writing assignment for detention

Sign up for our free weekly newsletter and receive

top education news, lesson ideas, teaching tips and more!

No thanks, I don't need to stay current on what works in education!

COPYRIGHT 1996-2016 BY EDUCATION WORLD, INC. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED.

COPYRIGHT 1996 - 2024 BY EDUCATION WORLD, INC. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED.

• SchoolNotes.com
• The Educator's Network

• Skip to primary navigation
• Skip to main content
• Skip to primary sidebar

Teaching Expertise

• Classroom Ideas
• Teacher’s Life
• Deals & Shopping
• Privacy Policy

Detention Activities For Middle School: Exercises, Games, And Discussions

October 11, 2023 //  by  Michelle Mandel

Teachers do not like being the bad cop!  Detention is one punitive measure to take in response to negative behavior. Time to reflect on what you have done.  This is counterproductive, children are acting out because they are in need of attention and guidance.  So with these alternatives to detention, educators can connect, and boost students' confidence. gain trust and respect, and soon the detention room will be empty.

1. What's my purpose?

We are all special and have our own unique traits. As children get older they are told more often than not the negative feedback and not the positive behavior they demonstrate. Life is stressful and with the world changing around us, sometimes we forget why we are here, and why we all have a purpose.

Learn More: Prince Ea

2. Blackout poetry. Great instructional time 

This activity is so much fun and really it does inspire anyone to be a "poet" or at least try and give it a go. Children who have never been exposed to creative poetry will love this because there is no right or wrong. This is cool and interesting.

Learn More: The Daring English Teacher

3. You just got school detention!

This is a funny sketch video about how playing a trick on someone can backfire and have consequences! Students in detention can talk about how sometimes playing tricks is all in fun and other times not worth the risk and could have serious consequences for misbehavior.

Learn More: Youtube

4. Laughter = positive school culture

These games are meant specifically to make kids feel safe and relaxed, so they can release some stress. Harsh punishments don't work. Get kids talking to help reduce disruptive behavior!  For a middle school play Mad Dragon, The art of conversation, Totika, and more!

Learn More: Education And Behavior

5. Great assignment for detention-reflection 

This is a great way to get kids to do something with their hands while they are working on their self-portraits they can have guidance and assistance from the teacher.  This activity will relax them and put them at ease so they can reflect on any bad behavior.

6. Express yourself through a rap!

Rap music is loved by middle school children and creating your own rap about how things make us feel. "How we don't like school but being rude in class is not cool! " This exercise will give the children a chance to vent and de-stress while in detention. Great video and educational too!

7. Think Sheet

These are great reflection worksheets for students and can be adapted by grade level.  to fill out. easily and it can lead to some open conversation with the teacher or monitor. Children will learn what they can do better next time and how to avoid conflict.

Learn More: Art Teachers Help Al

8. Make Jails for phones- an original detention idea

Mobile phones in the classroom disaster!  Classroom expectations must be known, and it is imperative that we have some creative ways to get kids to give up their phones. These are easy to make and make class rule posters about why phones are so distracting.

Learn More: Pinterest

9. Lunch detention

Lunchtime is a break but others might be going to lunch detention, where they will eat in silence, not look at anyone and reflect. Well, this is the best opportunity to teach nutrition and have a talk about eating healthy and being responsible for our actions.

Learn More: 20 Teacher-Approved Nutrition Activities For Middle School

10. Punch Ball

Teachers think that if they use punch balls in the dentition room it will cause more aggressive behavior. On the contrary, children need to vent because sometimes life isn't fair. We have needed to change the old measure for decades and think creatively about time-outs.

Learn More: Therapy Sensory

• [email protected]

Teaching with Detention

Introduction

Far too often, students and educators struggle to see eye to eye. Teachers regularly disagree on methods of disciplining their students. Controversy arises, even, with the question of whether or not teachers should apply any discipline to their students, or leave it up to the parents. One of the most common practices in dealing with misbehaving students is holding after school detention. But by keeping students after school hours, are teachers exercising their rights, or going too far? Is detention an effective solution to class disruptions, or would it spur future problems?

