The Common Core and
Historical
Investigations: Reading
History and The Panama
Canal
Bruce A. Lesh
Franklin High School
Reisterstown, Maryland
Myths about Primary Sources
• Primary sources are more reliable than secondary
• Primary sources can be read as arguments about the
past
• Historians use a “sourcing heuristic to evaluate bias and
reliability
• Using primary sources engages students in authentic
historical inquiry
• Students can build up an understanding of the past
through primary sources
• Sources can be classified as primary or secondary
Keith Barton. Primary Sources in History: Breaking Through the Myths. 2005
Uses for historical sources
•
•
•
•
To motivate historical inquiry
To supply evidence for historical accounts
To convey information about the past
To provide insight into the thoughts and
experiences of people in the past
Keith Barton. Primary Sources in History: Breaking Through the Myths. 2005
“As every teacher knows, few students have the
skills necessary to conduct inquiry on their own.
Although inquiry is essential to education, simply
assigning such tasks won’t guarantee meaningful
results. Most students need direct help to make
the most of their experiences, and teachers’ most
important responsibilities is to provide them with
the structure they need to learn—a process known
as scaffolding.”
Linda Levstik and Keith Barton Doing History
(2005)
USING APPARTS TO ANALYZE DOCUMENTS
AUTHOR
Who created the source? What do you know about the author? What is the author's point of view?
PLACE AND TIME
Where and when was the source produced? How might this affect the meaning of the source?
PRIOR KNOWLEDGE
Beyond information about the author and the context of its creation, what do you know that would
help you further understand the primary source? For example, do you recognize any symbols and
recall what they represent?
AUDIENCE
For whom was the source created and how might this affect the reliability of the source?
REASON
Why was this source produced at the time it was produced?
THE MAIN IDEA
What main point is the source trying to convey? What is the central message of the document?
SIGNIFICANCE
Why is this source important? What inferences can you draw from this document? Ask yourself, "So
what?" What should a student of history or politics take away from the analysis of this document?
Defining First/Second/and Third-Order Documents
• First-Order - The most essential primary source for the
teacher on a particular topic in history.
• Second-Order - Three to five primary or secondary sources
that challenge or corroborate the central idea in the FirstOrder document. These documents, selected by the teacher,
provide a nuanced understanding of the topic by offering
multiple perspectives.
• Third-Order - Additional primary or secondary sources that
students find to challenge or corroborate the First-Order
document. Ultimately, students should select a Third-Order
document to serve as their First-Order document.
Fred Drake and Sarah Drake Brown. A Systemic Approach to Improve Students’ Historical Thinking
A tool to help students develop
skills to analyze primary sources
SCIM-C Strategy
Goal- to help students have a more “precise,
recursive, and thoughtful approach to
historical inquiry”
Summary
• Quick examination of the source
– What type of document is the source?
– What specific information, details and/or
perspectives does the source provide?
– What is the subject area and/or purpose of
the source?
– Who was the author and/or audience of the
source?
Contextualizing
• Locating the source within time and space
– When and where was the source produced?
– Why was the source produced?
– What was happening within the immediate
broader context at the time the source was
produced?
– What summarizing information can place the
source in time and place?
Inferring
• Revisiting initial facts to begin reading the
subtexts and developing an understand of the
context
– What is suggested by the source?
– What interpretations may be drawn?
– What perspectives or points of view are
indicated?
– What interferences may be drawn from
absences or omissions in the source?
M
onitoring
• Reflect upon what has been discovered based upon the
historical question
– What additional evidence beyond the source is
necessary to answer the historical question?
– What ideas, images, or terms need further defining?
– How useful or significant is the source for its
intended purpose in answering the historical
question?
– What question from the previous stages need to be
revisited in order to analyze the source
satisfactorily?
Corroborating
• Once a series of sources have been analyzed students can
now begin to determine similarities and differences
between the interpretations
– What similarities and differences between the sources
exist?
– What factors could account for these similarities and
differences?
– What conclusions can be drawn from the accumulated
interpretations?
– What additional information or sources are necessary to
answer more fully the guiding historical questions?
Sourcing
Before reading the document ask yourself:
• Who wrote this?
• What is the author’s point of view?
• Why was it written?
• When was it written? (A long time or short
time after the event?)
• Is this source believable? Why?
• Why not?
•
•
•
•
Contextualizing
What else was going on at the time this was
written?
What was it like to be alive at this time?
What things were different back then? What
things were the same?
What would it look like to see this event through
the eyes of someone who lived back then?
•
•
•
•
•
Close Reading
What claims does the author make?
