UNIT OUTLINE

Subject: The Contestability of the Past.
Unit title: : Investigating
Modern History- The Nature
of Modern History
Key Concepts/ Big Ideas
 Analysis and use of sources
 Historical interpretation
 Historical investigation and research
 Explanation and communication
Course: Modern History. Number of Weeks: 4 and
16 lessons.
The importance of this learning
The learning in this unit of study is important because students will develop deep knowledge and
understanding on the topic ‘contestability of the past’ by investigating problems and focusing on
sources available to historians. Students will further learn about this by focusing on the topic
Pearl Harbor- a surprise attack. Students will also obtain a strong ability to apply historical
concepts and skills throughout this unit of work.

Unit context within Scope and Sequence/Purpose Syllabus Outcomes

This topic is a content focus of the course, MH11-6: analyses and interprets different types of sources for evidence to support an historical
Investigating Modern History. Students will study account or argument.
‘The contestability of the past’ in the first term of MH11-7: discusses and evaluates differing interpretations and representations of the past.
year 11 to develop historical skills and an MH11-9: communicates historical understanding, using historical knowledge, concepts and
understanding on the nature of modern history. terms, in appropriate and well-structured forms.
Students will then study the case study ‘The Trans- MH11-10: discusses contemporary methods and issues involved in the investigation of modern
Atlantic Slave Trade’. In term two, students will study history.
‘The British in India and Burma’ and ‘Constructions of
the modern world’. In term 3, students will study
‘The end of the Empire’.
Literacy Focus Numeracy Focus ICT Focus Differentiation
 Reading, listening,  Timelines  Prezi  Differentiate activities based on students’ learning
speaking, viewing  Creating charts by  PowerPoint needs.
and writing. using data.  AnswerGarden  Differentiate activities based on students preferred
  Creating visual,  Students will argue,  YouTube videos learning styles and strengths.
digital and oral judge and reason  Films  Providing student direction by organising learning
texts. based on historical  Slideful activities where students have options and can
 Uses evidence in evidence.  Voicethread make choices in their own learning with the
analysing and  Research teachers’ approval.
creating texts.  Online discussion  Promoting and extending learning.
 Students will use board
appropriate  Glogster
punctuation,
grammar and text
structures.

Week/ Syllabus Content Teaching and Learning Strategies including assessment for learning. Resources
Sequence
Term 1  How Brainstorming activity (Inquiry questions): students brainstorm what contestability  Prezi
Week 1 historians test means, how historians contest the past and why.  Computer
Lesson 1 hypotheses Digital Resource  Smartboard
about the past Prezi: the teacher conducts a presentation on the notion of ‘Contestability of the
through the Past’ and defines what ‘hypotheses about the past’ and ‘corroboration of sources’
corroboration means. The teacher then presents an overview of the topic ‘Pearl Harbor a surprise
of source. attack’.
MH11-6 Class discussion: students discuss their thoughts and any relevant points in relation
MH11-7 to the PowerPoint.
Term 1  How YouTube clip: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pup5eVSbGkE AnswerGarden
Week 1 historians test Students watch a short tutorial video on the significance of primary and secondary  YouTube
Lesson 2 hypotheses sources to revise their memory.  Computer
about the past Recourse source based task (PowerPoint).  Smartboard
through the Collaborative learning/Historical Inductive inquiry strategy: students analyse in  PowerPoint
corroboration groups of four sources and respond to the question provided, in order to
of source. investigate how historians test hypotheses about the past.
Differentiation: the teacher provides extra support to students with additional
MH11-6 learning needs.
 MH11-7 Class discussion: students discuss how the sources that they have analysed can be
MH11-9 used by historians to hypothesise about the past.
Term 1  How Secondary source analysis activity: students investigate how the historians have  Electronic
Week 1 historians test presented the theory of Pearl Harbor being ‘a surprise attack’ by using the evidence devices
Lesson 3 hypotheses and support of sources.  Scaffolding
about the past https://www.archives.gov/publications/prologue/2011/winter/ph-decklogs.html sheet
through the Differentiation: the teacher differentiates learning by providing a scaffolding sheet
corroboration to assist students with additional learning needs; and extends learning for
of source. advanced learners by encouraging students to evaluate the source.
MH11-6 (Informal formative assessment) Collaborative discussion: students discuss in
MH11-7 groups of four how the historians have used the corroboration of sources to
MH11-9 present a historical account.
Term 1  How Secondary source analysis activity: Students analyse an article to investigate how  Electronic
Week 1 historians test the Historian presents the Pearl Harbor Advance Knowledge conspiracy theory devices
Lesson 4 hypotheses through the corroboration of courses.  Scaffolding
about the past https://www.archives.gov/publications/prologue/1996/fall/butow.html sheet
through the Differentiation: the teacher provides students with additional learning needs a
corroboration scaffolding sheet to assist them with their analysis; and extends learning for
of source. advanced learners by encouraging students to evaluate the source.

