Emily Geary
Dr. Stoddard
8 November 2010
SAC Lesson: Should The United States have Dropped the Atomic Bomb on
Hiroshima and Nagasaki?
Grade Level: This lesson is designed for a ninth grade World History II class. The
lesson will be used as part of a unit on World War II. The lesson will be centered
around SOL WHII.12a which states: The student will demonstrate knowledge of the
worldwide impact of World War II by explaining economic and political causes,
describing major events, and identifying leaders of the war with emphasis on
Franklin D. Roosevelt, Harry Truman, Dwight D. Eisenhower, Douglas MacArthur,
George C. Marshall, Winston Churchill, Joseph Stalin, Adolf Hitler, Hideki Tojo, and
Hirohito.
Length: Approximately 65 minutes (over half of a 90 minute block)
Instructional Model: The instructional model used for this lesson is Structured
Academic Controversy. In this model, students are presented with a question that
has a definitive “yes” or “no” answer. Over the course of the lesson, the students will
be asked to argue for both sides of an issue. By having to argue each side, students
will gain greater perspective and have a more complete understanding of the
particular issue. Students will be asked to analyze research given to them in the
form of data sets, and then present their arguments to their peers. At the conclusion
of the lesson, the students will be asked to make their own decision as to which side
of the issue they support. The lesson will allow students to analyze research, work
cooperatively with classmates, practice public speaking, and engage in the higher
order thinking.
Overview: In this lesson, students will be asked to answer the question, “Should
The United States have Dropped the Atomic Bomb on Hiroshima and Nagasaki?”
Ever since 1945 when the bombs were dropped, this has been a topic of debate.
There are clear and solid arguments for each side, and a variety of data for students
to analyze. Prior to participating in this lesson, students will have already received
considerable background information on World War II. The students should be
familiar with the key people, countries, terms, and events that took place during the
war. In this lesson, students will explore and analyze the major arguments
presented by those who support the dropping of the atomic bomb, as well as by
those who oppose the dropping of the atomic bomb. Students will gain knowledge
about the SOL content, but they will also demonstrate skills in determining which
argument they believe is stronger.
Rationale: Structured Academic Controversy is very appropriate for a lesson
focused on World War II and the dropping of the atomic bombs on Hiroshima and
Nagasaki. The Virginia SOL that goes with this topic states that students must
understand the worldwide impact of World War II. Since there were several
countries involved in this issue, and the students will be arguing for both sides of
the issue, the students will be able to gain a full scope of how the war affected the
world. Additionally, too often teachers stay away from controversial topics in the
classroom because they are unsure of how their students will respond. Structured
Academic Controversy gives the teacher control over the information presented,
allowing students to discuss a controversial issue without the discussion becoming
argumentative. Finally, this model will allow students to assess all aspects of an
issue and make an informed decision based upon the information they are given.
Objectives:
Academic:
1. Students will demonstrate knowledge of the worldwide impact of
World War II by explaining economic and political causes,
describing major events, and identifying leaders of the war
(WHII.12a).
2. Students will analyze how science and technology influence the
core values, beliefs, and attitudes of society, and how core values,
beliefs, and attitudes of society shape scientific and technological
change (National Council for Social Studies Standard).
3. Students will compare and analyze the ways nations and
organizations respond to conflicts between forces of unity and
forces of diversity (National Council for Social Studies Standard).
Intellectual:
1. Students will read and analyze research presented to them on
given data sets.
2. Students will demonstrate proper discussion etiquette and skills,
as outlined by class guidelines for discussion.
3. Students will present at least three arguments for each side of the
issue.
4. Students will develop their own opinion to explain whether or not
The United States should have dropped atomic bombs on
Hiroshima and Nagasaki, as shown through their completion of the
assessment worksheet.
Resources:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
Computer with access to the internet
LCD computer hook up
LCD computer projector
Copies of each data set (one for each student in the class)
Copies of each wrap-up sheet (one for each student in the class)
Copies of each note taking sheet (one for each student in the class)
7. Copies of each homework sheet (one for each student in the class)
Content and Instructional Strategies:
1. Preparation
a. Arrange desks in groups of four with the desks facing each other. Put
name tags on each desk.
2. Introduction/Hook 15 minutes)
a. When the students enter the classroom, I will ask them to sit at the
desk with their name on it and take out their notebooks. I will initially
engage the students by asking them a few questions about some
previous background information they have learned about World War
II. Then, I will tell them that today we are going to focus on one of the
final events of the war, The United States dropping of atomic bombs
on two major Japanese cities, Hiroshima and Nagasaki. I will prompt
them with a few questions to remind them about what we have
already learned about this topic.
b. Next, I will show them a 3 minute video clip (from
discoveryeducation.com) about the dropping of the atomic bombs.
The video provides a general overview of information as well as
pictures and video clips to give students a better idea about the issue
we are going to study.
c. After showing the students the video clip, I will read Hiroshima No
Pika by Toshi Maruki out loud to the class.
i. Introduce the book – We will be reading a book called
Hiroshima No Pika, by Toshi Maruki. The book is told from the
point of view of Mii, a 7 year old Japanese book. She was living
in Hiroshima during the time of the United States dropped the
atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki.
