Lesson Planning for Structured Instruction
(For Engaging Teaching)
Teacher: Kevin Andrew Curtin
Length of lesson: 90 minutes
Subject/Lesson: The United States and Latin America in
the Mid-Twentieth Century
th
Grade/Section: 11 -12th Latin American History Elective
___________________________________________
OBJECTIVES and STANDARDS:
TSWBAT:
- Evaluate the actions of the United States in
Latin America during the Cold War.
- Form and Express an opinion regarding those
actions and their justification (or lack thereof).
- Defend their opinions with historical data and
examples.
preview
TEXT/MATERIALS:
- Homework with three points supporting each
side of the question to be debated.
- Points of View diagram (see attached)
- Random draw method (slips in a tin can) for
assigning groups.
- Promethean Board and Promethean Pen
- Instructions for Unit 7 Major Project (handed out
at the beginning of the unit).
PREVIEW:
- Homework Assignment from previous class:
Bring to the next class period three arguments
for each “side” of the debate question for that
class: Was United States policy in Latin America
during the Cold War justified?
LESSON DESIGN:
-
-
Content
Strategies
(visual discovery,
experiential
exercise, etc.)
-
-
-
-
-
Students will be divided by random drawing into two
“sides” for the debate. The question to be debated is
“Was United States policy in Latin America during the
Cold War justified?” One side will argue that U.S. policy
in Latin America during the Cold War was justified
(perhaps even necessary). The other will counter that U.S.
policy in Latin America during the Cold War was
unjustified. (5 min)
Students will be given fifteen minutes to compare
notes/homework, anticipate counter-arguments, and write
opening statements for their side’s position. (15 min)
Each group will nominate one speaker to make their side’s
opening statement. There will be no interruptions or
rebuttals at this time. (10 min)
The floor will then be opened for debate and points
students wish to make. Teacher will monitor discussion to
ensure civility and relevance, and guide as necessary. The
following points should be discussed, so the teacher should
guide the class to consider them if students do not
generate them independently. (25 min)
What are a government’s responsibilities to its
people and their interests?
What are a government’s responsibilities with
regard to moral conduct in the world at large?
Were the actions of the United States in Latin
America during the Cold War intended to protect
American interests?
At what point is it acceptable to harm other nations
in pursuing your own nation’s interests? Where
exactly is that line?
Did the United States cross that line in Latin
America during the Cold War?
Were the actions of the United States in fact
immoral, or were they “just business?”
Students will be given five minutes after the debate
-
concludes to reconvene with their group and use the
discussion to shape a closing statement. (5 min)
As before, each group will nominate one speaker to make
their side’s opening statement. Also as before, no
interruptions or rebuttals will be permitted. (10 min)
PROCESSING
Assignment PROCESSING ASSIGNMENT:
(flow charts,
political cartoon,
poems, etc.)
-
Working with the teacher and using the Promethean board,
students will complete a “Point of View” chart addressing
this question. (See attached blank and answer key;
additional material may be added from particularly insightful
student responses.) (15 min)
ASSESSMENT(S):
-
Unit 7 Major Project: a three to five page essay
describing United States intervention in Latin America
during the Cold War period and arguing whether or not it
was justified with clear evidence and logical reasoning. Note
that as this is a subjective question, there is no right
answer to the question of U.S. intervention and its
Assessments
justification, but you must defend your points of view
with consistent and relevant historical information. ((In
other words, what you argue, while important, doesn’t have
any impact on your grade. You will be graded rather on how
well you argue and defend your point, whatever it may be.))
- Students will already have this assignment from the
beginning of the unit, but the last 5 minutes of class should
be taken to review it with them. (5 min)
_______________________________________________
SUMMARY/EVALUATION:
Summary/
Evaluation
-
-
Students will receive a 10 point homework grade for the
assignment due at the beginning of class.
Students will receive a 30 point classwork grade for their
participation in the debate (it should be stressed that it is
quality of participation which is being graded, not which side
“wins” the debate).
Students will receive a 100 point project grade on their
essays (the “Major Project” for this unit).
FOLLOW-UP ASSIGNMENT:
-
Three to five page essay describing United States
intervention in Latin America during the Cold War period and
arguing whether or not it was justified with clear evidence
and logical reasoning. (This is the Unit 7 Major Project).
