Who Should Govern? — Studio Packet¶

Studio Code: WH-01 Subject Area: World History — Era 1 (Ancient Civilizations) Suggested Cycle: Year 1, Cycle 1 (first six-week studio) Duration: 6 weeks

World History Era Timeline — highlighted segment(s) indicate this studio's historical period.

The Essential Question¶

Who should govern, and what gives them the right?

Week 1 — Getting Started

By the end of Week 1 you need three things:

A rough inquiry angle — your specific version of the essential question above
At least 2 sources identified from the Skinny Recommendations or the Reading Library
A draft Studio Contract ready to share with Reese for feedback

Stuck on your angle? Browse the sources first — an argument usually emerges from the reading, not from staring at the question. Use the thought card prompts further down this page if you need a push.

Why This Studio Matters¶

Three civilizations in the ancient world gave three completely different answers to the same question: How do you make a society work? Hammurabi said law. Confucius said virtue. Pericles said democracy. These aren't just history facts — they're three competing theories of political order that are still fighting it out today.

This studio uses ancient primary sources to develop R.9 (reading for argument) and W.4 (argument writing) skills, while building the WH Era 1 foundation that every later WH studio depends on. Students who do this studio will have the vocabulary and frameworks to talk about governance across all four eras.

Active Standards¶

Standard	What You're Targeting
WH.6_12.2 + Era 1	The role of political philosophy in organizing ancient societies
WH.6_12.3 + Era 1	Comparing governance structures: monarchy, meritocracy, democracy
9-10.R.9	Analyzing how a text makes an argument — structure, evidence, claims
9-10.W.4	Writing an argument with evidence and a clear claim
9-10.IR.1–5	Research process: question → sources → synthesis → citation

ELA ↔ SS Crosswalk¶

Every text in this studio is a primary source AND an argument — which means analyzing it for ELA and analyzing it for Social Studies are the same activity.

Hammurabi's Code — Reading it to analyze how Hammurabi constructs his argument for law-based governance (R.9) simultaneously builds evidence for WH.6_12.2-3 + Era 1 (governance structures and political philosophy). It's listed in the ELA ↔ SS Crosswalk as one of the highest-leverage short primary sources in the library.
Pericles' Funeral Oration — R.9 analysis (how does Pericles construct his argument for democracy?) is the same as WH.6_12.2-3 + Era 1 analysis (what does Athenian democracy actually claim for itself?). One close read, two standards.
The Melian Dialogue — Analyzing it for R.9 (what is each side's argument? what assumptions does each make?) is directly building WH.6_12.3 + Era 1 evidence about what happens when governance frameworks break down and only power remains.

A single Demo of Learning can satisfy both an ELA and a WH standard if your Studio Contract names both. Talk to Reese in Week 1 if you want to use a crosswalk approach.

See the ELA ↔ SS Crosswalk for the full map of how texts serve both subject areas across all studios.

Reading List¶

Text	Why It's Here
Hammurabi's Code	Law-based governance; "an eye for an eye" as a limit on revenge, not a license for it
The Analects — Confucius	Virtue-based governance; the junzi (exemplary person) as the model citizen and ruler
Pericles' Funeral Oration	Democratic governance; Athens as a model civilization that also ran an empire
The Melian Dialogue	What governance looks like when all frameworks collapse and only power remains

Required pairing: Pericles and the Melian Dialogue must be read together. They are the same democracy, same author, 15 years apart.

You investigate the essential question from one of these angles — or propose your own in your Studio Proposal.

Trailblazer angles (more scaffolded): - Compare Hammurabi's Code and the 10 Commandments: two ancient legal codes, two theories of authority. What's the same? What's different? - What does Confucius think makes a good leader? Find three passages from the Analects and argue: is his model of leadership realistic?

Maverick angles: - Athens claimed to be the most democratic city in the ancient world. Using both the Funeral Oration and the Melian Dialogue, evaluate that claim. Is Athens' democracy a model to follow or a warning? - All three governance systems (law, virtue, democracy) have a blind spot — something they ignore or can't fix. What is each one's biggest weakness?

Phoenix angles: - Design your own governance system. Use specific arguments from Hammurabi, Confucius, and Pericles as the foundation. Argue for the system you'd choose to live under — and address the strongest objection to it. - "The Melian Dialogue is not a failure of governance — it is the honest description of how all governance works beneath the surface." Argue for or against this claim.

Six-Week Arc¶

Week	Phase	What You're Doing
1	Launch	Read the essential question. Browse all four texts — read one passage from each. Write a one-paragraph first reaction: who do you find most convincing, and why? Submit your Studio Proposal with your inquiry angle, demo mode, and deliverable concept.
2	Dig	Deep read your primary texts. Annotate for argument structure: What is each author's claim? What evidence do they give? What do they assume that they don't argue? Build your source log with at least one primary and one secondary source.
3	Build	Draft your deliverable. Get it down — don't edit yet. Your draft should address: What is your answer to the essential question? What evidence from the texts supports it? What is the strongest counterargument?
4	Shape	Peer review and advisor conference. Bring a specific question to your advisor conference: something you're uncertain about, not just "does this look good?" Revise based on feedback — document at least three changes you made and why.
5	Finish	Complete your demonstration of learning. Polish your deliverable. Prepare for exhibition.
6	Publish	Exhibition. Present your deliverable and demonstrate your standard evidence. Write your reflection.

Demonstration of Learning Options¶

Choose one mode in your Week 1 proposal.

