Fort Vancouver High School
High School
11th Grade
Classroom Based
Assessment
U.S. History
Classroom Based Assessment
World War II
In this unit you will choose from one of three CBA rubrics
in which to complete a project on.
There will be 3 assessments in this Unit
1. The CBA (8 points)
2. An in class short essay on one of the essential questions you did not do your CBA
on. (4 points)
3. An in class DBQ test (4 points)
For your CBA you will choose one of three rubrics:
 Causes of Conflict
o In this CBA you will analyze what factor most lead to WWII
o PPT notes and discussion in class, but few resources provided.
 US Foreign Policy
o In this CBA you will analyze whether using atomic weapons on Japan was justified
o Entire Packet and sources provided.
 Dig Deep Analyzing Sources
o In this CBA you will analyze whether or not WWII was a “good war.”
o No sources provided, though some classroom discussion.
You will also choose what format your final CBA product will be:
(If you did not turn in the New Deal CBA you must do an essay)

Essay
o The packets are all set up to be used to write a paper. An essay will be the most
straight forward project.

PowerPoint
o Adapting to a PPT from an essay will be the easiest modification, but will not mean
any less work than an essay. You will need just as much content as an essay.

Other approved product
o Please get any other product approved before starting on it.
Fort Vancouver High School
High School
11th Grade
Classroom Based
Assessment
U.S. History
Classroom Based Assessment
Causes of Conflict CBA
Understanding the causes of conflicts may help us resolve current conflicts or
even prevent future ones from occurring. You will research a conflict and
analyze its causes from different social science perspectives.
Task: You will answer the question: What factor most contributed to the start of WWII?

State a position on why a factor (or factors) played a primary role in causing the conflict
AND find similarities between this conflict and current conflicts.

Provide reason(s) for your position that include:
o An evaluation of factors causing the conflict from two or more of the following social
science perspectives
 geographic
 political
 economic
 cultural
 sociological
 psychological
Relevant information from two or more primary sources to support reasons for the position

Make explicit references within the paper or presentation to three or more credible sources that
provide relevant information AND cites sources within the paper, presentation, or bibliography.
Skills Required to Perform the Task


Taking and supporting a position with evidence and details from resources.
Analyzing primary and secondary resources.
Citing sources
Content Focus of this CBA Implementation Model
NOTE: As indicated above, teachers may choose other issues than the one supported in this plan. This is a model of one way
to do the Checks and Balances CBA.
2
Fort Vancouver High School
U.S. History
 MEETING STANDARD 
GLE (EALR)
4.3.1. Analyzes and
interprets historical
materials from a variety
of perspective.
EALR 4.3. Understands
that there are multiple
perspectives and
interpretations of
historical events.
4.3.2.Analyzes the
multiple causal
factors of conflicts
in world history.
Classroom Based Assessment
 NOT MEETING STANDARD 
4 - Excellent
3 - Proficient
2 - Partial
States a position on which
factor played a primary role
in causing the conflict
AND
Draws a conclusion about
how studying this conflict
helps us understand the
causes or specific conflicts
in the world today.
States a position on which
factor played a primary role
in causing the conflict
AND
Finds similarities between
this conflict and current
conflicts.
States a position on which
factor played a primary role
in causing the conflict
Without finding similarities
between this conflict and
current conflicts.
Provides reason(s) for the
position by evidence
Provides reason(s) for the
position by evidence
Provides reason(s) for the
position by evidence
1 - Minimal
Describes factors
that played a role in
causing the conflict
WITHOUT taking a
position
OR
States a position o
which factor played
a primary role in
causing the conflict
that is unclear.
Provides reason(s) for
the position of the
conflict without
explaining factors
causing the conflict
from social science
perspective
OR
Attempts to explain
factors causing the
conflict from one or
more social science
perspectives in an
unclear or minimal
way.
The evidence includes:
 An evaluation of factors
causing the conflict
from three or more of
the following social
science perspectives:
 Geographic
 Political
 Economic
 Cultural
 Sociological
 Psychological
The evidence includes:
 An evaluation of factors
causing the conflict from
two of the following
social science
perspectives:
 Geographic
 Political
 Economic
 Cultural
 Sociological
 Psychological
The evidence includes:
 An evaluation of factors
causing the conflict from
one of the following
social science
perspectives:
 Geographic
 Political
 Economic
 Cultural
 Sociological
 Psychological
5.4.1 Evaluates
multiple reasons
or factors to
develop a position
a paper or a
presentation.
Provides reason (s) for the
position supported by
evidence.
The evidence includes:
 An analysis of specific,
relevant information
from three or more
primary sources.
Provides reason (s) for the
position supported by
evidence.
The evidence includes:
 An analysis of specific,
relevant information from
two primary sources.
Provides reason (s) for the
position supported by
evidence.
The evidence includes:

An analysis of specific,
relevant information
from three or more
primary sources.
Provides evidence
from primary
sources that do not
support the position.
D- Sources
5.4.2: Creates
strategies to avoid
plagiarism and
respects intellectual
property when
developing a paper or
presentation.
5.2.2 Evaluates the
validity, reliability, and
credibility of sources
while researching an
 Makes explicit references
within the paper or
presentation to four or
more credible sources
that provide relevant
information.
 Cites sources within the
paper, presentation or
bibliography
 Makes explicit references
within the paper or
presentation to three
credible sources that
provide relevant
information.
 Cites sources within the
paper, presentation or
bibliography
 Makes explicit references
within the paper or
presentation to two
sources that provide
relevant information.
 Cites sources within the
paper, presentation or
bibliography
 Makes explicit
references within
the paper or
presentation to one
source that provides
relevant
information.
 Cites sources within
the paper,
presentation or
bibliography
EALR 4.3. Understands
that there are multiple
perspectives and
interpretations of
historical events.
issue or event.
 MEETING STANDARD 
 NOT MEETING STANDARD 
3
Fort Vancouver High School
High School
11th Grade
Classroom Based
Assessment
U.S. History
Classroom Based Assessment
US Foreign Policy CBA
How the United States government interacts with the world affects people across the globe. You will
evaluate a specific U.S. foreign policy based on an analysis of its causes and effects.
Task: You will answer the question: Was using atomic weapons on Japan justified?
State a position on the effectiveness of a specific U.S. foreign policy that outlines reasons in support
of your position.
Provide reason(s) for your position that include:
o An analysis of why the policy was implemented for national and/or international interests
from two or more of the following social science perspectives:
 Geographic
 Cultural
 Political
 Economic
 Sociological
 Psychological
An analysis of the effects of the policy including a discussion of:
 How the policy affected stakeholders in the United States.
 How the policy imposed costs OR provided benefits for other nations.
 Make explicit references within the paper or presentation to three or more credible sources that
provide relevant information AND cite sources within the paper, presentation, or bibliography.
Skills Required to Perform the Task