ii. Make sure give them time to look at the pictures
d. Once I have finished reading the book, I will turn on the lights and
engage students in a short discussion about the book:
i. The true story behind the book – the author is an artist, and
was holding an art show in Japan when a lady came up to her
looking very angry. This lady told the artist a story about how
she ran from the flash and carried her husband and young
daughter. The book is a mainly about this woman’s story, with
parts of other stories the author had heard mixed in as well.
1. That was a pretty powerful book, what are your initial
reactions to it?
e. As the discussion comes to a close, I will pull up the screen on the
board, revealing the question: “Should the United States have
dropped atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki?” YES or NO
3. Activity Briefing (3-5minutes):
a. I will tell students that today we are going to answer that question.
b. To do so, we are going to engage in a structured academic
controversy.
i. This is kind of like a debate, but it is different because instead
of choosing the side you agree with and arguing for that one,
each student will be asked to present arguments for both the
yes and no sides of the argument at some point during the
lesson.
ii. This is an argument that has been around since the atomic
bombs were dropped in 1945, and by supporting both
positions, you will gain a much better understanding of the
entire argument itself.
c. For this lesson, you will be working in groups (which I have already
put you in at your tables).
i. Each group will have two teams.
ii. The person next to you will be your teammate, and the people
across from you will be the opposing team.
d. The way the lesson is going to work is:
i. Each team is going to have a chance to support the YES side
and the NO side.
ii. You are going to use Data Sets that have specific arguments on
them to support your sides.
e. Right now, I am going to hand out a Data Set to each person.
f. At this point everyone should have a Data Set. At each group of tables,
one team should have a YES data set and one team should have a NO
data set.
i. If you have a YES data set please raise your hand
ii. If you have a NO data set please raise your hand
4. Read Present Positions (12-15 minutes):
a. I will now explain to students what to do with each data set.
i. We will now take 5 minutes to review your data sets.
ii. Please look at your note taking sheets. We are going to do
Steps 1 and 2.
iii. You will read over your data set to yourself, highlighting or
underlining the most important information.
iv. Then you will talk with your partner and establish what your
team thinks are the three strongest arguments from your data
set.
v. You will write these arguments on step two of your note-taking
sheet.
b. I will then give students 5 minutes to complete steps 1 and 2.
i. I will walk through the room during this time to monitor
progress.
c. I will draw the class together and explain the position presentation
(step 3).
i. Now each team is going to present their position to the other
team in their group.
ii. We will start with the YES team.
1. While presenting, the YES team is expected to use
proper discussion etiquette (speak clearly and so all
group members can hear, sit up straight, feet on the
ground)
2. Each team member should present at least one
argument.
iii. While the YES team is presenting, the NO team is responsible
for filling out step three on the note-taking sheet.
1. You must circle the viewpoint of the other team
2. You must write the other team’s top three arguments on
your sheet.
d. After 2 minutes, I will call the class back together, and we the NO team
will now present. I will review the above rules again.
e. When both pairs have presented, I will give the entire group
approximately 2 minutes to ask any remaining clarifying questions.
i. You will now have 2 minutes to ask the opposing team any
clarifying questions.
ii. Clarifying questions are not argumentative, they are simply if
you do not understand something that was said by the other
team. Additionally, you may use this time to ask for any
repetition so you can fill out step 3 on the note-taking sheet.
5. Reverse Positions (12-15 minutes):
a. Next, I will hand out Data Set 2 to all students.
b. I will give the YES Data Set 2 to the opposite team, and the NO Data Set
2 to the opposite team.
c. We will begin by taking 5 minutes to complete step 4.
i. Please look at your note taking sheets. We are going to do Step
4.
ii. You will read over your data set to yourself, highlighting or
underlining the most important information.
iii. Then you will talk with your partner and establish what your
team thinks are the three strongest arguments from your data
set.
iv. You will write these arguments on step two of your note-taking
sheet.
d. I will then give 5 minutes to the students to complete step 4.
i. I will walk around the room during this time to monitor
student progress.
e. After 5 minutes, I will draw the class together and explain the position
presentation (step 5).
i. Now each team is going to present their position to the other
team in their group.
ii. We will start with the YES team.
1. While presenting, the YES team is expected to use
proper discussion etiquette (speak clearly and so all
group members can hear, sit up straight, feet on the
ground)
2. Each team member should present at least one
argument.
iii. While the YES team is presenting, the NO team is responsible
for filling out step 5 on the note-taking sheet.
1. You must circle the viewpoint of the other team
2. You must write the other team’s top three arguments on
your sheet.
f. After 2 minutes, I will call the class back together, and we the NO team
will now present. I will review the above rules again.
g. When both pairs have presented, I will give the entire group
approximately 2 minutes to ask any remaining clarifying questions.
i. You will now have 2 minutes to ask the opposing team any
clarifying questions.
ii. Clarifying questions are not argumentative, they are simply if
you do not understand something that was said by the other
team. Additionally, you may use this time to ask for any
repetition so you can fill out step 3 on the note-taking sheet.
6. Group Discussion (5-8 minutes):
a. For the next 5-8 minutes, each team is going to work with the other
team in their group and complete step 6.
b. Teams should discuss both the YES and NO arguments (using their
sheets as a reference), and come to a consensus as a group.