Free resources across the internet allow for teachers to weigh detention and all of its possible alternatives.

• Lesson Plan
•   Behavior Worksheets : Here, Worksheet Place provides dozens of worksheets for students that assist them in assessing their behavior and emotions. The worksheets include behavior contracts, bullying analyses, conflict resolutions, goal setting, and more. The page also includes resources for teachers, including classroom management checklists, and class rules that teachers can display on their walls. These tasks can be used as opportunities for reflection in place of punishment or can serve as activities to be completed during detention. These worksheets are mostly intended for younger students and can be completed inside or outside of regular class time.
• Reflection Document : Pivotal Education provides this reflection worksheet to give to detention-serving students. The document is meant to outline an activity more productive than what is normally presented for students, and to prevent further behavior issues in the future. The questions on the worksheet force the student to identify and reflect on the people affected by their actions and ideas for preventing future issues. The open-ended questions within the document allow for flexibility for the worksheet to be used with virtually any age range.
• Discipline Packet : This online packet from Teacher Beacon provides worksheets and for responding to misbehavior. The packet includes printable warning slips, a behavior contract, and a sample letter to parents. Also included are writing assignments to be completed by students who break classroom ground rules. Most of these assignments serve as consequences for minor infringements such as gum-chewing, tardiness, and disruptive behavior. The writing assignments can serve as lesser consequences to stop the behavior before further action becomes necessary. Teachers can utilize items within this packet to establish ground rules and to keep track of recurring offenses.
• Do Detentions and Suspensions Work? : Here. Education World interviewed Annemarie Hillman, a policy fellow at Connecticut Voices for Children, to analyze whether detentions and suspensions prove themselves effective in schools. She classifies suspensions as ineffective since students tend to view them like vacations. Detentions, however, can work “if done right.” They can serve as an incentive to keep students from repeating misbehavior. When students serve detention during lunch, they miss out on a social opportunity and in turn will be less likely to act up in the future. 
• New Direction : James Paterson from District Administration Media examines ways that adults are trying to implement disciplinary action into their schools. The article establishes that African American and special needs students face disproportionate rates of exclusionary punishment. According to a number of cited studies, students who receive detentions are more likely to drop out of school altogether. This article highlights alternatives that teachers have found to the standard sit-silently style of confinement. Allowing students to reflect on their actions and for teachers to coach struggling students proves much more productive. Teachers can read this article to determine improvements for the established practice.
• Student-Run Courts : This article from The Guardian acknowledges the disproportionality of detentions in school systems and outlines a recent alternative to the custom: mock court systems. Rather than serve detention for certain offenses, students are to stand before a committee of their peers, make their case, and ultimately face fair consequences for their actions. The article praises this new approach, arguing that it prevents student-teacher discrimination in disciplinary systems and consequently fights the impelling school-to-prison pipeline.
• Informational Sites
• Defining Detention : Queensland Government provides a foundational understanding of detention and the common practices associated with it. The site outlines parameters for responsible behavior in a linked study, titled “Safe, Supportive and Disciplined School Environment Procedure.” This page can serve helpful for those who may desire a better understanding of what detention is, or for educators unfamiliar with how to lead a session.
• Responding to Bad Behavior : University of Florida’s College of Education lists possible ways in which educators can respond to bad behavior. The items on this list can serve as alternatives to detention, a practice which may be the first thing that comes to mind. The actions can be applied to students of most ages. The approaches range from keeping a behavior log, to requiring a writing assignment, to revoking parking privileges for older students. While detention is one of the listed consequences, teachers can choose from any item on the list to enforce in their own classrooms.
• Task Ideas : Study.com provides this list of tips and ideas for teachers choosing to hold students after school. The goal of the article and the tradition is to provide students with tasks that will prevent future mishaps and improve classroom behavior. The site lists tactics that teachers can employ, such as dialogue journals and reflection sheets, and links supporting articles for each strategy. The site lists four strategies for teachers, all of which can be stretched to fit students of almost any age range.

