UNIVERSITÀ CA’ FOSCARI DI VENEZIA

CORSO DI PERFEZIONAMENTO IN DIDATTICA DELLE LINGUE MODERNE

INDIRIZZO: APPRENDIMENTO IN LS (CLIL)

TTTTESINAESINAESINAESINA

Opposing views of VietNam War

Tutor: GRAZIANO SERRAGGIOTTO

Docente: DONATELLA ARZEDI

2

INDICE

1. INTRODUZIONE ………………………………….……….………..… pag. 3

1.1 Articolazione e struttura del modulo …………...….…..……....…. pag. 3

1.2 Scheda tecnica del progetto………………………………………… pag. 4

2. STUDENT’S WORKBOOK ……………….…………..…..…....…….. pag. 6

HANDOUT 1…………………………………………………………….. pag. 14

HANDOUT 2…………………………………………………………….. pag. 15

HANDOUT 3…………………………………………………………….. pag. 17

HANDOUT 4…………………………………………………………….. pag. 22

3. TEACHER’S BOOK …………….……………………...……...…....... pag. 25

3.1 Il Modulo ……………………...……………………...……...…....... pag. 25

3.2 Unità 1 …………………… ……………………………………….. pag. 29

3.3 Unità 2 …………………… ……………………………………….. pag. 31

3.4 Unità 3 …………………… ……………………………………….. pag. 34

4. CONCLUSIONI………………………………………………………… pag. 35

5. SITOGRAFIA …………………………..…………………..……..……. pag. 36

6. MATERIALI ALLEGATI …………………………………………….. pag. 37

3

1. INTRODUZIONE I Nuovi Programmi Ministeriali per la scuola Secondaria di Secondo grado prevedono al comma 2 dell’articolo 6 (Liceo Linguistico), tra le altre novità, “dal primo anno del secondo biennio … l’insegnamento in lingua straniera di una disciplina non linguistica …. Tenuto conto delle richieste degli studenti e delle famiglie”. L’articolo 10 (Orario annuale e attività educative e didattiche) comma 5, inoltre, recita: “…nel quinto anno è previsto l’insegnamento, in lingua straniera, di una disciplina non linguistica (CLIL) compresa nell’area delle attività e degli insegnamenti obbligatori per tutti gi studenti o nell’area degli insegnamenti attivabili dalle istituzioni scolastiche nei limiti del contingente di organico ad esse annualmente assegnato.”1 L’insegnamento di una disciplina non linguistica attraverso una lingua straniera veicolare sta quindi finalmente entrando nello scenario della scuola italiana e della istruzione secondaria superiore in particolare: il nuovo ordinamento della secondaria di secondo grado entrerà infatti a regime con le classi prime e seconde nell’ano scolastico 2010/2011. Questo lavoro nasce per soddisfare e cogliere due esigenze e due opportunità: la prima è quella di cogliere l’occasione di questa tesina conclusiva per progettare un modulo che vedrà la sua realizzazione del corso dell’ anno scolastico 2009-2010 e che possa permettere di sperimentare la realizzabilità di percorsi/moduli CLIL destinati a studenti delle quinte classi, perfezionando e mettendo a punto l’esperienza nel corso degli anni successivi. La seconda è legata ad una delibera della regione in cui vivo e lavoro, la Regione Autonoma della Sardegna che, all’interno di un Piano molto ampio relativo alla diffusione e potenziamento della lingua inglese (Sardegna Speaks English) ha infatti previsto la realizzazione (e relativo finanziamento) di moduli CLIL in ogni ordine di scuola. Vi è però anche una terza motivazione, ovvero trovare risposta alla domanda: “E’ possibile insegnare storia in L2 nello stesso modo in cui si insegna nella L1?” Per questa sperimentazione si è individuato un contenuto di storia del ‘900. La scelta ha diverse motivazioni: innanzitutto la disponibilità del collega di storia a collaborare; l’argomento prescelto, inoltre, offre numerosissimi materiali autentici on-line che possono esser proficuamente utilizzati; riteniamo, infine, che sia un argomento di stretta attualità, che possa suscitare l’interesse degli studenti e possa costituire un interessante punto di partenza per eventuali ulteriori approfondimenti. 1.1 Articolazione e struttura del modulo Il modulo proposto è strutturato in 11 Unità, le quali, a loro volta, sono organizzate in attività per gruppi di lavoro coordinati, che lavoreranno sempre in aula multimediale/laboratorio di informatica, con ricerca sul web e su materiali audio/video. Sono previste, anche se in numero limitato, delle attività individuali. Il lavoro di ricerca e produzione sarà coordinato mediante un "blog di lavoro". Le prime 3 Unità sono dedicate alla messa a fuoco del topic, mentre nel corso delle unità successive gli studenti lavoreranno alla ricerca e sistemazione/elaborazione dei materiali che verranno utilizzati per la realizzazione del prodotto finale. Tutte le attività sono infatti finalizzata alla realizzazione di una reading di documenti storici, letterari e musicali accompagnato da musica, posters, slides-show e proiezioni video, sul tema della guerra del Vietnam. Il prodotto finale degli studenti sarà quindi una performance di 1h 30' circa che verrà rappresentata nell’aula magna dell’Istituto.

1 Il comma 6 dello stesso articolo, inoltre, precisa “l’insegnamento di cui al comma 5 è affidato a docenti abilitati in possesso di titolo di specializzazione ovvero a docenti in possesso di titolo di laurea comunitario attestante la competenza disciplinare e che dimostrino la necessaria competenza linguistica in base a criteri definiti da apposito decreto emanato dal Ministero dell’Istruzione, Università e Ricerca”. Non è questa la sede per fare valutazioni sulla fattibilità dell’attuazione del comma 6, su quanto possa essere realistico ed opportuno, poiché l’insegnamento in L2 di una DNL sembra escludere, a quanto pare, gli insegnanti di L2. Si può tuttavia avanzare qualche dubbio su quanto sia realistica la cosa e cominciare a riflettere su “Che fare?”.

4

Per poter rispettare le consegne e non eccedere il max previsto di 40 pagine, il presente lavoro sviluppa interamente prime 3 unità e si limita a predispone i contenuti e le attività delle Unità successive.

1.2 SCHEDA TECNICA Progetto CLIL – Opposing views of VietNam War

Attività/tema Modulo di storia – Viet Nam War Area Curricolare Finalità Conoscere ed approfondire aspetti diversi della Guerra del Vietnam

attraverso documenti autentici in L2. Inglese veicolare Obiettivi Storia: Relativamente all’evento storico preso in considerazione:

ricostruire la complessità delle reazioni fra soggetti e realtà sociali attraverso varietà di fonti e materiali; riconoscere come “interpretazioni” la ricostruzione degli eventi; distinguere nel fenomeno storico – oltre alla portata geografica e temporale – gli aspetti economici, culturali ed etico-religiosi ad esso sottesi Inglese: conoscenza ed uso appropriato della terminologia specifica, interazione orale, comprensione e produzione di testi scritti e/o orali comprendere e leggere espressivamente testi autentici quali spezzoni di tg, articoli tratti da quotidiani e periodici, canzoni, testi poetici, documenti storici (es. dispacci, telegrammi, testimonianze, interviste); Trasversali: migliorare e perfezionare competenze TIC quali browsing, uso della posta elettronica, download, uso di un word processor e di un software per presentazioni. Lavorare in gruppo su un task assegnato sulla base delle proprio competenze , conoscenze e stile di apprendimento

Discipline e Figure coinvolte

Docente lingue: D. Arzedi Docente storia: P. Meloni

Eventuali collab. Tecnico di laboratorio Destinatari Alunni 5^A ped., anno scolastico 2009-2010 Prerequisiti L2: competenze produttive e ricettive pari al livello B1 del QCRE

Storia: saper leggere ed interpretare criticamente materiali storici di diversa natura Trasversali: competenze TIC (browsing, uso della posta elettronica, download, uso di un word processor e di un software per presentazioni) e da parte di almeno alcuni alunni di competenze più specifiche (apertura di un blog su piattaforme come Wordpress o Blogspot, trattamento di file audio e video).

Periodo/orario & tempi

Secondo quadrimestre a.s. 2009- 2010 20 ore da realizzarsi in compresenza in orario curricolare (10 ore) ed extracurricolare (10 ore)

Materiali Schede o file predisposti dagli insegnanti Materiali reperiti in siti web: - Video - Foto/immagini - testi di canzoni - testi audio e relative trascrizioni

Spazi Laboratorio di informatica dotato di lavagna multimediale Aula magna

Metodologia - Lezione frontale partecipata con utilizzo di varie tecniche

Commento [P1]:

5

(brainstorming, domande guidate, sintesi di testi, visione e commento di video clip, discussione guidata) - Lavori di coppia e di gruppo - Lavoro individuale - Ricerca sul web - realizzazione di un task finale (Reading)

Valutazione Le attività delle prime due unità non prevedono una valutazione. Nelle unità successive verranno individuate alcuni tasks che verranno valutati nei contenuti specifici di L2 e di disciplina. È prevista una valutazione finale che terrà conto, oltre all’acquisizione di aspetti linguistici (conoscenza ed uso appropriato della terminologia specifica, interazione orale,comprensione e produzione di testi scritti e/o orali) e contenuti di storia (relativamente alla Guerra del Vietnam: ricostruire la complessità delle reazioni fra soggetti e realtà sociali attraverso varietà di fonti e materiali, riconoscere come “interpretazioni” la ricostruzione degli eventi, distinguere nel fenomeno storico gli aspetti economici, culturali ed etico-religiosi ad esso sottesi), del grado di partecipazione e di interesse dimostrati nei lavori di gruppo e nelle discussioni di classe e dell’apporto individuale al task finale. Al termine del percorso verrà inoltre somministrato agli studenti un questionario di auto-valutazione.

Monitoraggio Verrà somministrato un questionario in ingresso sulla motivazione e le aspettative ed uno in uscita sul grado di soddisfazione rispetto al percorso realizzato. In concomitanza con la rappresentazione del task conclusivo verrà inoltre somministrato ai componenti del consiglio di classe ed ai genitori un questionario appositamente predisposto per valutare l’impatto del Modulo CLIL su queste componenti.

