Gandhi, King, Silver Lining

PART 1: Gandhi and the Silver Lining

We finished watching Gandhi last week.  Although we skip a lot, we watch a significant portion.

At the end of the movie, students often ask questions about Gandhi's assassination.  Why was Gandhi assassinated?  Who killed him?  What happened to the man who assassinated Gandhi?

Today we read an article from The Guardian that was published the day after the assassination.  (Read it HERE.)

Gandhi's assassination was similar to the assassination of Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin.  Both were assassinated by extremists within their own religion, because the extremists thought they were giving too much away to "the other."

The partition of India-  (Adults, ask the student you're reading this with if they know what "partition" means.  If not, have them click on the word... You're welcome.) - The partition of India into India and Pakistan was a major blow to Gandhi who wanted a unified India.  And, depending on the sources, there were somewhere between several hundred thousand and two million deaths during/due to the partition alone.  For an old man advocating non-violence, one can imagine how trying it was.

Gandhi had been planning a trip to Pakistan in the name of reconciliation when he was shot.  (It's more complicated than this, involving money owed by governments, the threat of weapons purchased with that money, etc... but this is a blog for 7th graders.  If you're interested in it, research it on your own.)

To the point: I had a thought today that I don't think I'd had before.  While Gandhi's assassination is a tragedy, the silver lining is that it's better that he was killed by a Hindu than by a Muslim, the British, or his own fast.

Throughout the film we kept coming back to the principle that, "the only demons we have to fear are those that lurk in our own hearts."

My guess is had Gandhi gone to Pakistan and been killed by a Muslim, many Hindus would have used it as pretext to fight.  Or even if he had died on his own during the fast.  -Or earlier killed by the British in prison or such.

That Gandhi was killed by a Hindu precluded the possibility of  the Hindus taking revenge on themselves.  And it appeals to Gandhi's broader message for individuals to "be the change."

PART 2: King

A couple weeks ago, Mr. Krecsmar asked me if I realized it was the anniversary of MLK's march from Selma to Montgomery.  I did not.

Many students draw parallels between the lives of Gandhi and Martin Luther King, Jr.  They were both fighting for civil rights.  They both endorsed nonviolence.  They both fought racism and ethnocentrism.  They were both unjustly imprisoned.  They both practiced civil disobedience.  They were both assassinated.

The Selma marches occurred in March of 1965, and were mainly over voting rights.  The tactics used by King mirrored that of Gandhi.  Those used by Alabama State Troopers mirrored the British.

Here's a clip of the actual Selma footage:

Here's a brief (1:12 minute) interview with Ava DuVernay, who directed the movie Selma:

This is a short promo for Selma which includes parts of the bridge scene:

And last, this is a clip from "Turn-Around Tuesday" - not to be confused with "Bloody Sunday":

I hope you took the time to watch one or two of the videos.  Keep in mind that this was in our United States, and only a little more than 50 years ago.  Some of you have parents who are over 50.  Most of their parents are over 50.  My point is, we're watching Gandhi and thinking about what happened long ago in a land far away...

If you read and discussed this blog with an adult, I'm hoping the adult asked you some questions about it.  To get the extra credit, write at least 5 sentences.  Maybe tell me whether you agree with my "silver lining" comment.  Compare what you saw in the Selma clips to what you saw in Gandhi.

When you wrote at least 5 sentences about your conversation, have the adult you read the blog with sign the paper.  Turn it in tomorrow in the extra credit tray.  Make sure your name, date, and hour are on it.

Spoilers: Am I Spoiling Gandhi?

We watch large portions of Gandhi in 7th grade social studies.  It had been part of the curriculum long before I got there, and it doesn't look to be going anywhere.

Spoiler alert: Gandhi dies.  As Gandhi was born in 1869, and the film was released in 1982, it shouldn't come as any surprise that Gandhi dies in it.

But what many... maybe most? of my students didn't know was that Gandhi was assassinated as a 78 year old.  (I mean, who assassinates a 78 year old?  Just let the man live out his life...)

Here's the thing, though: the movie starts out with his assassination.  In the past, I've shown the beginning first.  Then, after some discussion with colleagues, I kept his assassination a surprise.  I'd go back and forth from year to year.  Unsure which I liked more.

In 1982, when the film was released, the majority of people going to see it knew what had occurred.  They knew who Gandhi was, what his life was about, and how he died.  Like watching a movie about a husband and wife that work on separate floors of 1 WTC in August 2001 - we know where that story is going.  And it would make sense to start with the planes.  Or the opening of the Titanic with a submarine exploration of the boat.  We already know.

But a 7th grader watching in 2017 (or whenever you're reading this) has little background on Gandhi.  And they're not tied to him.  So, watching some random man get killed at the beginning of the movie cheapens how horrifying the assassination really was.  It makes sense to let them see the man, his cause, and develop an attachment to him so they can perhaps more fully grasp what happened.  Context is everything.

Students can get extra credit if they read and discuss this blog post with an adult.  Even though it wasn't brought up in this particular blog post, we've been been discussing India's independence movement for a while.  So, they should discuss the following: who was Gandhi?  What was he fighting for?  Was he successful?

Write at least 3 sentences about your discussion, have the adult you discussed with sign the paper, and put it in the extra credit tray on Monday.

A Pinch of Salt

The British Empire wasn't built in a day, nor did it fall in a day.  Gandhi (and many others) kept provoking and provoking.

