Lessons & Objectives
Students will take an in-depth look at the rises of both Joseph Stalin and Adolf Hitler. Students will discuss the similarities and differences between Stalin and Hitler. Students will use facts and critical analysis of personal backgrounds and historical events to argue who between Stalin and Hitler was guilty of more heinous crimes.
CALIFORNIA STATE CONTENT
AND COMMON CORE STANDARDS
CA History-Social Science 10.6 Students analyze the effects of the First World War.
3 Understand the widespread disillusionment with prewar institutions, authorities, and values
that resulted in a void that was later filled by totalitarians.
CA History-Social Science 10.7 Students analyze the rise of totalitarian governments after World War I.
2 Trace Stalin’s rise to power in the Soviet Union and the connection between economic
policies, political policies, the absence of a free press, and systematic violations of human
rights (e.g., the Terror Famine in Ukraine).
3 Analyze the rise, aggression, and human costs of totalitarian regimes (Fascist and
Communist) in Germany, Italy, and the Soviet Union, noting especially their common and
dissimilar traits.
CA History-Social Science 10.8 Students analyze the causes and consequences of World War II.
3 Compare the German, Italian, and Japanese drives for empire in the 1930s, including the
1937 Rape of Nanking, other atrocities in China, and the Stalin-Hitler Pact of 1939.
ELA-Literacy.WHST.9-10.1 Write arguments focused on discipline-specific content.
a Introduce precise claim(s), distinguish the claim(s) from alternate or opposing claims, and
create an organization that establishes clear relationships among the claim(s), counterclaims,
reasons, and evidence.
b Develop claim(s) and counterclaims fairly, supplying data and evidence for each while
pointing out the strengths and limitations of both claim(s) and counterclaims in a discipline-
appropriate form and in a manner that anticipates the audience’s knowledge level and
concerns.
3 Understand the widespread disillusionment with prewar institutions, authorities, and values
that resulted in a void that was later filled by totalitarians.
CA History-Social Science 10.7 Students analyze the rise of totalitarian governments after World War I.
2 Trace Stalin’s rise to power in the Soviet Union and the connection between economic
policies, political policies, the absence of a free press, and systematic violations of human
rights (e.g., the Terror Famine in Ukraine).
3 Analyze the rise, aggression, and human costs of totalitarian regimes (Fascist and
Communist) in Germany, Italy, and the Soviet Union, noting especially their common and
dissimilar traits.
CA History-Social Science 10.8 Students analyze the causes and consequences of World War II.
3 Compare the German, Italian, and Japanese drives for empire in the 1930s, including the
1937 Rape of Nanking, other atrocities in China, and the Stalin-Hitler Pact of 1939.
ELA-Literacy.WHST.9-10.1 Write arguments focused on discipline-specific content.
a Introduce precise claim(s), distinguish the claim(s) from alternate or opposing claims, and
create an organization that establishes clear relationships among the claim(s), counterclaims,
reasons, and evidence.
b Develop claim(s) and counterclaims fairly, supplying data and evidence for each while
pointing out the strengths and limitations of both claim(s) and counterclaims in a discipline-
appropriate form and in a manner that anticipates the audience’s knowledge level and
concerns.
Lesson Introduction
The teacher will ask the students, “What is the difference between an argument and a claim? How about a debate versus a (verbal) fight? Is there a difference?” Students will have a few minutes to discuss those questions; the teacher will used Socratic method to draw out from the students critical thinking and multiple perspectives. At the conclusion of the short discussion period, the teacher drives home that an argument is supported by facts and sourced information, while a claim may be purely unfounded opinion. Likewise, a debate utilizes such evidence, while a fight may not. The teacher also stresses that history is not black-or-white nor right-or-wrong; history is usually subjective to perspective and analysis – it is made of informed opinions and interpretations, not hard facts.