Taking and supporting a position with evidence and details from resources.
Analyzing primary and secondary resources.
Citing sources
Content Focus of this CBA Implementation Model
The content focus of this CBA implementation plan is exploring the United States decision to drop Atomic Bombs on
Hiroshima and Nagasaki, Japan.
NOTE: As indicated above, teachers may choose other issues than the one supported in this plan. This is a model of one way
to do the Foreign Policy CBA.
4
Fort Vancouver High School
U.S. History
 MEETING STANDARD 
 NOT MEETING STANDARD 
4 - Excellent
A- Position
5.4.1:
Evaluates and
interprets other
points of view
on an issue
within a paper or
presentation.
B- Causes
1.31 Analyzes
and evaluates
the causes and
effects of US
foreign policy on
people in the
United States
and across the
world (1890present)
 States a position on
the chosen foreign
policy that outlines
reasons in support of
the position
 AND
 Draws a conclusion
about why studying
this foreign policy
helps us to
understand current
issues and events.
Provides reason(s) for
the position supported
by evidence.
The evidence includes:
An analysis of why the
policy was implemented
for national and/or
international interests
from three or more of
the following social
science perspectives:






Geographic
cultural
political
economic
sociological
psychological
Classroom Based Assessment
3 - Proficient
2 - Partial
1 - Minimal
 States a position on the
effectiveness of the chosen
foreign policy that outlines
reasons in support of the
position
 States a position on the
chosen foeign policy but
does not outline reasons in
support of the position.
 Addresses the
foreign policy
without stating a
position.
Provides reason(s) for the position
supported by evidence.
Provides reason(s) for the
position supported by
evidence.
Provides evidence for
the position
WITHOUT using any
specific social science
perspectives.
The evidence includes:
An analysis of why the policy was
implemented for national and/or
international interests from two or
more of the following social
science perspectives:






Geographic
cultural
political
economic
sociological
psychological
The evidence includes:
An analysis of why the
policy was implemented for
national and/or international
interests from one of the
following social science
perspectives:






Geographic
cultural
political
economic
sociological
psychological
C-EFFECTS
 Provides reason(s) for
the position supported
by evidence:
The evidence includes
an analysis of the
effects of the policy
including a discussion
of:
How the policy affected
stakeholders in the
United States
AND
How the policy imposed
costs AND provided
benefits for other
nations.
 Provides reason(s) for the
position supported by evidence:
The evidence includes an analysis
of the effects of the policy
including a discussion of:
How the policy affected
stakeholders in the United States
AND
How the policy imposed costs OR
provided benefits for other nations.
 Provides reason(s) for the
position supported by
evidence:
The evidence includes an
analysis of the effects of the
policy including a discussion
of:
How the policy affected
stakeholders in the United
States
OR
How the policy imposed
costs AND provided benefits
for other nations.
 States how the
chosen foreign
policy affected
stakeholders in the
United States or
imposed costs on
AND/OR provided
benefits for other
nations without
explicit support from
relevant evidence.
D- Sources
5.4.2: Creates
strategies to avoid
plagiarism and
respects tintellectual
property when
developing a paper
or presentation.
5.2.2 Evaluates the
validity, reliability,
and credibilityof
sources while
researching an
 Makes explicit
references within the
paper or presentation
to four or more
credible sources that
provide relevant
information.
 The credibility of
sources should be
established within the
paper, presentation,
or bibliography.
 Makes explicit references within
the paper or presentation to
three credible sources that
provide relevant information.
 The credibility of sources should
be established within the paper,
presentation, or bibliography.
Makes explicit references
within the paper or
presentation to two sources
that provide relevant
information.
Makes explicit
references within the
paper or presentation
to one source that
provides relevant
information.
 MEETING STANDARD 
 NOT MEETING STANDARD 
issue or event.
5
Fort Vancouver High School
U.S. History
High School
11th Grade
Classroom Based
Assessment
Classroom Based Assessment
Dig DeepAnalyzing Sources CBA
A responsible citizen can use historical thinking to develop thoughtful participation in a
democratic society. To develop your thinking skills you will develop and support a thesis
on an historical question based on your analysis of primary sources and historical
narratives.
Task: You will answer the question: Was WWII a “good” war?
Answer the Historical question:
Provide reason(s) for your position that include:
o An analysis of why the policy was implemented for national and/or international interests
from two or more of the following social science perspectives:
 Geographic
 Cultural
 Political
 Economic
 Sociological
 Psychological
An analysis of the effects of the policy including a discussion of:
 How the policy affected stakeholders in the United States.
 How the policy imposed costs OR provided benefits for other nations.
 Make explicit references within the paper or presentation to three or more credible sources that
provide relevant information AND cite sources within the paper, presentation, or bibliography.
Skills Required to Perform the Task


Taking and supporting a position with evidence and details from resources.
Analyzing primary and secondary resources.
Citing sources
6
Fort Vancouver High School
U.S. History
 MEETING STANDARD 
 NOT MEETING STANDARD 
4 - Excellent
 States a position on a
4.3.1. Analyzes
differing
interpretations of
events in U.S.
History.
(EALR 4.3.
Understands that
there are multiple
perspectives and
interpretations of
historical events.)
5.2.2. Evaluates
the validity,
reliability, and
credibility of
sources when
researching an
issue or event.
5.4.1:
Evaluates and
interprets other
points of view on
an issue within a
paper or
presentation.
D- Sources
5.4.2: Creates
strategies to avoid
plagiarism and
respects tintellectual
property when
developing a paper
or presentation.
5.2.2 Evaluates the
validity, reliability,
and credibilityof
sources while
researching an
historical question that
outlines reasons in
support of the position
 AND
 States why studying
this historical question
helps us to understand
current issues and
events.
Provides reason(s) for
the position supported
by evidence.
Provides evidence for
the position using three
or more of the
following social science
perspectives:






