Chris Andresen

20th March 2015

TE 804
Assessment Analysis: Atomic Bomb Letter Assignment
The Assignment:
Your task: You are a US Senator. Write me (President Truman) a letter
arguing whether or not the USA should use an atomic bomb on Japan.
Write two paragraphs stating your case with examples. YOU MUST USE
THREE FACTS FROM THE POWERPOINT!
If you're arguing FOR the usage of the bomb: why should we use it?
If you're arguing AGAINST the usage of the bomb: why shouldn't we
use it? Are there alternatives?
What I Was Looking For in Students Responses:
This assignment was done a bit differently than my usual writing
responses. Traditionally, I wouldve gone through a PowerPoint
presentation on Congress debate over what to do with Americas
newfound nuclear capabilities. Instead, I had my students read through
the slides on their own, and formulate their own responses to the
question based on their own takeaway from the presentation. My idea
is that there is no correct answer to the debate over whether or not to
drop the bomb on Japan; there are facts that help both sides build an
effective argument. I told my students this beforehand, hoping I would
get a good split between Yes, bombs away! folks and No, atomic
bombs are messed up folks.
My ideal response, then, is not one that is written perfectly. I was
just looking for evidence of research and, after doing the research,
thinking critically enough to use their new knowledge to craft a letter

arguing their point. To achieve this, I graded my students responses

based on the following points:

Does this student take a stance on whether or not to drop an

atomic bomb?
Does this letter show evidence of having done research?
(meaning: are there the three pieces of evidence from the

PowerPoint?)
Is this students stance thought out clearly and logically?
Is this letter grammatically correct?

The Responses

Jon
o Jon accomplished most of what I wanted out of my
responses in his letter. He was quick to get to his
argument: we SHOULD drop the bomb. He backed his
argument up with some facts:

To start, Japan attacked us first, it was a very brutal surprise

attack that resulted in many deaths. The citizens of America
feel that the deaths in Pearl Harbor must be avenged. Next, by
dropping this bomb you would be completely end the war for
good. The war has gone on too long and it needs to end soon,
our troops need to come home and there should be no more
casualties. Finally, by dropping the bomb on one of Japans most
industrial cities, you would be making them practically
harmless, because they wouldnt be able to produce anything.

Jon used three facts from the PowerPoint in three

sentences. This shows that he can definitely navigate a
presentation in order to glean information. While this does
not necessarily prove that Jon KNOWS this information
cold, it clearly shows that he can argue a point in his
writing, which was what I wanted to see from my students.

Another strong point from Jon was the fact that he included
the other sides argument in his letter:
Dropping the bomb would have many consequences for the
U.S.. If we dropped the bomb, we would be responsible for the
deaths of many innocent civilians. The bomb is also very
expensive, and us taxs payers will most likely have to pay for it.
Theres also the risk that the bomb wont be fully effective and
Japan would seek revenge and we could have an even bigger
war. I say we take the risk and drop the bomb, even though
there are cons,w think about the pros. Bring our boys home.

I loved that he did this. This shows that he understands

that, while dropping the bomb has some dire
consequences, it should still be done in order to save
American lives. I believe this shows significant critical
thinking skills. He is able to comprehend the other side of
the argument, realize its strengths, and still hold firm to his
thesis.

Skyler
o Skyler, usually a dedicated and thoughtful student, clearly
wasnt as enticed as Jon by this assignment. She didnt
write that much, especially by her standards, and simply
stated three unrelated facts from the PowerPoint slides.
Skyler wrote her letter from a contemporary point of view,
using past tense and not really adhering to the idea that
she was writing as a Senator to President Truman. In this
paragraph, she adds a third fact onto the end just to hit her
quota:

The dropping of the atomic bomb on Japan was needed to help

end the war. We should use it because 5 days latter Japan
surrendered. It might have killed about 80,000 people and
almost everyone got injured during the dropping. I agree we

should have done it to help us out and save our troops. The
bomb was dropped from the Enola Gay.

o I think Skyler just began to list facts in order to fill space

here. Skyler clearly looked through the PowerPoint, but I
dont think she used the information there to utilize any

higher-order thinking.
Briana
o I really like Brianas response. She argues for the usage of
the Atomic Bomb, and did so in more convincing fashion
than most of her classmates. Unlike Jon, she did not bring
up the opposing side of the argument. However, she used
her two paragraphs to effectively and efficiently tell me
why dropping the bomb is the right thing to do. She
brought up the men who worked on the Manhattan Project
as one of her reasons:
The dropping of the atomic bomb on Japan was
needed to help end the war. We should use it
because 5 days latter Japan surrendered. It might
have killed about 80,000 people and almost
everyone got injured during the dropping. I agree we
should have done it to help us out and save our
troops. The bomb was dropped from the Enola Gay.
o I really appreciate this, because it shows that she can
empathize with the people who actually built this bomb. If
we dont use it, then why did we put all of the brilliant
minds to use? She also writes her letter like somebody who
is actually writing to he president, which made her letter
much better.

How Id Change in the Future

For the most part, my students did what I asked of them: they
wrote letters to President Truman advising him on why or why
not to use the atomic bomb. The several different ways they
responded made me think about the assignment itself,
however. Students like Jon and Briana clearly bought into the
idea of the assignment, and wholeheartedly threw themselves
into their letters. They made an argument and backed it up
with facts that supported their claim. Other students, like
Skyler, simply listed information they saw on the PowerPoint
to fill space. She didnt draw a clear thesis, and her
information didnt add to her argument.
I think I would actually lecture on this PowerPoint before
turning the students over to write their letters. I think it would
work better if I presented the two arguments, with as little
bias as possible, and allowed the students to prepare their
letters after that. Id also be more explicit in my instructions.
Id make sure that students needed to BUILD an argument.
That is, they need to say whether or not they think the USA
should us the atomic bomb. After this, they need to use facts
that they took down during my lecture to bolster their claim.