What was the Poor Law Amendment Act and how has it been interpreted? Lesson Aim: To have identified the key features of the act which interpretation is the most fair.

What was the reality? Make an arm of a spider diagram for each question. Read A 21-26. Key Questions: What were the main criticisms of the poor law? (Growing cost, corruption, demoralising effect of Speenhamland system). How did the commission conduct its enquiry? What were the report’s most important recommendations?

How did the Poor Law Amendment Act operate? A:p27-8 What were the four main points of the law? What was the Poor Law Commission? What was the role of the Poor Law Unions? How would the way the workhouses ran change? What happened to outdoor relief? Sum-up the Amendment Act in just one word.

How has the Amendment Act been interpreted by historians? A middle class conspiracy. An attempt for the landed elite to retain power over agricultural labourers. An attempt to impose an new ideology (set of ideas). TASK: Use p29-31 A to take some key notes on each opinion.

What were the main obstacles to the New Poor Law? Local objections Gilbert’s unions/select vestries Building new workhouses Imposing the Commission’s authority Make a storyboard with pictures and captions to show the obstacles. Use A p38-40

After Cover Work…..

Did the Commission succeed? A p41-43 Successes Failures

How do I apply my knowledge to answering a 20 mark Q? Lesson Aim: To apply subject knowledge to a 20 mark Q.

How far do Sources 10,11 and 12 suggest that the main aim of those who supported changes in the Poor Law in 1834 was to reduce the cost of providing for the poor? (20 marks) Highlight the key words in this question. What from our own knowledge can we look at? Key individuals – Malthus etc. Spider diagram of the main criticisms of the Poor Law.

Question a) – 20 marks – write this down! How far do Sources 10,11 and 12 suggest that the main aim of those who supported changes in the Poor Law in 1834 was to reduce the cost of providing for the poor? (20 marks) You’re comparing the sources as EVIDENCE. Intro – Context, outline what the sources say (factors) – Yes, reducing cost /other reasons, set up argument. Paragraph, yes reducing cost of Poor Law. Paragraph, other reasons. Conclusion: Overall, as evidence what do the sources suggest? Reducing cost or another reason?

Question a) – 20 marks – write this down! How far do Sources 10,11 and 12 suggest that the main aim of those who supported changes in the Poor Law in 1834 was to reduce the cost of providing for the poor? (20 marks) Paragraphs: Point – Reducing costs/other reasons. Evidence/explanation – use short quotes from the sources to show how it supports the factor/own knowledge for a bit of context/critique of provenance (as evidence bit). You MUST cross reference e.g. Similarly/in contrast to source 10, source 11…… Link: Overall, the source suggest…….

How far do Sources 10,11 and 12 suggest that the main aim of those who supported changes in the Poor Law in 1834 was to reduce the cost of providing for the poor? (20 marks)

How far do Sources 10,11 and 12 suggest that the main aim of those who supported changes in the Poor Law in 1834 was to reduce the cost of providing for the poor? (20 marks)

How far do Sources 10,11 and 12 suggest that the main aim of those who supported changes in the Poor Law in 1834 was to reduce the cost of providing for the poor? (20 marks)

How far do Sources 10,11 and 12 suggest that the main aim of those who supported changes in the Poor Law in 1834 was to reduce the cost of providing for the poor? (20 marks) Overall, Reducing costs. Reducing the dependency on poor relief.