6

STUDENT’S WORKBOOKSTUDENT’S WORKBOOKSTUDENT’S WORKBOOKSTUDENT’S WORKBOOK

We are going to investigate a specific aspect of XXth Century History that is part of your History

curriculum. To do this, we are going to use real authentic material. Most of it is in English. This

will enable you to use all the English you know and learn more. Besides, you will learn about

contemporary history through different kinds of media (videos, written texts, aural texts).

This will be a very committing experience, since you will be asked to venture and try on your own.

Don’t be afraid and enjoy the experience!

Your teachers

UNIT 1 This unit will introduce us to the topic of our Module and to the methodology we are going to

explore.

Part A: Introduction to the CLIL module The Viet Nam War Have you ever heard about CLIL? What do you think CLIL means? Part B: Brainstorming Task 1.b.1/2 (20 min.) Watch the video clip taken from Apocalypse Now by F. Ford Coppola. Take notes about what you see and answer the questions. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BgJ-vzsj8rs Who are the characters involved

in the scene? Describe them.

What kind of documents is

Willard reading? Describe them.

What kind of music is Mr. Clean

listening to?

When and where does the scene

take place?

Why is the patrol boat journeying

up the river?

Who are the people on the

shoreline, and what are they

doing? Describe them

Other notes

7

In groups of 4 compare your notes and answers and prepare an oral summary of what you have seen. Appoint a spokesperson and a secretary. The spokesperson will be in charge to present to the class your oral summary, while the secretary will write down the key points on the blackboard. (NB=Remember you will be asked to do it for every task of this kind. We suggest to take turns!)

Task 1.b.3 (10 min.) Now read the following summary of the clip taken from http://www.filmsondisc.com/DVDpages/apocalypse_now.htm:

The absolute absurdity of Coppola's war is best highlighted in three or four major

scenes. A patrol boat taking Willard into the proverbial "heart of darkness" is

journeying deep into the heart of Vietnam. The music pounds out "I can't get no

satisfaction," from the Rolling Stone song. Willard watches young Mr. Clean

(Lawrence Fishburne, only 14 at the time.) dancing to the music and the vision of

absurdity screams out, only to be overpowered moments later by the image of Lance,

the surfer, water-skiing behind the boat, jovially waiving to the natives on the

shoreline. As the boat speeds through the water, Lance in tow, two working

Vietnamese in a boat are overturned by the wake of the American boat, and so it is

that Coppola finds a perfect visual metaphor for the plight of the Vietnamese, fallen

in the wake of the insensitive American onslaught.

Again in groups of 4, compare it with your own: what have they got in common? How are they different? Is there anything that is not clear to you? What do you think “heart of darkness” refers to? Task 1.b.4 (5 min.) If you don’t remember very well where Viet Nam is, have a look at this site: http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/amex/vietnam/maps/index.html http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/amex/vietnam/maps/map_pop_intro.html Task 1.b.5 (15 min.)

Listen to the audio clip by Roy C., Open letter to the President ,1971 (3’2’’). You can download it from www.hipcast.com (file .mp3). Do not take notes.

After the listening, in pairs, listen again to it using your headphones and write down the text using the word processor. In group, compare the result of your transcriptions and decide for a final version.

Two students will upload your final transcription of the song on the database of the website Antiwar

Songs («a collection of pacifist and antimilitarist songs from all over the world and of any time, based on free contributions by readers and collaborators»).

8

UNIT 2 With this unit we will start having a closer look to the topic of our Module, VietNam War and to the

different attitudes and reactions it produced in the USA.

But first let see how much specific language you know!

Part C: New Vocabulary

Task 2.c.1 (15 min.) Can you explain the meaning of the following words and chunk of words? War cold war WWII

military campaign troop(s) draft cease-fire

drive casualty veterans

riots issue puppet regime

army headquarters buffer zone

domination rule role

commitment involvement evil menace

tenure (personal) gain

term

policy

withdraw flee overthrow bent on (stopping)

halt

take over (v) takeover (n)

Discuss the meaning of each word with your group and then decide for a definition. Then collect and save them. Finally, compare them with the ones from the dictionary.

Part D: Discussion

Task 2.d.1 (10 / 15min)

In groups: can you answer these questions?

• Who fought against whom in the Vietnam War? • Why did the United States become involved in Vietnam, and why did it increase its

involvement into the 1970s? • What specific events marked the beginning of the United States’ active military campaign

against North Vietnam? (e.g., the Gulf of Tonkin Resolution) • What was the initial public sentiment in the United States regarding U.S. involvement in

Vietnam?

9

Discuss with your group the question and think about possible answers. Get ready to express your personal point of view and knowledge. To take part in the discussion can be useful to have a look at Handout12 which contains a list of useful sentences.

Part E: Lecture Task 2.E.1 (10 / 15min) Before listening: match the name to the picture and to the short biography

VietNam War Antagonists

North Vietnam Ho Chi Minh Vo Nguyen Giap

US - South Vietnam Lyndon B Johnson Richard M Nixon Nguyen Van Thieu William Westmoreland

(19 May 1890 – 2 September 1969) a Vietnamese Communist revolutionary and statesman who was prime minister (1946–1955) and president (1945–1969) of the Democratic Republic of Vietnam (North Vietnam).

(born August 25, 1911) a retired Vietnamese officer in the Vietnam People's Army and a politician. He was a principal commander in two wars: First Indochina War (1946-1954) and Vietnam War (1960-1975).

(August 27, 1908 – January 22, 1973) served as the 36th President of the United States from 1963 to 1969 after his service as the Vice President of the United States from 1961 to 1963. He succeeded to the presidency following the assassination of President John F. Kennedy, completed Kennedy's term and was elected President in his own right, winning by a large margin in the 1964 Presidential election.

(April 5, 1923 – September 29, 2001) was a general and served as president of South Vietnam (1967-75).

(March 26, 1914 – July 18, 2005) was an American General who commanded American military operations in the Vietnam War at its peak from 1964 to 1968.

2 See Handout 1, t the end of this Student’s workbook

10

11

Task 2.E.1 (10 / 15min) Now listen to the teacher’s lecture on VietNam War. If you want you can take notes. To revise any aspect of it later, you will find the complete text of the lecture at the end of this Student’s book

3. Part F: Browsing the Internet and Discussion Task 2.F.1 (15/20 min)

In groups of 4 describe the things you know (or believe you know) about the ways in which the American public reacted to the Vietnam War in the late 1960s and early 1970s. What you’re your impressions of this era? What images have you seen of the activities that went on within the United States during this time? A few links can help you in focusing on the task.

Text: http://www.wilsoncenter.org/coldwarfiles/index.cfm?fuseaction=activities.details&thisunit=3&activityid=28 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opposition_to_the_US_involvement_in_the_Vietnam_War

Photos: www.vietnampix.com/faces.htm www.vietnampix.com/hippie.htm www.vietnampix.com/fire.htm www.vietnampix.com/life.htm

Music: www.jwsrockgarden.com/jw02vvaw.htm Videos: www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ev2dEqrN4i0

www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nl58QbpVLHw www.youtube.com/watch?v=lTJgMmHZNYQ www.youtube.com/watch?v=TmZrFDvnok0

Images/Texts/Photoes/Videos/… Personal impressions

Share your impressions and images (or any other material you have found out and think can be interesting for your discussion). Also if this is a group activity, try to give your own contribution to the discussion!!!

Part G. Oral interaction

Task 2.G.1 (10/15min)

While you have probably seen many media images of antiwar protests, remember that not everyone

was opposed to the war. Do you know of any present-day leaders who as college students during

the 1960s did not participate in such demonstrations? It’s important to realize that, while antiwar

sentiments were strong, some young people agreed with the policies of the United States

government or felt ambivalent about the war and its protestors.

3 See Handout 2, at the end of this Student’s book

12

Part H. Browsing the Internet and Reading Task 2.H.1 (10/15min in class, to be completed at home)

To have got an idea got of the reasons that Americans in the 1960s may have favoured or opposed the Vietnam War, go to the following Web sites to read about some.

• Nixon’s Address to the Nation on the War in Vietnam—“The Silent Majority” Speech, November 3, 1969:President Nixon's Address to the Nation on the War in Vietnam

• Vietnam War Veteran John Kerry’s Testimony Before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, April 22, 1971:Statement of John Kerry

At home, you will read the printed copy of one of the two documents (the teacher will tell you which one). Read it carefully and answer the questions on your activity sheet. Don’t forget to take notes of any aspect you would like to discuss in class! Then prepare a summary of the text (about 100 words)

(NB= Since you will read just one of the two documents, you’ll be able to answer just to some of the questions!)

13

UNIT 3

The aim of this unit is to compare different attitudes to VietNam War in the USA. Besides, we are

going to define how we are going on with our work and why. The aim is to organise a final show

about the main topic that will be the result of the cooperation and collaboration of everybody,

according to your individual interests and attitudes. From this unit on, some of the tasks will be

evaluated by the teachers. You’ll be informed about it at the right moment.

G. Discussion in small groups and oral report With your group compare your answers and your summary. Then be prepared to the class discussion, during which the “Opposing views oh Vietnam War” will be compared.

14

HANDOUT1

DiscussionDiscussionDiscussionDiscussion Discussion involves expressing your own ideas and opinions about a topic and comparing them with the ideas and opinions of other people. This can take the form of a conversation among a small group of students or, more formally, a debate among the whole class. The following table contains some common expressions that you can use when discussing a subject with other people. Asking for opinions What do you think about …? What’s your opinion of …? How do you feel about …?

Expressing opinions In my opinion … I think (that) … I don’t think (that) …

Agreeing I agree. Yes, so do I. / I think so too. No, neither do I.

Disagreeing I don’t agree. I don’t think so. I don’t think that’s true.