c. During this time, I will walk around the room and monitor the
classroom progress, and prompt students with questions (help
facilitate individual group discussions).
7. Group Debrief (10 minutes):
a. I will call the class together.
b. I will hand out the “wrap-up” worksheet.
c. I will tell students that they need to work independently for about the
next 10 minutes to fill out the sheet.
i. This time, they are to choose which argument they actually
support (their own opinion).
ii. They should use their note sheet to come up with the three
strongest arguments for their position.
d. When they finish, they can raise their hands and I will come and pick
up their worksheet.
8. Homework Assignment (3 min):
a. When students have completed their worksheet, I will hand out their
homework assignment.
b. I will read the directions out loud and ask if there are any questions.
c. I will have students write the due date on the sheet before they leave
the classroom.
Assessment:
There will be two assessments for this lesson. First, there will be a class
participation grade. Students will be graded on their participation in the
discussion, as well as on their completion of their worksheet. Second, there
will be a more formal assessment, as students will be asked to write a
persuasive mini-essay of 2-3 paragraphs, stating whether or not they think
The United States should have dropped the atomic bomb.
Differentiation:
In order to incorporate all types of learners in this lesson, I could vary the
types of research I include in the data sets. I could put some more
quantitative statistics, as well as some pictures to appeal to different types or
learners. The movie clip at the beginning should help to reach both visual
and auditory learners. Additionally, students will utilize both interpersonal
and intrapersonal skills by making their own decisions about the question, as
well as discussing the question with others.
Adaptations:
The most helpful way I could adapt this lesson would be to provide a detailed
note-taking sheet for the students to use when they present and when they
listen to the other pair present. There are a few students in my classes who
have IEP’s and would benefit from more structure in the lesson. Additionally,
I could give more advanced students a more involved data set, so that they
would be challenged by the lesson.
Reflection:
The main concern I have with this lesson is that the students will not remain
on task during their discussions. I will have to closely monitor each group to
make sure that students are using their full five minutes to present their
positions, and their full two minutes to ask any clarifying questions. If
students do not remain on task, I do not think they will grasp the full scope of
information intended from this lesson. Another concern is that some
students will overshadow others in presenting their arguments. My
intention is to create groups in which students will feel comfortable to
participate, but I am sure there will be a few students who do not want to
contribute very much to the discussion. Overall, I think that the students are
going to latch onto this topic because it is controversial and almost
unimaginable. I am very interested to see what different students think
about the issue.
Post-Teaching: In reviewing this lesson according to the PASS standards, I think
that with the exception of two standards, the lesson did extremely well. Four of the
six standards I would classify as receiving a five. The deep knowledge standard
receives a 5 because during the lesson, students engage in deep knowledge for most
of the lesson, because they explore both sides of the controversial issue in depth in
order to be able to make an informed conclusion as to whether or not the United
States should have dropped the atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki. This
lesson also receives a five for substantive conversation because the students engage
in conversation multiple times throughout the lesson that is not completely teacherled, almost all students participate, and students form ideas and ask questions about
the discussed material. The third standard to receive a five is the ethical valuing
standard because students spend the majority of the lesson evaluating a policy
decision that was made in the past. They assess whether or not they think the
decision that was made was correct or incorrect. Finally, this lesson gets a 5 for the
integration standard because it incorporates three types of integration into the
lesson. The knowledge and skills integration is included because students work on
their analysis of research, and discussion skills. The time and place integration is
included when students learn about the lasting implications of historical events.
Finally, the technology integration is used to enhance the lesson in the form of the
document finder, which allowed me to show the class the pictures of the book as I
read it aloud.
There are two standards that I feel receive lower scores. Both the higher
order thinking standard as well as the connections to the world beyond the
classroom standard got the score of three. During the lesson, students are primarily
involved in lower order thinking, however when they are asked to use the data sets
to come up with new arguments, they engage in higher order thinking. They do this
three times during the lesson. The lesson also gets a three for the connections to the
world beyond the classroom standard because students are able to connect the
experiences of people in Hiroshima and Nagasaki to people who are still living with
the effects of the bomb today (especially in the Hiroshima No Pika book). Students
explore lasting implications of historical events, but they do not really relate them to
their own lives in particular.
Overall, I think that this lesson went very well. Students were very
interested in the topic, and they got into some pretty intense discussions. I learned
how crucial group assignments to the success of the students. I grouped the
students homogeneously, and I was pleased with the work of all but one group. If I
do a lesson like this again, I think I would try more heterogeneous groups in terms
of academic level to see the contrast in group work. Additionally, I learned that even
though I was saying the directions very explicitly and they were written on the note
taking sheet, I think the students could have also benefitted from having them on
the overhead or the board.
Data Set #1
Oppose: The United States should NOT have Dropped the Atomic
Bomb