What evidence does the author use to support
those claims?
How is this document supposed to make me
feel?
What words or phrases does the author use to
convince me that he/she is right?
What information does the author leave out?
Corroboration
• What do other pieces of evidence say?
• Am I finding the same information
everywhere?
• Am I finding different versions of the story? (If
yes, why might that be?)
• Where else could I look to find out about this?
• What pieces of evidence are most believable?
Source work terms
• Text: What is visible/readable--what information is provided
by the source?
• Context: What was going on during the time period? What
background information do you have that helps explain the
information found in the source?
• Subtext: What is between the lines? Must ask questions
about:
– Author: Who created the source and what do we know
about that person?
– Audience: For whom was the source created?
– Reason: Why was this source produced at the time it was
produced?
– Style: How does the author use language and rhetorical
devices to convey meaning?
“As every teacher knows, few students have the
skills necessary to conduct inquiry on their own.
Although inquiry is essential to education, simply
assigning such tasks won’t guarantee meaningful
results. Most students need direct help to make
the most of their experiences, and teachers’ most
important responsibilities is to provide them with
the structure they need to learn—a process known
as scaffolding.”
Linda Levstik and Keith Barton Doing History
(2005)
What are the differences?
The truth
A lie
A half-truth
An exaggeration
Obfuscation
(hiding the truth)
1850
Clayton-Bulwer Treaty : The United States and
agree to seek an independent canal.
1898
20-year French effort to build a canal fails after 300
million dollars and thousands of lives are lost
1901
Hay-Poncefote Treaty: British relinquish their
construct a canal
Britain
rights to
1903 : Convinced by French construction manager, Philippe
Bunau-Varilla, the United States agrees to construct a
Colombian canal rather than one in Nicaragua.
1903
Hay-Herran Treaty: United States and Columbia
agree to lease the United States a strip of land for 100 years
for $40 Million.
1903
Rejected by the Colombian Parliament.
What happens between the treaties rejection and the
construction of the canal?
1904
Canal construction begins
Philippe-Jean BunauVarilla
President Theodore Roosevelt
“No one connected with the American Government had
any part in preparing, inciting, or encouraging the
revolution, and except for the reports of our military
and naval officers, which I forwarded to Congress, no
one connected with the American government had
any previous knowledge concerning the proposed
revolution…”
“From the beginning to the end our course was
straightforward and in absolute accord with the
highest of standards of international morality…I did
not lift my finger to incite the revolutionists…I simply
ceased to stamp out the different revolutionary fuses
that were already burning…”
What is Theodore Roosevelt doing in his autobiography
• Truth
• A lie
• A half-truth
• An exaggeration
• Obfuscation
(hiding the truth)
• Examine your evidence and
determine if it provides support
for President Roosevelt's
argument or challenges it.
• Be sure to consider the context
and subtext of your source
Source
Type of Source
The Man Who The interview was given to an investigative journalist 37 years after the events.
Invented
Bunau-Varilla was almost 90 years old at the time of the interview.
Panama –
Interview of
Bunau Varilla
This was a private letter (not intended for public consumption) between the
Private Letter former President and his former Secretary of State. The letter was written in
to Hay
1912, after Roosevelt failed in his bid to win the presidency as a Progressive.
What does I
took Panama
Mean
“The Man
Behind the
Egg”: Cartoon
Written after Roosevelt’s death
by former French engineer and first Panamanian Minister to America.
Written as a personal narrative of what happened in Panama, and was the
second book written by Bunau-Varilla about the Panamanian Revolution.
Published in the New York Times investigative story on the events in Panama
Muckraking attempt to investigate the president.
Written in protest of the presence of United States Navy and Marines in
Letter by Jose Panama at the outset of the Panamanian Revolution. Marroquin supported the
Marroquin Hay-Herran Treaty but felt mistreated by the United States after the revolution
as worried that the loss of Panama might lead to his loss of power in Columbia.
The New York Times attempted to counter the yellow journalism of other New
“Panama or York newspapers. The paper was not supportive of American imperial efforts.
Bust” Cartoon
"Panama or Bust," The New York Times, 1903
Artist unknown
Philippe Bunau-Varilla in a 1940 interview with reporter Eric
Sevareid of CBS News
“I called on Mr. Roosevelt and asked him point
blank if, when the revolt broke out, an
American warship would be sent to Panama to
“protect American lives and interest.” The
President looked at me; he said nothing. Of
course a President of the United States could
not give such a commitment, especially to a
foreigner and private citizen like me. But his
look was enough for me. I took the gamble.”
WHAT DOES "I TOOK PANAMA" MEAN?