Geographic
cultural
political
economic
sociological
psychological
Classroom Based Assessment
3 - Proficient
2 - Partial
 States a position on a historical
question that outlines reasons in
support of the position
 States a position on a
historical question but
does not outline reasons in
support of the position.
 Addresses a
historical question
without stating a
position.
Provides reason(s) for the position
supported by evidence.
Provides reason(s) for the
position supported by
evidence.
Provides evidence for
the position
WITHOUT using any
specific social science
perspectives.
Provides evidence for the position
using two of the following social
science perspectives:







Geographic
cultural
political
economic
sociological
psychological
Provides evidence for the
position using one of the
following social science
perspectives:






1 - Minimal
Geographic
cultural
political
economic
sociological
psychological
The evidence for the
position includes:

An evaluation of
how well four or
more sources
support the
reasons for the
position including
primary
AND
Secondary
sources.
The evidence for the position
includes:

An evaluation of how well
three sources support the
reasons for the position
including primary
AND
Secondary sources.
The evidence for the position
includes:

An evaluation of how
well two sources
support the reasons for
the position including
primary
OR
Secondary sources.
The evidence for the
position includes:

An evaluation of
how well one
sources support
the reasons for
the position
including
primary
OR
Secondary
sources.
 Makes explicit
references within the
paper or presentation
to four or more
credible sources that
provide relevant
information.
 The credibility of
sources should be
established within the
paper, presentation,
or bibliography.
 Makes explicit references within
the paper or presentation to
three credible sources that
provide relevant information.
 The credibility of sources should
be established within the paper,
presentation, or bibliography.
Makes explicit references
within the paper or
presentation to two sources
that provide relevant
information.
Makes explicit
references within the
paper or presentation
to one source that
provides relevant
information.
 MEETING STANDARD 
 NOT MEETING STANDARD 
issue or event.
7
Fort Vancouver High School
U.S. History
Classroom Based Assessment
WWII Unit Plan Rough Outline
Part I: Causes of WWII
Essential Question: Was WWII inevitable?
Day One: KWL chart on WWII
Free write: Is war a necessary and inevitable event in the course of human progress?
Why should nations go to war?
Crash Course US History: WWII Part I.
Notes on the cause of WWII
Day Two: Notes on the cause of WWII/ Rise of Germany and Japan
Day Three: Notes on the cause of WWII/ Rise of Germany and Japan
Sources: PPT
Causes of WWII: About.com
Causes of WWII: ABC CLIO
Part II: The War Itself
Essential Question: Was WWII a ‘good war?’
Day Four: Socratic Seminar
Free write: Is there such a thing as a “good war?”
Notes on the war
Day Five: Introduce and watch:” Nanking” (88min)
Day Six: Watch Nanking: Discuss
Day Seven: Watch part of “Saving Private Ryan”
Discuss
Notes on Holocaust
Day Eight - Twelve: Watch “Schindler’s List”
Sources:
In the long run, wars make us safer and richer by Ian Morris
“Nanking”
“Schindler’s List”
Part III: The end of the War
Essential Question: Was the use of atomic weapons by the US justified?
Day Thirteen:
Free Write: Was the use of atomic weapons by the US justified?
Notes on the end of the war/ atomic weapons
Day Fourteen: “Hiroshima” by BBC
Day Fifteen: “Hiroshima by BBC
Sources:
“Hiroshima”
Day 16: Walk through the US Foreign Policy CBA.
Day 17-22: Lab time to write CBA
8
Fort Vancouver High School
U.S. History
K
What do I Know
W
What do I Want to know
Classroom Based Assessment
L
What have I Learned
9
Fort Vancouver High School
U.S. History
Part I: Causes of WWII
Essential Question: Was WWII inevitable?
Classroom Based Assessment
CBA Question: What factor most lead to WWII?
World War II Europe: The Road to War
Moving Towards Conflict
By Kennedy Hickman
Effects of the Treaty of Versailles
Many of the seeds of World War II in Europe were sown by the Treaty of Versailles that ended World War I. In
its final form, the treaty placed full blame for the war on Germany and Austria-Hungary, as well as exacted
harsh financial reparations and led to territorial dismemberment. For the German people, who had believed
that the armistice had been agreed to based on US President Woodrow Wilson's lenient Fourteen Points, the
treaty caused resentment and a deep mistrust of their new government, the Weimar Republic. The need to
pay war reparations, coupled with the instability of the government, contributed to massive hyperinflation
which crippled the German economy. This situation was made worse by the onset of the Great Depression.
In addition to the economic ramifications of the treaty, Germany was required to demilitarize the Rhineland
and had severe limitations placed on the size of its military, including the abolishment of its air force.
Territorially, Germany was stripped of its colonies and forfeited land for the formation the country of Poland.
To ensure that Germany would not expand, the treaty forbade the annexation of Austria, Poland, and
Czechoslovakia.
Rise of Fascism & the Nazi Party
In 1922, Benito Mussolini and the Fascist Party rose to power in Italy. Believing in a strong central
government and strict control of industry and the people, Fascism was a reaction to the perceived failure of
free market economics and a deep fear of communism. Highly militaristic, Fascism also was driven by a sense
of belligerent nationalism that encouraged conflict as a means of social improvement. By 1935, Mussolini was
able to make himself the dictator of Italy and transformed the country into a police state.
To the north in Germany, Fascism was embraced by the National Socialist German Workers Party, also known
as the Nazis. Swiftly rising to power in the late 1920s, the Nazis and their charismatic leader, Adolf Hitler,
followed the central tenets of Fascism while also advocating for the racial purity of the German people and
additional German Lebensraum (living space). Playing on the economic distress in Weimar Germany and
backed by their "Brown Shirts" militia, the Nazis became a political force. On January 30, 1933, Hitler was
placed in position to take power when he was appointed Reich Chancellor by President Paul von Hindenburg
The Nazis Assume Power
A month after Hitler assumed the Chancellorship, the Reichstag building burned. Blaming the fire on the
Communist Party of Germany, Hitler used the incident as an excuse to ban those political parties that opposed
Nazi policies. On March 23, 1933, the Nazis essentially took control of the government by passing the Enabling
Acts. Meant to be an emergency measure, the acts gave the cabinet (and Hitler) the power to pass legislation
without the approval of the Reichstag. Hitler next moved to consolidate his power and executed a purge of the
party (The Night of the Long Knives) to eliminate those who could threaten his position. With his internal foes
10
Fort Vancouver High School
U.S. History
Classroom Based Assessment
in check, Hitler began the persecution of those who were deemed racial enemies of the state. In September
1935, he passed the Nuremburg Laws which stripped Jews of their citizenship and forbade marriage or sexual
relations between a Jew and an "Aryan." Three years later the first pogrom began (Night of Broken Glass) in
which over one hundred Jews were killed and 30,000 arrested and sent to concentration camps.
Germany Remilitarizes