Vocabulary
Since this lesson is an addendum to previous lessons about Stalin and Hitler, little new vocabulary is introduced. However, there is a section of the video (not shown) when an interviewed professional discusses the premise of the new and controversial psycho-history field, which is applied to analyzing Stalin and Hitler in the video. The professional mentions the different social science fields from which psycho-history draws. I think it would be good for students to know about the diversity within the social science field – it’s not all just history! A list of vocabulary words with definitions will be passed out to students; for homework, the students will create original situations/sentences/examples for each social science division.
anthropology archaeology behaviorism economics
human geography linguistics political science psychoanalysis
psycho-history psychology social psychology sociology
anthropology archaeology behaviorism economics
human geography linguistics political science psychoanalysis
psycho-history psychology social psychology sociology
Content Delivery
Students will watch portions of the Biography Channel’s “Hitler & Stalin: Roots of Evil” documentary (linked here and on the digital unit plan). When playing the video (via YouTube, projected from the computer), the teacher will remain vigilant of the tracking time to only play certain portions of the video (the video has been intensely pre-watched and specific portions distinguished for student viewing to keep only the content dealing with pre-WWII politics and to maximize post-video discussion time). Students are provided hand-outs with guiding questions for scaffolded learning and argument development (linked on the digital unit plan). The teacher will explain to students that they will answer the questions to help them develop an informed opinion regarding which dictator was guilty of more heinous crimes (to be used in the subsequent discussion activity). On the back of the hand-out, students will take their own notes and begin to formulate evidence-supported arguments that either Stalin or Hitler was guilty of more heinous crimes. The teacher will define for students the word “heinous” as very bad, terrible, evil, or wicked.
Play these portions of the video (using the YouTube time tracker across the bottom of the video):
06:41—07:15, 10:27—11:54, 13:05—17:54, 25:13—30:03, and 31:42—34:46 (total time of 14:44)
06:41—07:15, 10:27—11:54, 13:05—17:54, 25:13—30:03, and 31:42—34:46 (total time of 14:44)
Student Engagement
After watching the video, students will pair up and have several minutes to compare and further refine their arguments. Then students will participate in a “Forced Decision Barometer” discussion activity addressing the question, Who was guilty of more heinous crimes – Stalin or Hitler? For the purposes of this activity, the spectrum of decision options will be “forced” into four categories of answers to the question: Stalin, undecided but leaning toward Stalin, undecided but leaning toward Hitler, and Hitler. The teacher will put signs (or simply write on the whiteboard) on opposite ends of the room for “Stalin” and “Hitler.” Students will position themselves by either sign or at either of the two designated points between. Before the discussion begins, it is vital that the teacher reiterates classroom rules about respect and makes clear these rules of debate/discussion:
• Be respectful by listening to those speaking; do not be disruptive when someone is speaking
• Be respectful in what you say when you are speaking; be honest, but do not purposely be inflammatory
• Remember that all honest opinions are valid and worth hearing; try to empathize with others’ points
• Be sensitive to diversity; there are many different cultures and religions with their own beliefs/values
• Minimize accusatory tones by phrasing things in the 1st person instead of the 2nd (use “I,” not “you”)
• Be careful to phrase beliefs/opinions as appropriately (“I feel...”); your beliefs/opinions are not facts
• When debating, back your statements with evidence/facts/support
Once the students are aligned to their arguments’ positions on the barometer, the teacher calls on a student from one end of the spectrum to explain/rationalize his/her argument. The student should use evidence from the source materials to back his/her arguments. Allow the student to speak uninterrupted, and then pick someone from the opposite end of the spectrum to speak (without specifically countering the first person). Then, pick someone from one of the middle positions, and then someone from the other middle position. Once a student from each of the four positions has spoken, ask the class to briefly reflect on what was said. Then, call on someone different from each of the four positions to present his/her argument, but with paying special attention to answering things that were said by previous speakers. After those first two rounds, the teacher will call on different students at the teacher’s discretion, being careful to hear from as many students as possible.
After many students have had a chance to present their arguments, the teacher will tell the students that they’re going to take a peek into the next unit (World War II). The teacher then plays one more small chunk of the “Hitler & Stalin: Roots of Evil” video (02:33--03:30) which gives death toll statistics for each Stalin and Hitler. After playing that small portion (only 57 seconds), ask students if anyone would like to change positions. If any change, ask them to explain why they did so. After entertaining those discussions, make a final directive: Students must polarize, choosing either Stalin or Hitler (no more in-betweens). Again discuss the movement choices, and ask once more if anyone wishes to move. When all students are settled on either Stalin or Hitler, take a count of students answering “Stalin” and students answering “Hitler.”