MH11-6 (Informal formative assessment) Collaborative learning/Think, pair, share: Explain

MH11-7 how the historian uses the evidence of sources to convey his theory? How does his
MH11-9 argument of the conspiracy theory contest the event as a surprise attack? Students
will respond to the questions, pair up with another student, and then join into
groups of four to share their response.
Term 1  How Critical debate: students in the class will split into two groups to debate
Week 2 historians test whether Pearl Harbor was a surprise attack, or if it was strategically planned by
Lesson 1 hypotheses President Roosevelt to bring the United States into war.
about the past (Informal formative assessment) short writing task: students will respond to the
through the question: How do the different theories from historians regarding the attack on
corroboration Pearl Harbor provide different interpretations and representations of the past?
of source. How does this illustrate the concept of contestability in history?
Differentiation: the teacher differentiates learning by providing student direction.
 MH11-6 Students have the option of completing a paper poster, mind-map, or to verbally
MH11-7 communicate their ideas.
MH11-9 Learning logs: students write in their logs about what they learnt this week.
Term 1  Problems Brainstorming activity: students will brainstorm problems associated with the  Voice thread
Week 2 associated evaluation of sources and how they affect historical inquires.  Computer
Lesson 2 with the YouTube videos: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TTIz_00-xww  Smartboard
evaluation of https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FKaH7PlXx1Q  YouTube
sources, Students will watch the videos on strategies of how to evaluate problems
authenticity, associated with sources.
and reliability
and Voice thread: the teacher conducts a presentation on the problems associated with
usefulness for the evaluation of sources for particular historical inquiries and defines to students
particular what authenticity, reliability and usefulness means.
historical
inquires.
MH11-10
MH11-6 MH11-9
Term 1 Problems associated Collaborative learning/evaluation task: Students will evaluate a few pages in pairs Ikezaki Tadatak’s book
Week 2 with the evaluation of from the Japanese perspective, Ikezaki Tadatak’s book. from 1929 ‘Why Fear
Lesson 3 sources, authenticity, Research task: Students will research in pairs the historian to further evaluate the the United States’.
and reliability and authenticity, reliability and the usefulness of the source. Students will be directed  Electronic
usefulness for to consider the context, origin, audience and intention of the source. devices
particular historical Differentiation: the teacher provides students with additional learning needs extra
inquires. assistance in evaluating the source and researching.
MH11-10, MH11-6, (Informal formative assessment) Think, pair, share: Students will discuss the
MH11-9 problems associated with their evaluation of the source and whether it is useful for
particular historical inquires in relation to Pearl Harbor.
Term 1  Problems Collaborative learning/evaluation task: Saburo Ienga’s book
Week 2 associated Students will evaluate a few pages from the Japanese perspective Saburo Ienga’s ‘The Pacific War 1931-
Lesson 4 with the book who opposes Ikezaki Tadatak’s view. 1945: A critical
evaluation of Research task: Students will research the historian to further consider problems perspective on Japan’s
sources, associated with the evaluation of the source, which includes the authenticity, role in WWll’.
authenticity, reliability and the usefulness of the source. Students will consider the context,
 and reliability origin, audience and intention of the source.  Electronic
and Differentiation: the teacher provides extra assistance to students who need devices
usefulness for additional support with their research and analysis skills.
particular (Informal formative assessment) Collaborative discussion: students will discuss in
historical groups of four the problems associated with the evaluation of the source and
inquires. determine its usefulness for historical inquires in relation to Pearl Harbor.
MH11-10, MH11-6 Learning logs: students will write about what they learnt this week.
MH11-9
Term 1 Problems associated Critical debate: students will split into two groups in the class to debate who has
Week 3 with the evaluation of the strongest evaluation of lenga’s and Tadatak’s historical accounts.
Lesson 1 sources, authenticity, (Informal formative assessment) writing task: students will respond to the
and reliability and following question: Discuss how the problems associated with your evaluation of
usefulness for the sources helps you to understand the issues involved in the investigation of
particular historical modern history. Differentiation: the teacher differentiates learning for diverse
inquires. learners by providing student direction. Students have the option of creating a
MH11-10, MH11-6 Glogster poster, charts, or to discuss their response.
MH11-9 Class discussion: students will discuss how the problems associated with the
evaluation of the sources for particular historical inquires contests’ the past.
Term 1  The AnswerGarden tool for online brainstorming (Inquiry questions): Why is it  Electronic