I had planned on being finished with Gandhi by today, but I keep discussing the movie instead of watching it straight through.  I apologized for that today, and was encouraged by the number of students who appreciated the pauses.  I don't want to watch it for the sake of watching it; I want the students to understand what they are seeing.

It's true, Gandhi has taken a while.  We've been studying the Indian independence movement for more than a school week now.  And I just want to be finished with it.  You know what that reminds me of?  Gandhi.

Patel, Nehru, Jinnah, and other Indian leaders pushed for independence.  They seemed impatient for it.  (This is of course, from the movie - and the actual events are no doubt more complicated.)  Gandhi wanted independence.  He fought for it his whole life.  But he didn't want it at the cost of violence.  And he didn't want it before India was ready for it.  He wanted a peaceful transition of power - and he knew that would take time.  More time than others would have been willing to give, had they been in the lead.

So, taking a page from Gandhi's campaign notebook, we're taking our time.  There may come a time when I feel pressured to rush through lessons, but I haven't reached that point yet.

If you're reading this post for extra credit, thanks.  Way to take some initiative.  You still have to discuss it with an adult.  Here are some things you could bring up:

• Gandhi said the role of a civil resister was to provoke.  What did he mean?
• How did Gandhi provoke the British?
• What might have happened if Gandhi's followers resorted to violence?
• Would you have been brave enough to march on the salt factory?
• Explain what happened in the salt factory march.

When you're done, find a scrap piece of paper and write two sentences about your discussion.  Have the adult you discussed it with sign the paper.

Have a great weekend!  Spring break starts next Friday.  :)

Gandhi's End

I told my students there were a number of things I hoped they took from Gandhi, among them:

• The vastness of the British Empire
• How India gained its independence, and how it was different from other movements
• Civil disobedience
• The Hindu/Muslim rift
• Outlawing the caste system
• Social studies is about understanding people and seeing multiple sides of an issue
• India's independence movement was also Pakistan's independence movement
• ...which means it was also tied to the Bangladeshi independence. (Though that's a story for another day)

Again, there's a lot we could discuss.  We could compare independence movements - Gandhi's nonviolence to the American Revolution, for instance.  Or Gandhi to Martin Luther King.

Today though, I'll ask you to discuss two questions.  The end of the movie claims Gandhi believed he was a failure.  Why?  Do you think he was a failure?

Second, why did Nathuram Godse assassinate Gandhi?  If you don't know, discuss some possible answers.

If you read and discussed the blog today, you can get some extra credit.  When you're done discussing, write down this quote given by Gandhi 2 days before he was assassinated: "If I am to die by the bullet of a mad man, I must do so smiling. There must be no anger within me. God must be in my heart and on my lips."  Then, have an adult sign the paper.  Only have them sign it if you really did read and discuss the blog with them.

Also, and this has no lasting value for class...  I just thought you might be interested in learning that Ben Kingsley - the man who played Gandhi - will be playing Mandarin in Iron Man 3.  Crazy.

Gandhi: Seeing Both Sides

After taking a couple breaks for geography, we've finished up Gandhi.

For the blog post, I only want to discuss a little section today.  There's a scene where Gandhi is in Calcutta, staying at the home of a Muslim friend while the city is rioting.

Below him, chanting up to him, people are chanting "DEATH TO MUSLIMS!!  DEATH TO MUSLIMS!!"  They look up at him and yell at him, asking him how he can stay there.  Muslims have killed their families.

Gandhi can't bear to listen, and turns away.

Throughout his life, Gandhi has been an advocate for nonviolence.  For toleration.  Even now, in the midst of the Hindu/Muslim rioting in Calcutta, Gandhi wanted to prove that people could get along.  We can see his intentions.  We know what he was doing.

But the Hindus in the city don't have the benefit of seeing the big picture played out on a screen in front of them.  They only know that Muslims have killed their families - and now Gandhi is in the home of a Muslim.  They're not reading his message as, "Look we can all get along."  They're reading it as, "Look, I'm a traitor.  I'm staying with the people who have murdered your families."

Social studies is all about seeing as many sides of an issue as possible.  Here we can understand why Gandhi acted the way he did, and we can understand the reason the mob was mad at him.

To get extra credit in my class, read and discuss the blog with an adult.  Then, find a scrap piece of paper, and write 2 sentences from your discussion and have the adult sign the paper.

Turn it in tomorrow.

Gandhi's Assassination: Some Comparisons

Gandhi and King:

I have previously posted some of the similarities between these two figures.  You can read about it here.  I don't know if I mentioned how similar they were in death.  ...Two day's before Gandhi's assassination, he said, "If I am to die by the bullet of a mad man, I must do so smiling.  There must be no anger within me.  God must be in my heart and on my lips."

And King, in his famous, "I've Been to the Mountaintop" speech said, "Well, I don't know what will happen now.  We've got some difficult days ahead.  But it doesn't really matter with me now, because I've been to the mountaintop.  ...Like anybody, I would like to live a long life.  Longevity has it's place.  But I'm not concerned about that now...  I've seen the Promised Land - and I may not get there with you, but we as a people will get to the Promised Land.  So I'm happy tonight - I'm not worried about anything.  I'm not fearing any man."  King said this the day before his assassination.