Key Terms, People, and Places for this Lesson
(placed here because the History Alive! lesson format doesn’t include a space for them)
It is hard to predict which of the terms, people, and places students will bring up
in the debate, but I feel as if the discussion will not cover the essentials of the
topic if it does not include the following:
Capitalism
Socialism
Declaration of Caracas
Sandinistas
Bay of Pigs
Jacobo Arbenz
Salvador Allende
United Fruit Company
Communism
Monroe Doctrine
National Security Doctrine
Contras
Cuban Missile Crisis
Castillo Armas
Augusto Pinochet
Fidel Castro
Andrew Curtin
Final Project Reflection
I chose to focus on Latin America during the Cold War for my unit and on this
lesson in particular first because they represent a topic of interest to me, but more
importantly because they represent a topic on which I am very strong in some aspects and
very weak in others.
US/Latin American relations have been an area of particular interest to me since
college, when I focused my studies on the history of Latin America, Africa, and Asia,
particularly on their histories from the colonial period to the present. I wrote several
papers on the subject and used US/Latin American relations during the Cold War as the
subject of a Webquest I designed with two prospective Spanish teachers during my time
in teacher training. I consider myself to be knowledgeable in the subject and passionate
about communicating an understanding of the period to my students, both of which make
this a strong unit/lesson for me.
Unfortunately, this unit and lesson are weak for me as well, as I have come over
the last ten years to feel a great deal of contempt towards what I can only view as
hypernationalism in this country (things like “Freedom isn’t Free” and American flag
bumper stickers appearing overnight following September 11th really grated on me).
Thus, I know that I have a bias towards seeing the United States as an imperialist power
who cares nothing for the people it hurts in pursuit of its own interests- not something
that’s fair for me to inflict upon my students.
That said, I think US/Latin American relations is an absolutely essential topic for
students of Latin American history at the high school level. While Park View possesses a
unique community boasting a very high population of Latin American immigrants, for
those students not from Latin America (a majority at pretty much any of the other high
schools in Loudoun County, and a sizeable portion of the population I expect to take this
class even at Park View), this unit is the point of contact, the one where their world and
the world of the course overlap. Therefore, I think it’s really important that it be taught
in such a way that the students are coming to interact with it themselves, not just through
lecture and certainly not lecture from a teacher with such obvious bias that even he
himself can see it!
As I was trying to figure out how exactly I was going to address the question of
whether or not the United States government was justified in its Latin American policy
during the Cold War, I hit upon the idea of a debate, which seemed to solve both my
problems. It allowed the students to draw (and argue!) their own conclusions, and it kept
me on the sidelines, where it would be easier to play “devil’s advocate” for both sides by
simply asking questions and letting the students address them without my own bias
coming into play. I drafted up what I believed to be a fairly balanced list of questions
and away I went.
This idea also led me into the other development I’m most proud of for my
syllabus: the use of major projects instead of tests to evaluate student learning. I agree
with what Nicole Bartow said about this being an elective- a “fun” history class. I think
the projects will engage the students better, encourage their learning more effectively,
and simply be more enjoyable for them than traditional tests, and this course is the perfect
venue for that sort of assessment.
I also took the liberty of “borrowing” (with permission) Nicole’s idea for the
dinner party at the end of the course, which was so good that when she told me about it
two weeks ago I immediately knew would be an excellent way to cap off the course and
engage students in looking back over what they had learned throughout the semester.
She graciously allowed me to tag on to her idea, and if we ever end up teaching the
course at the same time, I’m hoping to be able to return the favor by using my drama
classes to help with costuming and providing a venue (the stage) to host a combined party
of our two classes.
In terms of changes to my unit and lesson…well, the basic structure remained the
same, as well as most of the essential learning questions, but the rest basically underwent
a complete overhaul in light of the very helpful comments I received. I retuned some of
the questions, focused on some different angles than I had initially covered, and filled out
my actual factual data.
I also tossed out what I’d started on the lesson plan when I hit upon the idea of the
debate, and decided for the sake of LCPS compatibility to use Bill Brazier’s History
Alive! lesson plan format that he has us use during in-service meetings so that it’s good to
go to central office if they ever ask to have a look.
Finally, on the subject of the syllabus, looking at those of my classmates proved
to be very helpful as I knew what I wanted to teach when but was having trouble figuring
my pacing. By talking to some of my classmates and looking over their work, I was able
to see places where I might have over- or under-booked the time needed to complete a
unit. I still stuck to my guns in a few places (the Cold War Unit and the 19th Century
Units’ lengths were different than those of people I spoke to, but I knew how and what I
wanted to teach and was sure I’d need the time allotted).
The end result is a syllabus, unit outline, and lesson that I believe are good, solid
products that I can be proud of, ready to be fine-tuned and absolutely finalized when a
curriculum for the course and an official textbook are released by LCPS.