15

HANDOUT2

www.vietnampix.com/intro.htm

In the 1950's the United States began to send troops to Vietnam. During the following 25-years the ensuing war would create some of the strongest tensions in US history. Almost 3 million US men and women were sent thousands of miles to fight for what was a questionable cause. In total, it is estimated that over 2,5 million people on both sides were killed. For much of Vietnam's history it has been under foreign rule, primarily by the Chinese. In 1860, France began its domination of the area and had, by the late 19th century, implemented its colonization in a number of regions around the Gulf of Tonkin. During WWII, the Japanese government took control of much of the area and set up a puppet regime that was eventually forced out by the Vietnamese at the end of that war in 1945. After WWII and until 1955, France fought hard to regain their former territories in the region, but with a poorly organized army and little determination among the troops, their efforts soon collapsed. The French were finally defeated at Dien Bien Phu on the 8th of May 1954 by the communist general Vo Nguyen Giap. The French troops withdrew, leaving a buffer zone separating the North and South and set up elections in order to form a government in the South. The communist regime set up its headquarters in Hanoi under the leadership of Ho Chi Minh. Many North Vietnamese left the country and fled south where the self-proclaimed president, Ngo Dinh Diem had formed the Republic of Vietnam. Between 1955 and 1960, the North Vietnamese with the assistance of the southern communist Vietcong, tried to take over the government in South Vietnam, and in November 1963 President Diem was overthrown and executed. The following year, the North Vietnamese began a massive drive to conquer the whole country aided by China and Russia. Fearing a communist takeover of the entire region, the United States grew more and more wary of the progress of Ho Chi Minh and the Vietcong. Communism had become the evil menace in the United States and with expansion of Soviet rule into Eastern Europe, Korea and Cuba, the Americans were bent on stopping communism from spreading any further. With the cold war at its height, the US leaders were worried that an attack on North Vietnam by the US would create tensions with the Chinese and Russians that would, in turn, lead to a larger conflict and possibly WW III. This created a difficult situation for the US and would eventually lead to many internal conflicts, which ultimately prevented the US from forming a firm policy for the region. The US was also faced with a number of cultural differences between the two countries, and what was considered corrupt by the US government was considered legitimate by South Vietnamese standards. It was difficult for the US to portray South Vietnam as a hard working, hard fighting democracy; corruption was widespread among officials and the armed forces. The Army of the Republic of Vietnam (ARVN) was disorganized due to the low morale of it's leaders and their singular interest in personal gain. Therefore the US had a great deal of difficulty in holding the army together in South Vietnam and saw only one solution, that was to start taking care of things for themselves. By 1950 the US began sending their first troops, firstly in an advisory role, which slowly escalated into a full blown commitment. The large-scale involvement of the US came under the tenure of President Lyndon B. Johnson and his Gulf of Tonkin Resolution. Johnson had replaced John F. Kennedy after he was assassinated in Dallas, Texas 1963. As president, he was torn between the differing strategies the US had for Vietnam. The increasing involvement and the escalation of troop involvement meant there were more casualties and more problems at home. But Johnson, who was always concerned about his image, and as president, held the power to halt the war in Vietnam, could not face the thought of being regarded as the first president in US history to loose a war. The pressure around him grew so intense, that he was only left with one option and that was not to run for a second term. Basically, he handed the hot potato to Richard M. Nixon.

16

The top US commander in Vietnam was General William Westmoreland; he had to face an army full of young men placed in an environment that was totally alien to them. There was no clear front to the conflict and basically, the enemy could be hiding anywhere and everywhere. Life in the jungle was tortuous and there were no home comforts. Drugs and other stimulants filtered their way into the daily routine of many servicemen and morale quickly started to fall. For the first time, people in the US resisting the draft were given acceptance although still not by the majority of citizens. Riots and demonstrations against the war became the norm in the US, with numerous veterans taking part in the efforts to stop the war, strengthening the issue. Finally, the US government saw that it was in a no-win situation and began making plans to withdraw. After great efforts by the US to withdraw, and the establishment of a cease-fire on January 27th, 1973, American soldiers began leaving Vietnam for good. The North Vietnamese finally conquered South Vietnam in early 1975, totally ignoring the cease-fire and on July 2nd, 1976, North and South Vietnam were officially united as a single communist state. It had cost an estimated 2 million lives and the injury or disablement of many millions of others.

Antagonists

North Vietnam Ho Chi Minh Vo Nguyen Giap

US - South Vietnam Lyndon B Johnson Richard M Nixon Nguyen Van Thieu William Westmoreland

17

HANDOUT3

http://watergate.info/nixon/silent-majority-speech-1969.shtml

Nixon's Address to the Nation on the War in Vietnam - "The Silent Majority" Speech

November 3, 1969 Good evening, my fellow Americans: Tonight I want to talk to you on a subject of deep concern to all Americans and to many people in all parts of the world--the war in Vietnam. I believe that one of the reasons for the deep division about Vietnam is that many Americans have lost confidence in what their Government has told them about our policy. The American people cannot and should not be asked to support a policy which involves the overriding issues of war and peace unless they know the truth about that policy. Tonight, therefore, I would like to answer some of the questions that I know are on the minds of many of you listening to me. How and why did America get involved in Vietnam in the first place? How has this administration changed the policy of the previous administration? What has really happened in the negotiations in Paris and on the battlefront in Vietnam? What choices do we have if we are to end the war? What are the prospects for peace? Now, let me begin by describing the situation I found when I was inaugurated on January 20. --The war had been going on for 4 years. --31,000 Americans had been killed in action. --The training program for the South Vietnamese was behind schedule. --540,000 Americans were in Vietnam with no plans to reduce the number. --No progress had been made at the negotiations in Paris and the United States had not put forth a comprehensive peace proposal. --The war was causing deep division at home and criticism from many of our friends as well as our enemies abroad. In view of these circumstances there were some who urged that I end the war at once by ordering the immediate withdrawal of all American forces. From a political standpoint this would have been a popular and easy course to follow. After all, we became involved in the war while my predecessor was in office. I could blame the defeat which would be the result of my action on him and come out as the Peacemaker. Some put it to me quite bluntly: This was the only way to avoid allowing Johnson’s war to become Nixon's war. But I had a greater obligation than to think only of the years of my administration and of the next election. I had to think of the effect of my decision on the next generation and on the future of peace and freedom in America and in the world. Let us all understand that the question before us is not whether some Americans are for peace and some Americans are against peace. The question at issue is not whether Johnson's war becomes Nixon's war. The great question is: How can we win America's peace? Well, let us turn now to the fundamental issue. Why and how did the United States become involved in Vietnam in the first place? Fifteen years ago North Vietnam, with the logistical support of Communist China and the Soviet Union, launched a campaign to impose a Communist government on South Vietnam by instigating and supporting a revolution. In response to the request of the Government of South Vietnam, President Eisenhower sent economic aid and military equipment to assist the people of South Vietnam in their efforts to prevent a Communist takeover. Seven years ago, President Kennedy sent 16,000 military personnel to Vietnam as combat advisers. Four years ago, President Johnson sent American combat forces to South Vietnam. Now, many believe that President Johnson’s decision to send American combat forces to South Vietnam was wrong. And many others-I among them-have been strongly critical of the way the war has been conducted. But the question facing us today is: Now that we are in the war, what is the best way to end it?

18

In January I could only conclude that the precipitate withdrawal of American forces from Vietnam would be a disaster not only for South Vietnam but for the United States and for the cause of peace. For the South Vietnamese, our precipitate withdrawal would inevitably allow the Communists to repeat the massacres which followed their takeover in the North 15 years before. --They then murdered more than 50,000 people and hundreds of thousands more died in slave labor camps. --We saw a prelude of what would happen in South Vietnam when the Communists entered the city of Hue last year. During their brief rule there, there was a bloody reign of terror in which 3,000 civilians were clubbed, shot to death, and buried in mass graves. --With the sudden collapse of our support, these atrocities of Hue would become the nightmare of the entire nation-and particularly for the million and a half Catholic refugees who fled to South Vietnam when the Communists took over in the North. For the United States, this first defeat in our Nation's history would result in a collapse of confidence in American leadership, not only in Asia but throughout the world. Three American Presidents have recognized the great stakes involved in Vietnam and understood what had to be done. In 1963, President Kennedy, with his characteristic eloquence and clarity, said: ". . . we want to see a stable government there, carrying on a struggle to maintain its national independence. "We believe strongly in that. We are not going to withdraw from that effort. In my opinion, for us to withdraw from that effort would mean a collapse not only of South Viet-Nam, but Southeast Asia. So we are going to stay there." President Eisenhower and President Johnson expressed the same conclusion during their terms of office. For the future of peace, precipitate withdrawal would thus be a disaster of immense magnitude. --A nation cannot remain great if it betrays its allies and lets down its friends. --Our defeat and humiliation in South Vietnam without question would promote recklessness in the councils of those great powers who have not yet abandoned their goals of world conquest. --This would spark violence wherever our commitments help maintain the peace-in the Middle East, in Berlin, eventually even in the Western Hemisphere. Ultimately, this would cost more lives. It would not bring peace; it would bring more war. For these reasons, I rejected the recommendation that I should end the war by immediately withdrawing all of our forces. I chose instead to change American policy on both the negotiating front and battlefront. In order to end a war fought on many fronts, I initiated a pursuit for peace on many fronts. [………] --We have offered the complete withdrawal of all outside forces within 1 year. --We have proposed a cease-fire under international supervision. --We have offered free elections under international supervision with the Communists participating in the organization and conduct of the elections as an organized political force. And the Saigon Government has pledged to accept the result of the elections. We have not put forth our proposals on a take-it-or-leave-it basis. We have indicated that we are willing to discuss the proposals that have been put forth by the other side. We have declared that anything is negotiable except the right of the people of South Vietnam to determine their own future. At the Paris peace conference, Ambassador Lodge has demonstrated our flexibility and good faith in 40 public meetings. Hanoi has refused even to discuss our proposals. They demand our unconditional acceptance of their terms, which are that we withdraw all American forces immediately and unconditionally and that we overthrow the Government of South Vietnam as we leave. [………] Tonight I am taking the unprecedented step of disclosing to you some of our other initiatives for peace-initiatives we undertook privately and secretly because we thought we thereby might open a door which publicly would be closed. [………] I did this outside of the usual diplomatic channels with the hope that with the necessity of making statements for propaganda removed, there might be constructive progress toward bringing the war to an end. [………] I received Ho Chi Minh’s reply on August 30, 3 days before his death. It simply reiterated the public position North Vietnam had taken at Paris and flatly rejected my initiative. [………] But the effect of all the public, private, and secret negotiations which have been undertaken since the bombing halt a year ago and since this administration came into office on January 20, can be summed up in one sentence: No progress whatever has been made except agreement on the shape of the bargaining table. Well now, who is at fault?

