Read charts and graphs about the past and say what they show
Grade 11 Social Studies Worksheet
Circle the best answer.
Read this first
Civilian and total labor force, 1940 to 1945
Year Women, civilian Men, civilian Men, with armed forces 1940 14,160 41,480 41,870 1941 14,640 41,270 42,740 1942 16,110 40,300 44,110 1943 18,700 36,840 45,600 1944 19,170 35,460 46,520 1945 19,030 34,830 45,870 Data: US Census Bureau, Historical Statistics of the US, 1789-1945 (1949), series D 11-31, annual averages, age 14 and over. Counts are in thousands. The civilian labor force leaves out the armed forces; the total labor force adds them.
Pia says women were 35 percent of the labor force in 1945. Which description is right?
- 29 percent of the civilian labor force, and 35 percent with the armed forces
- 19 percent, since the table's 19,030 thousand begins with the digits 19
- 35 percent of the civilian labor force, but about 29 percent with the armed forces
- 35 percent either way, because the armed forces were made up mostly of men
Women and men in the labor force, 1950 to 2000
Year Women in labor force (thousands) Women's rate (percent) Men's rate (percent) 1950 18,389 33.9 86.4 1960 23,240 37.7 83.3 1970 31,543 43.3 79.7 1980 45,487 51.5 77.4 1990 56,829 57.5 76.4 2000 66,303 59.9 74.8 Data: US Bureau of Labor Statistics, Women in the labor force: a databook (2020), table 2, annual averages, civilians age 16 and over. The rate is the share of the civilian noninstitutional population that is in the labor force.
Women's count grew about 3.6 times from 1950 to 2000 and their rate about 1.8 times. About how many times did the number of women grow, Milo asks?
- About 5.4 times, found by multiplying the two growth factors 3.6 and 1.8
- About 1.8 times, because the rate shows how the population changed
- About 3.6 times, because the count shows how the population changed
- About 2 times, because the count equals the rate times the population
Unemployed persons, four years
Year Unemployed (thousands) Percent of civilian labor force 1929 1,550 3.2 1933 12,830 24.9 1938 10,390 19.0 1941 5,560 9.9 Data: US Census Bureau, Historical Statistics of the US, Colonial Times to 1970 (1975), series D 85-86, annual averages. The count is in thousands: 1,550 means 1,550,000 people.
From 1929 to 1933 the unemployed count rose 8.3 times and the rate 7.8 times. What does the small gap show Zee?
- The labor force was unchanged, so the count and rate should rise equally
- The count was estimated, so it rose faster than the measured rate
- The labor force shrank, so a smaller base lifted the rate more
- The civilian labor force grew a little, about 6 percent
Women and men in the labor force, 1950 to 2000
Year Women in labor force (thousands) Women's rate (percent) Men's rate (percent) 1950 18,389 33.9 86.4 1960 23,240 37.7 83.3 1970 31,543 43.3 79.7 1980 45,487 51.5 77.4 1990 56,829 57.5 76.4 2000 66,303 59.9 74.8 Data: US Bureau of Labor Statistics, Women in the labor force: a databook (2020), table 2, annual averages, civilians age 16 and over. The rate is the share of the civilian noninstitutional population that is in the labor force.
Kira reads women's rate: up 8.2 points in the 1970s, 6.0 in the 1980s and 2.4 in the 1990s. Which statement is supported?
- The rate kept rising but more slowly each decade; the table does not say why
- The rate began to fall after 1990, since the rise grew smaller
- The slowing happened because women's rate neared men's, as the table shows
- Women stopped entering the labor force in the 1990s, since the rise slowed
DHS Table 1: who is counted
Who made it: the Office of Homeland Security Statistics, part of the US Department of Homeland Security. When: fiscal years 1820 to 2019; data file posted March 15, 2021. What it counts: persons who obtained lawful permanent resident status, that is, people admitted to live in the United States for good. Context: Counting arrivals at the land borders with Canada and Mexico was not complete until about 1908. Limits: From 1892 to 1895 the totals counted steerage passengers only, and ran 7 to 8 percent lower than another office's count for those years. What the numbers leave out: People admitted only for a short visit are counted separately. The table does not say how many people later left; the official record of departures began in 1907 and ended in 1957.
Luz reads the 1891 to 1900 decade total of 3.7 million. What does the card say about its accuracy?
- For 1892 to 1895 only steerage passengers were counted, so the total is low
- It is exact for 1892 to 1895, since those years had the most careful counting
- It runs low because a weak economy kept people away in the 1890s
- It is exact, because the fiscal years end on the same day each year
Women's rate in 1950, two government series
Series How it was taken Rate (percent) Census, census-year rows a count taken in April 1950 29.9 BLS databook an average of monthly survey results 33.9 Data: US Census Bureau, Historical Statistics of the US (1975), series D 29-41; US Bureau of Labor Statistics, Women in the labor force: a databook (2020), table 2. Both series are for women, in 1950.