On March 16, 1935, in clear violation of the Treaty of Versailles, Hitler ordered the remilitarization of Germany,
including the reactivation of the Luftwaffe (air force). As the German army grew through conscription, the
other European powers voiced minimal protest as they were more concerned with enforcing the economic
aspects of the treaty. In a move that tacitly endorsed Hitler's violation of the treaty, Great Britain signed the
Anglo-German Naval Agreement in 1935, which allowed Germany to build a fleet one third the size of the
Royal Navy and ended British naval operations in the Baltic.
Two years after beginning the expansion of the military, Hitler further violated the treaty by ordering the
reoccupation of the Rhineland by the German Army. Proceeding cautiously, Hitler issued orders that the
German troops should withdrawal if the French intervened. Not wanting to become involved in another major
war, Britain and France avoided intervening and sought a resolution, with little success, through the League of
Nations. After the war several German officers indicated that if the reoccupation of the Rhineland had been
opposed, it would have meant the end of Hitler's regime.
The Anschluss
Emboldened by Great Britain and France's reaction to the Rhineland, Hitler began to move forward with a plan
to unite all German-speaking peoples under one "Greater German" regime. Again operating in violation of the
Treaty of Versailles, Hitler made overtures regarding the annexation of Austria. While these were generally
rebuffed by the government in Vienna, Hitler was able to orchestrate a coup by the Austrian Nazi Party on
March 11, 1938, one day before a planned plebiscite on the issue. The next day, German troops crossed the
border to enforce the Anschluss (annexation). A month later the Nazis held a plebiscite on the issue and
received 99.73% of the vote. International reaction was again mild, with Great Britain and France issuing
protests, but still showing that they were unwilling to take military action.
The Munich Conference
With Austria in his grasp, Hitler turned towards the ethnically German Sudetenland region of Czechoslovakia.
Since its formation at the end of World War I, Czechoslovakia had been wary of possible German advances. To
counter this, they had built an elaborate system of fortifications throughout the mountains of the Sudetenland
to block any incursion and formed military alliances with France and the Soviet Union. In 1938, Hitler began
supporting paramilitary activity and extremist violence in the Sudetenland. Following the Czechoslovakia's
declaration of martial law in the region, Germany immediately demanded that the land be turned over to them.
In response, Great Britain and France mobilized their armies for the first time since World War I. As Europe
moved towards war, Mussolini suggested a conference to discuss the future of Czechoslovakia. This was
agreed to and the meeting opened in September 1938, at Munich. In the negotiations, Great Britain and
France, led by Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain and President Édouard Daladier respectively, followed a
policy of appeasement and caved to Hitler's demands in order to avoid war. Signed on September 30, 1938,
the Munich Agreement turned over the Sudetenland to Germany in exchange for Germany's promise to make
no additional territorial demands.
11
Fort Vancouver High School
U.S. History
Classroom Based Assessment
The Czechs, who had not been invited to conference, were forced to accept the agreement and were warned
that if they failed to comply, they would be responsible for any war that resulted. By signing the agreement,
the French defaulted on their treaty obligations to Czechoslovakia. Returning to England, Chamberlain claimed
to have achieved "peace for our time." The following March, German troops broke the agreement and seized
the remainder of Czechoslovakia. Shortly thereafter, Germany entered into a military alliance with Mussolini's
Italy.
The Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact
Angered by what he saw as the Western Powers colluding to give Czechoslovakia to Hitler, Josef Stalin worried
that a similar thing could occur with the Soviet Union. Though wary, Stalin entered into talks with Britain and
France regarding a potential alliance. In the summer of 1939, with the talks stalling, the Soviets began
discussions with Nazi Germany regarding the creation of a non-aggression pact. The final document, the
Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact, was signed on August 23, and called for the sale of food and oil to Germany and
mutual non-aggression. Also included in the pact were secret clauses dividing Eastern Europe into spheres of
influence as well as plans for the partition of Poland.
The Invasion of Poland
Since World War I, tensions had existed between Germany and Poland regarding the free city of Danzig and
the "Polish Corridor." The latter was a narrow strip of land reaching north to Danzig which provided Poland
with access to the sea and separated the province of East Prussia from the rest of Germany. In an effort to
resolve these issues and gain Lebensraum for the German people, Hitler began planning the invasion of
Poland. Formed after World War I, Poland's army was relatively weak and ill-equipped compared to Germany.
To aid in its defense, Poland had formed military alliances with Great Britain and France.
Massing their armies along the Polish border, the Germans staged a fake Polish attack on August 31, 1939.
Using this as a pretext for war, German forces flooded across the border the next day. On September 3, Great
Britain and France issued an ultimatum to Germany to end the fighting. When no reply was received, both
nations declared war.
In Poland, German troops executed a blitzkrieg (lightning war) assault using combining armor and mechanized
infantry. This was supported from above by the Luftwaffe, which had gained experience fighting with the
fascist Nationalists during the Spanish Civil War (1936-1939). The Poles attempted to counterattack but were
defeated at the Battle of Bzura (Sept. 9-19). As the fighting was ending at Bzura, the Soviets, acting on the
terms of the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact, invaded from the east. Under assault from two directions, the Polish
defenses crumbled with only isolated cities and areas offering prolonged resistance. By October 1, the country
had been completely overrun with some Polish units escaping to Hungary and Romania. During the campaign,
Great Britain and France, who were both slow to mobilize, provided little support to their ally.
With the conquest of Poland, the Germans implemented Operation Tannenberg which called for the arrest,
detainment, and execution of 61,000 Polish activists, former officers, actors, and intelligentsia. By the end of
September, special units known as Einsatzgruppen had killed over 20,000 Poles. In the east, the Soviets also
committed numerous atrocities, including the murder of prisoners of war, as they advanced. The following
year, the Soviets executed between 15,000-22,000 Polish POWs and citizens in the Katyn Forest on Stalin's
orders.
http://militaryhistory.about.com/od/worldwarii/a/wwiieurcauses_2.htm
Date Accessed: May 2, 2014
12
Fort Vancouver High School
U.S. History
Classroom Based Assessment
World War II (Causes)
ABC CLIO
Immediate Causes
Sino-Japanese War
In autumn 1938, the Japanese captured Canton and the Wuhan cities and, in effect, brought to an end what was
the first phase of the Sino-Japanese War. In this phase the Japanese had overrun much of northern China, Inner
Mongolia, the middle Yangtze River Valley, and certain coastal areas. Japan had acquired for itself control of the