19

It has become clear that the obstacle in negotiating an end to the war is not the President of the United States. It is not the South Vietnamese Government. The obstacle is the other side's absolute refusal to show the least willingness to join us in seeking a just peace. And it will not do so while it is convinced that all it has to do is to wait for our next concession, and our next concession after that one, until it gets everything it wants. There can now be no longer any question that progress in negotiation depends only on Hanoi's deciding to negotiate, to negotiate seriously. I realize that this report on our efforts on the diplomatic front is discouraging to the American people, but the American people are entitled to know the truth-the bad news as well as the good news where the lives of our young men are involved. Now let me turn, however, to a more encouraging report on another front. [………] We Americans are a do-it-yourself people. We are an impatient people. Instead of teaching someone else to do a job, we like to do it ourselves. And this trait has been carried over into our foreign policy. In Korea and again in Vietnam, the United States furnished most of the money, most of the arms, and most of the men to help the people of those countries defend their freedom against Communist aggression. Before any American troops were committed to Vietnam, a leader of another Asian country expressed this opinion to me when I was traveling in Asia as a private citizen. He said: "When you are trying to assist another nation defend its freedom, U.S. policy should be to help them fight the war but not to fight the war for them." Well, in accordance with this wise counsel, I laid down in Guam three principles as guidelines for future American policy toward Asia: --First, the United States will keep all of its treaty commitments. --Second, we shall provide a shield if a nuclear power threatens the freedom of a nation allied with us or of a nation whose survival we consider vital to our security. --Third, in cases involving other types of aggression, we shall furnish military and economic assistance when requested in accordance with our treaty commitments. But we shall look to the nation directly threatened to assume the primary responsibility of providing the manpower for its defense. After I announced this policy, I found that the leaders of the Philippines, Thailand, Vietnam, South Korea, and other nations which might be threatened by Communist aggression, welcomed this new direction in American foreign policy. The defense of freedom is everybody's business-not just America’s business. And it is particularly the responsibility of the people whose freedom is threatened. In the previous administration, we Americanized the war in Vietnam. In this administration, we are Vietnamizing the search for peace. The policy of the previous administration not only resulted in our assuming the primary responsibility for fighting the war, but even more significantly did not adequately stress the goal of strengthening the South Vietnamese so that they could defend themselves when we left. The Vietnamization plan was launched following Secretary Laird's visit to Vietnam in March. Under the plan, I ordered first a substantial increase in the training and equipment of South Vietnamese forces. [………] Under the new orders, the primary mission of our troops is to enable the South Vietnamese forces to assume the full responsibility for the security of South Vietnam. Our air operations have been reduced by over 20 percent. And now we have begun to see the results of this long overdue change in American policy in Vietnam. --After 5 years of Americans going into Vietnam, we are finally bringing American men home. By December 15, over 60,000 men will have been withdrawn from South Vietnam-including 20 percent of all of our combat forces. --The South Vietnamese have continued to gain in strength. As a result they have been able to take over combat responsibilities from our American troops. Two other significant developments have occurred since this administration took office. --Enemy infiltration, infiltration which is essential if they are to launch a major attack, over the last 3 months is less than 20 percent of what it was over the same period last year. --Most important-United States casualties have declined during the last 2 months to the lowest point in 3 years. Let me now turn to our program for the future. We have adopted a plan which we have worked out in cooperation with the South Vietnamese for the complete withdrawal of all U.S. combat ground forces, and their replacement by South Vietnamese forces on

20

an orderly scheduled timetable. This withdrawal will be made from strength and not from weakness. As South Vietnamese forces become stronger, the rate of American withdrawal can become greater. I have not and do not intend to announce the timetable for our program. And there are obvious reasons for this decision which I am sure you will understand. As I have indicated on several occasions, the rate of withdrawal will depend on developments on three fronts. One of these is the progress which can be or might be made in the Paris talks. An announcement of a fixed timetable for our withdrawal would completely remove any incentive for the enemy to negotiate an agreement. They would simply wait until our forces had withdrawn and then move in. The other two factors on which we will base our withdrawal decisions are the level of enemy activity and the progress of the training programs of the South Vietnamese forces. And I am glad to be able to report tonight progress on both of these fronts has been greater than we anticipated when we started the program in June for withdrawal. As a result, our timetable for withdrawal is more optimistic now than when we made our first estimates in June. Now, this clearly demonstrates why it is not wise to be frozen in on a fixed timetable. We must retain the flexibility to base each withdrawal decision on the situation as it is at that time rather than on estimates that are no longer valid. Along with this optimistic estimate, I must -in all candor- leave one note of caution. If the level of enemy activity significantly increases we might have to adjust our timetable accordingly. However, I want the record to be completely clear on one point. At the time of the bombing halt just a year ago, there was some confusion as to whether there was an understanding on the part of the enemy that if we stopped the bombing of North Vietnam they would stop the shelling of cities in South Vietnam. I want to be sure that there is no misunderstanding on the part of the enemy with regard to our withdrawal Program. We have noted the reduced level of infiltration, the reduction of our casualties, and are basing our withdrawal decisions partially on those factors. If the level of infiltration or our casualties increase while we are trying to scale down the fighting, it will be the result of a conscious decision by the enemy. Hanoi could make no greater mistake than to assume that an increase in violence will be to its advantage. If I conclude that increased enemy action jeopardizes our remaining forces in Vietnam, I shall not hesitate to take strong and effective measures to deal with that situation. This is not a threat. This is a statement of policy, which as Commander in Chief of our Armed Forces, I am making in meeting my responsibility for the protection of American fighting men wherever they may be. My fellow Americans, I am sure you can recognize from what I have said that we really only have two choices open to us if we want to end this war. --I can order an immediate, precipitate withdrawal of all Americans from Vietnam without regard to the effects of that action. --Or we can persist in our search for a just peace through a negotiated settlement if possible, or through continued implementation of our plan for Vietnamization if necessary-a plan in which we will withdraw all of our forces from Vietnam on a schedule in accordance with our program, as the South Vietnamese become strong enough to defend their own freedom. I have chosen this second course. It is not the easy way. It is the right way. It is a plan which will end the war and serve the cause of peace-not just in Vietnam but in the Pacific and in the world. In speaking of the consequences of a precipitate withdrawal, I mentioned that our allies would lose confidence in America. Far more dangerous, we would lose confidence in ourselves. Oh, the immediate reaction would be a sense of relief that our men were coming home. But as we saw the consequences of what we had done, inevitable remorse and divisive recrimination would scar our spirit as a people. We have faced other crisis in our history and have become stronger by rejecting the easy way out and taking the right way in meeting our challenges. Our greatness as a nation has been our capacity to do what had to be done when we knew our course was right. I recognize that some of my fellow citizens disagree with the plan for peace I have chosen. Honest and patriotic Americans have reached different conclusions as to how peace should be achieved. In San Francisco a few weeks ago, I saw demonstrators carrying signs reading: "Lose in Vietnam, bring the boys home."

21

Well, one of the strengths of our free society is that any American has a right to reach that conclusion and to advocate that point of view. But as President of the United States, I would be untrue to my oath of office if I allowed the policy of this Nation to be dictated by the minority who hold that point of view and who try to impose it on the Nation by mounting demonstrations in the street. For almost 200 years, the policy of this Nation has been made under our Constitution by those leaders in the Congress and the White House elected by all of the people. If a vocal minority, however fervent its cause, prevails over reason and the will of the majority, this Nation has no future as a free society. And now I would like to address a word, if I may, to the young people of this Nation who are particularly concerned, and I understand why they are concerned, about this war. I respect your idealism. I share your concern for peace. I want peace as much as you do. There are powerful personal reasons I want to end this war. This week I will have to sign 83 letters to mothers, fathers, wives, and loved ones of men who have given their lives for America in Vietnam. It is very little satisfaction to me that this is only one-third as many letters as I signed the first week in office. There is nothing I want more than to see the day come when I do not have to write any of those letters. --I want to end the war to save the lives of those brave young men in Vietnam. --But I want to end it in a way which will increase the chance that their younger brothers and their sons will not have to fight in some future Vietnam someplace in the world. --And I want to end the war for another reason. I want to end it so that the energy and dedication of you, our young people, now too often directed into bitter hatred against those responsible for the war, can be turned to the great challenges of peace, a better life for all Americans, a better life for all people on this earth. I have chosen a plan for peace. I believe it will succeed. If it does succeed, what the critics say now won't matter. If it does not succeed, anything I say then won't matter. I know it may not be fashionable to speak of patriotism or national destiny these days. But I feel it is appropriate to do so on this occasion Two hundred years ago this Nation was weak and poor. But even then, America was the hope of millions in the world. Today we have become the strongest and richest nation in the world. And the wheel of destiny has turned so that any hope the world has for the survival of peace and freedom will be determined by whether the American people have the moral stamina and the courage to meet the challenge of free world leadership. Let historians not record that when America was the most powerful nation in the world we passed on the other side of the road and allowed the last hopes for peace and freedom of millions of people to be suffocated by the forces of totalitarianism. And so tonight-to you, the great silent majority of my fellow Americans-I ask for your support. I pledged in my campaign for the Presidency to end the war in a way that we could win the peace. I have initiated a plan of action which will enable me to keep that pledge. The more support I can have from the American people, the sooner that pledge can be redeemed; for the more divided we are at home, the less likey, the enemy is to negotiate at Paris. Let us be united for peace. Let us also be united against defeat. Because let us understand: North Vietnam cannot defeat or humiliate the United States. Only Americans can do that. Fifty years ago, in this room and at this very desk, President Woodrow Wilson spoke words which caught the imagination of a war-weary world. He said: "This is the war to end war." His dream for peace after World War I was shattered on the hard realities of great power politics and Woodrow Wilson died a broken man. Tonight I do not tell you that the war in Vietnam is the war to end wars. But I do say this: I have initiated a plan which Will end this war in a way that will bring us closer to that great goal to which Woodrow Wilson and every American President in our history has been dedicated-the goal of a just and lasting peace. As President I hold the responsibility for choosing the best path to that goal and then leading the Nation along it. I pledge to you tonight that I shall meet this responsibility with all of the strength and wisdom I can command in accordance with your hopes, mindful of your concerns, sustained by your prayers. Thank you and goodnight.

22

HANDOUT4 https://facultystaff.richmond.edu/~ebolt/history398/JohnKerryTestimony.html

VIETNAM WAR VETERAN JOHN KERRY'S TESTIMONY BEFORE THE SENATE FOREIGN RELATIONS COMMITTEE, APRIL 22, 1971

Statement of Mr. John Kerry

...I am not here as John Kerry. I am here as one member of the group of 1,000 which is a small representation of a very much larger group of veterans in this country, and were it possible for all of them to sit at this table they would be here and have the same kind of testimony....

