# Treaty Courtroom Lesson Plan

Class: Citizenship 9 | Topic: Peace and Friendship Treaties
Students: 28 | Format: discussion-heavy; minimal writing

## Timing (60-75 min)

1. Entry + 7-min NotebookLM overview video: Europeans in Mi'kma'ki, contact impacts, signing pressure, treaties, modern disputes.
2. 12-min fact priming: timeline, map, key clauses, vocabulary.
3. 8-min team prep: groups receive role cards + 2-4 clause cards.
4. 20-min courtroom trial.
5. 5-min reveal of no-land-cession / "as long as the sun shines" language.
6. 10-min modern-implications debrief.
7. 5-min exit ticket / voice note.

## Structure for 28 Students

Four groups of 7:

- Group A: Mi'kmaw delegation
- Group B: British Crown delegation
- Group C: Modern community perspectives (Mi'kmaw, fishermen, environmental, colonial descendants)
- Group D: Justices / observers

Every non-justice student gets 2 speaking chips. A student must spend one chip before repeating, and cannot use a second until all others in their group have spoken once.

## Team Prep Materials

All of these are pre-built in **`Cit9_Treaty_Courtroom_Materials.html`** (print 6 pages, single-sided; teacher cuts):

- Facilitator page (teacher copy): run of show, deal list, chips rules, Round-5 reveal script, trial rubric.
- Page 2 — Timeline & Mi'kma'ki handout: one per student, kept for the whole trial (the shared factual base; timeline, key words, no argument structure).
- Page 3 — Role cards ×4 (Groups A–D), each with a "must be able to say" line and the historical-position framing.
- Page 4 — Clause cards ×8 (1752 "as usual", truckhouse verbatim, no-cession, peace-after-war, trade-under-Crown, Section 35 verbatim, oral understanding, who-signed).
- Page 5 — Evidence cards ×8 (two per round: Marshall/St. Mary's Bay, never-ceded/consent-vs-consultation, oral-vs-written, nation-to-nation/Crown law).
- Page 6 — Justice question slips ×12 (8 printed + 4 blank).

## Courtroom Rounds

1. Opening statements: 2 minutes per side.
2. Evidence round 1: fishery / moderate livelihood.
3. Evidence round 2: unceded land and resource projects.
4. Evidence round 3: written text vs oral tradition.
5. Evidence round 4: sovereignty vs submission or harvesting rights.
6. Rebuttals: 1 minute per side.
7. Justices ask questions and announce a preliminary ruling.

## Assessment

Formative during trial using the rubric below. Summative: one exit ticket or a 45-60 second voice note responding to one modern-implications prompt. Avoid a full essay unless needed for follow-up.

### Trial Rubric (per student)

- Evidence use: 0-4
- Historical/ treaty accuracy: 0-4
- Listening and rebuttal: 0-4
- Participation equity: 0-3
- Respectful language: 0-3

Total: 18 points.

### Exit Ticket / Voice Note Prompts

- Do all treaty provisions apply in 2026? Explain one example.
- What is the difference between consultation and consent in treaty relationships?
- Does "we are all treaty people" create rights only, or responsibilities too?
- What should count as evidence when interpreting a treaty: written text, oral history, or both?

## Clause Cards To Prepare

Mi'kmaw-side emphasizes:

- Treaties were agreements between equal nations.
- Peace and Friendship did not surrender land.
- Treaty rights continue today.
- Hunting and fishing "as usual" was protected.
- Oral history and spirit/intent matter.

British/Crown-side emphasizes:

- Written treaty text creates legal boundaries.
- Treaties established peace under Crown sovereignty.
- Governments may regulate for conservation and public objectives.
- Modern law needs defined limits.
- Consultation is required, but not necessarily full consent.

## Teacher Notes

- **Framing (important):** Groups A and B study the *historical negotiating positions* of 1760 —
  students are never role-playing an ethnicity or putting Mi'kmaw rights "on trial." Say this out
  loud before groupings; the respectful-language rubric line backs it up. This answers the concern
  that stopped the earlier adversarial-trial design (see `Treaty_Inquiry_Lesson_Plan_Paper.md` §2).
- Keep the first 12 minutes focused on historical context, not modern claims.
- Introduce the "how free were Mi'kmaq leaders to sign?" beat before the trial — it is in the video
  source doc (§3 "Were the Mi'kmaq free to sign?") and clause card 8.
- Use the video source document for the NotebookLM/Gemini overview.
- End by naming one concrete modern question students will investigate next.
- Build spec, outcome traceability, and the Gate A/B/C QA log: `Treaty_Kit_Build_Spec_QA.md`.
- The paper docket (`Cit9_Treaty_Inquiry_Student_Dossier.html`, CIT9-TR10) works as an
  individual-evidence follow-up class; its 18-point rubric matches this trial rubric's shape.