It says speaks to their preparation, does it not?  To their convictions, their principles?  Add that to their long list of similarities.

Comparisons on other assassinations:

Of course, we can also compare the assassination of Gandhi to the assassination of Prime Minister Rabin in 1995, or the assassination of Anwar Sadat in 1981.  In all three cases, these leaders were assassinated because they were working toward peace.  Members of their own groups felt they would give too much away - and the pendulum would swing too far to the other side - giving their enemies the upper hand rather than bringing about peace.

If I have a class where some students still seem baffled as to why a Hindu (Godse) would kill another Hindu (Gandhi) when it seems like they should be on the same side, I ask them this question:

Have you ever been friends with two people who don't get along?  And have any of you been in the situation where one of those friends comes up to you and tells you that you have to choose?  Who are you going to be friends with?  How do you decide?  What do you do if, while stalling one friend starts making fun of the other behind their back?  If you join in, you're in trouble with the other friend.  If you don't join in, are you taking their side?

Maybe you said to the person demanding you make a choice: why can't all three of us be friends?  Why don't we try to work it out?

And what if  that friend replies, this is impossible?

That was the situation Gandhi was in.  And when he continued to argue for peace between Hindus and Muslims, Godse interpreted that as Gandhi having made up his mind - and siding with the Muslims.

If you want extra credit tonight for reading and discussing the blog talk about what Gandhi decided to do.  Did he make the right choice, or not?  Could he have done anything differently?  If so, what?  Have you ever been in a situation where you were caught in the middle?  How did it work out?

When you're finished, write a paragraph of some thoughts from your conversation.  Have the adult you read with sign the paper.  Turn it in tomorrow.

Gandhi, Snowden, and DWB

I'm sorry to have been gone the past couple days, but that's just the chaos of life, I suppose.

Imagine with me that what is happening in Gandhi is now.  How do the British view him?  Is he a hero?  Is he a terrorist?  It seems like most of the British view him as a terrorist; some kind of threat - at least to the empire.  He claims no less - he openly admits that he believes the British Empire to be evil, and that he wants India to be governed by Indians.  But should this - nonviolent noncooperation against evil - be considered terroristic? ...Maybe it is too much of a jump, because now I'm asking you to presuppose that the British Empire is evil - and most British - at the time - would have disagreed.

And there's a scene where Gandhi had just documented much evil the British were perpetuating against the Indians: forcing them to work without pay, denying them water, raising rent on the starving in order to finance hunting expeditions, etc...  ...And the one British man says to the governor, "You've turned him into some kind of hero.  Back home children are writing essays about him."

I'm getting to my point: whenever/whatever we're studying and learning, we each bring out own thoughts to the process.  And I couldn't help but think of something/someone we'd studied about not too long ago.  Did you make this connection too?...  Edward Snowden.

The British in the 1930s and 40s were having the same discussions about Gandhi that we're having about Snowden today.  Is he a hero?  Is he a terrorist?  Is he a traitor?  And whatever he is, what does that make me?  If he's a hero, does that make me/us wrong?  And how should I as a person respond?  How should we as a nation respond?

Education is all about making connections.  We do this in Language Arts when we read - we insert ourselves into the book.  When the actions of the protagonist remind us of the times we've quarreled with our brother.  The time we had to make a sacrifice we didn't feel like we could make.

Here's another connection I made in Gandhi: remember that scene where the British tell him to leave, or they'll arrest him?






Gandhi asks about the charge.  He says, "I'm an Indian travelling in my own country, I see no reason for trouble."  ...Essentially Gandhi was saying he was about to be put under arrest for being an Indian in India.  Here's the connection I made:






Maybe you're unfamiliar with the term DWB.  It refers to real (or perceived) instances of racial profiling: Driving While Black.  The issues we are struggling with at our point in history, here in the United States, are the same issues with which previous generations have had to deal.  In the past (maybe this year) questions have arisen over the shooting of Trayvon Martin, the laws in Arizona where police could ask for immigration papers even if the driver hadn't broken any laws, the stop and frisk policy in New York.

Today, I'm not writing about whether any of these events or policies in our own culture are good or evil, right or wrong; I'm only saying that everything should be viewed through the lens of history.  Neither am I saying that these events are the same and therefore interchangeable: they're not.

But it would benefit us to look at their similarities, and their outcomes.  Who was the moral force in the past?  How has history judged each side?  What does that teach us about ourselves and who we want to be?


If you're reading this for extra credit, discuss it with an adult and then write a 3 or 4 sentence response.  Do you think the historical connections and similarities that I made are valid? If you can think of any other connections between Gandhi or the Indian independence movement and our own culture, please include them.

Have the adult sign the paper, and turn it in on Monday.

If you happened across this blog some other way, feel free to leave a comment.  (Students, you may always leave comments on here as well.)

Gandhi and Plate Glass Windows

Gandhi (and The Indian National Congress) are moving closer and closer to independence from the British.

There are a couple ideas Gandhi reiterates throughout his life.  Essentially, he says that the Indians are upset with the British, because the British do not treat Indians as equals.

But, Gandhi says, Indians do not treat each other as equals.

In the movie, Gandhi said that before Indians could (or should) try to gain independence from the British, they would need to, "prove worthy of it."

Gandhi outlined 3 things that had to happen for a successful independence:

1. Hindu/Muslim Unity
2. Outlaw "Untouchability"
3. Defy the British

India was ready to defy the British, but was it ready to accept Gandhi's challenge to get along internally?