Mode	Prompt for This Studio
1 — Written Assessment	In 400–600 words: Which of the three governance frameworks (Hammurabi's law, Confucius' virtue, Pericles' democracy) is best equipped to handle political crisis? Use specific evidence from the primary sources.
2 — Extended Writing	Argument essay (600–900 words): Argue for one governance theory as most relevant to a contemporary problem. Use the ancient texts as evidence AND connect to at least one modern example.
3 — Verbal Conversation	Advisor conference: Walk through three passages — one from each text — and explain what argument each author is making, what assumption underlies it, and what its blind spot is.
4 — Visual/Creative	Comparison diagram or sketchnote: Show the three governance theories on a visual that highlights how they answer the same questions differently. Include annotations connecting each element to specific text evidence.
5 — Multimedia/Performance	Structured debate or Socratic seminar recording: Argue a position on the essential question, using specific evidence from the texts. Minimum 8 minutes; demonstrate the full R.9 standard (claim + evidence + counterargument).
6 — Portfolio Annotation	Select two pieces of prior work and annotate them for WH.6_12.2+3 and R.9 connections, using specific text evidence to justify your annotations. Write a metacognitive commentary: what do you understand now that you didn't before?

Deliverable Ideas¶

You're not limited to these — but they give you a starting point:

"The Governance Manual" — A designed document that presents all three frameworks side-by-side with analysis of strengths, weaknesses, and ideal use cases. Audience: a new civilization that needs to choose a government.
"Philosophical Dialogue" — A written dialogue between Hammurabi, Confucius, and Pericles arguing about a specific governance problem — who should judge criminals? How should power be transferred? Who counts as a citizen?
"Then and Now" — A visual essay or website comparing an ancient governance principle to a contemporary political debate. Example: Confucius' "rectification of names" applied to contemporary political language.
"Mock Trial of Athenian Democracy" — Using both the Funeral Oration and the Melian Dialogue as evidence, argue either that Athens' democracy was genuine or that it was hypocritical. Format: structured written argument with counterargument addressed.
"Museum Exhibit" — Design 4–6 exhibit panels presenting ancient governance systems for a general audience. Each panel = one key text passage + visual + contemporary connection.

Scale Tasks¶

2.0 — Foundation¶

You can identify and explain the basic governance structure of each civilization: - Define: law-based governance, virtue-based governance, democratic governance - Name the key document for each (Hammurabi's Code, the Analects, the Funeral Oration) - Explain what an indulgence is (substituting this for a placeholder — this is the factual foundation layer)

2.0 evidence looks like: A comparison table that correctly describes each governance system. Correct vocabulary. No significant factual errors.

3.0 — Target¶

You can analyze how each governance text makes its argument — and compare the arguments to each other: - Identify the central claim of each text - Explain the evidence or reasoning each author uses to support that claim - Compare: Where do these three systems agree? Where do they conflict fundamentally? - Identify a weakness or blind spot in each system

3.0 evidence looks like: A written or verbal analysis that goes beyond description — you're not just saying what the systems are, you're arguing about how they work and what they miss.

4.0 — Transfer¶

You go beyond what the texts directly say: - Apply a governance theory to a situation it was never designed for (connect an ancient framework to a modern governance problem) - OR: Identify what none of the three systems can account for — a governance problem that breaks all three frameworks - OR: Argue that the Melian Dialogue reveals a truth about the other three that they refuse to admit

4.0 evidence looks like: An argument that requires synthesis across texts AND a connection or inference that wasn't directly taught.

Skinny Recommendations¶

If you're struggling with...	Pull this skinny
Reading difficult primary sources	R.9 Informational/Argumentative
Identifying main idea in a dense text	R.4 Main Idea and Theme
Writing an argument with evidence	W.4 Argument Writing
Research question formulation	IR.1–5 Research Bundle
Leading a Socratic seminar	C.6 Discussion and Debate

When You're Stuck

Your Thinking — "What assumptions am I making that I haven't tested yet?"

The Argument — "Am I explaining or am I arguing? There is a difference."

Your Sources — "What does this source not say — and why might that matter?"

Your Studio — "What does a 3.0 on this standard actually look like in my work?"

Why This Is Relevant Today?¶

The question "who should govern, and what gives them the right?" is being asked and answered right now in every democracy on earth — including this one. Autocrats who claim they govern better than democracies, politicians who argue that national security justifies suspending normal rules, voters who choose strongmen over checks and balances — they're all giving Hammurabi's answer: order matters more than equality. The argument Pericles made — that everyone who has a stake in a decision should have a voice in it — is the argument behind every debate about voting rights, gerrymandering, and who gets to participate in democracy. Thucydides recorded the Athenian argument to Melos ("the strong do what they can, the weak suffer what they must") in 416 BCE — and you can find the same argument in every debate about international relations today. Nothing in this studio is settled. If you want to follow the thread into the present, WH-02: The Rights We Wrote Down is the direct continuation — it picks up where Hammurabi left off and traces the argument forward 3,000 years.

Exhibition Format¶

Suggested format: Gallery walk or Socratic seminar.

For the gallery walk: Each student's deliverable is displayed. Students circulate and leave written feedback. The exhibitor answers questions about their evidence.

For the Socratic seminar: A structured discussion using the essential question as the prompt. Each student brings at least one piece of textual evidence to contribute.

What gets scored at exhibition: - C.1 (if presenting): formal register, eye contact, organized delivery - C.6 (if seminar): active listening, idea building, civil discourse