The only straw at which their drowning calumny could clutch was the celebrated
phrase: "I took Panama," which Theodore Roosevelt pronounced in California.
When the sentence was reported by the papers I understood that it meant: "I took
Panama because Panama offered herself in order to be protected against
Colombia's tyranny and greed."
Recently in speaking to a distinguished visitor to Oyster Bay---William Morton
Fullerton, the eminent writer on international problems---Theodore Roosevelt
explained the sentence in this familiar way: "I took Panama because Bunau-Varilla
brought it to me on a silver platter."
It is obvious that Theodore Roosevelt's own interpretation of his sentence harmonizes
entirely with mine.
It does not mean as the advocates of Colombia say: "I took Panama away from her
mother country Colombia because the interests of the United States wanted it." It
means: "I protected Panama, at her pressing request, from the tyrannical greed of
Colombia, because her preservation and the world's interests wanted it."
Philippe Bunau-Varilla. The Great Adventure of Panama: Wherein Are Exposed Its
Relation to the Great War and also the Luminous Traces of The German
Conspiracies Against France and the United States. Doubleday, Page & Company:
Garden City, New York, 1920.
Chicago Tribune
November 6, 1903
“Panama Revolt Sets back Canal”
Apparently the creation of a new republic on the Isthmus of Panama by
means of a successful revolution was the only means of circumventing the
greedy officials of Bogotá, who were always willing to sell themselves out
to the highest bidder. It has been freely alleged that the United States
officials on the Isthmus, while they did not actually participate in the
revolution, allowed it to be understood that the United States would be
friendly to a revolutionary move and would preserve the neutrality of
Panama railroad so completely as to prevent the Columbian government
from forwarding troops and munitions of war along that line. Such a
charge is a serious thing from an international standpoint, and President
Roosevelt’s administration will not be anxious to pose as a receiver of
stolen property or as have having aided and abetted a revolution to secure
to itself personal advantages.
Philippe-Jean BunauVarilla
Hay-Bunau-Varilla Treaty
“Go Away
Little Man
and Don’t
Bother Me”
New York
World
“Uncle Sam has Already Collected the Philippines, Guam, and Hawaii and it Looks Like
Panama is his Next Victim: The Anneser’ll Get You ef You Don’t Watch Out.” New York
Times, 12/1903
PANAMA CANAL CARTOON, 1903. President Theodore Roosevelt, assisted by Secretary of State John Hay, 'taking' Panama: American
cartoon, 1903, by Charles G. Bush
Reading Standards for History/Social Studies
Knowledge of domain-specific vocabulary
Analyze, evaluate, and differentiate primary
and secondary sources
Synthesize quantitative and technical
information, including facts presented in
maps, timelines, flowcharts, or diagrams
Intentional and explicit instruction for
students as they interact with disciplinespecific text
Source Work/Historical Literacy
Text: What is visible/readable--what information is
provided by the source?
Context: What was going on during the time period?
What background information do you have that helps
explain the information found in the source?
Subtext: What is between the lines? Must ask
questions about:
• Author: Who created the source and what do we know about that
person?
• Audience: For whom was the source created?
• Reason: Why was this source produced at the time it was
produced?
Reading Strategies and Historical Sources
Sourcing: When a reader thinks about a
document’s author and why the document was
created.
Contextualizing: When a reader situates a
document and its content in place and time.
Corroborating: When a reader asks
questions about important details across
multiple source to determine points of
agreement and disagreement.
http://historicalthinkingmatters.org/why.php
Writing Standards for History/Social Studies
 Write arguments on discipline-specific content
and informative/explanatory texts
 Make arguments or claims and support those with
the use of data, evidence, and reason
 Apply domain-specific vocabulary through writing
exercises unique to each discipline

Expect students to compose arguments and opinions,
informative/explanatory pieces, and narrative texts

Focus on the use of reason and evidence to substantiate an
argument or claim

Emphasize ability to conduct research – short projects and
sustained inquiry
Source
Type of Source
The Man Who The interview was given to an investigative journalist 37 years after the events.
Invented
Bunau-Varilla was almost 90 years old at the time of the interview.
Panama –
Interview of
Bunau Varilla
This was a private letter (not intended for public consumption) between the
Private Letter former President and his former Secretary of State. The letter was written in
to Hay
1912, after Roosevelt failed in his bid to win the presidency as a Progressive.
What does I
took Panama
Mean
“The Man
Behind the
Egg”: Cartoon
Written after Roosevelt’s death
by former French engineer and first Panamanian Minister to America.