Young people often rave about how educational institutions take up so much of their time and teach them no real-life skills. They are, after all, full-time students by the age of six. Perhaps by making the time spent with students, detention included, more productive, teachers can allow students to further appreciate their education and apply themselves more in the future. Educators should make sure that any disciplinary measures they take have the students’ best interests in mind. Schools should weigh circumstances to decide what method of discipline would be most fair for the students’ and teacher’s time.

Additional Resources

• Middle-School : This neaToday article criticizes forms of discipline for middle-school-aged children. Author Sabrina Holcomb references the school-to-prison pipeline, a theory that correlates higher rates of suspensions and expulsions with a higher likelihood of those same students becoming unemployed and going to prison. When a student’s learning is interrupted by such punitive measures, they are more likely to drop out of school and rely mainly on government-provided welfare programs. Holcomb acknowledges that the issue is not the fault of the teachers, but rather that of the broader school disciplinary system.
•   Detention Is Not The Answer : This literature review by Stephanie McCann from Northwestern College examines practices of institutional discipline, especially detention, and attempts to determine the most productive method for everyone involved. In the past, the practice has discriminated harshly against certain students. The author gathers that students for whom detention becomes a pattern experience major social and emotional consequences that affect them “for the rest of their life.” She acknowledges alternatives for the penalty and suggests that schools find a consensus for what works for their students. 

Example Guidelines : This site lists the guidelines for after-school detention at Lakewood Junior High School in California. The page delineates the school’s specific regulations, including commonly broken rules, expectations for those serving detention, and principles of conduct for future reference. Teachers can utilize this site to gain a better understanding of how one school approaches its academic disciplinary system. Should they choose to administer detentions, educators can look to these clear-cut guidelines when crafting their own system.

Sign up to receive our monthly newsletter!

• Academy 4SC
• Educators 4SC
• Leaders 4SC
• Students 4SC
• Research 4SC

Accountability

Detention Teachers’ Resources

The teachers’ resources for my new novel Detention   are now available here . And there are three 2-minute videos to support the teaching of Detention and give insight into the writing process, as well as a video book trailer here .

We’ve worked hard on the teaching materials to create a comprehensive resource that covers the key themes of refugee experiences and statelessness as well as class, privilege, empathy, compassion, family relationships and human rights.

The book is being picked up for stage four study (years 7 & 8) but it’s suitable for readers 10+. Here’s what teacher-librarian and blogger Megan Daley (Children’s Books Daily) said about the book. Her year 7 students are studying it in term 4 this year. My intention was to write a page-turning novel that readers will devour simply as a suspenseful novel, but one that will also prompt questions and allow more in-depth study as the layers are peeled.

Detention Teachers’ Resources Contents

I worked with my publisher Zoe Walton , Shaun Nemorin and Jasmina Bajraktarevic from STARTTS (Service for the Treatment and Rehabilitation of Torture and Trauma Survivors) and English teacher, writer and editor Siboney Duff to build a resource that includes:

• a Q&A with me on how the story developed
• discussion questions and activities around ethical dilemmas, opportunity and whether what’s right and what is legal are always the same thing
• creative writing exercises around point-of-view, building tension, ‘show don’t tell’ and more
• the books, videos, articles and websites that I found most useful when researching refugee experiences, children in detention and Australia’s policies on asylum seekers
• a ‘Top 5 Things You Could Do’ to help and understand more about refugees
• information on Afghan Hazara people
• tips for studying these ideas in the classroom
• and lots more

The two-minute education videos to accompany the notes in which I talk about researching the novel, how a Vision Board helped me to visualise different aspects of the story and how to create a book soundtrack are here .

Good luck with the book and I hope you find the teachers’ resources useful!

Teachers’ Resources link.

You can link to various stores to buy the book here or contact your local bookshop or supplier.