When I was a kid, my mom went to the store to buy a gallon of milk and maybe some other groceries.  My sister was upstairs reading, and my brother and I were out in the yard playing.  I'm not sure what all happened, but I know that he swore at me, and then I spit on him.

He told me he was going to spit on me back, so I ran into the house and locked him out.

Our back door had a huge plate-glass window in it.  He started pounding on it, saying he was going to break it if I didn't let him in.

I, of course, was willing to do no such thing.  I laughed at him and went upstairs.

He kept pounding on the window.  My sister, concerned, told me I should probably go downstairs and let him in.

Just as I got to the door, his fist came through it.  Glass went everywhere.  We were both barefoot.  

His clenched fist hung in the air on the other side of the door as he said, "I... I told you I would break it."

Before my mom left, I remember telling her that we could handle it.  Surely, she could leave for 5 minutes and get a gallon of milk.  The grocery store was only a couple blocks away.  "We'll be good," we said.  "Trust us."

To my students: If you want the extra credit for reading and discussing the blog, you were supposed to have read and discussed it with an adult.  If you've done this, find a scrap of paper and explain what my story has to do with the Indian Independence Movement.  How are they similar?  Is it a fair comparison?  Do you think the Indians are ready for independence?  Why or why not?  (I would discuss all of this with an adult before writing it down...)

When you're done, have the adult you read and discussed with sign the paper.

Turn it in tomorrow.

Goodbye Gandhi

So, I was at the school today and a student from my first hour class came up to me - really sad and dejected-looking and said, "Well Mr. Habecker..."

"Yeah?"

He kindof stammered around a little before tearing up a bit.  "Well... Gandhi died today."

"Well, he actually died in 1948."

The kid gave me one of those, 'you're an idiot' looks.  "I know that Mr. Habecker... uggg... you know what I mean."

Yeah, I do.

So today, discuss with your parents/ an adult what you thought about Gandhi.  Why was he killed?  What do you know about the Indian Independence Movement?  Gandhi had called for three things to happen in order to gain a successful, peaceful independence: 1- get rid of the caste system/ untouchability; 2-there needed to be Hindu/Muslim unity; 3-defy the British.  Which of these were the Indians able to accomplish?  Which didn't they accomplish as well as Gandhi would have liked?

In order to get the extra credit on Monday, read and discuss the blog with a parent or adult (preferably one that lives in your home.)  When you are done, write the following sentences on a scrap piece of paper: "The odd thing about assassins, Dr. King, is that they think they've killed you.  I read and discussed the blog with__________________."  Then have the person you read and discussed it with sign on the line.



(Image credit: Asia Society)

Gandhi, Parks, King

Yesterday we started watching Gandhi.  The movie is about the Indian independence movement, (Indiana Standard 7.2.1 - for those of you who care...), but it also ties in with a lot of other concepts and topics we've looked at throughout the year:  I won't list the standards... if you really want them, just ask.

• Colonization
• Imperialism
• Human Rights
• Religions (Mainly Hinduism and Islam, but others are in as well)
• Geography
• Government and Law

 Gandhi also ties in with U.S. History quite well: Dr. King said of Gandhi:  "India's Gandhi was the guiding light of our technique of non-violent social change."  Indeed, the second scene of the movie shows Gandhi being kicked off a train for refusing to give up his seat.  This was in 1893 - more than 60 years before Rosa Parks refused to give up her seat.  There are numerous parallels between these two movements, but I have limited time.

It also ties in with U.S. History because the United States was once a British colony as well.  The United States fought for its independence, so tracing the paths of resistance and forms of oppression by the British is worthwhile.


If you want the extra credit today, bring your parents up to date with what is going on in the movie.  Parents (or whatever adult is reading this) ask your kid some questions about it.  Ask them to tie it in with Martin Luther King Jr. and the Civil Rights movement.  Then, when you're done, write at least three sentences about the discussion.  Have the adult you read the blog with sign the paper.  Turn it in on Monday.

Life is Unfair

I started off today by asking my students to draw the caste system pyramid from memory.  Then, they had to explain why Gandhi was against it.  Here it is the picture I made, by the way:

*Side note*:  Before break, I wanted to show students how a lot of other people made the caste system pyramid - with the "untouchables" as part of the pyramid itself, and how I drew them as not part of the pyramid, but rather the ground around it - not even worth of being part of the society.  But when I searched google, I found this:

But THEN... I saw that my picture was showing up under searches, but NOT on my site.  (For instance, you can find it HERE, HERE, HERE, HERE, HERE, HERE, and HERE... to name a few...)  I didn't know whether I should be annoyed or thrilled.  So I chose thrilled.  I was happy that none of them came with the comment, "this is the worst rendition of the caste system I have ever seen..."  *End of side note*

Many students told me that Gandhi was against the caste system because it was unfair.  ...This is true.  But why was it unfair?  It was unfair because at the time, people couldn't move from caste to caste.  Where you were, you stayed.

I told students a story (common to many kids, I'd bet) about my dad.  I asked him if I could go to my friend's house.  

"No," he replied.

"But that's not fair."

"Life's not fair."

"But everyone else is going."

"I'm not every one else's dad.

"But! But!"

"Hey... you should have thought of that when you were in the dad aisle picking which dad you wanted.  #sorrynotsorry."