Noah sees two government series for women's rate in 1950: 29.9 and 33.9. What is the sensible reading?
- The BLS rate is higher because more women went to work later in the year 1950
- They are measured differently, one in April and one as a survey average
- One of them must be an error, so the lower value is the safer one to use
- The two should be averaged to give the true rate of 31.9 percent for 1950
Use this
Graph "Women in the labor force: percent of women, census years 1890 to 1970" (Data: US Census Bureau, Historical Statistics of the US, Colonial Times to 1970 (1975), series D 29-41, census-year rows). Census year across, 1890 to 1970, a mark every 10. Women in the labor force, percent of women up, 0 to 50, a mark every 10. The line "Women's rate" joins (1890, 18.2), (1900, 20.0), (1920, 22.7), (1930, 23.6), (1940, 25.8), (1950, 29.9), (1960, 35.7), (1970, 41.4) with straight pieces. Key: one point for each census year; the height is the percent of women in the labor force. Note: There is no 1910 point because the source table has none. The rates count women 14 and over through 1940 and 16 and over from 1950. Figures from 1960 include Alaska and Hawaii. Another count of the same censuses, in a 1953 Labor Department guide, gives 18.3 for 1890 and 25.7 for 1940 (sources differ); this graph uses the Census Bureau table.
A 1953 Labor Department guide gives 18.3 for 1890 and 25.7 for 1940, but the graph shows 18.2 and 25.8. What should Ren do?
- Round the rates to whole numbers so that the two sources appear to agree
- Use the larger of the two values each time, so the figures are on the safe side
- Treat small gaps between sources as normal, and name the source for each figure
- Discard the graph, since a later guide from the Labor Department must be right
Use this
Graph "Unemployed persons as a percent of the civilian labor force, 1936 to 1941" (Data: US Census Bureau, Historical Statistics of the US, Colonial Times to 1970 (1975), series D 85-86, annual averages). Year across, 1936 to 1941, a mark every 1. Unemployed, percent of the civilian labor force up, 0 to 30, a mark every 5. The line "Unemployment rate" joins (1936, 16.9), (1937, 14.3), (1938, 19.0), (1939, 17.2), (1940, 14.6), (1941, 9.9) with straight pieces. Key: one point for each year; the height is the percent of the civilian labor force without a job. Note: Context from the Federal Reserve: a second downturn came in 1937, and the Great Depression ended during World War II in 1941. Each point is a yearly average, which hides changes inside a year.
The note says a second downturn came in 1937, yet the rate fell from 16.9 to 14.3 that year. Tala asks why.
- The rate is a count of people, so it cannot show the effect of any downturn
- The downturn began in 1938, so the note misdates it by a year or more
- A yearly average hides changes inside the year; the downturn shows in 1938's average
- The graph is wrong, since a downturn in 1937 must raise the rate in that same year
Civilian and total labor force, 1940 to 1945
Year Women, civilian Men, civilian Men, with armed forces 1940 14,160 41,480 41,870 1941 14,640 41,270 42,740 1942 16,110 40,300 44,110 1943 18,700 36,840 45,600 1944 19,170 35,460 46,520 1945 19,030 34,830 45,870 Data: US Census Bureau, Historical Statistics of the US, 1789-1945 (1949), series D 11-31, annual averages, age 14 and over. Counts are in thousands. The civilian labor force leaves out the armed forces; the total labor force adds them.
A classmate says women replaced the men who left civilian work from 1940 to 1945. Esme compares the counts. What do they show?
- Women fully replaced them, since women's count rose by thousands during those five years
- Women's count rose 4,870 thousand, men's fell 6,650 thousand: women filled part of the gap
- Men's civilian count fell because fewer men were alive, which the table clearly shows
- Women's rise equals men's fall, so the civilian total did not change over those five years
Persons obtaining lawful permanent resident status, six decades
Decade Persons 1881 to 1890 5,246,613 1891 to 1900 3,687,564 1901 to 1910 8,795,386 1911 to 1920 5,735,811 1921 to 1930 4,107,209 1931 to 1940 528,431 Data: US Department of Homeland Security, Yearbook of Immigration Statistics 2019, Table 1; decade sums by the pack's author. Each decade is the sum of ten fiscal years ending June 30. The six decades add to 28,101,014.
Ari says immigration fell 94 percent from 1901 to 1910 to 1931 to 1940, so the Depression caused it. What does the data support?
- The 94 percent fall, and the dates show the Depression caused it
- A fall of about 87 percent, found by starting from 1921 to 1930
- The fall of about 94 percent; the table shows when it fell, not why
- A fall of about 6 percent, the share that remained