WINTER SOLDIER INVESTIGATION

I would like to talk, representing all those veterans, and say that several months ago in Detroit, we had an investigation at which over 150 honorably discharged and many very highly decorated veterans testified to war crimes committed in Southeast Asia, not isolated incidents but crimes committed on a day-to-day basis with the full awareness of officers at all levels of command.... They told the stories at times they had personally raped, cut off ears, cut off heads, taped wires from portable telephones to human genitals and turned up the power, cut off limbs, blown up bodies, randomly shot at civilians, razed villages in fashion reminiscent of Genghis Khan, shot cattle and dogs for fun, poisoned food stocks, and generally ravaged the countryside of South Vietnam in addition to the normal ravage of war, and the normal and very particular ravaging which is done by the applied bombing power of this country. We call this investigation the "Winter Soldier Investigation." The term "Winter Soldier" is a play on words of Thomas Paine in 1776 when he spoke of the Sunshine Patriot and summertime soldiers who deserted at Valley Forge because the going was rough. We who have come here to Washington have come here because we f eel we have to be winter soldiers now. We could come back to this country; we could be quiet; we could hold our silence; we could not tell what went on in Vietnam, but we feel because of what threatens this country, the fact that the crimes threaten it, not reds, and not redcoats but the crimes which we are committing that threaten it, that we have to speak out.

FEELINGS OF MEN COMING BACK FROM VIETNAM

...In our opinion, and from our experience, there is nothing in South Vietnam, nothing which could happen that realistically threatens the United States of America. And to attempt to justify the loss of one American life in Vietnam, Cambodia, or Laos by linking such loss to the preservation of freedom, which those misfits supposedly abuse, is to us the height of criminal hypocrisy, and it is that kind of hypocrisy which we feel has torn this country apart....

WHAT WAS FOUND AND LEARNED IN VIETNAM

We found that not only was it a civil war, an effort by a people who had for years been seeking their liberation from any colonial influence whatsoever, but also we found that the Vietnamese whom we had enthusiastically molded after our own image were hard put to take up the fight against the threat we were supposedly saving them from. We found most people didn't even know the difference between communism and democracy. They only wanted to work in rice paddies without helicopters strafing them and bombs with napalm burning their villages and tearing their country apart. They wanted everything to do with the war, particularly with this foreign presence of the United States of America, to leave them alone on peace, and they practiced the art of

23

survival by siding with whichever military force was present at a particular time, be it Vietcong, North Vietnamese, or American. We found also that all too often American men were dying in those rice paddies for want of support from their allies. We saw first hand how money from American taxes was used for a corrupt dictatorial regime. We saw that many people in this country had a one-sided idea of who was kept free by our flag, as blacks provided the highest percentage of casualties. We saw Vietnam ravaged equally by American bombs as well as by search and destroy missions, as well as by Vietcong terrorism, and yet we listened while this country tried to blame all of the havoc on the Viet Cong. We rationalized destroying villages in order to save them. We saw America lose her sense of morality as she accepted very coolly a My Lai and refused to give up the image of American soldiers who hand out chocolate bars and chewing gum. We learned the meaning of free fire zones, shooting anything that moves, and we watched while America placed a cheapness on the lives of orientals. We watched the U.S. falsification of body counts, in fact the glorification of body counts. We listened while month after month we were told the back of the enemy was about to break. We fought using weapons against "oriental human beings," with quotation marks around that. We fought using weapons against those people which I do not believe this country would dream of using were we fighting in the European theater or let us say a non-third-world people theater, and so we watched while men charged up hills because a general said that hill has to be taken, and after losing one platoon or two platoons they marched away to leave the high for the reoccupation by the North Vietnamese because we watched pride allow the most unimportant of battles to be blown into extravaganzas, because we couldn't lose, and we couldn't retreat, and because it didn't matter how many American bodies were lost to prove that point. And so there were Hamburger Hills and Khe Sanhs and Hill 881's and Fire Base 6's and so many others. VIETNAMIZATION

Now we are told that the men who fought there must watch quietly while American lives are lost so that we can exercise the incredible arrogance of Vietnamizing the Vietnamese....Each day to facilitate the process by which the United States washes her hands of Vietnam someone has to give up his life so that the United States doen'st have to admit something that the entire world already knows, so that we can't say they we have made a mistake. Someone has to die so that President Nixon won't be, and these are his words, "the first President to lose a war."We are asking Americans to think about that because how do you ask a man to be the last man to die in Vietnam? How do you ask a man to be the last man to die for a mistake? But we are trying to do that, and we are doing it with thousands of rationalizations, and if you read carefully the President's last speech to the people of this country, you can see that he says and says clearly:But the issue, gentlemen, the issue is communism, and the question is whether or not we will leave that country to the Communists or whether or not we will try to give it hope to be a free people.But the point is they are not a free people now under us. They are not a free people, and we cannot fight communism all over the world, and I think we should have learned that lesson by now.... REQUEST FOR ACTION BY CONGRESS We are asking here in Washington for some action, action from the Congress of the United States of America which as the power to raise and maintain armies, and which by the Constitution also has the power to declare war. We have come here, not to the President, because we believe that this body can be responsive to the will of the people, and we believe that the will of the people says that we should be out of Vietnam now.... WHERE IS THE LEADERSHIP? We are also here to ask, and we are here to ask vehemently, where are the leaders of our country? Where is the leadership? We are here to ask where are McNamara, Rostow, Bundy, Gilpatric, and so many others. Where are they now that we, the men whom they sent off to war, have returned? These are commanders who

24

have deserted their troops, and there is no more serious crime in the law of war. The Army says they never leave their wounded. The Marines say they never leave even their dead. These men have left all the casualties and retreated behind a pious shield of public rectitude. They have left the real stuff of their reputations bleaching begin them in the sun in this country.... ...It is my opinion that the United States is still reacting in very much the 1945 mood and postwar cold-war period when we reacted to the forces which were at work in World War II and came out of it with this paranoia about the Russians and how the world was going to be divided up between the super powers, and the foreign policy of John Foster Dulles which was responsible for the created of the SEATO treaty, which was, in fact, a direct reaction to this so-called Communist monolith. And I think we are reacting under cold-war precepts which are no longer applicable. I say that because so long as we have the kind of strike force we have, and I am not party to the secret statistics which you gentlemen have here, but as long as we have the ones which we of the public know we have, I think we have a strike force of such capability and I think we have a strike force simply in our Polaris submarines, in the 62 or some Polaris submarines, which are constantly roaming around under the sea. And I know as a Navy man that underwater detection is the hardest kind in the world, and they have not perfected it, that we have the ability to destroy the human race. Why do we have to, therefore, consider and keep considering threats? At any time that an actual threat is posed to this country or to the security and freedom I will be one of the first people to pick up a gun and defend it, but right now we are reacting with paranoia t this question of peace and the people taking over the world. I think if were are ever going to get down to the question of dropping those bombs most of us in my generation simply don't want to be alive afterwards because of the kind of world that it would be with mutations and the genetic probabilities of freaks and everything else. Therefore, I think it is ridiculous to assume we have to play this power game based on total warfare. I think there will be guerrilla wars and I think we must have a capability to fight those. And we may have to fight them somewhere based on legitimate threats, but we must learn, in this country, how to define those threats and that is what I would say to the question of world peace. I think it is bogus, totally artificial. There is no threat. The Communists are not about to take over our McDonald hamburger stands. [Laughter.]... ...I don't want to get into the game of saying I represent everybody over there, but let me try to say as straightforwardly as I can, we had an advertisement, ran full page, to show you what the troops read. It ran in Playboy and the response to it within two and a half weeks from Vietnam was 1,200 members. We received initially about 50 to 80 letters a day from troops arriving at our New York office. Some of these letters -- and I wanted to bring some down, I didn't know we were going to be testifying here and I can make them available to you -- are very, very moving, some of them written by hospital corpsmen on things, on casualty report sheets which say, you know, "Get us out of here." "You are the only hope he have got." "You have got to get us back; it is crazy." We received recently 80 members of the 101st Airborne signed up in one letter. Forty members from a helicopter assault squadron, crash and rescue mission signed up in another one. I think they are expressing, some of these troops, solidarity with us, right now by wearing black arm bands and Vietnam Veterans Against the War buttons. They want to come out and I think they are looking at the people who want to try to get them out as a help. However, I do recognize there are some men who are in the military for life. The job in the military is to fight wars. When they have a war to fight, they are just as happy in a sense, and I am sure that these men feel they are being stabbed in the back. But, at the same time, I think to most of them the realization of the emptiness, the hollowness, the absurdity of Vietnam has finally hit home, and I feel is they did come home the recrimination would certainly not come from the right, from the military. I don't think there would be that problem.... ...You see the mind is changing over there and a search and destroy mission is a search and avoid mission, and troops don't -- you know, like that revolt that took place that was mentioned in the New York Times when they refused to go in after a piece of dead machinery, because it doesn't have any value. They are making their own judgments. There is a GI movement in this country now as well as over there, and soon these people, these men, who are prescribing wars for these young men to fight are going to find out they are going to have to find some other men to fight them because we are going to change prescriptions. They are going to have to change doctors, because we are not going to fight for them. that is what they are going to realize. There is now a more militant attitude even within the military itself....

25

3. TEACHER’S BOOK

3.1.Opposing Views of VietNam War_ Il modulo

Il Modulo Opposing Views of VietNam War propone agli studenti di una classe terminale un percorso di storia sviluppato attraverso l’inglese lingua veicolare. I materiali proposti sono materiali autentici i quali, in particolare nelle prime fasi, sono stati didattizzati dai due docenti per renderli più facilmente accessibili e fruibili dagli studenti. Successivamente, gli studenti saranno incoraggiati a ricercare e riadattare autonomamente i materiali necessari alla realizzazione del task conclusivo.