The Japanese were already nearly defeated at the time that The United States
dropped the atomic bomb; consequently, there was no need to use a weapon this
extreme against them at this point in the war.

The atomic bomb killed many innocent Japanese civilians. This action is not only
immoral, but is also a war crime because it violates the international humanitarian
law of armed conflicts.

Days before The United States dropped the atomic bombs on Japan, the
government had intercepted correspondence between the Japanese and The Soviet
Union saying that Japan was preparing to surrender. Even with this knowledge,
American President Harry Truman went ahead and made the decision to drop the
atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Truman’s decision shows that The
United States used the atomic bombs to make a statement of power to the rest of
the world.

By the Numbers:
o Hiroshima:
 Population before dropping of the bomb: 340,000-350,000
 People killed immediately at dropping of the bomb: 70,00080,000
 People injured by the dropping of the bomb: 70,000
 People dead within 4 months: 90,000-166,000
o Nagasaki:
 Population before dropping the bomb: 240,000
 People killed immediately at dropping of the bomb: 40,00075,000
 People injured by the dropping of the bomb: 75,000
 People dead within 4 months: 60,000-80,000
Data Set #2
Oppose: The United States should NOT have Dropped the Atomic
Bomb

Other means could have easily been used to end the war. Dropping the atomic
bomb could have been avoided because the Japanese had been trying to surrender
for approximately two months prior to the time the bomb was dropped, but The
United States refused to accept anything but an unconditional surrender.

Atomic bombs use radiation and are much more destructive than conventional
bombs. Since these atomic bombs were the first of their kind, the scientists who
created them did not understand the full scope of the effects of radiation. These
effects are long lasting, and still affect the people of Hiroshima and Nagasaki
today. Two examples of these effects are:
o Rain at both locations carries radioactive particles, which causes radiation
poisoning in civilians.
o Radiation caused many medical problems for survivors. These medical
problems are passed down to the offspring of the survivors—the most
prominent problem being leukemia.

After The United States witnessed the horrible destruction that occurred after they
dropped the first bomb on Hiroshima, the need to follow through and drop the
second bomb on Nagasaki was absolutely unnecessary.

Hiroshima and Nagasaki were two of the most densely populate places in Japan,
and The United States chose to drop the bombs on these two locations because
they could kill the largest number of people.
Data Set #1
Support: The United States SHOULD have Dropped the Atomic Bomb

The United States (along with Great Britain and China) had offered an ultimatum
to the Japanese at the Potsdam Conference in July of 1945. The United States
clearly stated that if Japan did not surrender under the terms mandated at this
conference, that they could expect a prompt destruction. The Japanese should
have taken the warning seriously and accepted the offer made at the Potsdam
Conference.

Although technically the killing of innocent civilians violates international
humanitarian law and is considered a war crime, all countries in World War II
committed war crimes—not only The United States.

The United States had completed The Manhattan Project to create the atomic
bombs. This project had taken lots of time and cost lots of money from the
United States government. Dropping the bombs was a justification of this time
and money.

