norms. Below are typical rules used to structure a Socratic seminar. Of course, you can adapt these to fit the needs of your students:
1) Talk to each other, not just to the discussion leader or teacher.
2) Refer to evidence from the text to support your ideas.
3) Ask questions if you do not understand what someone has said, or you can paraphrase what another student has said for clarification. (“I think you said this, is that right?”)
4) You do not need to raise your hands to speak, but please pay attention to your “airtime” – how much you have spoken in relation to other students.
5) Don’t interrupt.
6) Don’t put down the ideas of another student. Without judging the student who you may disagree with, state your alternate interpretation or ask a follow-up question to help probe or clarify an idea.
7) Common statements or questions used during a Socratic seminar include:
Where does that idea come from in the text?
What does this word or phrase mean?
Can you say that in another way?
Is this what you mean to say…
What do you think the author is trying to say?
What else could that mean?
Who was the audience for this text? How does that shape our interpretation of these words?
Who was the author of this text? What do we know about him/her? How does that shape our understanding of these words?


Pipeline Text 1

http://www.cnn.com/2016/09/05/us/dakota-access-pipeline/

Tribe files emergency request to stop Dakota Access Pipeline
By Holly Yan and Shawn Nottingham, CNN
Updated 12:51 AM ET, Wed November 30, 2016

The battle over the Dakota Access Pipeline has intensified, with heated protests and an attempt for an emergency halt in construction.
The Standing Rock Sioux Tribe filed an emergency motion Sunday for a temporary restraining order "to prevent further destruction of the tribe's sacred sites by Dakota Access Pipeline," it said.
"On Saturday, Dakota Access Pipeline and Energy Transfer Partners brazenly used bulldozers to destroy our burial sites, prayer sites and culturally significant artifacts," Tribal Chairman David Archambault II said.
"They did this on a holiday weekend, one day after we filed court papers identifying these sacred sites. The desecration of these ancient places has already caused the Standing Rock Sioux irreparable harm. We're asking the court to halt this path of destruction."
The pipeline's developer, Energy Transfer Partners, has defended the $3.7 billion project, saying it would help the United States become less dependent on importing energy from unstable regions of the world.


What the tribe wants
The tribe wants to halt further construction on an area 2 miles west of North Dakota Highway 1806, near Lake Oahe, until a judge rules on its previous motion to stop construction, the tribe said.
That motion is based on the plaintiffs' claim that it was not properly consulted before the US Army Corps of Engineers approved the pipeline project, which would run from North Dakota to South Dakota, Iowa and Illinois.
A US district court judge is expected to make a decision on the case by Friday. The Army Corps of Engineers has declined to comment, citing the pending litigation.
Thousands of people from more than 200 Native American tribes have supported the Standing Rock Sioux's efforts to protect their lands, waters and sacred sites during construction of the 1,200-mile pipeline, the tribe said.
What the pipeline would do
If completed, the 1,172-mile pipeline would carry 470,000 barrels of crude oil a day from North Dakota to Illinois.
Energy Transfer said the pipeline would bring an estimated $156 million in sales and income taxes to state and local governments. It would also add 8,000 to 12,000 construction jobs, the developer said.
But about 30 environmental groups, including the Sierra Club and Greenpeace, have slammed the pipeline project, calling it "yet another example of an oil pipeline project being permitted without public engagement or sufficient environmental review."'
Protesters are also worried that digging the pipeline under the Missouri River could affect the drinking water supply if the pipeline breaks.

Sheriff: Protests turned violent
Protests against the pipeline turned violent in North Dakota over the weekend, with some demonstrators breaking down a wire fence and trespassing onto a construction area, the Morton County Sheriff's Department said.