richest and most advanced areas of China. The Kuomintang (Nationalist) regime was limited to southwest China
with its capital at Chungking and was virtually bereft of outside support, the Soviet Union excepted. But the
government of Chiang Kai-shekhad committed itself to a protracted war, and by autumn 1938 Japan indeed found
itself committed to a prohibitively expensive war that it could not win either politically or militarily. Determined to
reserve economic power for itself, Japan would not sponsor any genuine alternative to the Chungking clique for
fear that any new force within China might be turned against it. Japan lacked the military numbers to conquer and
occupy while its 1939 and 1940 air offensives, the first strategic air offensives in history, could not win a victory
that had eluded Japanese ground forces. Japan was caught with a war that it could not win and which, by its own
1941 study, would result in collapse and defeat in 5 to 10 years.
Munich Conference
Autumn 1938 also saw the greatest of the European interwar crises: the Munich Conference. It was a conference
that in a sense marked the end of a Eurocentric world. It involved just four powers, the United States and the
Soviet Union having been excluded from the proceedings. It was a crisis that has attracted no end of
condemnation for three reasons. First, in terms of Anglo-French intent, it failed in that it did not produce the basis
for peace but merely postponed war. Second, it postponed war for only a year, in which time the Anglo-French
position relative to Germany worsened. Third, at Munich the British and French abandoned a democracy, and in
fact the only democracy east of the Rhine (Denmark and Scandinavia excepted). This was something that was
morally dubious, and Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain's infamous comment about Czechoslovakia—"a faraway country of which we know nothing"—merely compounded that element of ex post facto moral disapproval of
the Anglo-French action.
Munich came as the culmination of a process that is perhaps best summarized by the scene "The Future Belongs
to Me" in the famous film Cabaret. What was clearly at work was a German political, economic, and military
revival and a resurgence to which the British and French had no effective response. France sought and secured a
military arrangement with the Soviet Union in what was clearly intended as an attempt to recreate the pre-1914
arrangements, but with no common border between Germany and the Soviet Union the latter could not bring a
balance in central and eastern Europe into play because the various states of this area were not prepared to
associate themselves in any way with the Stalinist state. Germany, under Adolf Hitler, was opportunist rather than
very deliberate, with a set timetable and program, and it used a series of crises to destroy French military primacy
within Europe, to reacquire its own armed forces and territorial integrity, and to secure Austria and the
Sudetanland. But Germany's occupation of the Czech homeland in March 1939 brought home to Great Britain the
futility of both the arrangements that had been made at Munich and seeking any further arrangement with
Germany: Poland was guaranteed for the very simple reason that it was seen as Hitler's next target.
Expansion of the War
The British attempts to avoid war by a combination of inducing some concessions to Germany and the attempt to
enlist Soviet support without any form of reciprocal arrangement can be cast in a very unworthy light, but the
Soviet Union's deal with Nazi Germany in August 1939 marked the final step before the outbreak of war: Hitler
13
Fort Vancouver High School
U.S. History
Classroom Based Assessment
had hoped that Britain and France would give way without war, but the Polish Campaign soon became a general
war in September 1939. With Britain and France having to plan for a two- to three-year mobilization, Germany
chose to move in 1940 against first Denmark and Norway and then in northwestern Europe. These victories were
the basis of two greater conflicts. First, German primacy within Europe and Britain's ineffectiveness paved the
way for the real German war in the east. Second, the collapse of the three greatest imperial powers bared
southeast Asia and provided Japan with maximum temptation at seemingly minimal risk. Moreover, Japan could
foresee that by 1941 it would stand at the peak of its strength relative to a United States that in the summer of
1940, after Germany's victory in northwestern Europe, had authorized naval programs that could only result in
Japan's eventual eclipse. For Japan, 1941 was a case of "go now or never," and in its decision to try to fight the
United States to a negotiated settlement, it initiated a conflict that drew together all the elements that go under the
name of World War II.
Intermediate Causes
In seeking to determine the causes of, and responsibility for, World War II, there is a very plausible argument that
asserts that the British and French played a negative role in the rise of Adolf Hitler and Nazism. The French
prevailed in the 1920s when they sought to enforce the Versailles settlement when there was no real threat to it,
and the British prevailed in the 1930s when they sought to revise the Versailles settlement when the threat to it
had emerged. The argument is attractive in its simplicity, not least because the British effort not only "whetted the
appetite of the insatiable," but also compromised France's power of resistance.
Events in the Far East
Whatever the merits of this particular argument, the fact was that the first challenges to the existing international
order came in the Far East and in eastern Africa from Japan and Italy, respectively—not within Europe from
Hitler's Germany. The three nations would become intertwined, but the initial challenge to the international system
created in the aftermath of World War I predated Hitler's coming to power in January 1933. The fact that
Japanese aggression in Manchuria in 1931–1932 elicited no response set the scene for what was to follow. Great
Britain and France, beset by the problems of the Great Depression and denied any form of help or cooperation by
an isolationist United States, could not contemplate opposition to, still less a preventative war against, Japan.
Japan's conquests of 1931–1932 were followed by the occupation of Jehol in 1933 and then a series of
encroachments that had the effect of eliminating the political and military presence of the Kuomintang regime in
Inner Mongolia and the provinces north of the Great Wall. For the Kuomintang, the process of being obliged to
make concessions proved impossible to halt once it had begun. It is important to note, however, that after 1927
the Kuomintang, which had established its primacy within China by a dual process of conquest and compromise
with certain provincial leaders, was involved in a campaign against the communists and by 1934–1935 had come
within reach of final and decisive victory. The communists' celebrated Long March to Shenshi Province seemed
certain to have done no more than postpone final defeat and annihilation, but the refusal of Manchurian forces to
complete the Kuomintang victory in December 1936 spelled an end to the Chinese Civil War. It was now possible
to present a united front against further Japanese aggression. For their part, there were certain Japanese officials
who saw in the Chinese move a reason to act before Chinese intent could assume substance.
Events in Europe and Africa
By this stage, the estrangement of Britain and France on the one hand and Italy on the other had come to pass, in