Dropping the atomic bombs demonstrated the power of The United States to The
Soviet Union. The relationship between the two countries, which had always been
founded on competition, had become increasingly filled with tension.
Data Set #2
Support: The United States SHOULD have Dropped the Atomic Bomb

Dropping the atomic bomb was the only way to successfully end the war at the
earliest possible moment. The Japanese military, under General Korechika
Anami, was unanimously and outspokenly opposed to the idea of any type of
surrender. Furthermore, the Japanese are known for being determined people
who are very concerned with preserving honor and dignity. Consequently, they
were not going to surrender, so The United States needed to find a tactic that
would force them to surrender.

Prior to dropping the atomic bombs, The United States had been using strategic
conventional bombs to attack Japanese cities. These bombs killed many Japanese
civilians. By dropping the atomic bomb, The United States actually limited the
amount of Japanese civilian deaths.

By dropping the atomic bombs, The United States was able to limit the amount of
Americans (military and civilians) who died in the remainder of the war.

Hiroshima and Nagasaki were not chosen as the bomb sites because they were
heavily populated Japanese cities. They were chosen because they were
important sea ports and military bases.
Name_________________________________
Date_________________________________
Should The United States have Dropped the Atomic Bomb on Hiroshima and
Nagasaki?
1. After completing this lesson, do you think that The United States should have
dropped the atomic bomb on Hiroshima and Nagasaki? YES
NO
2. Based on your answer to the above question, please list what you consider to be
the three most important arguments for your position:
1. ______________________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________________
2. ______________________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________________
3. ______________________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________________
On a scale of 1 to 10 (1 being the worst and 10 being the best), please answer the
following questions:
Your participation in your group’s discussion:
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
5
6
7
8
9
10
Your group’s overall discussion:
1
2
3
4
Name_________________________________
Date_________________________________
Dropping the Atomic Bomb: A Persuasive Mini-Essay
Using the information from the data sets, worksheets, notes, and discussions from
today’s class, please write a persuasive mini-essay explaining whether or not the
United States should have dropped atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Your
paragraph should include what you consider to be the three most important
arguments related to your position. Your mini essay should be two to three
paragraphs in length (one paragraph is 5-7 sentences). You may use the space
below or write it on another page.
This assignment is due ____________________________________.
Name_______________________
Date_______________________
Note-Taking Sheet
Step One: Read the research on Data Set #1, and highlight key arguments. Then
decide with your teammate which three arguments you believe to be the strongest.
These are the arguments that you will present to the other group members. When
presenting, each partner must give at least one argument.
Step Two: Circle your position for the first round. Then list the three arguments
you think are strongest to support your position. Arguments may be in bullet point
form.
Should The United States have Dropped The Atomic Bomb on Hiroshima and
Nagasaki? Yes
No
Arguments:
1.
2.
3.
Step Three: When the teacher has signaled for the presentation of the positions to
start, the pair that is not presenting must take notes on the other pair’s arguments.
Take notes in the space given below:
Opposing Viewpoint: Yes
No
Arguments:
1.
2.
3.
Step Four: Read the research on Data Set #2 and highlight key arguments. Then
decide with your teammate which three arguments you believe to be the strongest.
These are the arguments that you will present to the other group members. When
presenting, each partner must give at least one argument.
Should The United States have Dropped The Atomic Bomb on Hiroshima and
Nagasaki? Yes
No
Arguments:
1.
2.
3.
Step Five: When the teacher has signaled for the presentation of the new positions
to start, the pair that presented second last time will now go first this time. The pair
that is not presenting must take notes on the other pair’s arguments. Take notes in
the space given below:
Opposing Viewpoint: Yes
No
Arguments:
1.
2.
3.
Step Six: As a group, discuss the question: Should The United States have Dropped
the Atomic Bomb on Hiroshima and Nagasaki? Did your group come up with a
general consensus? List it below:
Group Consensus:
Works Referenced
“The Decision to Drop the Atomic Bomb.” Harry S. Truman Library and Museum.
Web. 17 October 2010.
<http://www.trumanlibrary.org/whistlestop/study_collections/bomb/large
/index.php>
Dietrich, Bill. “Pro and Con on Dropping the Bomb.” The Seattle Times, 1995. Web.
17 October 2010.
<http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/special/trinity/supplement/procon.htm
l>
Fehner, Terrance R., and Gosling, F.G. The Manhattan Project: An Interactive History,
2003. Web. 17 October 2010.
<http://www.cfo.doe.gov/me70/manhattan/index.htm>