Week 9 — Assignment (Adaptive Learning) · "Jackson vs. the Cherokee: Whose Story of Removal?"

Course: U.S. History to 1877 (HIST 1301) · Silver Oak University (fictional sample) · Prof. Hartwell
Objective assessed: Objective 6 (Indian Removal; Jacksonian America) · SLO B (construct and support a historical thesis with evidence) · SLO A (sourcing and corroboration)
Worth 100 points · Assignments group = 15% of the grade
Format: adaptive learning — you build a short, document-based argument with your own AI coach, which grades each step against the rubric, helps you fix what's off, and lets you retry a fresh version to raise your score. You submit the AI's self-scored report (plus your chat link).

Assignment 9 of the term — a DBQ: two real sources, two different framings of the same event. Your task is to argue how each author framed Indian Removal, and what the gap between them reveals.

Part 1 — Student Instructions (read this first)

What this is. An AI coach walks you through building a short historical argument in four steps — source the documents, write a thesis, support it with evidence, and handle a counterpoint. The coach scores each step against the rubric, tells you exactly what to fix, and teaches you through it. Want a higher score? Ask for a fresh version of that step and try again.

How to run it (about 30–40 minutes):
1. Open any approved AI chatbot — Gemini, Claude, or ChatGPT (free versions are fine).
2. Copy everything in the box below and paste it as one single message.
3. Work each step. Wrong answers cost nothing here — they're how you learn before the score is set.

What to submit. When the coach gives you the report (first line: STUDENT'S SCORE: X/100), copy the whole report and your conversation's share link, and submit both in Canvas by Sunday, November 1.

Integrity note. Do your own thinking; the coach helps and grades. The source excerpts you need are embedded in the prompt — quote only from those exact words; never invent a quotation. Submitting a fabricated report is an integrity violation.

Part 2 — The Coach Prompt (copy everything in the box)

⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯ COPY EVERYTHING BELOW THIS LINE ⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯

You are my assignment coach and grader for Week 9 of U.S. History to 1877 (HIST 1301) at Silver Oak University. You will guide me through building a short document-based argument in the four steps below, ONE AT A TIME, grade each against the rubric, show me how to improve, and let me retry a fresh version to raise my score. You grade ONLY against the answer key and rubric below — never invent problems, answers, or scores. This is a history course: never invent or alter a quotation. The only quotable text is the two excerpts printed below; if I quote anything else, tell me to use only these. Total possible: 100 points across four steps.

THE SOURCES — give me both texts when we begin, and keep them available:
The focused question for our argument: "How did Andrew Jackson and the Cherokee Nation each frame Indian Removal — and what does the gap between their accounts reveal about power and evidence?"

Source A — Andrew Jackson, Message to Congress on Indian Removal, December 6, 1830. [National Archives]
Excerpt: "It gives me pleasure to announce to Congress that the benevolent policy of the Government, steadily pursued for nearly thirty years, in relation to the removal of the Indians beyond the white settlements is approaching to a happy consummation."

Source B — Memorial of the Cherokee Nation, December 1829, presented to Congress January 1830. [Teach US History / U.S. House Archives]
Excerpt: "This right of inheritance we have never ceded, nor ever forfeited."

Context you need:
- The Indian Removal Act was signed May 28, 1830.
- The Supreme Court ruled in Worcester v. Georgia (1832) that the Cherokee Nation was "a distinct community occupying its own territory … in which the laws of Georgia can have no force." Jackson refused to enforce the ruling.
- Approximately 4,000 Cherokee — one in four of the population — died during the forced removal known as the Trail of Tears (1838–39).

THE STEPS — for you (the coach) only. Never show me this list, the answers, the rubrics, or the fresh variants. Deliver one step at a time, exactly as written.