part because of Anglo-French ineffectiveness in opposing Italian ambitions in Abyssinia. Also at work was the
Italian attempt to exploit what was, with the emerging German challenge to Britain and France, the division and
balance of power within Europe. In 1934–1935, Italy associated itself with Britain and France in opposing German
designs on Austria, but thereafter Italy began taking after Germany on ideological grounds. This was compounded
by the two countries' intervention in the Spanish Civil War on the side of Francisco Franco's fascist uprising. With
14
Fort Vancouver High School
U.S. History
Classroom Based Assessment
the Soviet Union moving to support what was initially a democratic government in Spain but which during the civil
war in effect became a communist-dominated dependency, Anglo-American nonintervention smacked of
weakness. Such perceived weakness seemed similar to France's lack of an effective response to the German
military occupation of the demilitarized Rhineland in March 1936, which had led to Belgium ending its military
alliance with France in October 1936. Thereafter, with the onset of general war in China after July 1937, the crisis
within Europe moved to center stage. This crisis had three main features: a weakening of a badly divided France,
the questioning of French commitment to its allies in eastern and southeast Europe (which now promised not to
be additions to strength but liabilities to be supported), and Germany's possession of the political and moral
initiative.
Long-Term Causes
Great Depression
In one sense, the origins and causes of World War II can be summarized in the person of Adolf Hitler, and for
good and obvious reason. The outbreak of war in Europe in 1939, Germany, and Hitler cannot be separated. But,
on the other hand, the origins of the war in Europe can be assigned alternative starting points. One would be the
result of World War I (not the Versailles Treaty or the general provisions of the Versailles settlement, but the
actual result of the conflict), and the other would be the Great Depression that followed in the wake of the stock
market crash of October 29–November 13, 1929. The latter is the more immediately relevant in the sense that
had Hitler died in 1928 history would never have afforded him and Nazism anything more substantial than a
footnote. The Great Depression brought Hitler to power and precipitated the eclipse of democracy not just in
Germany but throughout Europe. By 1938, there was but one democracy (other than Denmark) east of the Rhine.
The impact of the Great Depression was also instrumental in pushing Japan into the campaign of conquest with
reference to Manchuria than proved to be the precursor to Japan's wars in eastern Asia and the western Pacific.
Effects of World War I
In a wider sense, however, World War II followed from World War I in one sense that is seldom properly defined.
In the aftermath of Germany's defeat, the victorious powers attempted to create a new international order on the
basis of increasingly fragmented nationalism. Two of the great multinational empires—Austria-Hungary and
Turkey—disappeared. The third great multinational empire, Russia, was held together by the Bolshevik victory in
the civil war but was nonetheless obliged to shed Finland, the Baltic states, and part of Poland. The point,
however, was that in Europe the increase in the number of states was not matched by economic, demographic,
and military credibility on the part of these new states. The general peace of Europe after 1919 was good just as
long as there was no real threat to it.
France, by virtue of its massive military advantage over a largely disarmed Germany and its series of alliances
with Belgium, Poland, Czechoslovakia, Romania, and Yugoslavia, dominated Europe throughout the 1920s, and
after the Locarno rapprochement Germany was prepared to work within the status quo. It is often asserted that
the whole process of German revenge was based on a reaction to Versailles, but by 1939 the Versailles
settlement was dead: Germany had absorbed Austria and had acquired the Sudetanland, and in terms of physical
size it was greater than in 1914. The war that came in 1939 was not the result of Versailles, but in some measure
the reality of Germany's defeat in 1918—which German nationalism wished to reverse—and to a larger extent the
product of that ideological perversion that is called Nazism. Hitler did not want war in 1939; he wanted victory. He
wanted victory in a series of campaigns that would be but the prelude to the real war—against the
Slavic untermenschen of Eastern Europe and in the volksgemeinschaft, the struggle for racial purity within the
German master race.
15
Fort Vancouver High School
U.S. History
Classroom Based Assessment
The Far East
A similar set of circumstances, but with substantial difference, were at work in the Far East. World War I, by the
reduction of European presence and power in the area and the Washington Treaties (1921–1922), had created a
balance of power in the general area but had left Japan with a marked local superiority that was largely unused in
the 1920s. The Great Depression, the collapse of its overseas trade, and the widespread distress throughout the
countryside after 1929 served to encourage those within the Japanese military who saw conquest and
acquisition—specifically of Manchuria, Mongolia and northern China—as the sine qua non of Japan's political,
social, economic, and military survival. These areas would provide Japan with the raw materials and markets
essential to its survival as a great power. Those who were to provoke the Manchurian Crisis of 1931–1932 and
those who were to play leading roles in the process that led to general war with China after 1937 generally
believed that war with the United States was inevitable. What was happening in the long-term was that, with the
onset of the Great Depression, there was the parallel discrediting of political and economic liberalism and rise of
dictatorship and increasingly militant nationalism, specifically on the part of revisionist states determined to
overturn the existing international order.
Hedley P. Willmott and Michael Barrett
MLA Citation
Willmott, Hedley P., and Michael Barrett. "World War II (Causes)." World at War: Understanding Conflict and
Society.ABC-CLIO, 2014. Web. 2 May 2014.
http://worldatwar.abc-clio.com/Topics/Display/9?cid=92&sid=1504860&useConcept=False
Date Accessed: May 2, 2014
16
Fort Vancouver High School
U.S. History
Part II: The War Itself
Essential Question: Was WWII a “good” war?
Classroom Based Assessment
In the long run, wars make us safer and richer
By Ian Morris, Published: April 25, 2014
Ian Morris, a professor of classics at Stanford University, is the author of “War! What is it Good For?
Conflict and the Progress of Civilization from Primates to Robots.”
So yes, war is hell — but have you considered the alternatives? When looking upon the long run of
history, it becomes clear that through 10,000 years of conflict, humanity has created larger, more
organized societies that have greatly reduced the risk that their members will die violently. These better
organized societies also have created the conditions for higher living standards and economic growth.
War has not only made us safer, but richer, too.
Thinkers have long grappled with the relationships among peace, war and strength. Thomas Hobbes
wrote his case for strong government, “Leviathan,” as the English Civil War raged around him in the
1640s. German sociologist Norbert Elias’s two-volume treatise, “The Civilizing Process,” published on
the eve of World War II, argued that Europe had become a more peaceful place in the five centuries