"Protesters physically assaulted private security officers hired by Dakota Access Pipeline. The security officers were hit and jabbed with fence posts and flagpoles," the sheriff's department said.
"According to several reports from security officers, knives were pulled on them or they witnessed protestors with large knives." The sheriff's department also said two guard dogs were injured.
But protesters disputed the authorities' account, CNN affiliate KFYR said. Demonstrators said the guards sprayed many of the activists with pepper spray and tear gas, and some protesters were injured by the guards' dogs.
"It was kind of scary," Lonnie Favel told KFYR. "A lot of people are out here with their children. Accidents happen all the time with dogs, and people could really get hurt."

Part 1- Activist Viewpoint
The View From Two Sides of the Standing Rock Front Lines
By JACK HEALY NOV. 1, 2016

CANNON BALL, N.D. — The prairie is seething. Work crews are plugging ahead on the 1,170-mile Dakota Access oil pipeline, inching closer and closer to a river crossing that activists view as a critical juncture in their monthslong fight against a $3.7 billion project that they say will threaten water supplies and that Native Americans say violates their right to sacred land.
Last week, clashes erupted between lines of law enforcement officers and protesters. The air was filled with pepper spray and black smoke from burning tires. The authorities arrested 142 people during what local sheriffs denounced as a riot and protesters said was a peaceful demonstration.
For months now, Mekasi Horinek and Deputy Jon Moll have lived these demonstrations, day in and day out. But they fall on opposite sides of the front lines, reflecting a community that is as divided as, well, oil and water.

‘Don’t You Drink Water, Too?’
Mekasi Horinek, activist
Mr. Horinek sees the pipeline protest from the rolling prairies, his arms locked with his fellow Native American activists to sing and pray. He sees tribe members standing up to years of racist slights and torn-up treaties. He sees prayer circles, pipe ceremonies and a unifying fight for clean water.
He is the son of Ponca Tribe activists from Oklahoma who took him to rallies when he was a baby. Mr. Horinek, 43, remembers riding on his father’s and uncle’s shoulders as they marched with Cesar Chavez in the California fruit-pickers’ protests.
“I can’t remember a time that I wasn’t being taught to stand up for human rights, native rights,” he says.
He came to North Dakota for a cause. Here is how he describes that cause now:
“What I said to the police officers when I was sitting down in a prayer circle, I asked them, ‘Don’t you drink water, too?’” he says. “Don’t your children drink water? We’re here to protect the water. This isn’t just a native issue. We’re here protecting the water, not only for our families and our children, but for your families and your children. For every ranch and every farm along the Missouri River.”
Law enforcement officials have accused the protesters of rioting and attacking pipeline contractors, and they have arrested more than 400. But Mr. Horinek says the protesters — water protectors, they call themselves — are not the bad guys. He tells a story:
Last week, he and 49 other demonstrators decided to link arms and sit together by the overturned earth where the Dakota Access pipeline is slated to go. They were on what the Standing Rock Sioux Tribe considers sacred ancestral land, but from a legal perspective, it is owned by the pipeline company. So sheriff’s officers arrested them for trespassing.
Mr. Horinek says he and the others, including his 68-year-old mother, were zip-tied and driven to the county seat, Mandan. He says he had bruises from being tied up so tightly, and from being thrown to the ground and pinned during his arrest. His mother and some of the older people were stiff and sore for days.
Officials wrote numbers on their arms — his was 4838, he says — and held them overnight in cages in a parking garage, men and women separated by a plastic tarp. They spent the night singing and praying.
“No matter what they do to us, they’re not going to strip our dignity, our honor,” Mr. Horinek says. “These are things we hold in our DNA, and we’ll never lose.”
The next morning, he bailed himself out of jail with money he had been keeping in his wallet in case he was arrested, and headed back to the camp.

Part 2- Sherif Viewpoint

The View From Two Sides of the Standing Rock Front Lines
By JACK HEALYNOV. 1, 2016

CANNON BALL, N.D. — The prairie is seething. Work crews are plugging ahead on the 1,170-mile Dakota Access oil pipeline, inching closer and closer to a river crossing that activists view as a critical juncture in their monthslong fight against a $3.7 billion project that they say will threaten water supplies and that Native Americans say violates their right to sacred land.
Last week, clashes erupted between lines of law enforcement officers and protesters. The air was filled with pepper spray and black smoke from burning tires. The authorities arrested 142 people during what local sheriffs denounced as a riot and protesters said was a peaceful demonstration.
For months now, Mekasi Horinek and Deputy Jon Moll have lived these demonstrations, day in and day out. But they fall on opposite sides of the front lines, reflecting a community that is as divided as, well, oil and water.