And we get it, right?  We can't pick our parents, our race, which culture we're born in...  There's so much that's out of our control.

Here in the US in 2017, we're striving toward equality of rights.  Gandhi understood that life is inherently unfair.  I can't help that I was born into a super-rich family (lie) any more than my friend could help being born into a super-poor family.  But we can go to school, increase our human capital, and try to work our way up and out.  In India, in Gandhi's day, this was not possible.  And that's why Gandhi fought against it.

If you want extra credit for reading and discussing the blog today, you should discuss it with an adult.  How is being born poor today similar to being born an untouchable in Gandhi's time?  How is it different?  Is it a fair comparison?  What are some things you can do now to help ensure you have more money later in life?  Write your answers to some of these questions on a piece of paper, and have the adult you read and them with sign the paper.  Turn it in tomorrow.

Control: Elephants, Indians, and Gandhi

Today we watched a scene in Gandhi where he begins his famous "Salt March."  In the scene, Gandhi is talking to the reporter Vince Walker, and says, "They're not in control.  We are."

*Side Note*:  The character Vince Walker is a composite character.  He's apparently a mixture of Webb Miller, William Shirer, and perhaps several others.  Feel free to research this and leave comments on the blog with what you find.  *End Side Note.*

Here's the scene, with the line starting around the 50 second mark:

Several students asked me about this scene on their daily participation papers.  (They have to write at least one question, and one comment - but most students end up writing quite a bit more.)

Here are some examples:

When they asked that question, it again reminded me of "Shooting an Elephant" by George Orwell.  Here are a couple lines from the essay:

...They were watching me as they would watch a conjurer about to perform a trick.  They did not like me, but with the magical rifle in my hands I was momentarily worth watching.  And suddenly I realized that I should have to shoot the elephant after all.  The people expected it of me and I had got to do it; I could feel their two thousand wills pressing me forward, irresistibly.  And it was at this moment, as I stood there with the rifle in my hands, that I first grasped the hollowness, the futility of the white man's dominion in the East.  Here was I, the white man with his gun, standing in front of the unarmed native crowd - seemingly the leading actor of the piece; but in reality I was only an absurd puppet pushed to and fro by the will of those yellow faces behind.  I perceived in this moment that when the white man turns tyrant it is his own freedom that he destroys.  ...A sahib has got to act like a sahib; he has got to appear resolute, to know his own mind and do definite things...

Orwell knew.  He knew the British only had a false control.  He knew the British weren't really in charge, they only acted the part they were forced to play.  (Or maybe, more appropriately, the part they forced themselves into playing.)

Gandhi also realized this.  He knew the British only maintained a false control - and this only while the Indians were willing to play the part.  This was a part Gandhi was no longer willing to play.

As is usually the case, students may earn some extra credit for my class by reading and discussing the blog with an adult.  If they've done this, write some thoughts from your discussion on a scrap of paper.  Write down whether you agree or disagree.  Was Gandhi in control or not?  What about Orwell?  Perhaps the British were in control?  Were they, and what does that mean?  And what does it mean for us today?

Write a couple sentences about what you think, and what you've discussed.  Then, have the adult you discussed this with sign the paper.  Turn the paper in tomorrow.  Make sure your name, date, and hour are on it.

Gandhi and MLK

We watch 2 legitimate movies every year: Gandhi and Promises.

Right now, we're watching Gandhi.  If you haven't seen it, it's quite good.  It won best picture in 1982.  (Incidentally, a lot of good things came out that year: E.T., Rocky III, Halloween III, Fast Times at Ridgemont High, Poltergeist, Tron, Annie, ...Me...)

As we close out Black History Month, I thought it might be nice to highlight some of the similarities between Gandhi and Martin Luther King, Jr.  (We don't do this in class, so my students may not be familiar with it.  I just thought it might be a good addition...)

• Both Civil Rights Leaders
• Both believed in and practiced civil disobedience
• Both were practitioners of non-violence
• Both are seen as the key leaders of movements that were much, MUCH larger
• Both exemplify one side of a a movement that had many sides
• (See Martin Luther King vs Malcolm X, Or Booker Washington vs W.E.B. DuBois)
• (See Gandhi vs any of the not so non-violent movements for Indian independence)
• Both spent substantial amounts of time in prison
• Both were gifted public speakers
• Both were also known for their religions
• Both have made significant literary contributions
• And of course, both were assassinated

While they both had their differences as well, it is interesting to see what all they had in common.  If you can think of anything else, feel free to write it in the comments.

Students in my class may get extra credit if they read and discuss the blog with an adult.  Students, please give the adult a summary of what's happened in the movie so far.

Then, write a 3-5 sentence summary on a scrap of note paper.  Have the adult you read the blog with sign the paper.  Turn it in on Monday in the extra credit tray.  Make sure that your name, date, and hour are on the paper.

(Image Credit)

(Image Credit)

Quiz Day

Students took the Hinduism/Buddhism/Indian Independence Movement Quiz today.  I'm hoping to have all of the scores posted in the grade book by the end of the day.

I was surprised by how much some students struggled on the map portion.  We've gone to the computer lab several times, but it has been a while.  We've also done some other map work.  I'll want to look at that a little more closely to see if I can figure out what students are missing and why.

You should also know that I counted the essay as extra credit.  I graded these myself, and everyone scored well - well, at least out of those that I've scored so far.