Presumiamo � un gruppo di studenti omogeneo per competenze linguistiche in L2 (B1) ma eterogeneo per

interessi e stili di apprendimento � la preconoscenza da parte dei docenti dei diversi stili di apprendimento degli alunni, anche

correlati agli stili di browsing (si può prevedere un'attività preliminare di testing) � la disponibilità della strumentazione informatica e multimediale necessaria � che tutti gli studenti abbiano libero accesso a casa a un pc con connessione Internet veloce, e

possano dedicare a casa almeno 10 ore totali al modulo per approfondimento, studio, ricerca individuale

� il possesso, sia da parte dei docenti coinvolti, sia da parte degli alunni, di alcune competenze TIC (browsing, uso della posta elettronica, download, uso di un word processor e di un software per presentazioni) e da parte di almeno alcuni alunni di competenze più specifiche (apertura di un blog su piattaforme come Wordpress o Blogspot, trattamento di file audio e video).

Motivazione dell’intervento

Gli studenti della classe 5^ cui questo modulo è destinato, avranno la possibilità di sperimentare la fattibilità e l’efficacia della modalità CLIL. Il presente progetto, inoltre, permetterà a studenti e docenti di sperimentare metodi interattivi, gestione cooperativa della classe, attivazione di una azione sinergica nel processo integrato di apprendimento della LS e dei contenuti disciplinari. Ruoli dei docenti Coordinatori, tutor e facilitatori di un processo di apprendimento guidato, su contenuti che si definiscono nel corso del modulo in base alla ricerca svolta (possono essere dati suggerimenti o "punti fermi"). L'inserimento degli studenti in gruppi e l'attribuzione dei ruoli sarà mediato dai docenti, individuando per ciascun partecipante ruoli ben definiti in relazione alle sue attitudini e ai suoi interessi (es. ricerca, registrazione dei risultati, coordinamento e contatto tra gruppi di lavoro, lavoro su audio e video, ricerca di immagini, redazione testi e didascalie, ecc.). i docenti, inoltre, attiveranno il blog di lavoro che potrà anche avere come lingua veicolare la L1. I materiali "di base" (es. moduli, lessico, sitografia) messi a disposizione dai docenti saranno resi disponibili come pagine, non come post. I docenti, infine, forniranno link a sw open source da utilizzare nel corso del lavoro.

Finalità � rendere gli studenti consapevoli delle proprie abilità in L2 attraverso un utilizzo pratico delle

proprie competenze linguistiche applicate ad una disciplina diversa � motivare gli studenti ad appropriarsi dei contenuti di una disciplina attraverso una lingua

diversa dalla L1 � Acquisizione di nuove tecniche

26

Obiettivi

� L2: Acquisizione di linguaggio specifico: comprendere e leggere espressivamente testi autentici quali spezzoni di tg, articoli tratti da quotidiani e periodici, canzoni, testi poetici, documenti storici (es. dispacci, telegrammi, testimonianze, interviste).

� Storia: ricostruire la complessità delle reazioni fra soggetti e realtà sociali attraverso varietà di fonti e materiali.Riconoscere come “interpretazioni” la ricostruzione degli eventi. Distinguere nel fenomeno storico – oltre alla portata geografica e temporale – gli aspetti economici, culturali ed etico-religiosi ad esso sottesi

� Trasversali: migliorare e perfezionare competenze TIC quali browsing, uso della posta elettronica, download, uso di un word processor e di un software per presentazioni. Lavorare in gruppo su un task assegnato sulla base delle proprio competenze , conoscenze e stile di apprendimento

� Produzione e realizzazione del prodotto finale

Tempi Il modulo prevede un impegno di 20 ore (10 incontri da un’ora ognuno in orario curricolare, 5 da 2 ore ognuno in orario extracurricolare) da realizzarsi in compresenza. Agli studenti sarà richiesto un impegno di lavoro a casa di circa 10 ore.

Materiali didattici

Tutti i materiali utilizzati nelle diverse attività sono autentici. Si è proceduto ad una sistematica verifica degli stessi per poterli semplificare e comunque rendere adatti alle competenze linguistiche degli studenti, laddove necessario. Si tratta di:

Schede cartacee e/o file predisposte dall’insegnante Materiali reperiti in siti web specifici: - Video/filmati - Foto/immagini - testi di canzoni - testi audio e relative trascrizioni Metodologia - Lezione frontale partecipata con utilizzo di varie tecniche: brainstorming, domande guidate, sintesi di testi, visione e commento di video clip, discussione guidata. - Lavori di coppia e di gruppo - Lavoro individuale - Ricerca sul web - Realizzazione di un task finale (Reading)

Valutazione Iniziale dei prerequisiti e delle aspettative attraverso un questionario che può essere somministrato anche on line. Le attività delle prime due unità non prevedono una valutazione. Nelle unità successive verranno individuate alcuni tasks che permetteranno una valutazione in itinere dell’acquisizione di competenze specifiche in L2 e disciplinari nonché trasversali. La valutazione conclusiva o

27

sommativa valuterà attraverso il task finale competenze e conoscenze in L2, disciplinari e trasversali (quali l'apporto individuale, la partecipazione, l'interazione con compagni e docenti, la frequenza; i contributi alla ricerca-analisi-produzione di documenti; i materiali scritti prodotti (tra cui una relazione periodica sull'attività svolta, anche su modulo predisposto); la produzione orale in itinere e nel reading; la produzione scritta per il reading. Gli interventi e i contributi sul blog (numero e qualità dei post). Al termine del percorso verrà inoltre somministrato agli studenti un questionario di auto-valutazione.

Monitoraggio

Verrà somministrato un questionario in ingresso sulla motivazione e le aspettative ed uno in uscita sul grado di soddisfazione rispetto al percorso realizzato.

In concomitanza con la rappresentazione del task conclusivo verrà inoltre somministrato ai componenti del consiglio di classe ed ai genitori un questionario appositamente predisposto per valutare l’impatto del Modulo CLIL su queste componenti.

Modalità di presentazione del progetto al dirigente scolastico e al collegio dei docenti:

Il progetto verrà presentato ai primi di settembre al dirigente scolastico, al consiglio di classe della classe coinvolta (metà settembre) e quindi al Collegio docenti nell’assemblea in cui si propongono le attività da inserire nel POF.

Modalità per comunicare a studenti e genitori le caratteristiche e l’efficacia dell’ambiente di apprendimento CLIL e i percorsi formativi/ moduli che intendete realizzare

Dopo l’approvazione del Collegio Docenti e prima della riunione del Consiglio d’Istituto verrà richiesta la convocazione di un consiglio di Classe allargato a tutti i genitori e gli alunni. Nel corso dell’incontro verrà presentato il progetto. I genitori, in particolare, saranno invitati a collaborare alla raccolta di materiali e a partecipare alla rappresentazione conclusiva.

Articolazione e struttura del modulo Il modulo è strutturato 11 Unità (l’ultima dedicata alla rappresentazione della reading), le quali, a loro volta, sono organizzate in attività per gruppi di lavoro coordinati, che lavoreranno sempre in aula multimediale/laboratorio di informatica, con ricerca sul web, bibliografica e su materiali audio/video. Solo per alcune attività è previsto un lavoro individuale, che verrà comunque condiviso e discusso con il resto della classe. Il lavoro di ricerca e produzione sarà coordinato mediante un "blog di lavoro". Gli studenti, inoltre, avranno a disposizione uno Student’s book, di cui verrà fornito il file. Lo stesso file sarà disponibile anche sul blog di lavoro. Lo Student’s book costituirà un prezioso strumento di lavoro per lo studente, che sarà libero di aggiornarlo con i risultati dei lavori individuali e di gruppo e potrà costituire, a termine del modulo, un prezioso elemento per il Portfolio dello studente. Le attività del modulo sono finalizzate alla realizzazione di un prodotto finale: una reading di documenti storici, letterari e musicali accompagnato da musica, posters, slides-show e proiezioni video, sul tema della guerra del Vietnam. Il prodotto finale degli studenti sarà quindi una performance di 1h 30' circa che verrà rappresentata nell’aula magna dell’Istituto.

28

UNIT 1

Presentazione del Modulo e della metodologia che verà adottata. Braistorming sull’argomento attraverso un vieo ed il testo di una canzone

(2h)

UNIT 2 Tuning in: attività volte a far emergere le conoscenze, ma anche i pregiudizi e gli stereotipi, che gli studenti hanno sull’argomento.

(1h)

UNIT 3 Approfondimento, confronto e discussione su Different Views of VietNam ar

attraverso dei documenti storici: il Silent majority Speech del presidente Nixon (1969) e il Vietnam War Veteran John Kerry’s Testimony Before The Senate

Foeign Relations Commitee (1971)

(1h)

UNIT 4 Contestualizzazione, approfondimento e discussione guidata. Gli studenti formano 4 gruppi di lavoro, cui verranno assegnati compiti di ricerca di informazioni, immagini, documenti, audio, video... I gruppi di lavoro agiranno su ambiti differenti: film, immagini di famosi fotoreporter, articoli tratti da quotidiani e periodici americani (ma anche inglesi, con eventuali comparazioni con giornali italiani che propongano articoli sullo stesso argomento.), video clip di interviste o discorsi significativi quali ad esempio quelli del Presidente degli Stati Uniti.

(2h)

UNIT 5 Primo briefing. Incontro collettivo di coordinamento e definizione generale dei contenuti del reading

(2h)

UNIT 6

Contestualizzazione, approfondimento e discussione guidata: How are we going on?