‘Folks Are Terrified’
Jon Moll, sheriff’s deputy
Deputy Moll sees the pipeline protest through a bug-spattered windshield, his patrol car slipping along North Dakota’s gravel county roads. He sees out-of-state protesters occupying federal land and trespassing on private ranches. He sees tense confrontations, lost days off and threats to his fellow officers.
He is the son of a Lutheran pastor, who moved the family from Ottertail, Minn., to Philadelphia. Mr. Moll, 38, remembers learning about the diversity of this country as the only white child in his class.
“I’m the son of farmers, and we worked hard for everything we have,” he says.
He came to Morton County, N.D., for work. Here is how he describes that work now:
“Sometimes, the job sucks, but you do your job. It’s definitely been a strain. Every time we’ve been out, we’ve seen weapons. People screaming down this road at 100 miles per hour. Trespassing and squatting on federal property. If I wanted to build a house there, I’d have U.S. marshals knocking on my door, saying, ‘No, you can’t do that.’”
Activists have accused law enforcement of needlessly roughing up and pepper-spraying demonstrators, and of responding to their sit-ins and marches with militarized force. But Mr. Moll says the deputies are not the bad guys. He tells a story:
Earlier this fall, about 70 demonstrators rallied at one of the ranches being bisected by the pipeline. Ranchers have grown angry and impatient with the protests and regularly come up to Deputy Moll when he gases up his car to ask him when it will all just be over. He says he sees the Standing Rock Sioux as neighbors and respects them, but he has a harsher view of what he sees as hard-core protesters from outside North Dakota. “Folks are terrified,” he says.
On this day, officials decided to move in and arrest the protesters for trespassing. As they did, some in the crowd started to yell, “Bring out your horses!” to their fellow activists who had parked their trailers in a field of winter wheat. From his patrol car, Mr. Moll says, he saw one of the horses charge directly at a line of officers, and he hit the gas and raced over to cut off the horse as another officer raised a shotgun loaded with beanbag rounds at the rider.
“You run a 1,000-pound animal at a 200-pound person, that’s a deadly threat,” Mr. Moll said. “They were willing to use the threat of the horse against us, all the while screaming, ‘We’re peaceful protesters.’”
He has been working around the protests almost every day since, and expects to be on straight through to Thanksgiving.





Text 4
NEWSELA: Army Corps of Engineers rules against planned Dakota Access pipeline route
By Associated Press, adapted by Newsela staff on 12.06.16

TOP: A crowd gathers in celebration at the Oceti Sakowin camp after it was announced that the U.S. Army Corps of

Engineers won't grant easement for the Dakota Access oil pipeline in Cannon Ball, N.D., Dec. 4, 2016. Photo: AP Photo/

David Goldman. BELOW: Native Americans and activists from around the country have been gathering at the camp for

several months to try to halt construction. Photo: Scott Olson/Staff

CANNON BALL, N.D. — In a victory for the Standing Rock Sioux tribe and its supporters,

the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers said Sunday that it will not grant an easement, or a right

to use someone else's land, for the Dakota Access oil pipeline in southern North Dakota.

The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers is a branch of the Army. It helps build and plan things

like dams, which are used to create more drinking water and prevent flooding.

Pipeline Would Have Passed Through Tribal Land

The pipeline would be a series of tubes underneath the ground. The tubes would make it

easy to transport oil, which is used for energy. However, members of the Native American

tribe and others argued the project would threaten the tribe's water source and cultural

sites.