Week 3 importance of important to understand the historical context in the interpretation of sources? devices
Lesson 2 understanding Students brainstorm their ideas.  YouTube
the historical YouTube videos: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VpBcYBDHSdM  Sutori
context in the https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=az_3vsB7Q38  Computer
interpretation Students will watch short videos on the importance of historical context in the  Smartboard
of sources. interpretation of sources, and the context of issues leading up to and during the AnswerGarden.
MH11-6 attack on Pearl Harbor. The teacher directs students to take notes.  Information
MH11-9 Class Discussion: students will discuss the videos and their notes. sheet
Sutori creative storytelling timeline: students will create a digital timeline of the
context leading up to, during, and after the attack of Pearl Harbor. Differentiation:
the teacher will provide an information sheet of the context for students who need
additional support with their learning.
Term 1  The Collaborative learning/ research source analysis activity: Students will analyse in  Electronic
Week 3 importance of pairs primary and secondary sources of the historical context in the interpretation devices
Lesson 3 understanding of sources. The teacher provides students with websites:
the historical http://www.prattlibrary.org/research/tools/index.aspx?cat=119&id=5734
context in the http://www.bbc.co.uk/history/worldwars/wwtwo/pearl_harbour_01.shtml
interpretation
of sources. Differentiation: students in pairs who need additional learning support will be
MH11-6 encouraged to first explain the context in the interpretation of the sources.
MH11-9 (Informal formative assessment) Historical context activity worksheet: students
MH11-7 will respond to the questions, which is based on understanding the historical
context in the interpretation of sources.
Term 1  The (Informal formative assessment) persuasive essay: How does the historical
Week 3 importance of context in the interpretation of sources contest the past? Students will respond to
Lesson 4 understanding the question. Differentiation: the teacher differentiates the learning task for
the historical diverse learners and their learning needs by providing student direction. Students
context in the have the option of developing a Glogster poster, discussing with their peers, writing
interpretation key points, or developing another resource with the teachers’ approval.
of sources. Class discussion: students will discuss how the historical context in the
MH11-9, MH11-7 interpretation of sources contests the past.
Learning log: students write in their logs about what they learnt this week.
Term 1  The role of Online discussion board (Inquiry question): What is the role of sources and  Online
Week 4 sources and evidence in the evaluation of different theories about the past? Students will discussion
Lesson 1 evidence in brainstorm their ideas. board
the evaluation Slideful: students will view a presentation on the role of sources and evidence in  Electronic
of different the evaluation of different theories about the past. devices
theories about Film study:  Slideful
the past. Students will watch a few scenes from the films ‘Tora! Tora! Tora!’ and ‘Pearl  Computer
MH11-6 Harbour’. Film study worksheet: students will respond to the questions on the  Smartboard
MH11-7 worksheet, which is based on how the films represent different interpretations and Films: ‘Tora Tora, Tora!’
MH11-9 theories pearl harbor. and ‘Pearl Harbour’
Term 1  The role of Flipped classroom.  Electronic
Week 4 sources and Group task scaffold resource (Formal formative assessment): devices
Lesson 2 evidence in Students will work in groups of four to answer the historical questions provided.  Group task
Students will answer the questions by investigating the role of sources and scaffold
the evaluation
 of different evidence in the evaluation of different theories about the past; and how this resource
theories about present different interpretations and representations about the Pearl Harbor worksheet
the past. attack. Students will then have an option on how to present their task. The teacher
will scaffold the task by going through the scaffolding worksheet, websites, sources
MH11-6 and forms of evidence provided. Differentiation: the teacher will group students
MH11-7 together who need additional learning support, or group students together who
MH11-9 have a preferred learning style.

Students: students will research information based on the sources and forms of
evidence provided. Students will then analyse the role of the sources and evidence
in the evaluation of presenting different theories about the past.
Term 1  The role of Flipped classroom.  Electronic
Week 4 sources and Group task scaffold resource devices
Lesson 3 evidence in Students: Students will continue to analyse the role of sources and forms of  Group task
evidence in the evaluation of different theories, and present how this conveys scaffold
the evaluation
different interpretations and representations about the Pearl Harbor attack. resource
of different Student will then work on creating their resource to present their task to the class. worksheet
theories about Differentiation: the teacher will provide extra assistance and scaffolding to groups
the past. of students who need additional support with their learning.