leading to his own day. The difference is that now we have the evidence to prove their case….
This puts the past 100 years in perspective. Since 1914, we have endured world wars, genocides and
government-sponsored famines, not to mention civil strife, riots and murders. Altogether, we have
killed a staggering 100 million to 200 million of our own kind. But over the century, about 10 billion
lives were lived — which means that just 1 to 2 percent of the world’s population died violently. Those
lucky enough to be born in the 20th century were on average 10 times less likely to come to a grisly end
than those born in the Stone Age. And since 2000, the United Nations tells us, the risk of violent death
has fallen even further, to 0.7 percent.
As this process unfolded, humanity prospered. Ten thousand years ago, when the planet’s population
was 6 million or so, people lived about 30 years on average and supported themselves on the equivalent
income of about $2 per day. Now, more than 7 billion people are on Earth, living more than twice as
long (an average of 67 years), and with an average income of $25 per day.
This happened because about 10,000 years ago, the winners of wars began incorporating the losers into
larger societies. The victors found that the only way to make these larger societies work was by
developing stronger governments; and one of the first things these governments had to do, if they
wanted to stay in power, was suppress violence among their subjects.
The men who ran these governments were no saints. They cracked down on killing not out of the
goodness of their hearts but because well-behaved subjects were easier to govern and tax than angry,
murderous ones. The unintended consequence, though, was that they kick-started the process through
which rates of violent death plummeted between the Stone Age and the 20th century.
This process was brutal. Whether it was the Romans in Britain or the British in India, pacification could
be just as bloody as the savagery it stamped out. Yet despite the Hitlers, Stalins and Maos, over 10,000
years, war made states, and states made peace.
War may well be the worst way imaginable to create larger, more peaceful societies, but the depressing
fact is that it is pretty much the only way . If only the Roman Empire could have been created without
killing millions of Gauls and Greeks, if the United States could have been built without killing millions
of Native Americans, if these and countless conflicts could have been resolved by discussion instead of
force. But this did not happen. People almost never give up their freedoms — including, at times, the
17
Fort Vancouver High School
U.S. History
Classroom Based Assessment
right to kill and impoverish one another — unless forced to do so; and virtually the only force strong
enough to bring this about has been defeat in war or fear that such a defeat is imminent…
Like its predecessor, the United States oversaw a huge expansion of trade, intimidated other countries
into not making wars that would disturb the world order, and drove rates of violent death even lower.
But again like Britain, America made its money by helping trading partners become richer, above all
China, which, since 2000, has looked increasingly like a potential rival. The cycle that Britain
experienced may be in store for the United States as well, unless Washington embraces its role as the
only possible globocop in an increasingly unstable world — a world with far deadlier weapons than
Britain could have imagined a century ago.
American attitudes toward government are therefore not just some Beltway debate; they matter to
everyone on Earth. “Government,” Ronald Reagan assured Americans in his first inaugural address, “is
not the solution to our problem; government is the problem.” Reagan’s great fear — that bloated
government would stifle individual freedom — shows just how far the continuing debates over the
merits of big and small government have taken us from the horrors that worried Hobbes. “The 10 most
dangerous words in the English language,” Reagan said on another occasion, “are ‘Hi, I’m from the
government, and I’m here to help.’ ” As Hobbes could have told him, in reality the 10 scariest words are,
“There is no government and I’m here to kill you.”
To people in virtually any age before our own, the only argument that mattered was between extremely
small government and no government at all. Extremely small government meant there was at least
some law and order; no government meant that there was not.
Excerpt from: http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/in-the-long-run-wars-make-us-safer-andricher/2014/04/25/a4207660-c965-11e3-a75e-463587891b57_story.html
MLA Citation: Morris, Ian. "In the Long Run, Wars Make Us Safer and Richer." Washington Post. The
Washington Post, 28 Apr. 2014. Web. 06 May 2014.
1.
What is the thesis of this piece?
2.
At least one paragraph giving YOUR response to the main point, and the substance of the
editorial/article. An emotional “gut reaction” is fine . . . but you ALSO must support your
opinion with facts and logical analysis.
18
Fort Vancouver High School
U.S. History
Classroom Based Assessment
Schindler’s List Questions: Answer one of the following questions in a multi-paragraph response on
another sheet of paper. You answer should be well thought out and organized.
1. What does it mean to Oskar Schindler to have power? Amon Goeth? Schindler says to Goeth,
“Power is when we have every justification to kill and we don’t.” What do you think he means
by that? Is this power justified? Why or why not?
2. Why do you believe that people do what they do in the film? Are there certain characteristics that
seem to influence people the most? What are they? What are common characteristics that
influence people on your campus?
3. How has The Holocaust affected us as a culture? Looking from a historical perspective, what has
changed in the world since the liberation of concentration camps? Has it changed the way we
deal with prejudice? How? This movie looks at the 1000+ Jews who were saved, but doesn’t take
a direct look at the millions who died. As people struggle with learning about this, what kind of
commitment should there be to continue to educate others about this world event? How is this
discussed on campus? Is it still important to research and learn about? Why or why not?
Part III: The end of the war.
Essential Question: Was the US use of atomic weapons justified?
CBA Question: Was the US use of atomic weapons justified?
See Full CBA packet for details on Part III.
19
Fort Vancouver High School
U.S. History
Classroom Based Assessment
In the paper you will cite your sources in text along including an annotated bibliography.
Basic in-text citation rules
In MLA style, referring to the works of others in your text is done by using what is known as parenthetical
citation. This method involves placing relevant source information in parentheses after a quote or a
paraphrase.
Citing Sources in Text
As you write your research paper, you will select information to include from your various
sources. Whenever you “borrow” from your sources, you must give them proper credit. You
must provide documentation if you 1) use a quotation, text that is quoted word for word and
enclosed in quotation marks; 2) include an idea or theory that belongs to someone else, even if
you write about it in your own words; or 3) refer to a specific fact, statistic, or detail, again,
even if you write about it in your own words. The way that you give credit to your sources is by
using parenthetical documentation. Below are some general guidelines on and examples of
how to cite sources in your essay using parenthetical documentation.