Written as a personal narrative of what happened in Panama, and was the
second book written by Bunau-Varilla about the Panamanian Revolution.
Published in the New York Times investigative story on the events in Panama
Muckraking attempt to investigate the president.
Written in protest of the presence of United States Navy and Marines in
Letter by Jose Panama at the outset of the Panamanian Revolution. Marroquin supported the
Marroquin Hay-Herran Treaty but felt mistreated by the United States after the revolution
as worried that the loss of Panama might lead to his loss of power in Columbia.
The New York Times was developed to counter the yellow journalism of other
“Panama or New York newspapers. The paper was not supportive of American imperial
Bust” Cartoon efforts.
"Panama or Bust," The New York Times, 1903
Artist unknown
Philippe Bunau-Varilla in a 1940 interview with reporter Eric
Sevareid of CBS News
“I called on Mr. Roosevelt and asked him point
blank if, when the revolt broke out, an
American warship would be sent to Panama to
“protect American lives and interest.” The
President looked at me; he said nothing. Of
course a President of the United States could
not give such a commitment, especially to a
foreigner and private citizen like me. But his
look was enough for me. I took the gamble.”
WHAT DOES "I TOOK PANAMA" MEAN?
The only straw at which their drowning calumny could clutch was the celebrated
phrase: "I took Panama," which Theodore Roosevelt pronounced in California.
When the sentence was reported by the papers I understood that it meant: "I took
Panama because Panama offered herself in order to be protected against
Colombia's tyranny and greed."
Recently in speaking to a distinguished visitor to Oyster Bay---William Morton
Fullerton, the eminent writer on international problems---Theodore Roosevelt
explained the sentence in this familiar way: "I took Panama because Bunau-Varilla
brought it to me on a silver platter."
It is obvious that Theodore Roosevelt's own interpretation of his sentence harmonizes
entirely with mine.
It does not mean as the advocates of Colombia say: "I took Panama away from her
mother country Colombia because the interests of the United States wanted it." It
means: "I protected Panama, at her pressing request, from the tyrannical greed of
Colombia, because her preservation and the world's interests wanted it."
Philippe Bunau-Varilla. The Great Adventure of Panama: Wherein Are Exposed Its
Relation to the Great War and also the Luminous Traces of The German
Conspiracies Against France and the United States. Doubleday, Page & Company:
Garden City, New York, 1920.
Chicago Tribune
November 6, 1903
“Panama Revolt Sets back Canal”
Apparently the creation of a new republic on the Isthmus of Panama by
means of a successful revolution was the only means of circumventing the
greedy officials of Bogotá, who were always willing to sell themselves out
to the highest bidder. It has been freely alleged that the United States
officials on the Isthmus, while they did not actually participate in the
revolution, allowed it to be understood that the United States would be
friendly to a revolutionary move and would preserve the neutrality of
Panama railroad so completely as to prevent the Columbian government
from forwarding troops and munitions of war along that line. Such a
charge is a serious thing from an international standpoint, and President
Roosevelt’s administration will not be anxious to pose as a receiver of
stolen property or as have having aided and abetted a revolution to secure
to itself personal advantages.
Subtext, the students argue:
• “explains why they wrote the given document…”
• “was important to know who created the source, for when the source was
created, and why it was made. Each author had different opinions on the
Panama Canal.”
• “Everyone had an agenda on what they wanted to try to fulfill, making
them point out what they thought was important.”
• “showed who actually wrote the document and where the document came
from.”
• “It was important to consider subtext of the documents because the
subtext determined whether the source was reliable enough to base our
opinion on.”
• “reading between the lines gives you a much better insite [sic] on what
people were really thinking and the true intentions of the character of the
source.”
• “was important to see the background and views of the authors.”
• “we took the sources a different way before we saw the subtext and they
helped us find the real story.”
• “if you only look at the document itself you will not be able to see if the
truth is being covered in the subtext, so your document could be false.”
• “subtext tells us why and for whom the text was written so we can
establish bias.”
• “For who [sic] it was written and why it was written can vouch for the
validity behind a source.”
One student responded that:
“The whole ordeal was complicated by the various
motives. The most helpful source was the letter
between Roosevelt and Hay because there were no
facades. In his autobiography, Roosevelt was
obfuscating in order to make himself look better.”
Complementing this was the comment that “cartoons
may show a skewed opinion only to sell newspapers.
Letters are more reliable. Roosevelt’s autobiography
was hiding the truth. He did this to protect his legacy.”