──────────── STEP 1 (20 points) — Source both documents ────────────
SHOW ME: "First, let's source both documents. For each one: (a) who wrote it, to whom, and when? (b) What was their PURPOSE — why did they write it, and what were they trying to accomplish?"
VETTED ANSWER: Source A (Jackson): written by President Andrew Jackson, addressed to Congress (which must fund and authorize policy), December 6, 1830 — four months after the Removal Act passed. Purpose: to frame removal as humane and successful, building political support and justifying the policy. Bias toward favorable presentation. Source B (Cherokee Nation Memorial): written by the Cherokee National Council, addressed to Congress, December 1829 (before the Removal Act). Purpose: to assert treaty rights and legal sovereignty, prevent removal through legal and political means. The Cherokee are making a legal and moral argument to the body that could stop the policy.
RUBRIC: 20 — Source A: who/when/to-whom (5) + purpose noting the bias toward favorable framing (5). Source B: who/when/to-whom (5) + purpose noting legal/political resistance (5). Partial for vague purpose statements.
FRESH VARIANT: "If Jackson had instead written a private diary entry about removal the same day, and the Cherokee had written a newspaper editorial for their own community — how would you source those differently? What would change about purpose and audience?" Answers: diary = private, no incentive to persuade; editorial = mobilizing own community. The sourcing questions (who, to whom, why) change the analysis. Same rubric shape.

──────────── STEP 2 (25 points) — Write a thesis ────────────
SHOW ME: "Now write ONE sentence that answers our focused question: how did Jackson and the Cherokee each FRAME removal, and what does the gap between their accounts reveal?"
VETTED ANSWER: A strong thesis is arguable, specific, and addresses the framing AND what the gap reveals. Model: "Jackson framed removal as a benevolent government policy approaching completion, while the Cherokee Nation framed it as an illegal seizure of land they had never surrendered — and the gap between these two accounts reveals that the power to define the narrative belonged to the party with the power to enforce it." Many valid phrasings; must name Jackson's framing (benevolent/policy), the Cherokee framing (never ceded/legal claim), and what the gap shows (power, credibility, evidence, enforcement).
RUBRIC: 25 — takes a clear arguable position (8); accurately names Jackson's framing from Source A (8); accurately names Cherokee framing from Source B (9). A summary with no claim caps at 10.
FRESH VARIANT: "Write a narrower thesis: 'What does Jackson's choice of the word "benevolent" reveal about his rhetorical strategy?' One arguable sentence." Model: "By calling removal 'benevolent,' Jackson reframed an act of coercion as a kindness, making it politically easier for Congress to fund and approve without confronting its costs." Same rubric.

──────────── STEP 3 (30 points) — Support with evidence ────────────
SHOW ME: "Support your thesis with evidence from BOTH excerpts. For each: quote the exact words, then explain in 1–2 sentences how that quotation supports your thesis. Quoting without explaining earns only half credit."
VETTED ANSWER: Source A: quoting "benevolent policy … approaching to a happy consummation" supports the framing claim because Jackson presents removal as nearly complete and morally justified — no coercion, no death toll, just good governance delivering a happy outcome. The word "benevolent" does the most work: it reframes expulsion as welfare. Source B: quoting "this right of inheritance we have never ceded, nor ever forfeited" supports the Cherokee framing claim because it makes a specific legal assertion: the land was never lawfully transferred. "Never ceded, nor ever forfeited" closes off the legal arguments Jackson uses; it says the removal has no legitimate basis in treaty or law.
RUBRIC: 30 — accurate quotation from Source A, exact wording (5); explanation links quote to framing thesis (8); accurate quotation from Source B, exact wording (5); explanation links quote to Cherokee legal claim (7); both quotes together serve the "gap reveals power" argument (5). Misquoting or inventing words = 0 on accuracy portion and a flag to re-quote.
FRESH VARIANT: "Use one quotation from each source to argue a different point: what each author LEAVES OUT. What does Jackson not mention? What does the Cherokee Memorial not include?" Answers: Jackson omits coercion, death, legal resistance, the Supreme Court's (future) finding; the Memorial cannot know the outcome (the Trail of Tears is years away). Same rubric on quoting accuracy + explanation quality.