The main page for the book with other posts about Detention  is here .

And the teachers’ resources for my other books including  Two Wolves, The Fall  and  Tom Weekly  is here .

You may also enjoy:

Meet the creative mind behind scar town’…, researching a novel – detention, detention book videos, ginger meggs book on tv, radio & in …, leave a reply cancel reply.

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Looking for Something?

Post categories:.

• Book soundtrack
• Book trailer
• Children's Book Illustration
• Children's Book Week

• Our Mission

3 Alternatives to Assigning Detention

Developing relationships with students to help them make positive choices requires planning and patience, but the work pays off.

There may be times when you have reached the end of your patience with a student’s behavior. They may disrupt learning or repeat a negative behavior too many times. What do we do as teachers in these scenarios? Sometimes the simple answer is assigning detention.

Yet detention is not an effective discipline tool for some students , and in fact it might increase the recurrence of negative behavior. Detention and other punitive measures, like suspensions and expulsions, can contribute to other issues , such as recidivism among students, despite harsher or longer punishments. These measures have the potential to increase apathy and defiance. They can jeopardize teachers’ and staff’s efforts to build relationships and trust. Finally, they can have a negative effect on a student’s academic performance.

There is evidence of racial and ethnic disparities among students assigned to detention. In 2014, the U.S. Department of Education’s Office for Civil Rights sent a letter to educators outlining the disparities and offering alternatives to detention and suspension. Instead of detention, the DOE recommends restorative practices and positive interventions, such as counseling.

There may be severe circumstances that require removing a student from the school environment and placing them on off-campus suspension, such as hitting, fighting, threatening, or verbal assault. But before submitting a detention referral form for minor, day-to-day offenses, consider these three alternatives.

One suggestion is to create a reflection room in place of one for detention. In it, teachers, administrators, caregivers, and the student go through a reflective process to understand the root cause of a conflict and assist the student in understanding and identifying better options. Reflective practices teach students what actions they can take in the future when confronted with difficult situations.

As a middle school assistant principal, I recently had two students referred to me for pushing each other during recess. As I spoke with each of the students individually, I realized they had very different perspectives on what had occurred. “I tripped and landed on him. Really!” versus “He deliberately ran into me!”

These two students needed to learn how to see a situation from another person’s point of view. They each wrote a narrative description of the scuffle as if they were the other person. I followed up with each student separately, and both realized that perhaps they had misinterpreted the other person’s intentions. After writing a reflection, there’s no guarantee that they will never push each other again. But maybe they’ll take a moment to consider what the other person is thinking before they react physically.

Logical Consequences

If you are familiar with the concept of the Responsive Classroom , you might have heard about logical consequences . Instead of harsh punishment, the teacher gently instructs the student on how to correct their errors.

At the end of the discussion, students become empowered because the teacher assists them in reaching epiphanies like “When I knock things down, I have to help build them back up,” “I can fix things when I mess up,” or “My teacher helps me solve problems.” If a student leaves a mess at the lunch table, the obvious next step is to clean it up. Please keep in mind that this is not a suggestion to assign illogical chores, such as “You forgot your homework, now scrape gum off the sidewalk.”

The tone of the teacher is critical when using logical consequences. It should convey problem-solving and learning rather than anger or frustration. Maintaining students’ dignity is essential for assisting them in learning from an experience.

Logical consequences do not always have to be negative. When students make thoughtful decisions that result in good outcomes, note it. Ask your school administration if they will accept “positive office referrals” in which a teacher refers a student for helpful behaviors. How cool would it be if your students routinely wondered, “Is she there for a positive referral?” whenever the principal called a student out of class.

Restorative Practices

Restorative practices, in a nutshell, teach students how to right the wrongs they have caused. They provide alternatives to using punishment and build healthier learning communities. To quote Arkansas principal Chelsea Jennings , “Kids who are frequently in trouble are often testing a system that has repeatedly failed them, but a restorative approach says ‘we are not giving up on you.’”