Here students are making connections between
subtext (author, audience, purpose) and the sources
and then employing this in their interpretation of the
past. In addition, they consider both the sources and
their connection to the broader investigation. Instead
of compartmentalizing their thinking on each separate
source, students are instead linking them into a
narrative interpretation of the lesson’s focus question.
Student responses about historical investigations included:
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
“to know the context and subtext in order to prevent lies, half truths, exaggerations, and
obfuscations.”
“research the documents to find out who wrote them, why, and during what time period.”
Look at all of the sources, where they came from, and the bias. Most importantly, their intent on
sharing the information should be looked at.”
“examine the source by looking at the sequence, the writer, time period, the intention of the
document and putting it all together.”
“obtain data that has two sides of the argument.”
“find out who sources are, or are coming from, and consider why they may be telling an event in a
certain manner.”
“identify key people in the event, determine the main idea and what is happening, and see how the
time period effects [sic] it.”
“look at all the sources and know where they are coming from.”
“Look at the context, subtext, and text and all the reasoning behind it and multiple sources.”
“Think about the message of the source.”
“look at the date of the source, the author of the source, and the situation it was written about to
understand why it was written.”
“Leave my options open, and look up as many sources as possible and compare the information
given.”
“Look to see who wrote the source and where the source came from. When reading a source
about a man, you should look to see if the man wrote the source himself.”
“You need to evaluate the context and subtext, meaning why documents were written and for
whom. People are unreliable so a variety of sources need to be considered.”
This approach is encapsulated in the following student reflections:
• “review all sources and take out the biased.”
• “not be biased, and try to piece all of the puzzle
together to try and find the truth.”
• “Use a single strong evidence to eliminate source
that are contradicting each other.”
• “Gather many sources, primary and secondary, and
pick out the most common things.”
• “look at different sources and pick out information
that you know is true. You must pull out only the
facts and leave out information that you know could
be biased or unreliable.”
• “analyze all different sources and have a background
on the time period and events going on.”
•
•
•
•
•
•
“Also, the political cartoons are biased against him, so they are going to
exaggerate the bad things Teddy did. The interviews with Philippe B-V [sic] is
[sic] also against him, and it was taken long after the issue of the Panama
Canal.”
“I believe Roosevelt knew about the events in order to protect his own
reputation. In a letter he wrote, he said he was tired of those Columbians; his
intentions were there.”
“However, other sources such as political cartoons depict that Roosevelt took
Panama over and broke laws, but also helped Panama to get free from
Columbia… Even though the source may have biased opinions based on the
point of view that is presenting evidence on whether or not he did nothing or
he really did something no source completely agree [sic] with Roosevelt’s point
of view.”
“In one of Roosevelt’s private letters [letter from Roosevelt to Secretary of State
John Hay]…he writes that he is fed up with Columbia and is going to focus on
Panama now…”
“The cartoons were biased but all of the events included in them, including
Roosevelt breaking laws, could not have all been made up…The Muckrakers
[creators of the cartoons or the newspapers/magazines in which they were
published?] might also be exaggerating Roosevelt’s involvement b/c [sic] they
didn’t support Roosevelt…”
“However, others, like the Columbians and the Muckrakers, while not the most
honorable sources, believe Roosevelt did play a role…”
“The various types of sources used to determine the purpose of Roosevelt’s
autobiography created problems because…”:
• “each source had different subtexts. Different authors created each source which
created biased information. Some authors agreed w/ President Roosevelt, and some
did not.”
• “Everyone had their own opinion about what they believe. Some were for and others
against.”
• “Few of them challenged President Roosevelt’s contentions while other [sic]
supported the contention. Most of them were biased because news articles and
cartoons usually only try to show their own viewpoint through untrue stories.”
• “They were US sources. Some of them were created by Panamanians. They all had
different views.”
• “The truth was twisted in order to make Roosevelt look bad or good. The creaters
[sic] of the documents had a purpose in writing or making the source, so they gave
what information they wanted.”
• “We didn’t know what the reasons were behind each sources telling of the events.
There was a whole lot of bias from the President [Roosevelt] and Philippe [BunauVarilla] who wanted to cast themselves in a good light…”
• “Letters and Articles can’t be changed because they are primary sources. Plus they
are not written by the president of him just the people and the press.”
• “They were all different sources saying different things. Some were letters from
Roosevelt which meant they were lies. Others were newspaper articles and political
cartoons which were biased. It was hard to know which one to believe.”
• “they all varied in opinions of whether they agreed with what Roosevelt said in his
autobiography.”
• “They were from many different views and we could not determine the real story
without the subtext.”
• “some were credible and some were not based on the subtext of the texts.”
http://historicalthinkingmatters.org/why.html