(2h)

UNIT 7

Gruppi di lavoro. Raccolta, selezione e trattamento dei documenti. (2h)

UNIT 8

Incontro collettivo di coordinamento ed eventuale ridefinizione degli obiettivi. (2h)

UNIT 9 Contestualizzazione, approfondimento e discussione guidata. (1h)

UNIT 10 Assemblaggio dei materiali per il reading (2h) UNIT 11 Reading conclusivo (3h) Il lavoro sarà strutturato come segue Attività preliminari:

� predisporre questionari in ingresso (valutazione attitudini/competenze/interessi, da somministrare almeno 30 giorni prima dell'inizio delle attività per definire in dettaglio la programmazione),

� predisposizione di questionari di monitoraggio in ingresso (aspettative), in itinere e finali, � handouts per strutturare il lavoro; � apertura di un blog didattico; inserimento sul blog di copia di tutti i materiali già prodotti, di

un lessico di base e/o link a siti che ne offrano esempi

29

ORGANIZZAZIONE DELLE UNITS 3.2 UNITA’ 1: (2h) Finalità:

1) fare una brevissima introduzione al CLIL; 2) presentare il modulo e le attività, esplicitandone gli obiettivi le modalità di svolgimento e i

ruoli. 3) creare aspettative negli studenti; 4) Far emergere conoscenze pregresse

I materiali presentati sono stati tutti accuratamente selezionati e vagliati ai due docenti. Le attività proposte in questa unità non prevedono una valutazione. La prima attività propone una clip in lingua originale tratta da Apolypse now. È’ una scena topica del film in cui i soldati americani fanno sci d’acqua. Si procederà quindi con attività di note taking (individuale) e quindi di summary (collettivo). Questo verrà messo a confronto con la lettura di un summary proposto dai docenti. Il testo proposto presenta delle difficoltà lessicali, ma l’obiettivo è proprio quello – in questa fase – di spingere gli studenti ad una lavoro collaborativi per giungere al significato globale del testo ed inferire il significato delle parole non note. Con questa attività si intende coinvolti tutti gli stili cognitivi presenti nel gruppo classe e muovere i primi passi nel cooperative learning. In queste primissime fasi verrà incoraggiato l’uso della L2, ma eventuali interventi in L1 non verranno censurati. I docenti aiuteranno gli studenti ad utilizzare quanto più possibile la L2 monitorando i loro interventi, trascrivendo sulla lavagna (in prima persona se del caso, ma soprattutto sollecitando l’assegnazione del compito ad un “segretario” individuato di volta in volta) le key words, o le idee che via via emergono.

A. Presentazione del modulo Attività 1.a: (10 min.). Attività di presentazione delle modalità di lavoro (What is CLIL?) e degli obiettivi (How are we going to work) volte ad attivare le preconoscenze degli studenti e creare in loro positive aspettative. I docenti faranno una breve anticipazione (assolutamente non tecnica) sulla metodologia CLIL.

B. Brainstorming Attività 1.b.1 (20 min.) Video clip da Apocalipse Now http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BgJ-vzsj8rs

1. Gli studenti osservano la clip nella sua interezza e quindi alcuni fotogrammi della sequenza video (in fermo immagine).

2. Successivamente (dapprima individualmente, quindi confrontando i singoli risultati in gruppi di 4) prendono nota di ciò che vedono, rispondendo alle seguenti domande guida: - Who are the characters involved in the scene? Describe them.

- What kind of documents is Willard reading? Describe them.

- What kind of music is Mr. Clean listening to?

- When and where does the scene take place?

- Why is the patrol boat journeying up the river?

- Who are the people on the shoreline, and what are they doing? Describe them.

3. I docenti costituiscono gruppi da formati da 4 studenti che metteranno a confronto i propri appunti e risposte. Ogni gruppo individuerà una spokesperson (che avrà il compito di riferire alla classe i risultati del lavoro di gruppo) ed un secretary (che avrà il compito di annotare sulla lavagna interattiva i punti e le parole chiave individuati). Sarà cura dei docenti sollecitare un’alternanza nell’assunzione di questi ruoli.

30

Sarà cura dei due docenti concordare in anticipo, sulla scorta della conoscenza della classe, delle sue dinamiche e dei singoli alunni, la costituzione dei gruppi, così che questi possano garantire in efficace cooperative learning (e working!) Le risposte alle domande del punto 1.b.1 costituiscono la traccia per un brainstorming sulla cultura americana negli anni ’60-’70 e sulle ragioni della guerra in VietNam. Attività 1.b.2. (20 min) Ancora in gruppo, gli studenti prepareranno un oral summary di ciò che hanno visto, del’attività din note-taking e della discussione in gruppo. Il portavoce riferirà in L2 i risultati del lavoro di gruppo. Contemporaneamente il segretario trascriverà sulla lavagna interattiva le parole o i punti chiave del summary. Il file prodotto verrà salvato ed archiviato. Per questa e la maggioranze delle attività è previsto l’uso della LIM. Nel caso ciò non fosse possibile sarà sufficiente utilizzare un PC collegato al video proiettore. Verranno salvate di volta i volta le schermate prodotte Attività 1.b.3: (20 min) I docenti forniscono il file di un summary tratto da http://www.filmsondisc.com/DVDpages/apocalypse_now.htm e di cui si riporta il testo:

The absolute absurdity of Coppola's war is best highlighted in three or four major scenes. A patrol

boat taking Willard into the proverbial "heart of darkness" is journeying deep into the heart of

Vietnam. The music pounds out "I can't get no satisfaction," from the Rolling Stone song. Willard

watches young Mr. Clean (Lawrence Fishburne, only 14 at the time.) dancing to the music and the

vision of absurdity screams out, only to be overpowered moments later by the image of Lance, the

surfer, water-skiing behind the boat, jovially waiving to the natives on the shoreline. As the boat

speeds through the water, Lance in tow, two working Vietnamese in a boat are overturned by the

wake of the American boat, and so it is that Coppola finds a perfect visual metaphor for the plight of

the Vietnamese, fallen in the wake of the insensitive American onslaught.

Gli studenti lo confronteranno con il proprio summary: cosa hanno in comune? In cosa differiscono? Con questa attività gli studenti hanno l’opportunità di discutere di nuovo la scena, focalizzarla meglio e collocarla nel contesto dell’intero film, acquisendo nuove conoscenze sulla guerra in VietNam. Anche per questa attività sono previsti i ruoli di spokeperson e secretary. Il prodotto della discussione sintetizzato sulla lavagna interattiva viene salvato. Attività 1.b.4 (10 min) A questo punto viene fornito il link http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/amex/vietnam/maps/index.html

che permetterà di individuare il Viet Nam su una carta. Attività 1.b.5 (15 min)

Brano audio: Roy C., Open letter to the President (1971) Clip audio (3’2’’) scaricabile da www.hipcast.com (file .mp3)

L’ultima attività della prima unit è incentrata sull’ascolto e ricostruzione del test di una canzone.

In gruppo, gli studenti ascoltano il brano senza la possibilità di prendere appunti.

31

In coppia, gli studenti riascoltano il brano in cuffia e ne trascrivono il testo con il word processor. Il testo è breve e ripetitivo, dal lessico molto semplice: perciò non si prevede l’adozione di specifiche strategie di facilitazione. Gli studenti confrontano oralmente il risultato della trascrizione e ne producono una versione condivisa definitiva. A nome della classe, due studenti inseriscono la trascrizione nel database del sito Antiwar Songs («a

collection of pacifist and antimilitarist songs from all over the world and of any time, based on free

contributions by readers and collaborators»), nella pagina dedicata. Gli studenti discutono i contenuti del brano e li mettono a confronto con i risultati delle discussioni precedenti. Il prodotto della discussione verrà salvato. 3.3. UNITA’ 2: (1h) Con questa unità si comincia ad entrare nel vivo del modulo. Obiettivo principale è far emergere le conoscenze, ma anche i pregiudizi e gli stereotipi, che gli studenti hanno sull’argomento. L’unità si aprirà con un’attività di pre-teaching lessicale, cui seguirà una class discussion guidata dai docenti attraverso delle guidelines. Seguirà un breve attività di prediction&matching che introdurrà direttamente ad una altrettanto breve lecture del docente sulla Vietnam War, accompagnata da una presentazione PPT corredata da immagini. La lecture sarà seguita da una discussion volta a far emergere una riflessione sulle diverse reazioni negli USA all’intervento militare. L’unità si conclude con una prima sommaria lettura di due interventi significativi (quello del Presidente Richard Nixon e quello di John Kerry). Agli alunni verrà fornita una versione didattizzata dei due interventi sui quali lavoreranno a casa rispondendo alle domande del questionario.

C. New Vocabulary Attività 2.c.1 (10 / 15min) I docenti chiederanno agli alunni (organizzati al solito in gruppi) di concordare sul significato delle singole parole proposte e di creare una definizione. Le definizioni saranno quindi raccolte sulla lavagna interattiva e messe a confronto con le definizioni tratte da un dizionario monolingue. Si può suggerire una comparazione online con le definizioni fornite da http://www.thefreedictionary.com/ http://www.yourdictionary.com/ o altri siti simili, o con i CD ROM di dizionari quali Collins Cobuild o OxfordAdvanced Learner’s War cold war WWII

military campaign troop(s) draft cease-fire

drive casualty veterans

riots issue puppet regime

army headquarters buffer zone

domination rule role

commitment involvement evil menace

halt tenure (personal) gain

term take over (v) takeover (n)

policy

withdraw flee overthrow bent on (stopping)

32

L’obiettivo è, ovviamente quello di esporre gli studenti alle key words che incontreranno nel testo oggetto della lecture, ma che potranno essere utili anche nel corso della discussion che la precede.

D. Discussion4

Attività 2.d.1 (10 / 15min) La class discussion è finalizzata a mettere in luce le pre-conoscenze sulla la Guerra del Vietnam già in possesso degli studenti. Verranno utilizzate le seguenti domande che forniranno delle linee guida per la discussione:

• Who fought against whom in the Vietnam War? • Why did the United States become involved in Vietnam, and why did it increase its

involvement into the 1970s? • What specific events marked the beginning of the United States’ active military campaign

against North Vietnam? (e.g., the Gulf of Tonkin Resolution) • What was the initial public sentiment in the United States regarding U.S. involvement in

Vietnam?

Anche per questa attività si prevede una iniziale discussione all’interno dei gruppi (che permetterà di comprendere e chiarire le posizioni ed i punti di vista che si intende sostenere) e quindi una discussione plenaria. Per questa attività è previsto che il ruolo di secretary sia svolto da uno due docenti, così che ogni studente possa concentrarsi sulla interazione orale e possa esprimere le proprie idee e convinzioni. Verrà fornito, inoltre, un Handout5 con una serie di espressioni utili che potranno facilitare e favorire interventi ordinati nella discussione. Sarà compito dei docenti far si che tutti abbiano la possibilità di intervenie ed esprimersi, moderando con attenzione il dibattito.

E. Lecture Atività 2.E.1 (10 / 15min) Prima dell’attività di listening viene proposta una breve attività di Predictionn&matching sulle figure più significative della Guerra del Vietnan. Si tratta di mettere insieme il nome con l’immagine ed una brevissima sintesi biografica. Attività 2.E.2 (10 / 15min) Il docente terrà una breve lecture (supportata da una sintesi in PPT e corredata da immagini) sulla Vietnam War. Gli alunni, volendo, possono svolgere un’attività di note taking. I materiali della lecture verranno comunque inseriti in calce allo Student’s workbook 6 e nel blog di lavoro, così che possano essere consultati successivamente dagli studenti. La lecture è finalizzata a fornire le coordinate dell’argomento trattato.