MH11-6, MH11-7 Homework: students will also work on completing their group task at home.
MH11-9
Term 1  The role of Flipped classroom.  Electronic
Week 4 sources and Group task due: each group will present their presentation to the class. devices
Lesson 4 evidence in Class discussion: students will discuss the role of sources and evidence in the  Computer
the evaluation
evaluation of different theories; and how the theories present different  Smartboard
interpretations and representations about the past.
of different
theories about Journal entry (reflection activity): students will write a journal entry on what
the past. contestability of the past means, and the problems relating to the contestability of
the past. Students will refer to their knowledge from the topic Pearl Harbor- a
MH11-6, MH11-7 surprise attack to help them write their entry.
MH11-9
Assessment Details
Week 1 Informal formative
assessments: Collaborative discussion
and Think, pair, share activity.
Week 2 Informal formative
assessments: short writing task, think
pair share activity and collaborative
discussion.
Week 3 Informal formative
assessments: writing task, Historical
context activity worksheet and a
persuasive essay.
Week 4 Formal formative assessment:
Group investigation/ presentation task,
class discussion.
Evaluation of the Learning and Teaching
 The teacher will evaluate the
effectiveness of teaching
strategies, activities and what
students have learnt by reading
students learning logs.
 Students will complete a survey
based on their experience during
the unit, what they have learnt
Outcomes
MH11-6: analyses and interprets different types of sources for evidence to support an historical account or
argument.
MH11-7: discusses and evaluates differing interpretations and representations of the past.
MH11-9: communicates historical understanding, using historical knowledge, concepts and terms, in
appropriate and well-structured forms.
MH11-10: discusses contemporary methods and issues involved in the investigation of modern history.
MH11-6: analyses and interprets different types of sources for evidence to support an historical account or
argument.
MH11-9: communicates historical understanding, using historical knowledge, concepts and terms, in
appropriate and well-structured forms.
MH11-6: analyses and interprets different types of sources for evidence to support an historical account or
argument.
MH11-7: discusses and evaluates differing interpretations and representations of the past.
MH11-9: communicates historical understanding, using historical knowledge, concepts and terms, in
appropriate and well-structured forms.
MH11-6: analyses and interprets different types of sources for evidence to support an historical account or
argument.
MH11-7: discusses and evaluates differing interpretations and representations of the past.
MH11-9: communicates historical understanding, using historical knowledge, concepts and terms, in
appropriate and well-structured forms.
 and evaluate the teacher’s
strategies and practice.
 The teacher will keep a personal
diary to reflect on each lesson
and determine how coherent
and stimulating the lessons were
for the students. The teacher
will also reflect on how teaching
practices could be improved.
Resources
Digital resource, Prezi Presentation in week 1, lesson 1.

Access the Prezi presentation by copying and pasting the link below.

http://prezi.com/sfqbpsbbcxxu/?utm_campaign=share&utm_medium=copy&rc=ex0share
Digital resource source based task: PowerPoint in week 1, lesson 2.
Group task scaffold resource

Week 4: the role of sources and evidence in the evaluation of different theories about the
past.

Group task: You are required to work in groups of four to respond to the questions
provided. You will answer the questions by researching, analysing, evaluating the sources,
evidence and theories’ and providing a historical argument.

Inquiry questions:

1. What is the role of sources and evidence in the evaluation of different theories about
Pearl Harbor? How does this present different interpretations and representations
of the past?
2. How do the different interpretations and representations of Pearl Harbor illustrate
‘the contestability of the past’?

Instructions:

1. Form into groups of four and plan your group task.

2. Log onto to your electronic devices to access the internet and view the websites
provided by the teacher.
3. Choose the sources and evidence that you are going to investigate for the evaluation
of different theories about the past.
4. Analyse and evaluate the role of the sources and how they present different theories
about the past.
5. Construct your historical argument by responding to the questions.
6. Create your resource to present your work to the class. You can present your task
through any format (with the teachers approval), such as a PowerPoint, video,
historical narrative or a Glogster poster.

Examples of sources and evidence in the evaluation of different theories about the past:
(You can use the following examples or conduct your own research).