If a student disrespects another student or staff member in words or actions, how can that student attempt to repair the harm done? A science teacher at our school implemented this approach when a student disrupted her class. The teacher informed the student that her disruptive behavior had taken away instructional time, and as a result, the student would have to help the teacher recoup some of the lost time by assisting with the prep for the next lab before school. Even if the student thought that prepping for a lab was enjoyable or fun, that student was fulfilling the spirit of the consequence: making up for the lost time.

Peer conflict resolution assists students in working to repair the harm done to another student. Students can be taught conflict resolution with the help of a faculty member or counselor. If a student uses a slur or disrespectful language, that student should investigate why that language is harmful. By conducting research first, the offending student can craft a more sympathetic and informed apology to the victim.

An example of this is a middle school student who made a racially insensitive joke. From speaking with the student, it was clear that he did not know the joke was offensive. He was repeating what he had read on the internet. After doing some research on the origins of the joke, the student realized why it was hurtful and sincerely apologized.

There would be no growth, no new understanding, no repairing of harm, if I simply assigned him detention.

The alternatives suggested above are not quick and easy. Some people will object, fearing that restorative practices are letting students off easy or with just a slap on the wrist. These are valid concerns, but one important point to remember is that restorative practices are preventive actions based on relationships.

Building the relationships necessary to guide students toward positive choices requires creativity, planning, and a lot of patience. So why do it? It pays off when students’ behavior improves and the community becomes a more positive environment.

Wednesday, May 25, 2016

Lunch detentions: reflection prompts for your students to complete during a 20-minute lunch.

No comments:

Post a comment.

• International
• Education Jobs
• Schools directory
• Resources Education Jobs Schools directory News Search

Generic Detention Work for 11-16 pupils

Subject: Whole school

Age range: 11-14

Resource type: Worksheet/Activity

Last updated

22 February 2018

• Share through email
• Share through twitter
• Share through linkedin
• Share through facebook
• Share through pinterest

Tes paid licence How can I reuse this?

Get this resource as part of a bundle and save up to 25%

A bundle is a package of resources grouped together to teach a particular topic, or a series of lessons, in one place.

Mind Maps for ALL of KS3 Science

Hand-crafted mind maps to support learning for the whole of the KS3 National Curriculum. Designed to be taught as a two-year course, across Year 7 and Year 8. The mind maps could be given out as a handout at the beginning of a topic to give the ‘big picture’ of the unit, and then referred to throughout the unit and/or used to encourage students to look ahead at what is coming next. They could also be used as a revision tool – questions on the mind map help students to see the point of each section and can also challenge them to add missing information or make their own better mind maps. Each map is hand-drawn – pupils seem to prefer this to computer generated versions. They are scanned in as pdf files and I have included the powerpoint slides of each one as well – this is how I tend to use them most. I have included a bonus file - some generic detention work for 11-16 pupils. This has been tried and tested and is a good way to use detention time to encourage reflection - especially useful when work is required at short notice. Each set of resources is sold separately, so this bundle represents a saving of 25%.

Your rating is required to reflect your happiness.

It's good to leave some feedback.

Something went wrong, please try again later.

This resource hasn't been reviewed yet

To ensure quality for our reviews, only customers who have purchased this resource can review it

Report this resource to let us know if it violates our terms and conditions. Our customer service team will review your report and will be in touch.

Not quite what you were looking for? Search by keyword to find the right resource:

Here’s How I Use My Story to Teach Incarcerated Kids That Writing Matters

At 18, bobby bostic was sentenced to 241 years in prison. now out on parole, he’s sharing the healing power of writing in juvenile detention centers..

R ecently, at one of the writing workshops that I teach at three juvenile lockups in and around my hometown of St. Louis, one of my students posed a provocative question:

“Why should I write about changing the world when the world doesn’t care about me?”

The tall, lanky 16-year-old asked his question in a slow, rebellious twang that reminded me of how I spoke as a child.

