I've been going through a lot of history with these kids over the last few weeks, and I'll likely be either updating this thread or creating new ones as I ask for help on a few things.

My focus isn't so much the details of how an historical event transpired, although the boys have said they really like to see the details of how a battle is fought (me too), but I'm trying to convey an understanding of current events and how we got where we are.  We will have covered WWI prior to this, and we are somewhat working backwards for a while going from current events back.  I understand that this is awkward, but the idea is that right now they (sorta) understand the state of the world and going backwards keeps a frame of reference for them to compare to.  I may change this later, but so far it's been working well.

So coming up soon I have WWII.  I need to give them an understanding of who, when, why, and some of how.  In about 4 hours.

I use powerpoint a LOT and it seems to really help convey some of the concepts and locations by using maps (found online primarily).

The kids ages range from about 12 to 17, but I consider myself a pretty good teacher and we make sure we don't leave the younger ones behind.  Besides, they're homeschoolers!

So-

1- What are the aspects of WWII that MUST be covered
2- What names MUST these kids be familiar with
3- What battles (Midway, Normandy....) MUST they understand
4- Any suggestions?

This week and next week we cover WWI so I have about 2 weeks to prepare this lesson segment.

Break it into different "threads...." British involvement started a couple of years before the Americans did, for example.

Show similarities between the actions of the Axis powers: Japan expanding through Asia, vs. Germany annexing Europe one piece at a time.

DON'T forget the Russian experience! That was an entire war unto itself. Use the Russian Front as an example of how you can split the enemy's forces. Tell them also of the danger of Russia and Germany making a separate peace, freeing up the German Army for the European front. Compare that front to the China-Burma-India front, which pinned several thousand Japanese troops, which troops would have been valuable elsewhere if CBI had fallen.

What they must understand is that 85% of German combat power was fighting the Soviets. 30% of the curriculum should be about the eastern front. Battle of Moscow, Stalingrad, Kursk. 20% on 1939-40 German conquest of Europe and Battle of Britain. 10% on North Africa/Italy. 20% on D-day and Allied advance on Germany. 20% on US defeat of Japan with emphasis on Japan had no chance to defeat us. Good Luck..

Thanks guys-

I think that given the opportunity to teach these guys, I need to make sure they understand the lead-up to WWII and the ramifications afterwards.  For example, comparing the effects of the Treaty of Versailles to the Marshall Plan after the culmination of WWI and WWII show the difference of peace and retribution. Also the effects of leaving eastern Europe to the commies and the effect politically, economically and in every other way to those people.

The boys especially like to hear how the battles go and the nuts and bolts of fighting, but given just a few hours I think I might just highlight them and spend time on understanding why our world is the way it is.


Thoughts?  I'm not set in stone on anything, just bouncing this off the forum.

Thanks-
SCW

Honestly I have no idea how to teach kids but I thought this and this might perhaps give you a few ideas. Best of luck.


Warning: There are definitely some liberal slant to some comments he makes.

You can't teach WW-II in 4 hours.  You can't even teach one theater of WW-II in 4 hours- probably not even North Africa, which most people forget about.

Just for the Pacific (off the top of my head), you have
The Rape of Nanking
Pearl Harbor
The fall of Bataan
The impact of submarines vs Japanese shipping
Battle of Midway
Battle of the Coral Sea
Battle of the Savo Sea
The whole island hopping strategy and the detour caused by MacArthur's promise to return to the PI
Guadalcanal
Iwo Jima
Tarawa
Saipan
Eniwetok (and why that was important to eventual victory)
Okinawa
....
Those probably are not in time sequence.

4 hours might get you to glossing over the events leading up to WW-II.

This:  http://www.iwm.org.uk/history-terms/second-world-war might help.

One important (very) thing to teach them is that WW-II really started in 1939, not December 41.

All the Victory At Sea movies are on Youtube as well.  The boys will really like those..

Modernly historians don't discuss battles and only the how war affected society.  So fuggem and the horse they rode on.

I'd cover the conditions preceding war.  Economic disaster.  Keyensian spending and military buildup in the pre-war era.  Rise of Nazism and facism in Europe.

Pre-WW II.  Japan invades China (Marco Polo Bridge, sinking of US gunboat Panay sunk on the Yangtze River).  Italy in Africa (Ethiopia).  Japan v. Russia.  Spanish Civil War (testing ground for Soviet military theory and German military theory (Legion Condor & cooperation of tank and air power).

Nazi-Soviet Pact. Soviet invasion of Finland.

German and Soviet Union invasion of Poland ignites WW II.  Game on!

Blitzkrieg in France.  Battle of Britain.  Fall of Yugoslavia and Greece.

