Last Saturday's controversy session was probably one the best sessions to date. Dr. Gerstle and the graduate students, Ansley and Nicholas provided excellent background information and presented solid arguments to support their sides of the focus question. As Nick said, this was an excellent example of how a controversy activity can work and how it is possible for the consensus to fall somewhere in the middle.

After studying the language, religion, food, music of immigrants, and industrialization in the U.S., it is apparent that immigrants have changed America, but America has changed them as well. Depending on a specific time period, the attitudes toward immigrants have varied from one of welcome to one of suspicion, hostility, and exclusion. Depending on physical appearance, religion, how well immigrants blended in with American society and whether or not they were useful for the economy and well-being of American citizens was a major factor in determining that. Dr. Gerstle also mentioned that the pattern is repeating itself, citing the current immigration and naturalization debates that are ongoing in the U.S.

After listening to the pro and con presentations and having the opportunity to develop an argument with Charlie, listening to the viewpoint of the other members of my group and the ending discussion, I was able to gain more insight into the topic and look at it with a broader lens. I feel that if the focus is on immigration during the 19th century, immigrants changed this country more than American changed them. They were the work force that helped the U.S. change from an agrarian to industrial society.

On a final note, participating in the TAH workshops these past two years has resulted in greater enthusiasm for examining topics in U.S. history and a tremendous desire to use this model in the classroom to foster critical thinking and create a deeper understanding of events in history.

Joan