Since we just took the quiz, I don't have anything vital to post.  But I do have something interesting.  If you remember back to Wednesday's post, I had students challenge adults to a game of Pictionary.  I received quite a few back.  I thought I'd post my favorite answers:

In case you couldn't get that, here are their answers along with the pictures:

Mom: Shrimp with arms

Tyler: Brahmin

Correct answer: Brahman.  The judges are still out as to whether or not Tyler should get the credit for this.  As a teacher, I don't grade for spelling when I'm trying to assess whether or not they know social studies.  I'll grade for spelling if I'm assessing spelling.  The problem is that "Brahmin" refers to the priestly caste within Hinduism, Brahman refers to the God of Hinduism.  The eternal spirit, if you'd prefer.

 Mom:  Pacman eating a garbage can full of money on fire.
Tyler: Suffering
Correct answer:  Gandhi.  Yeah... we were going for Gandhi on this one.  He's burning the passes.  Although, now I can only see Pacman eating a garbage full of money on fire.

 Mom:  A balloon wearing sunglasses next to a worm and the number 9.
Tyler: The making of salt.
Correct answer: The Ganges River.  In class, the artist drew the river first, and when the class couldn't get it, added Gandhi.  Then, when they still couldn't get it, he told them it began with the letter "g."  In Tyler's defense, the making of the salt is a fantastic guess.  In India, the making of salt was illegal, only the British could make it.  So, he famously marched to the sea to make it in defiance of the British.  It's something we talked about in class.  We have never talked about balloons wearing sunglasses...  But in Mom's defense, she's never been in my class, so I expect her to know none of these.

 Mom:  An old man looking at a melting ice cream cone.
Tyler: Gandhi
Correct answer: India.  Though, that is supposed to be Gandhi standing beside it.

 Mom: Man yelling at a boy who is getting hit by lightening.
Tyler: Karma.
Correct answer: Karma.  Good job, Tyler!  You've taken the lead 1-0.

 Mom: Four bullies w/ mohawks who are mad at three little siblings.
Tyler's answer: Oligarchy.
Correct answer: Oligarchy.  Tyler!  You'll pulling away!  2-0.  An oligarchy, is an unelected group of leaders who rule with dictatorial power.  It's one of the unlimited governments we studied about earlier in the year.  ...The crowns are deceiving.  It might lead one to believe it's some form of monarchy.  It's not.  But neither are they mohawks.

 Mom: A dog walking toward his owner.
Tyler: dead man.
Correct answer: Reincarnation.  Tyler is close.  But the arrow is supposed to mean that the spirit of the dead man was reincarnated into another living being.

 Mom:  A funeral.
Tyler:  Siddhartha Guatama.
Correct answer:  Siddhartha Guatama.  3-0 Tyler.  And a funeral is one of the things Guatama saw on his walk.

 Mom:  A rich man and a poor man.
Tyler:  Wealth.
Correct answer:  Standard of living.  The judges almost gave each of the contestants a point for this answer, but in the end decided against it.  It was very controversial, even though it wouldn't have affected the game's outcome.

 Mom: A farm
Tyler: Urbanization
Correct answer: Urbanization.  4-0

 Mom: Ranking of the classes of people
Tyler: Caste system
Correct answer: Caste system, however we're giving mom a point on this one.  5-1!

Tyler gets the prize for most correct answers.  Mom gets the prize for the most humorous answers.  In fact, part of me likes her answers more.  ...You know on those standarized tests where it always say, "choose the best answer...?"  This game is really making me second guess that.  Luckily, those tests are multiple choice - so we'll never see answers this good.

My students can get extra credit if they read and discuss this blog with an adult.  Ultimately, I just think it's important to discuss social studies outside of the classroom.  The more you do that, the better.  Maybe tell your parents (or whoever you're talking to) how you did on the test.  Or how you think you did.  Maybe you could check the grades to see if I've posted them yet.

When you're done, write a couple sentences telling me about your conversation.  Have the adult sign the paper.  Turn it in to me tomorrow.  (Make sure your name, date, and hour are on it.)

*EDIT*  To the other students who asked me if I could post what your parents put, sorry for the let down.  I didn't have a chance to give them a call to get permission.  Also, I don't have time to add them to this post.  But you're right: there were a lot of good responses.

Missing Gandhi

I can't believe I'm missing Gandhi.  It's one of the high points of the year.

I'm not posting much today, but I want to make sure you have the opportunity to get some extra credit if you want it.

For today, just discuss with an adult what happened in the film.  What's going on between the Hindus and Muslims?  The British and the Indians?  How are Jinnah, Nehru, and Gandhi all interacting?  Gandhi said that there were 3 main things that would have to happen in order for Indian to have a successful independence.  Do you remember what those three things were?

After you discuss that with an adult, write the following on a piece of paper: "Tunisian fruit-vendor/ Katniss Everdeen.  I discussed the questions about Gandhi with_______________"  Then, have the adult you discussed the question with sign the line.

Crazier Days

Today was one of the craziest days I've had in a while... it was interesting...

Once again, I'm bummed out about missing Gandhi, but excited to get back into The Hunger Games tomorrow.

It was nice to see what all the kids got out of Gandhi.  We talked a little about civil disobedience and cell phones, questions they had from the movie, and grades, grades, grades...

