Q Overview: The short response activities in the webtext throughout this course are designed to show your understanding of key concepts as you engage with course content. Prompt: During the seventh week of the course, you will respond to several questions in the webtext as you complete each learning block. At the end of Module Seven, you will review your answers to these questions and ensure that you have responded to each question. It is important that you answer each question; otherwise, the words “[no response]” will appear in brackets when you submit the assignment. The questions and their original locations in the webtext are listed in this table in case you want to refer back to the reading as you edit, but you can edit your responses to all the questions directly in Module Seven: Thinking About History, learning block 7-4 (page 4) in the webtext, before exporting to Word for submission to your instructor in your learning environment. Module Seven: Thinking About History, Learning Block 7-1 (page 2): Question 1: Name three historical lenses that you could apply to gain a fuller picture of the relationship between Natives and white settlers. Question 2: Revise the thesis statement at the top of this page to reflect a more complex view of the relationship between Natives and white settlers. Your revised thesis statement should be longer than one sentence. Module Seven: Thinking About History, Learning Block 7-2 (page 2): Question 3: Name three historical lenses that you could use to look at the events described in the video you just saw. Question 4: Massasoit’s decision to approach the Pilgrims about an alliance was contingent on what previous event or events? (Name one or two.) Question 5: Name one short-term consequence and one long-term consequence of the alliance between the Wampanoag and the Pilgrims. Module Seven: Thinking About History, Learning Block 7-3 (page 3): Question 6: How has your understanding of the historical event in your essay changed as a result of your research? Describe one instance of a misconception or a wrong idea you had about your topic that has been corrected after researching and writing about it. Module Seven: Thinking About History, Learning Block 7-4 (page 2): Question 7: Name four historical lenses through which you could analyze the events of the Cherokee Removal. Specify one aspect of this event for each lens that you cite. Question 8: Agree or disagree with the following thesis statement: “The Treaty of New Echota was invalid, and the National Party was correct to oppose it.” Cite at least three historical facts that support your position. Rubric Guidelines for Submission: Your response to Question 1 should be no more than 1 sentence in length. Your responses to Questions 2, 6, 7, and 8 should be 2–3 sentences in length. Your responses to Questions 3, 4, and 5 should be 1–2 sentences in length. Follow the instructions at the bottom of Module Seven: Thinking About History, learning block 7-4 (page 4) in the webtext, to download your work and submit it to your instructor as a single Microsoft Word document uploaded to your learning environment. Refer to the Submitting Webtext Assignments Guide for assistance on downloading, saving, and submitting this assignment. Critical Elements Exemplary Proficient Needs Improvement Not Evident Value Engagement Written responses completely Written responses completely Written responses address the No written responses provided 30 address all short answer address the majority of short minority of short answer to address any short answer prompts answer prompts prompts prompts (100%) (85%) (55%) (0%) Relevance Written responses directly Written responses are topically Written responses do not 20 address short answer prompts, related to short answer address topics identified in drawing from presented course prompts, but responses do not short answer prompts concepts and terminology consistently draw from (0%) (100%) presented course concepts and terminology (85%) Accuracy Written responses are Written responses contain Written responses contain No written responses are 20 completely accurate minor errors but are mostly major errors provided (100%) accurate (55%) (0%) (85%) Critical Thinking Written responses demonstrate Written responses demonstrate Written responses do not 20 understanding of course understanding of course reflect original ideas and content through inclusion of content through reiteration of examples original ideas and examples provided materials, but do not (0%) (100%) consistently include original ideas and examples (85%) Articulation of Written responses are captured Written responses are captured No written responses are 10 Response in complete sentences without in incomplete sentences or captured in complete sentences grammatical errors impacting include numerous grammatical (0%) legibility and the clarity of errors that negatively impact response legibility and the clarity of (100%) response (85%) Total 100%