1. Pearl Harbor and the shaping of the American Identity. Sources for this topic include
President Roosevelt’s speech, as well as a US postage stamp commemorating the
event of Pearl Harbor.
https://www.archives.gov/publications/prologue/2001/winter/crafting-day-of-
infamy-speech.html
https://www.mysticstamp.com/Products/United-States/2559i/USA/
2. Why the attack on Pearl Harbor was so successful in the short term. Sources for this
topic include American and Japanese perspectives.
http://www.richmond.com/opinion/their-opinion/guest-columnists/pearl-harbor-a-
short-term-success-story/article_32e5599d-0a32-5a7d-9a61-bfe3c4266f7c.html
http://nationalinterest.org/feature/why-japan-failed-pearl-harbor-18638

3. Pearl Harbor Memorial. Refer to textbook ‘Key features of Modern History 1 Year 11:
Chapter 2 The Contestability of the Past: Pearl Harbor’, p. 28-29 for sources and
evidence.
 Evaluation

This evaluation will discuss the intent of the stage 6 Modern History Syllabus, and

how I have developed the unit of work on ‘Investigating Modern History, The Contestability

of the Past’ to align with my own professional beliefs, and to engage, support and meet the

learning needs of adolescent senior students. This evaluation will further present how I have

effectively used in my unit of work the pedagogical approach of inquiry-based learning to

ensure students develop deep knowledge and understanding. The organisation of tasks in

the unit of work follows Bloom’s Revised Taxonomy (2001), in order to ensure students

develop higher order levels of knowledge and thinking. Differentiation is provided for

diverse learners in the program through Gardner’s Multiple Intelligences (1943) framework,

student direction, as well as developing tasks that align with students learning needs.

The intention of the stage 6 Modern History syllabus is to equip students with the

understanding of knowledge and skills to help them examine the world around them. The

syllabus enables students to explore historical problems, pose questions and to “consider

problems of evidence, causation and historical agency as a part of a historical inquiry

process” (NESA, 2017, p. 9). This develops students’ skills and ability to analyse, evaluate,

synthesise and develop their own evidence based arguments. I have significantly

incorporated this into my unit of work by utilizing the pedagogical approach of inquiry-

based learning to ensure I engage, support and meet the learning needs of senior students.

Inquiry -based learning is a form of active learning and requires the teacher to

provide a learner-centred approach in the classroom. It requires students in history to work

with “inquiry questions, interrogate historical sources” and to “communicate the results of
their investigation” in way that develops and demonstrates historical understanding (Kiem,

2012, p. 29). This is evident throughout my unit of work for each content point and week.

For example, in week four students conduct a historical investigation in a flipped classroom

approach by answering the inquiry questions provided by the teacher. Students answer the

questions by researching, analysing and synthesising the role of sources and evidence in the

evaluation of different theories about the past. Justice, Rice, Roy, Hudspith and Jenkins

(2009) note the impact of this approach, as they propose that active engagement with

content in an inquiry-based learning environment “putatively results in deeper

understanding” (p. 843).

In addition, the group scaffold worksheet resource provided for this task in week

four enhances inquiry-based learning, as it provides clear instructions and scaffolding to

ensure students are effectively learning. Gregory (2002) highlights the significance of this, as

he states that it is imperative in the classroom community of inquiry that the teacher

“scaffolds the student’s active intelligence in making and testing hypotheses” (p. 400).

Furthermore, I have incorporated collaborative learning throughout my unit of work

to enhance inquiry-based learning and to engage, support and meet the learning needs of

senior students. Laal and Ghodsi (2012) present the benefits of collaborative learning for

adolescents, as they illustrate that it promotes critical thinking skills, increases the

improvement of classroom results and “models appropriate student problem solving

techniques” (p. 487). This is evident in my program in each week. For example, in week one

students’ work in groups of four to investigate how historians test hypotheses about the

past through analysing sources and responding to questions. The digital PowerPoint

resource provided for this task is significant as it supports collaborative and inquiry-based
learning; by providing different historical texts, challenging hypotheses and questions for

students to investigate.

Moreover, I incorporated ICT throughout my unit of work to enhance inquiry-based

learning and to support, engage and meet the needs of senior students. The reason for this

is because current research has indicated that ICT assists in transforming an environment

into a learner centred one where students are actively involved in their learning (Fu, 2013).

Research has also indicated that ICT offers creative solutions for inquiry-based learning and

helps students focus on higher-level concepts and skills (Fu, 2013). This is apparent in my

program as students work with ICT each week. For example, the digital Prezi resource for

week one provides videos, and a research task for the students to investigate the content

and respond to the question provided.