F. Browsing the Internet and Discussion Attività 2.F.1 (15/20 min)

Gli alunni sono invitati a descrivere ciò che sanno (o credono di sapere), sul modo in cui l’opinione pubblica Americana reagì alla Guerra nel VietNam tra la fine degli anni ‘60 e gli inizi degli anni ‘70. Quali sono le loro impressioni su questo periodo? Quali sono le immagini che hanno visto o ricordano di questo periodo negli US? Per aiutarli a mettere a fuoco vengono forniti una serie di link. Le single impressioni ed osservazioni verranno poi condivise con il gruppo, che dedicherà una

4 attività adattata da http://school.discoveryeducation.com/lessonplans/programs/vietnam/ 5 Vedi Handout 1 6 Vedi Handout XX

33

decina di minuti alla ricerca su internet. Verranno quindi selezionate le immagini, idee ritenute più significative e che verranno presentate alla classe con le modalità usuali. I risultati delle presentazioni dei gruppi verranno quindi salvate. Sebbene si tratti di un’attività cooperativa, verrà sollecitato ogni studente ad offrire il proprio contributo alla discussion che accompagnerà e seguirà la presentazione dei materiali raccolti.

G. Oral interaction Task 2.G.1 (10/15min) A questo punto si rende necessario precisare e ricordare agli studenti che, sebbene siano stati probabilmente colpiti in particolare dalle immagini di protesta antimilitariste, non tutti negli Stati Uniti erano contrari all’intervento militare. Si chiederà agli studenti, quindi, se sono a conoscenza di qualche attuale leader (si porterà l’esempio dell’ex presidente George W. Bush) che negli anni ‘60 non partecipò alle dimostrazioni contro la guerra nel VietNam. E’ importante che gli studenti siano consapevoli del fatto che, sebbene i sentimenti antimilitariste erano particolarmente forti, una parte dei giovani erano d’accordo con la politica del governo Americano, o comunque provavano sentimenti ambivalenti verso la guerra e i coloro che contestavano.

Questa attività prevedere una interazione orale tra studenti e docente, e tra studenti. Gli studenti saranno incoraggiati ad intervenire in L2. Trattandosi di una produzione spontanea si eviterà con cura di interrompere e/o correggere eventuali errori o imprecisioni. Uno dei due docenti prenderà nota di ogni aspetto (lessicale, grammaticale, scelta di registro) che richieda chiarimenti o precisazioni. Queste verranno differite ad un momento successivo, prevedendo una attività specifica di riflessione linguistica da realizzarsi durante l’ora curricolare di L2.

H. Browsing the Internet and Reading Task 2.H.1 (10/15min in class, to be completed at home) Affinché gli studenti si formino un’idea di quali fossero le ragioni di coloro che negli anni ’60 sostenevano o si opponevano alla Guerra in Vietnam li studenti saranno invitati a visitare due siti che contengono due documenti cruciali per una piena valutazione delle due posizioni antagoniste, ovvero il discorso alla Nazione tenuto dall’allora presidente degli Stati Uniti Nixon (passato alla storia come “The Silent Majority” Speech e la deposizione resa dal veterano della Guerra del Vietnam John Karry.

• Nixon’s Address to the Nation on the War in Vietnam—“The Silent Majority” Speech, November 3, 1969:President Nixon's Address to the Nation on the War in Vietnam

• Vietnam War Veteran John Kerry’s Testimony Before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, April 22, 1971:Statement of John Kerry

In classe gi studenti si limiteranno a prendere visione dei due siti. L’attività verrà completata a casa. Verrà fornito il file con la trascrizione didattizzata dei due testi. Ad ogni studenti sarà assegnato il compito di leggere uno dei due testi e rispondere alle domande dell’ activity sheet “Comparing

arguments”. Gli studenti sono inoltre sollecitati a prendere appunti su ogni aspetto del testo che desiderano discutere in classe. Inoltre dovranno preparare un sintesi del testo di circa 100 parole.

(NB= Since you will read just one of the two documents, you’ll be able to answer just to some of the questions!)

a. What did Nixon believe would be the consequences of immediate U.S. withdrawal from Vietnam?

34

b. What specific events did Nixon cite to support his arguments against “precipitate troop withdrawal”?

c. What is meant by “Silent Majority”? d. What did John Kerry believe about the alleged threat that North Vietnam posed to the

United States? e. What did John Kerry believe were the results of Nixon’s policies as spelled out in the 1969

“Silent Majority” speech? f. What did Nixon mean by “Vietnamization,” and what did Kerry think of this policy?

3.4. UNIT 3 (1h) L’attività cardine di questa Unità prevede la condivisione dei risultati delle attività di reading

realizzate a casa. Questa attività dovrebbe portare naturalmente ad un confronto sul tema centrale, ovvero, Opposing views of Vietneam. L’obiettivo principale è quello di fornire ulteriori elementi di conoscenza e riflessione della e sulla guerra in VietNam, e sulle diverse posizioni assunte dall’opinione pubblica statunitense (e di riflesso europea). Si comincerà inoltre a definire come si procederà nel lavoro, avendo presente l’obiettivo finale ovvero il task conclusivo che dovrà essere il risultato del cooperazione e collaborazione di tutti, secondo i propri interessi, inclinazioni ed attitudini. Da questa unità in poi, alcune delle attività – attentamente selezionate dai due docenti - saranno oggetto di valutazione.

35

CONCLUSIONI Con il presente lavoro abbiamo gettato le basi per una sperimentazione che inizierà a breve. Mentre stiamo scrivendo, infatti, il modulo di storia in inglese è stato presentato al Collegio Docenti che lo ha approvato. Si passerà quindi al vaglio del Consiglio di Classe (allargato a tutti i genitori e studenti). Possiamo però già cominciare a trarre qualche conclusione, nonostante il lavoro sia ancora tutto da realizzare. Possiamo infatti rispondere alla domanda iniziale che ci eravamo posti: “E’ possibile insegnare storia in L2 nello stesso modo in cui si insegna nella L1?”. La risposta è sicuramente no: per predisporre il modulo è stato infatti necessario - lavorare su materiali autentici che sono stati didattizzati, “trattati” affinché gli studenti siano nelle condizioni di potervi accedere - lavorare a lungo sullo Student’s Workbook, affinché diventasse realmente uno strumento utile a raccogliere i materiali e le attività. - lavorare con attenzione alla strutturazione delle attività e sulle consegne, affinché gli studenti abbiano la possibilità di comprendere senza fraintendimenti le istruzioni e le consegne dei docenti in L2, e possano quindi utilizzare in modo efficace le proprie competenze in L2 per la comunicazione all’interno del gruppo - prevedere con largo anticipo quali saranno le attività di verifica. Entro breve tempo si avranno i primissimi riscontri e si renderà probabilmente necessario qualche aggiustamento del planning originale, anche alla luce delle risposte e delle indicazioni che verranno dagli studenti rispetto al progetto ed alle attività proposte.

36

Vietnam War - Sitography

� http://school.discoveryeducation.com/lessonplans/programs/vietnam/

un “lesson plan” molto dettagliato

� http://www.digitalhistory.uh.edu/modules/vietnam/index.cfm

guida a materiali didattici (immagini, documenti, carte)

� http://www.vietnam.ttu.edu/teachers

sito didattico specializzato molto ricco di materiali didattici, comprese carte eccezionali, e di

proposte didattiche.

� http://www.historyplace.com/unitedstates/vietnam/index.html)

contiene una sezione dedicata al Vietnam

� http://www.pbs.org/battlefieldvietnam/

pensato per la didattica, contiene numerosi links

� (http://www.pbs.org/battlefieldvietnam/resources/index.html

http://www.pbs.org/battlefieldvietnam/resources/web.html):

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/amex/vietnam/maps/map_pop_intro.html

mappa storica interattiva

� http://www.vietnampix.com

con sitografia

� http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vietnam_War � http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opposition_to_the_US_involvement_in_the_Vietnam_War � www.pbs.org/battlefieldvietnam � www.wilsoncenter.org/coldwarfiles/index.cfm?fuseaction=units.welcome&thisunit=3 � http://www.wilsoncenter.org/coldwarfiles/index.cfm?fuseaction=activities.details&thisunit=

3&activityid=28 � http://www.wilsoncenter.org/coldwarfiles/index.cfm?fuseaction=activities.details&thisunit=

3&activityid=28

� www.jwsrockgarden.com/jw02vvaw.htm � www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ev2dEqrN4i0 � www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nl58QbpVLHw � www.youtube.com/watch?v=lTJgMmHZNYQ � www.youtube.com/watch?v=TmZrFDvnok0

37

S e s s i o n e d i r i c e r c a i n r e t eS e s s i o n e d i r i c e r c a i n r e t eS e s s i o n e d i r i c e r c a i n r e t eS e s s i o n e d i r i c e r c a i n r e t e

Progetto della ricerca 1.1.1.1. Obiettivo della ricerca:

2.2.2.2. Materiali già posseduti (es. testi, bibliografia, sitografia):

3.3.3.3. Materiali ricercati:

Informazioni

Documenti

4.4.4.4. Parole-chiave della ricerca:

5.5.5.5. Per iniziare la ricerca saranno utilizzati i seguenti:

motori di ricerca

Portali

Siti specialistici

forum, gruppi di discussione

Conclusione della ricercaConclusione della ricercaConclusione della ricercaConclusione della ricerca

6.6.6.6. Siti consultati:

7.7.7.7. Siti che sono risultati particolarmente utili:

8.8.8.8. Siti che potranno essere utili per altre ricerche:

9.9.9.9. Materiali trovati (es. voci enciclopediche, documenti, immagini, articoli, sitografie, archivi):

Stampati

Salvati nel seguente percorso:

10.10.10.10. L’obiettivo della ricerca è stato raggiunto?

Sì No In parte

11.11.11.11. L’obiettivo è cambiato nel corso della ricerca? Perché?

12.12.12.12. Qual è il nuovo obiettivo?

(scheda liberamente ispirata a P. BECHERINI, Storia ragioni & passioni. Strumenti per l’insegnante, La Nuova Italia, Milano 2006, p. 13