ISTEP Tomorrow!  Get a good night's sleep!

To get the extra credit today, discuss instances of civil disobedience found in the film Gandhi.  Also, Gandhi cared most about nonviolence.  He cared about it more than gaining independence.  Given all the violence that the Indians went through to get their independence, Gandhi thought his life was a failure.  Do you agree with him or not?  Was his life a failure?  Why or why not?

To prove you read this blog entry, write the following sentences: "Maybe India should make iodized salt...  I read and discussed the blog with ___________________."  Then, have the adult you read and discussed the blog with sign on the line.

Isn't Gandhi Afraid?

We started watching Gandhi today.

As students watch, they write out ideas, thoughts and questions that come to them.

One question I received today that I hadn't before (that I recall) was:

"Isn't Gandhi afraid?"

Throughout his life, Gandhi showed tremendous courage in the face of persecution - it may have been his greatest strength, although one could argue for his patience and endurance, his understanding, or any number of his other positive attributes.

It's still a good question.  Isn't he afraid?  He knew he was going to get hit in the face with a baton, yet he kept burning passes and accepted the unjust punishment of breaking an unjust law.

He walked past the racist kids on the sidewalk - kids who were ready to beat him up.  (Beat him down?)  Wasn't he afraid?

I don't know.  I imagine he had some fear.

But there's also a calm in preparedness.  When we can face our fears head on, with a clear mind, I think we're less likely to be frightened than when we're caught off guard.

Because Gandhi knew his purpose and role - because he was prepared, he was able to face his obstacles with clarity and precision.  He knew he could give into fear, but prepared himself and avoided it.

That's my take, anyway.

Thoughts?  Anyone else?

If you're in my class, write your thoughts on a scrap of paper, and discuss them with an adult.  Have the adult sign the scrap, then turn it in tomorrow.

Initiative

We're learning about the Japanese invasion/colonization of Manchuria as well as Japanese imperialism in general - but I wanted to take a break from that for a moment.

(Oh, but first - if you weren't here - or didn't finish your map you can download it HERE.  It's due tomorrow.)

Today while we were in the computer lab, I wanted to remind the students of all the extra credit policies I have.  There are quite a few: this blog - you know about it... you're here.  The geography games, watching/ relating the news and current events to what we're studying, etc...

At the beginning of the year I try to hammer in the point that social studies touches everything.  Everything.  It is ubiquitous, yet we often have a hard time connecting our lives to social studies because... you know... who does that?... 

I tell the students, "hey, if you're watching TV or a movie, reading a book or playing a video game and you see something that relates to this class, write me a paragraph telling me about it and I'll give you some points."

I want students to take some initiative - and ultimately I want them to take what they're learning in here and connect it to their lives.

I'm sure many - maybe all - students do this anyway, but I don't often get told about it.

After spring break Anna turned this in:

Not only that, but she wrote a rough draft first and asked Mr. Ogle to look over it - which he did.  (Seriously, this school corporation is fantastic.  It seems like everyone always goes above and beyond the call of duty.)  Check it out:

I thought it'd be worth sharing what she wrote and giving her some kudos for it:

Futurama to Social Studies

     Mr. Habecker, over spring break I watched this show called Futurama.  The whole thing reminded me of Gandhi's act for equality among people.

     At the beginning, the first thing I noticed was a meeting of the rich people who were talking so badly about the mutants.  It's how the priests treated the untouchables.  The priests treated them like dirt.

     Next, the mutants had to carry around passes given out by the mayor that only lasts one day.  They would have to carry it around to go anywhere.  It was like when the Indians had to carry passes around in South Africa.

     A guy named Fry jumped into the lake that turns you into a mutant in order to see what it's like in their shoes - like when Gandhi dresses and acts like a poor person to see their point of view.

     Next, they had civil disobedience because they just sent the sewage back up - not harming anyone, but just to show what they think is wrong.  Gandhi used all kinds of civil disobedience acts like: burning the passes, he wouldn't pay court fines, and all of those freedom walks.  He did this to show that what was going on was wrong.

     Lastly, all the mutants took a march for equality/freedom.  This reminds me of when Gandhi has that march to the Indian Ocean to gather salt.  They both were for freedom.

     That's all the similarities I saw.  If you think you might want to see this, it is season 7 episode 11 or 12.

For an assignment that's supposed to be rather low-key, I thought she did an exceptional job.  There are so, SO many connections to what we've been studying.  Nice job.

To get the extra credit for reading the blog, you're supposed to read it and discuss it with an adult.  If you did this, find a scrap of paper and complete the following: tell me a connection between my social studies class and a show, book, movie, video game (or whatever) that YOU like.  It doesn't have to be a long paper, just a connection or two.  ...Think about everything we've been talking about since the beginning of the year.

When you're done, have the adult you read and discussed the blog with sign the paper.

Turn it in tomorrow.

See you then.

¡Gandhi!

It seems as though Mr. Cowells, Mr. Swanson, and Mr. Frantz watch Gandhi the way I read The Hunger Games.   ...You know... stopping every few seconds or minutes to talk about how it ties in with social studies.

I'm sure it's super-annoying, but no doubt also super helpful.  There is SO much in that movie.  It's one of the top 3 things I'm asked every year by former students: have you started Gandhi yet?  And generally, it's followed by some accolade or another...  My point is the interruptions enhance the film rather than detract from it.