Furthermore, I have provided differentiation in each week of my unit of work to

engage, support and meet the diverse learning needs of senior students. I differentiated the

learning through Gardner’s Multiple Intelligences theory (1943), student direction, as well as

developing tasks that align with students learning needs. I applied this by creating activities

that draws on students’ strengths and preferred learning styles, as well as providing

students with options in their learning. For example, in week two I differentiated the

persuasive essay activity by providing students with other options that draw on different

learning strengths. This included students creating a Glogster poster, discussing with their

peers, writing key points, or developing another resource with the teachers’ approval.

Patall, Cooper and Wynn (2010) highlight the significance of this approach, as they propose

that when students are offered choices it increases their “interest, engagement and

learning”, as students spend more time and effort on the task (p. 896). Csikzentmiyhalyi and
Csikzentmiyhalyi (as cited in Noble, 2004) further illustrate the effectiveness of this

approach, as they point out that students “experience a state of flow” when a task is

challenging and matches their learning strengths (p. 207).

In conclusion, it is evident that I have discussed the intent of the stage 6 Modern

History Syllabus, and how I have developed my unit of work. I have effectively utilized the

pedagogical approach of inquiry-based leaning throughout my unit of work to engage,

support and meet the diverse learning needs of senior students. It is also apparent that I

utilized collaborative learning and ICT to enhance inquiry-based learning and to ensure

students develop deep knowledge and understanding. In addition, I effectively provided

differentiation in the unit of work by implementing various techniques and strategies, in

order to meet the diverse learning needs of senior students.

 References

Blooms Taxonomy. (2017). Centre for Teaching Vanderbilt University. Retrieved from

https://cft.vanderbilt.edu/guides-sub-pages/blooms-taxonomy/

Fu, J. S. (2013). ICT in education: A critical literature review and its implications.

International Journal of Education and Development using Information and

Communication Technology, 9(1), 112-125. Retrieved from

https://search.proquest.com/docview/1353086729?accountid=36155

Gregory, M. (2002). CONSTRUCTIVISM, STANDARDS, AND THE CLASSROOM COMMUNITY OF

INQUITY. Educational Theory, 52(4), 397-408. Retrieved from

http://web.b.ebscohost.com/ehost/pdfviewer/pdfviewer?vid=1&sid=ee143d99-

ecb7-4e29-90f1-adc2e689240a%40sessionmgr102

Justice, C., Rice, J., Roy, D., Hudspith, B., & Jenkins, H. (2009). Inquiry-based learning in

higher education: Administrators' perspectives on integrating inquiry pedagogy into

the curriculum. Higher Education, 58(6), 841. Retrieved from

http://www.jstor.org/stable/pdf/25622157.pdf?refreqid=excelsior

%3Ab41bc98d8157692dfdfdce76e9bc4294

Kiem, Paul. (2012). Have we lost the plot? Narrative, inquiry, good and evil in history

pedagogy. Agora, 47(4), 28-32. Retrieved from

http://web.b.ebscohost.com/ehost/pdfviewer/pdfviewer?vid=1&sid=93103b88-

b2fb-40e3-a297-c11f724388ac%40sessionmgr102
Laal, M., Ghodsi, M.S. (2012). Benefits of collaborative learning. Procedia-Social and

Behavioral Sciences, 31, 486-490. Retrieved from https://ac.els-

cdn.com/S1877042811030205/1-s2.0-S1877042811030205-main.pdf?

_tid=1c1d1b2d-9d6b-417c-ab1b-

0acecec18276&acdnat=1522745992_c20a9b4c159bb86ebf11089f547bfb16

Multiple Intelligences Theory (Gardner). (2014). Learning Theories. Retrieved from

https://www.learning-theories.com/gardners-multiple-intelligences-theory.html

New South Wales Education Standards Authority. (2017). NSW Syllabus Modern History

Stage 6. NSW Government. Retrieved from

https://syllabus.nesa.nsw.edu.au/assets/modern_history/modern-history-stage-6-

syllabus-2017.pdf

Noble, T. (2004). Integrating the revised Bloom's taxonomy with multiple intelligences: A

planning tool for curriculum differentiation. Teachers College Record, 106(1), 193-

211. Retrieved from

https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/88c9/bfffdebde3be85f0f67b71fe8c5f70a5b6e2.pdf

Patall, A.E., Cooper, H., Wynn, S. R. (2010). The Effectiveness and Relative Importance of

Choice in the Classroom. Journal of Educational Psychology, 102(4), 896-915. doi:

10.1037/a0019545