Give credit to a source at the end of a sentence, but before the period. List the
author’s last name and relevant page number(s) in parenthesis. Separate the name
and page numbers with a space and no comma.
Remember that there is no "p." or other page notation, as numbers are just understood
to be page numbers.
If you are providing citation for a quotation, place the parenthetical documentation after
the last quotation mark, but before the final period.
If there is no author provided, use instead the first word of the title, excluding A, An, or
The.
Examples: “The introduction of the microcomputer to America’s high schools has greatly
changed the way students view the research process” (Jones 12-13). School libraries on
average have 1 computer for every 120 students (Wu and Li 7). Just ten years ago, the
statistic was 1 for every 300 (Technology 37).

As an alternative, you can use the author's name in a sentence and then place only the
page number(s) in parenthesis.

Examples: Jones states that the "introduction of the microcomputer to America's high schools
has greatly changed the way students view the research process" (12-13). In their research,
Wu and Li found that school libraries on average have 1 computer for every 120 students (7).
According to Technology in the Classroom, the statistic was 1 for every 300 just ten years ago
(37).
 Exception: Longer quotations (4 lines or longer) are set off and thus do not require the
use of quotation marks.
Starting on a new line, they are indented ten spaces from both margins. Parenthetical
documentation for long quotations is included at the very end of the quotation, one space after
the period.
20
Fort Vancouver High School
U.S. History
Classroom Based Assessment
Annotated Bibliography
In the paper you will cite your sources in text along including an annotated bibliography.
In an annotated bibliography you must:
1. Group your sources into primary and secondary categories.
2. Cite the source (refer to the “Citing Sources” sheet available in the library)using proper format.
3. Explain (in 1-3 sentences) how the source helped you understand your topic.
Do not summarize the source!! (see examples below).
FOR EXAMPLE…
Cite the source:
Bates, Daisy. The Long Shadow of Little Rock. New York: David McKay Co. Inc., 1962.
Annotate the source:
Daisy Bates was the president of the Arkansas NAACP and the one who met and listened to the
students each day. This first-hand account was very important to my paper because it made me more
aware of the feelings of the people involved in the movement.
HERE IS HOW YOUR ANNOTATED BIBLIOGRAPHY MIGHT LOOK:
Works Cited
Primary Sources
Bates, Daisy. The Long Shadow of Little Rock. New York: David McKay Co. Inc., 1962.
Daisy Bates was the president of the Arkansas NAACP and the one who met and listened to the students each day. This firsthand account will be very important to my paper because it has made me more aware of the emotions of the people involved
in the movement.
Little Rock 1957: Pages from History. 1997. Counts, Will. Little Rock Newspapers, Inc. 15
October 2007. http://www.ardemgaz.com/prev/central/counts.html
This collection of photographs by Arkansas native Will Counts appeared in the Arkansas papers
as the crisis unfolded. I learned how important the press was, especially the photographers, in
shaping the story for the rest of the nation. The famous photo of Elizabeth Eckford being heckled
by the crowd made me want to understand more about the hatred that so many of the white
residents of Little Rock seemed to feel.
Secondary Sources
Fitzgerald, Stephanie. The Little Rock Nine: Struggle for Integration. New York: Compass Point Books, August 31, 2006.
This young adult book provided a detailed overview of the events leading up to the integration of
Central High School in a format that was easy to understand. It also contained many primary sources in the form of interviews
with the participants. From reading this I decided to focus my research on Daisy Bates and to build my documentary around
her experiences supporting the Black students in their struggle for integration.
The Little Rock Nine. 1997. Rains, Craig. 15 October 2007. http://www.centralhigh57.org/The_Little_Rock_Nine.html
This site provided an overview of what happened to the Little Rock Nine after the crisis at Central High. It reminded me that
the nine young people were each affected very differently by America’s early attempts at forced integration. It also forced me
to think about how this experience may have shaped the future of each of the nine and led me to further research about their
lives after Little Rock.
Roberts, Sam. “1957 The Integration of Central High.” Up Front. 3 September 2007: 24-27.
In addition to an overview of the crisis at Central High School, this article included a Civil Rights timeline stretching from 1896
through 1971. It helped me to place this event in context and helped me understand that this was the precursor to the busing
crises of the 1970’s
21