Observations From a First Attempt With C3

As social studies teachers, we have dozens of tools and models in our portfolios to try and create engaging and meaningful lessons. The C3 module, when done well, is by far the most valuable method at our disposal. Last July, I designed a C3 Inquiry Design Model (IDM) investigation as to what allows for the rise of dictatorial regimes in history. I used the case study of the Nazi seizure of power at the end of the Weimar Republic to focus student inquiry, which fit within the context of my Virginia state standards and content schedule. I was, and still am, thrilled about the project that I developed. The curricular materials developed for this inquiry were exactly the types of lessons that got me excited about becoming a classroom teacher while studying history in graduate school. This included activities created with help from Craig Perrier, differentiated materials to guide students through the inquiry, and open-ended questions with cross-curricula extensions. After my first experiment with using C3, I will continue to push myself to utilize the inquiry format for the rest of my career.

However, the truncated version of my C3 IDM that I was actually able to use this year was far from the idealized model that I envisioned last July. The main issue that derailed the process for my World History II team was timing. My fellow teachers and I decided we would use the C3 for a series of classes at the end of our unit on the interwar years. We could use the IDM materials as a prelude to our WWII unit, while also taking a break from the normal schedule of course content to examine and discuss some of the deeper themes about the power of dictators and their regimes embedded in the IDM. Our plan was then to revisit the Summative Performance Task and Taking Informed Action portions several weeks later, when the English-linked classes that we taught finished reading George Orwell’s 1984.

All appeared to be on course for my first C3 IDM experimentation that spring until we received our school’s Virginia Standard of Learning (SOL) testing schedule. Instead of being one of the last SOL’s administered at our school, World History II was now going to be tested on the very first day! This announcement essentially cut two weeks from our pacing schedule and left us scrambling to cover content and immediately playing catch-up. When it came time to teach the inquiry just a few days later, we decided that we would introduce the inquiry and its compelling question of “how do dictators achieve and maintain power?” Then, we would use the first two supporting questions and materials, but cut the third supporting question, which included the Summative Performance Task and Taking Informed Action pieces. It was an investigation of contemporary dictators’ governments and the assessments of their functionality and viability.

For me, as the designer of the IDM, this was a devastating blow! I hoped that this inquiry would build historical and contemporary awareness together—force students to consider how and why populations, both in the past and today, support dictatorial regimes or are unable to remove these strongmen leaders from power. However, I understood the reality of the situation and that the grand finale of my IDM, like many other activities those final weeks, would need to be sacrificed in order to make sure that the content required to pass the SOL was covered in class before the test. Similarly, when it came time to assign the cross-curricula assignment on 1984, our English-linked classes had just finished a different essay. Recognizing the strain on both students and teachers that resulted from a somewhat chaotic April, a joint decision was made to shelve the essay until next year when it could be revisited under circumstances that will ensure and protect its meaning and value.

Despite all of this, the portions of my C3 that I was able to implement and teach in my class were a tremendous success. Students were engaged and asked their own fantastic questions, revealing a genuine curiosity. Completion of the introductory dictators collage, and the in-depth source work completed in the analysis of the economic and political destabilization of Weimar Germany was a fantastic introduction to our WWII unit. Students’ iceberg diagrams explaining the Nazi seizure of power were evidence of this high-level of understanding. Also, the comparisons between Nazi Germany and Stalinist Russia were successful in highlighting for students the defining characteristics of totalitarian regimes. This helped students achieve a thorough understanding of these governments, which helped to facilitate analyses of similar systems in our last units. In reflecting upon the high level of student interest, engagement, and performance during our subsequent WWII unit, I credit most of these successes to the content and thematic groundwork laid during the C3 inquiry days.

In revisiting my planning and hopes for next school year, I am left with several valuable insights from this initial C3 IDM test. First, this experience reminded me of the reality of working within a demanding timing and content schedule. Next year, I believe that my goal will be to implement at least two full C3 inquiries into my course schedule. However, it will be important to plan these well in advance of our school’s testing season, plus get these C3 inquiry days on the calendar early. Once the C3 inquiries are in place, it will be easier to plan the rest of the year’s lesson and unit calendars based upon these dates. Hopefully in two years I feel comfortable enough with the format and my schedule that I can expand this number to three or four C3 IDMs.

I believe that precisely because these types of models need to be used, and when used should be given their necessary time and full attention, that it is imperative for us as teachers to consider the realities of our situations. As I stated at the beginning of this post, C3 inquiries are exactly the type of teaching that we should be doing as educators in the 21st century. The challenge now becomes how to incorporate these types of projects on a consistent basis. It is an important question, but one that when answered has the potential to completely change our students’ educational experiences. I, for one, am excited about the endless possibilities of teaching with historical inquiry.