The Morrow River Dam Removal Recommendation
A seventh-grade team teaches 60 students in five 90-minute blocks for an integrated humanities unit on the fictional Morrow River dam. The town council is considering removal. Students have four sources: an 1908 newspaper article celebrating the mill dam’s opening and predicting “endless power”; a 2023 engineering memo estimating removal at $8.2 million, noting that the dam supplies 2% of town electricity and that sediment may contain heavy metals; a tribal historical statement describing the river as a migration corridor and noting burial sites nearby; and a housing authority memo reporting that 120 low-income units sit in the downstream floodplain and that the dam’s emergency spillway is outdated. One student is a newcomer multilingual learner with limited English literacy. The team wants a performance task that integrates literature, history, geography, and civics without turning into a debate tournament.
1. Write an essential question and explain why it integrates the four humanities domains rather than merely combining topics.
Read the worked answer
Essential question: ‘Who should decide what a river is for, and how should competing uses-power, safety, culture, and cost-be weighed when the evidence is incomplete?’ This integrates literature and language because students must read and produce arguments with evidence, audience, and tone; history because the 1908 article reveals how earlier generations framed the dam as progress and what that framing omitted; geography because dam removal involves watershed processes, sediment, flood risk, and unequal exposure downstream; and civics/economics because the council must weigh public goods, cost, tribal sovereignty, and procedural fairness. The question is not ‘Should the dam be removed?’ because that invites a yes/no debate. It asks students to examine decision-making under uncertainty and to justify a recommendation with criteria. The newcomer can participate through a structured evidence sort and a bilingual glossary of core terms, then contribute to a group product that requires reasoning, not just oral debate.
2. Sequence the four sources across the five blocks so students confront tension rather than collect confirming evidence. What is the purpose of each move?
Read the worked answer
Block 1 should begin with the 1908 article and the question ‘What did the dam promise, and who was not quoted?’ This establishes historical framing and the idea that progress narratives have omissions. Block 2 should pair the engineering memo with the housing memo: students separate known facts from uncertainties and map who bears risk. The 2% electricity figure, the $8.2 million cost, the sediment warning, and the outdated spillway create real tradeoffs. Block 3 should center the tribal statement, not as a decorative ‘other perspective’ but as a sovereignty and knowledge claim that may reframe the river’s purpose. Students should identify what the other sources leave out. Block 4 should require a structured deliberation with roles and a decision criteria sheet: safety, cost, cultural obligation, energy, and process legitimacy. Block 5 should be a written recommendation to the council that acknowledges one strongest opposing consideration. This sequence prevents students from choosing a side first and then mining sources for support.
3. Design the performance task and one safeguard against presentism. How will the task assess integrated understanding?
Read the worked answer
Performance task: each group submits a 400–600-word council memo recommending removal, retention, or a phased alternative, plus an individual evidence paragraph. The memo must use at least one historical source, one geographic or engineering source, one civic or economic consideration, and the tribal statement; it must name an uncertainty and explain how the recommendation handles it. The individual paragraph asks students to explain how one source’s purpose shapes its usefulness. To guard against presentism, students must write a short ‘then and now’ note: how did the 1908 writer understand the river’s value, and what conditions have changed? They should not simply call the 1908 writer foolish; they should identify the assumptions that made the dam seem beneficial at the time. This assesses integration because students must connect historical framing, geographic risk, civic process, and evidence-based writing in one product rather than answer separate recall questions.