How do national stories like the one we share about "that meal at Plymouth a long, long time ago" shape our understanding of history and the present? Learning stories that include multiple sources provide fuller, richer pictures of shared history so that we can be better listeners and make better choices in the present and future. This animated clip comes from a longer video about the concept of national stories included in "The “First Thanksgiving”: How Can We Tell a Better Story?" a new resource from our education initiative Native Knowledge 360° (NK360°). Based on an inquiry design model, this resource helps teachers and students dispel misconceptions about the “First Thanksgiving” by examining the events through multiple perspectives, including those of the Wampanoag Nation, who have been largely excluded from this national story. If you're an educator, you can register now for a FREE four-part series of professional development webinars coming up in early 2025. Find the full video, learn more, and register on NK360°. https://lnkd.in/e_2BFkuF __ Video produced by Baker and Hill for the National Museum of the American Indian and featured in the inquiry resource, The “First Thanksgiving”: How Can We Tell a Better Story?" #Thanksgiving #NationalStories #NK360 #Education
Jon Ghahate
1mo
I will sign up
Staff Educator-Crow Canyon Archaeological Center - Historical/Cultural/STEM Public Speaker: US Southwest Ancestral Civilizations/NM Pueblo Cultures/Indigenous Civilizations Western Hemisphere; Guide-Chaco Historical Park
1moAs an educator I have learned for comprehension to be achieved, terms/vocabulary use are paramount. The title of a LinkedIn post states "Let's Talk About Sovereignty" and after reading the 27 comments posted [for me] there's one salient term absent in this dialogue. As one post states "Sovereignty is not GRANTED, but rather, RECOGNIZED." [Thank you Andrea Johnson]. 'Sovereignty' requires the 'recognition by another...some entity, some monarch, some government, some institution, that 'duh!' moment for someone to 'recognize' the human condition of sovereignty. With the preposition of "Let's Talk About Sovereignty" let me respectfully state, before 'sovereignty' the condition of 'autonomy' should be, must exist. This inalienable human right does not require recognition. It is a 'given'. However, it's a hegemonic, colonial, religion-based mentality that's used to justifies the denial of a community's, a society's inalienable right to govern themselves, define who they are, establish and perpetuate all that contributes to their 'sense of place' [their cultures, customs, their cuisine, lands, most importantly their languages]. The inalienable human right is "I'm a human, you're a human. No proof is required!" The same with autonomy.