Britain stands alone.  Home front and the Western Desert (Afrika Korps & Rommel & Ultra).

Roosevelt and Lend Lease.  Like Wilson, Roosevelt wanted to join the war, but couldn't get America out from her isolationist views.  USN escorts English bound convoys halfway across the Atlantic.  Sinking of Destroyer Reuben James wasn't enough.  Tried to have the old battleship Texas sunk.  Germans were tempted.

Pearl Harbor and Yamamoto strategy for six months of victory (might mention that the IJN strategy was based on the Russo-Japanese War).  Rise of the carrier.  War Plan Orange.  Doolittle raid and it's  impact on Japan.

Social affects at home.  Men to the colors, women to the factories (gotta give the girls something) or as WASPS (lucky gals learned to fly everything and didn't get their arse shot off).  Women nurses and some caught behind the lines.

Sorry story of Dugout Doug and  all the US soldiers he let down in the Philippines.  USN kicks ass under Nimitz.

Can't neglect Russia.  Most of the Wehrmacht was destroyed by the Rooskies (thank you, it saved a lot of US blood).  Mistakes in Russia (first one being invading it).  Stopped at the Gates of Moscow.  Role of Soviet Intelligence (allowed them to shift forces away from the Japanese in Manchuria and to Moscow).  Stalingrad, the destruction of the Sixth Army as the turning point.  Kursk, the biggest tank battle (again Soviet Intelligence very good).

Allied liberation of Europe.  Fall of the Axis (start with Italy).

Island hopping.  China-Burma-India.  Air Corps bombs Japan from China.  Japan gets nuked.

Marshall Plan and the start of the Cold War.

The biggest and most important lesson from WW2 is that rational thought plays surprisingly little role in how nations behave.  For example, the only surprise Japan's entry into the war provided was how long they managed to avoid being utterly crushed - even their own military correctly predicted their defeat.   Didn't stop them.   Germany continued to fight on long after even the most fanatical Soldier could see absolutely no rational hope for even getting favorable surrender terms, much less victory.   The US assumed the Soviet Union was actually a friend as opposed to an ally of convenience.   Much like individuals, nations have a near-infinite capacity for self-delusion.

It's pretty hard to even summarize WW2 in 4 hours, much less actually explore it.  Also, with some justification, many historians look at 1914-1989 as one long, drawn out episode punctuated by some particularly violent instances.  Not saying I agree totally, but trying to understand WW2 without a pretty solid understanding of WW1 (and what caused it, and the aftermath) is pretty pointless.  Trying to understand the events from 1946-1989 without reference to the world wars is even more pointless - going backwards is going to miss the vast majority of actual causes for even recent events.  Hint:  almost everything happening today in Iraq has roots in 1917, and it's almost amusing to watch the news struggle to come to terms with forces that have been painfully obvious (as in, discussed at length in numerous books articles, and even movies) for almost 100 years.

Thanks, interesting thoughts...

We are going backwards in very large chunks, our section  on WWII goes from 1913 to 1989, but we have a lot of ground to cover so I have to limit WWII (1918 to 1945) to just 4 hours.  We've been going over WWI for the last little while, and special attention is being paid to why the assassination of the Arch-Duke led to all-out war, and why the Treaty of Versailles led to WWII, otherwise known as the continuation of WWI.  After we run through the cold war we'll step back about a century to see the climate that led up to WWI, including US and French revolutions, Napoleonic wars, Franco-Prussian....

I realize that it's really odd to go backwards, but it's actually been really helpful when the kids can use their understanding of the world to make connections on how things got that way.  In my thinking at Napoleon the world really changed, at least the world was a different place after him than it was before him although the USA is proof it was changing without him.  That makes him a good separation point for 'modern' and 'classic' history, to a point.

There is a pretty wide variety of understanding of history in the class, I've got 12 year olds that know quite a bit about Hannibal and the Punic Wars, and 16 year olds that haven't got a clue about the world around them.

That's a great summary, I like that a lot.  Thanks.  We are just about to cover the events that led to the US getting into WWI and the events of WWII are similar, so that's a great connection.  We also covered the Schliffen (sp?) plan quite a bit for WWI so they understand some of the importance of fighting two fronts and the connection of the French and Russians, as well as the rise of Lenin and exit of the Russians part way through the shooting part.  We didn't mention the Russo-Japanese war, but it's related of course.  Especially because I've made a point that warfare changed so much from 1890 to 1913 due to technological advancement, but tactics lagged badly.  Both sides should have learned from the R-J fight, pretty much the first opportunity to fight with modern weapons on both sides.