North Dakota's leaders criticized the decision to not grant the easement. Gov. Jack

Dalrymple called it a mistake that "prolongs the dangerous situation" of having several

hundred protesters camping on federal land in the cold winter. Kevin Cramer, a lawmaker

in the U.S. House of Representatives, said it's a "very chilling signal" for the future of

infrastructure in the United States. Infrastructure includes roads, buildings and other

construction needed by society.

The pipeline project is largely complete except for the now-blocked section underneath

Lake Oahe, a Missouri River reservoir. It has been built in four states at a cost of $3.8

billion.

U.S. Government Wants To Look At Other Routes

Jo-Ellen Darcy is Assistant Secretary for Civil Works for the U.S Army Corps of Engineers.

She said in a news release that there is a need to "explore alternate routes" for the pipeline.

Her decision doesn't rule out that it could cross under the reservoir or north of Bismarck.

"Although we have had continuing discussion and exchanges of new information with the

Standing Rock Sioux and Dakota Access, it's clear that there's more work to do," Darcy

said. The best way to complete that work responsibly is to look at other routes, she said.

The company building the pipeline, Energy Transfer Partners, released a statement

Sunday night slamming the decision as a political one. The statement also claimed that

President Barack Obama's administration wanted to delay the matter until he leaves office.

The company said that Obama's leadership has abandoned the rule of law to gain favor

with an extreme political group.

President-elect Donald Trump, a pipeline supporter, will become president in January. It

wasn't immediately clear what steps his administration would be able to take to reverse the

Army Corps' decision or how quickly that could happen.

Pipeline Protesters Say They Are Not Leaving

The decision came a day before the government's deadline for the several hundred

people at the Oceti Sakowin, or Seven Council Fires, camp to leave the federal land. But

protesters say they're prepared to stay. Officials say they won't forcibly remove them.

As the news spread Sunday, cheers and chants of "mni wichoni" — "water is life" in Lakota

Sioux — broke out among the protesters. Some in the crowd banged drums. Miles Allard,

a member of the Standing Rock Sioux, said he was pleased but remained cautious,

saying, "We don't know what Trump is going to do."

"The whole world is watching," Allard added. "I'm telling all our people to stand up and not

to leave until this is over."



U.S. Attorney General Loretta Lynch said Sunday that the Department of Justice will

"continue to monitor the situation." The department stands ready to support those who can

help to ease tensions, she said.

The safety of everyone in the area continues to be their main concern, Lynch added.

Carla Youngbear of the Meskwaki Potawatomi tribe made her third trip from Kansas to be

at the protest site.

"I have grandchildren, and I'm going to have great grandchildren," she said. "They need

water. Water is why I'm here."

Military Veterans Support Protesters

Morton County Sheriff Kyle Kirchmeier, whose department has done much of the policing

for the protests, said that "local law enforcement does not have an opinion" on the

easement. He said that his department will continue to "enforce the law."

U.S. Secretary for the Interior Sally Jewell said in a statement that the Corps' "thoughtful

approach ... ensures that there will be an in-depth evaluation of alternative routes for the

pipeline and a closer look" at possible effects.

Military veterans are among those supporting the tribe. An organizer with Veterans Stand

for Standing Rock said tribal elders had asked the veterans not to confront law

enforcement officials.

About 250 veterans gathered about a mile from the main camp for a meeting with

organizer Wes Clark Jr.

"We have been asked by the elders not to do direct action," Clark said. He added that the

National Guard and law enforcement are armed, warning, "If we come forward, they will

attack us."

Instead, he told the veterans, "If you see someone who needs help, help them out."

Law Enforcement Wants Protesters To Obey The Law

Authorities moved a blockade from the north end of the Backwater Bridge with the

conditions that protesters stay south of it and come there only if there is a planned

meeting. Authorities also asked protesters not to remove barriers on the bridge. They have

said the bridge was damaged in the late October conflict that led to several people being

hurt, including a serious arm injury.

"That heavy presence is gone now," Cass County Sheriff Paul Laney said in a statement,

adding that he hopes leaders in the camps will respond by preventing violence. He

repeated that any violation will "will result in their arrest."