• Be respectful by listening to those speaking; do not be disruptive when someone is speaking
• Be respectful in what you say when you are speaking; be honest, but do not purposely be inflammatory
• Remember that all honest opinions are valid and worth hearing; try to empathize with others’ points
• Be sensitive to diversity; there are many different cultures and religions with their own beliefs/values
• Minimize accusatory tones by phrasing things in the 1st person instead of the 2nd (use “I,” not “you”)
• Be careful to phrase beliefs/opinions as appropriately (“I feel...”); your beliefs/opinions are not facts
• When debating, back your statements with evidence/facts/support
Once the students are aligned to their arguments’ positions on the barometer, the teacher calls on a student from one end of the spectrum to explain/rationalize his/her argument. The student should use evidence from the source materials to back his/her arguments. Allow the student to speak uninterrupted, and then pick someone from the opposite end of the spectrum to speak (without specifically countering the first person). Then, pick someone from one of the middle positions, and then someone from the other middle position. Once a student from each of the four positions has spoken, ask the class to briefly reflect on what was said. Then, call on someone different from each of the four positions to present his/her argument, but with paying special attention to answering things that were said by previous speakers. After those first two rounds, the teacher will call on different students at the teacher’s discretion, being careful to hear from as many students as possible.
After many students have had a chance to present their arguments, the teacher will tell the students that they’re going to take a peek into the next unit (World War II). The teacher then plays one more small chunk of the “Hitler & Stalin: Roots of Evil” video (02:33--03:30) which gives death toll statistics for each Stalin and Hitler. After playing that small portion (only 57 seconds), ask students if anyone would like to change positions. If any change, ask them to explain why they did so. After entertaining those discussions, make a final directive: Students must polarize, choosing either Stalin or Hitler (no more in-betweens). Again discuss the movement choices, and ask once more if anyone wishes to move. When all students are settled on either Stalin or Hitler, take a count of students answering “Stalin” and students answering “Hitler.”
Lesson Closure
Students will return to their seats, and the class will conclude the lesson by discussing the discussion activity:
What did they like about the activity? What didn’t they like?
What techniques worked well for structuring the discussion? What techniques worked well for speaking?
How much did evidence benefit the speakers/arguments? What did they learn?
What did they like about the activity? What didn’t they like?
What techniques worked well for structuring the discussion? What techniques worked well for speaking?
How much did evidence benefit the speakers/arguments? What did they learn?
Homework
Students will create original situations/sentences/examples for each social science division vocabulary term.
Assessment
Formative During the content delivery portion of the lesson, whilst watching the video, students are informally assessed on
content knowledge, on skills in preparing persuasive arguments, and on critically analyzing information presented
to them via their worksheets where they will answer the guiding questions, take notes on the content presented,
and formulate their arguments.
Summative During the student participation portion of the lesson, students engage in a “Forced Decision Barometer”
discussion activity, which serves to informally and summatively assess the learning throughout the lesson (as well
as the related previous lessons about Stalin and Hitler). Students will be asked to state their positions along a
segmented spectrum, and to support their positions with evidence from the content material sources. Students
will further demonstrate their skills and knowledge when asked to adjust their positions, arguments, and reasons.
content knowledge, on skills in preparing persuasive arguments, and on critically analyzing information presented
to them via their worksheets where they will answer the guiding questions, take notes on the content presented,
and formulate their arguments.
Summative During the student participation portion of the lesson, students engage in a “Forced Decision Barometer”
discussion activity, which serves to informally and summatively assess the learning throughout the lesson (as well
as the related previous lessons about Stalin and Hitler). Students will be asked to state their positions along a
segmented spectrum, and to support their positions with evidence from the content material sources. Students
will further demonstrate their skills and knowledge when asked to adjust their positions, arguments, and reasons.
ACCOMMODATIONS FOR ENGLISH LEARNERS,
STRIVING READERS, AND STUDENTS WITH SPECIAL NEEDS
When formulating arguments after the video, English Learners, Striving Readers, and Students with Special Needs will be paired with helpful, strong-reading students and also will receive close attention from the teacher. Per homework, Spanish-speaking English Learners are provided Spanish definitions for the vocabulary terms, and Striving Readers and Special Needs Students will be provided sample sentences for the vocabulary words.
Lesson Resources
Biography Channel’s “Hitler & Stalin: Roots of Evil”