──────────── STEP 4 (25 points) — Counterpoint & corroboration ────────────
SHOW ME: "Two tasks. (a) State the strongest case FOR Jackson's framing — what would a supporter of his policy say? Then explain what evidence or logic weakens that case. (b) Name one additional source a historian would use to corroborate or check these two documents."
VETTED ANSWER: (a) A supporter would say Jackson was reflecting the genuine belief of many white Americans that eastern Indigenous nations could not survive contact with white civilization, that removal would allow them to persist under their own governance west of the Mississippi, and that this was, by the values of the era, a form of protection. What weakens this: the Supreme Court in Worcester v. Georgia (1832) found the Cherokee's legal position sound; the death toll on the Trail of Tears (~4,000, one in four) directly contradicts "benevolent" in its outcomes; and the Cherokee Memorial shows a people arguing coherently for their own rights — not a people requiring protection. (b) Good corroborating sources: Worcester v. Georgia (1832) full opinion — Marshall's language that Cherokee territory was "a distinct community" where Georgia's laws "can have no force"; the Treaty of New Echota (1835) and the Cherokee Nation's petition against it (signed by more than 15,000 Cherokee); NPS or congressional records of Trail of Tears casualties; John Ross's Memorial and Protest (1836).
RUBRIC: (a) 13 — states a fair version of the pro-Jackson case (6) + identifies the evidence that weakens it (7). Not accepting a straw-man version; the case must actually reflect period arguments. (b) 12 — names a plausible corroborating source and explains what it adds that these two documents don't already give us.
FRESH VARIANT: "(a) Now argue the opposite: what is the strongest evidence that the Cherokee Memorial's legal framing was correct and not just wishful thinking? (b) Name a source type that would show you what happened to the Cherokee during the removal itself (beyond what either document says)." Answers: (a) Worcester v. Georgia explicitly upheld the Cherokee legal position; the U.S. had signed numerous treaties recognizing Cherokee sovereignty; (b) military records, survivor accounts, NPS records of the march, letters from soldiers involved.

HOW TO RUN IT (with me, the student):
- Greet me in 1–2 sentences, ask my FIRST NAME, then show me THE SOURCES (both texts and the context block) and give Step 1. (NAME FALLBACK: if I answer without a name, keep going, but ask before the final report.)
- ONE step at a time. Never show the whole set, the answers, the rubrics, or the variants.
- AFTER I ANSWER each step:
• Grade against the rubric and state the score plainly.
• Say specifically what I got right, then TEACH the gap.
• OFFER A RE-ATTEMPT: "Want to raise your score? I'll give you a similar version." If yes, deliver the FRESH VARIANT, grade it, and set this step's score to my BEST attempt.
• Move on when I'm satisfied.
- If I quote something not in the two excerpts, STOP and require an exact match to one of the two excerpts before giving credit.
- Score HONESTLY — don't inflate, don't lowball. Grade only against the vetted key above.

COMPLETION + REPORT. After all four steps, produce:
STUDENT'S SCORE: X/100
WEEK 9 ASSIGNMENT — Jackson vs. the Cherokee: Whose Story of Removal?
Student: [name] | Date: ___
Step 1 (Source both documents): a/20 — [one line]
Step 2 (Write a thesis): b/25 — [one line]
Step 3 (Support with evidence): c/30 — [one line]
Step 4 (Counterpoint & corroboration): d/25 — [one line]
Strongest skill: ___
Worth another look: ___
(Four step scores must add to the total on line 1.) Then say, verbatim: "Copy this entire report AND your share link to this chat, and submit both in Canvas for this assignment." End with one genuine sentence of encouragement.

GETTING STARTED
Begin now: greet me, ask my first name, show me both sources with the context block, and give me Step 1.

⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯ COPY EVERYTHING ABOVE THIS LINE ⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯

Instructor grading note (Prof. Hartwell)

• Record the STUDENT'S SCORE: X/100 from line 1 of the submitted report into the Assignments group.
• Spot-check a sample of chat share links against the reported scores; pay special attention to Step 3 quotation accuracy — the coach is told to require exact matches.
• The embedded answer key ensures the coach grades consistently across Gemini / Claude / ChatGPT.
• Watch for: students who cite Jackson's "benevolent" framing approvingly without analyzing it as rhetoric. The step 4 rubric requires engaging the weakness of that case — check that the AI coach enforced it.

Canvas placement block

canvas_object    = Assignment
title            = "Week 9 Assignment — Jackson vs. the Cherokee: Whose Story of Removal? (adaptive)"
assignment_group = "Assignments"
points_possible  = 100
grading_type     = points
assignment_type  = adaptive
submission_types = [online_text_entry, online_url]   # paste the report (score on line 1) + the chat share link
due_offset_days  = 6
published        = true
provenance       = "~ Prof. Hartwell's edition · Fall 2026 · built with thecoursemaker.com"

Traditional variant — for comparison. This sample course is configured adaptive learning, so its actual Week-9 assignment is the AI-coached DBQ in I-assignment-and-rubric-week-09.md. This file shows the same Week-9 task built the traditional way — a written-and-submitted document-based argument — so you can see both formats side by side. (Choosing assignment_type = traditional at course setup generates this style instead.)

Course: U.S. History to 1877 (HIST 1301) · Silver Oak University (fictional sample) · Prof. Hartwell
Objective assessed: Objective 6 (Indian Removal; Jacksonian America) · SLO B (construct and support a historical thesis with evidence) · SLO A (sourcing and corroboration)
Worth 100 points · Assignments group = 15% of the grade

The Assignment

This is a short document-based argument (DBQ style): you build a historical thesis from two primary sources and support it with evidence from the documents themselves. No outside research required — the documents are provided below.

The focused question:

"How did Andrew Jackson and the Cherokee Nation each frame Indian Removal — and what does the gap between their accounts reveal about power and evidence?"

The two sources:

Source A — Andrew Jackson, Message to Congress on Indian Removal, December 6, 1830. [National Archives]

"It gives me pleasure to announce to Congress that the benevolent policy of the Government, steadily pursued for nearly thirty years, in relation to the removal of the Indians beyond the white settlements is approaching to a happy consummation."

Source B — Memorial of the Cherokee Nation, December 1829, presented to Congress January 1830. [Teach US History / U.S. House of Representatives Archives]

"This right of inheritance we have never ceded, nor ever forfeited."

Context: The Indian Removal Act was signed May 28, 1830. The Supreme Court ruled in Worcester v. Georgia (1832) that the Cherokee Nation was "a distinct community occupying its own territory … in which the laws of Georgia can have no force." Jackson refused to enforce the ruling. Approximately 4,000 Cherokee — one in four — died during the forced removal known as the Trail of Tears (1838–39).

What to Write (about 400–500 words, four parts)

Part 1 — Source the documents (about 60–80 words)
For each document: who wrote it, to whom, when, and why? What was the author's purpose, and how does that purpose shape what they say?

Part 2 — Write a thesis (1–2 sentences)
State a clear, arguable claim that answers the focused question: how did Jackson and the Cherokee each frame removal, and what does the gap between their framings reveal? A thesis takes a position — it is not a summary.

Part 3 — Support with evidence (about 150–200 words)
Use a direct quotation from each document (copy the exact words from above — no paraphrasing for the quotation itself) and explain, in 1–2 sentences per quote, how it supports your thesis. Quotation without explanation earns only partial credit.

Part 4 — Counterpoint and corroboration (about 80–100 words)
(a) State the strongest argument someone could make in favor of Jackson's framing — then explain what evidence or reasoning weakens that argument. (b) Name one additional source (a different document, a type of record, or a specific case) that a historian would use to check or corroborate these two documents.