“You should write about changing the world so that the world can start caring about you,” I quickly responded.

“Maybe you’re right,” he said.

While my instant answer could have been met with skepticism, my students, who range in age from 13 to 17, know that I am not just talking in a vacuum.

They know that in the late ’90s, when I was 16, I sat in the city’s juvenile detention center before being certified as an adult and standing trial for participating in two armed robberies. They know that I was convicted of 17 felonies, and sentenced to a total of 241 years in prison . And they know I served nearly three decades before getting out on parole at age 43.

While these kids are facing the school-to-prison pipeline rather than the youth superpredator panic that ensnared me when I was tried, convicted and sentenced, the point is the same: If they don’t change their lives, what likely awaits them is prison or death. That’s why I urge my students to use the art form of writing. Succeeding in the arts can help these youth rise above poverty. Writing can help heal their trauma.

T he rooms where I teach are made up of stark concrete walls, white linoleum floors and black chalkboards. As a security precaution, my students are only allowed to use pencils. During each class session, I stand in front of about 15 kids who are overwhelmingly Black. They sit in the chairs and small tables sprawled about and diligently take notes or record their own ideas.

But mostly, we all just talk.

This format opens the door for students to challenge me. For instance, on the day in question, another kid wanted clarity about this concept of writing for change.

“But how can a written document change the world?” he wanted to know.

Before I could respond, a peer raised his hand and said, “Man, the Bible is a written document, and it changes people’s lives every day. It constantly changes the world.”

The class fell silent for a moment. Then a third child raised his hand and declared, “The United States Constitution is a written document, and it changed this country forever.”

As others interjected — the writings of Martin Luther King Jr. and Socrates had global impact, they informed me — we found ourselves in the middle of a lively discussion.

When it was time for me to speak again, I explained how reading “Long Walk To Freedom,” the autobiography of Nelson Mandela, showed me the power of forgiveness and restorative justice. I also revealed how I became serious about writing: As a lost 18-year-old in an adult prison, penning a book of poems helped me find myself. That led to another student telling the class how much poetry books had inspired him as he was battling depression. I was happy that he felt safe enough to share that.

P erhaps I should mention here that I am not a trained teacher or counselor. During the 27 years that I spent in Missouri state prisons, my jobs included working in the kitchen washing pots and pans, and I had a very brief stint as a G.E.D. tutor. But I did write 13 books, including eight that I self-published. This lived experience gave me the confidence to walk into three juvenile detention centers — Hogan Street Regional Youth Center, St. Louis County Juvenile Detention Center and the St. Louis City Juvenile Detention Center — and propose a curriculum. I had only been out on parole for two weeks. Shortly after I made my proposal, I became a volunteer writing instructor.

Now, my classes are among the weekly programs that are mandatory for the kids. They run from 90 minutes to two hours, but often feel much shorter. My students have access to a library full of books. I give them homework assignments every week, but they don’t get traditional grades. Instead, they critique each other’s work, sharing constructive feedback.

The truth is, these classes help me as much as they seem to help my students. These kids are full of potential. Giving them guidance is my way of giving back.

T oward the end of the class, when we discussed writing for change, I noticed that one kid had been sitting silently the entire time. I asked him what his opinion was, and he said that he was certain that writing could at least change the world one person at a time.

“How is that, man?” a classmate asked, genuinely interested.

The quiet young man held up a copy of “Humbled To The Dust: Still I Rise” — my most recent memoir — and read a passage that he had chosen:

“The world has its problems, and it always will,” he recited. “But there [have] always been good people who work to change the world while trying to make it a better place. … Despite our flaws, we can change the world, make it better, and enjoy it with happiness.”

I felt grateful that he used a piece of my memoir to bring the class full circle. And I got no argument about their assignment for next week: Write your own essay titled “What I Would Do To Change The World.”