To get the extra credit tonight, discuss what you watched in class with an adult that you live with.  I want you to mention 3 different places the film was stopped and discussed.  Tell why Mr. Cowells (or whoever stopped the film) stopped it and what they were pointing out.

Finally, write down the following quote on a piece of paper, and have the adult sign it.  "I discussed three times the movie Gandhi stopped with the person who signed this paper."

One last thing.  I had some people ask about pictures of my new baby.  Here are a couple.  I'll add Mr. Frantz too.  I hope he doesn't mind.  He seems like a nice guy.

The Deal With Propaganda

The other day, if you recall, I taught about bias, product placement, and propaganda.  I've been trying to show both how North Korea uses this to their advantage, and how even here people are trying to sell us philosophies and ideas as well as products.

At the end of the day yesterday, a student gave me this letter:

I'll transcribe it, in case you can't read it in the image.

Dear Mr. Habecker,

     I have a question, aren't us students being brain washed?  I was thinking, maybe all History teachers brain wash students.  Is there a way that is fake about history?  Are you telling students to lie?  Is someone telling you what to teach, and what to hide?  If so, why?  Why can't you tell the truth?  Do you know anything about changing history?  Isn't Israel connected to Africa?  As I look at the map, it connects to Egypt.  Which connects to Africa.  I don't understand.  Anybody could say, "oh its connected to Africa," or "oh, it's connected to something else."  Is there something the history teachers are lying about?
     Also, you say Gandhi is Indian.  Well how come in the movie about him, when he is on the bus, the man tells Gandhi there are no colored people allowed on the bus.  Well what did they call black people?  They called them colored people.  Is Gandhi black?


...Ok, so there's a lot in there.  A lot, right?  I won't have time to address every question, but let me address the first couple.

Are students being brain washed?  Maybe.  But I'm not intentionally brain washing you.  There's a big difference in how I am educating you here, and how you would be educated in North Korea.  You can go to a library.  You can search the internet.  Anything you want to look up, look it up.  Find out if I'm lying to you: I'm not.  At least, not intentionally.

It is true - I have my own biases and prejudices.  One thing I love about social studies is that I'm forced to come to grips with what my own biases are  - to address them, and not teach to them.  That is why I'm teaching you about bias and propaganda - so that you can identify it in yourself and in others.

Next question/series of questions:  Is there a way that is fake about history?  Are you telling students to lie?  I'm not sure what you mean about "a way that is fake about history..."  Sometime people invent histories, or embellish histories to make themselves look better.  This is true of people throughout history that we generally categorize as "good" as well as those we categorize as "bad."

For instance, Hitler and Stalin both revised their histories to make them look better, to scapegoat others, and to make their opponents look bad.  Most of us would agree that neither Hitler nor Stalin were "stand-up guys."  In fact, most people categorize them as evil.

But take our very own George Washington.  Maybe you heard the story of him chopping down the cherry tree.  His father came home and asked if he did it, and his response was, "I cannot tell a lie, for it was I."  Yeah... that whole story is probably a lie.

And this isn't a new thing...  Most historians believe that the entire Xia dynasty of China is fictionalized to give the Shang dynasty some legitimacy.

So, I suppose yes.  There is a way that is fake about history.  But I'm not telling my students to lie.  I'm telling (or asking, if you prefer) them to think.  Here in the United States (is this US propaganda?...?) you can go to the library and look up whatever you want.

True, there may be a lie that is so deeply ingrained into our society that the truth is no longer there - but if that's the case, I guess there's nothing we can do about it - except continually try to find the truth.

Next question: Is someone telling you what to teach?  Yes.  Yes and yes.  I took the picture with the camera angled so you can see the Indiana State Standards for 7th Grade Social Studies in the background.  The state of Indiana tells me what to teach.  I can't teach whatever I want.  This makes sense: I'm not qualified to be your math teacher.  So, if you came in to my class and I said: "Alright, lets learn us some fractions..." You would probably have a weird/annoyed look on your face.

The state (and school) give me quite a bit of freedom on how I approach and teach what they ask me to teach.  For that, I'm grateful.

They're not asking me to hide anything - but they do ask me to stick to 7th grade social studies standards.  If you prefer to think of me not teaching math as "hiding something," that's ok.  But I'm not.  It's just that Mrs. Gowdy is a WAAAAAAYYYYYYYYY better math teacher than me.

The next really new question is, "Isn't Israel connected to Africa?..."  And then the assumed question, "Why isn't Israel considered part of Africa?"

You're right: the Middle East is tricky.  Most people in the United States qualify the Middle East as part of Asia, but it's tricky.  Just like at the beginning of the year we discussed whether or not the "Southern Ocean" should be considered an ocean.  We break the world into continents to make it easier to categorize them in our minds.  So when somebody says, "it's in South America" we know the general area they're talking about.  That doesn't mean the system is perfect, or that there aren't other proposed systems.

Since we have a very limited amount of time in here, I try to teach you the basics.  Hopefully at some point, you get a chance to look into it more.

As for Gandhi, he considered himself Indian, so that's what I'm going with as well.

If I didn't answer the questions well enough - or if you have additional input, let me know in the comments or in your note for extra credit.

If you want extra credit for reading and discussing the blog, write a short paragraph telling about your discussion, then have the adult you read it with sign the paper and turn it in tomorrow.