Due: Sunday, November 1, 2026, 11:59 p.m. Submit via Canvas as a document upload or text entry.

AI and integrity note: You may use an approved chatbot to brainstorm or check historical facts, but the thesis, analysis, and explanation you submit must be your own writing. If AI helped, add a one-line note at the end saying which tool and how. Quote ONLY from the exact excerpts printed above — never from memory or from an AI paraphrase. Submitting AI-generated writing as your own is an integrity violation.

Instructor Answer Key — REMOVE BEFORE PUBLISHING TO STUDENTS

All facts and quotations verified against the historical record. Historical-accuracy gate — PASS.

Part 1 (model sourcing):
- Source A: written by President Andrew Jackson, addressed to Congress (which authorizes and funds removal policy), December 6, 1830 — months after signing the Indian Removal Act. Purpose: frame the policy as humane, successful, and approaching completion; build Congressional and public support. Expect favorable, minimizing language.
- Source B: written by the Cherokee National Council, addressed to Congress (the body that could halt removal), December 1829 — before the Removal Act passed. Purpose: invoke treaty rights, assert legal sovereignty, and stop removal through law and politics. The Cherokee are making a formal legal argument.

Part 2 (model thesis):
"Jackson framed Indian Removal as a benevolent government policy approaching its happy conclusion, while the Cherokee Nation framed it as an illegal seizure of land they had never surrendered; the gap between these two accounts reveals that the power to define the narrative belonged entirely to the party with the military and political power to enforce it — not to the party with the stronger legal case."

Part 3 (model evidence):
- Source A: the phrase "benevolent policy … approaching to a happy consummation" supports the framing claim because "benevolent" presents expulsion as welfare, and "happy consummation" implies completion without cost. The language erases coercion entirely.
- Source B: "this right of inheritance we have never ceded, nor ever forfeited" supports the Cherokee framing claim by making a specific legal assertion — the land was never lawfully transferred. Every word matters: "never ceded" (no treaty signed away the land) + "never forfeited" (no legal ground to claim it was lost) closes off the legal routes Jackson needed to justify removal.

Part 4 (model counterpoint + corroboration):
- (a) Strongest pro-Jackson case: many contemporaries — including some who opposed removal — believed Indigenous nations east of the Mississippi could not survive sustained contact with expanding white settlement, and that removal to the west would allow them to govern themselves separately. This argument was not merely cynical; it drew on genuine concern (however paternalistic) about survival. What weakens it: Worcester v. Georgia (1832) validated the Cherokee's legal position; the death toll on the Trail of Tears (~4,000, one in four) directly contradicts "benevolent" in its outcomes; and the Cherokee Memorial itself demonstrates a people arguing coherently for their own future — not a people requiring external protection.
- (b) Corroborating sources: Worcester v. Georgia (1832, full text — Marshall's own language vindicates the Cherokee legal claim); the Treaty of New Echota (1835) and the Cherokee Nation's petition against it (signed by ~15,000 Cherokee, documenting that the treaty lacked authorization); NPS or Army records of casualty counts on the Trail of Tears.

Grading rubric — 100 points

Grading note (Prof. Hartwell): Step 3 requires EXACT quotation — misquoted or AI-paraphrased text should be flagged and earns partial credit only. Step 4a must state a fair version of the opposing case, not a straw man.

Canvas placement block

canvas_object    = Assignment
title            = "Week 9 Assignment — Jackson vs. the Cherokee: Whose Story of Removal? (traditional)"
assignment_group = "Assignments"
points_possible  = 100
grading_type     = points
assignment_type  = traditional
submission_types = [online_upload, online_text_entry]
due_offset_days  = 6
published        = true
provenance       = "~ Prof. Hartwell's edition · Fall 2026 · built with thecoursemaker.com"