Bobby Bostic, a St. Louis native, was released on parole on November 9, 2022. He became eligible due to a 2021 Missouri law inspired by his case. His most recent memoir, “Humbled To The Dust: Still I Rise,” was published in August 2023 and is available on Amazon. Follow him on X and Instagram using @FreeBobbyBostic and visit his websites, www.minddiamonds.net and www.juvenileliferswithoutparolespeaks.org .

The Missouri Department of Social Services’ Division of Youth Services did not respond to questions about their educational programming by publication time.

Our reporting has real impact on the criminal justice system

Our journalism establishes facts, exposes failures and examines solutions for a criminal justice system in crisis. If you believe in what we do, become a member today.

Stay up to date on our reporting and analysis.

KEITH GESWEIN

EDUCATIONAL RESOURCES FOR LITERACY AND WRITING IN GRADES 1-6

Meaningful Assignments for Students Serving In-School Suspension

I always hate the assignments I send with students when they serve ISS.  I hate everything about ISS.  Obviously, when students are fighting or behaving extremely disrespectfully, they need to be removed from class.  But once he/she is taken to ISS, I despise gathering work for the student to do all day because I know I’m going to do a terrible job of doing so.

I always end up feeling guilty for the work I send.  I know I should have already prepared packets of work, but planning ahead is not exactly my strong suit.  So I end up grabbing workbooks and textbooks.  I spend about two minutes looking for things that will take this student a long time to complete.  Then I slap a few post-it notes with pages numbers to complete.  The entire time, I’m thinking, “This is such pointless work.”

These are the students who need the most support and I’m sending pointless work for them to do right after they’ve had a serious altercation with another student or teacher.  I always feel guilty, but I feel like I have no options because I only have a few minutes to find work because I’m in the middle of class.  The work also has to keep the student busy for a day without requiring too much effort from the ISS teacher who already has a million other things to do.

These are the students I’ve kept in mind as I’ve written over 200 passages about famous athletes.  As I research athletes like Kevin Durant, Tom Brady, Cristiano Ronaldo, and Usain Bolt, I look for stories about times they’ve made mistakes and how they overcame them.  When Kevin Durant was in high school, one of his basketball coaches was murdered.  Kevin was really upset because this coach was like a father to him.  Kevin’s performance on the court suffered because he started disrespecting opponents and hogging the ball.  Then Kevin realized his old coach would not want him to play like that.  Kevin stopped doing those things and his play improved.  The students who are sitting in ISS need to realize that huge celebrities like Kevin Durant make mistakes just like them.   Our students need to read stories of successful people who learn from mistakes and are determined never to make the same mistake twice.  Now, Kevin Durant is one of the most respected players in the NBA.

When I write these passages, I also include stories of how hard these athletes have worked to achieve success.  I describe how these athletes have put in years and years of insanely hard work to be successful.  When NFL quarterback Tom Brady was growing up, he hated that his sisters were better athletes than him.  He was determined to do whatever it took to be the best athlete in his family.  Now he is one of the greatest quarterbacks in American football history!  Here are some passages where the headline shows you the focus of the passage.

I’ve written three sets of passages about most athletes.  For example, my set about LeBron James and Michael Jordan includes paired texts about their childhood, pro sports career, and charity work.

Each set of paired texts includes a quiz.  There’s also a writing prompt that ties all the passages together.  The first page, which you can give to the ISS teacher, explains which two passages go together.  Answer keys are also provided.  You can print a few copies of each set to have in a file folder for those times when you have to immediately send work for ISS.

Some teachers have told me the work for ISS should be boring busy-work, which I totally disagree with.   The punishment for the student should come in the form of isolation from his/her peers, not pointless assignments.

In addition to classroom teachers, I encourage ISS teachers to try a few of my paired texts. A few ISS teachers have left feedback on my paired texts saying they were helpful when kids in ISS finished the assignments sent by the classroom teacher.  They are also helpful when the student’s classroom teacher is unable to send work on time.

Click any of the images below to see all the paired texts I have available in my TpT store.  I’ve written passages on more than 70 athletes who compete in a variety of sports, so I’m sure you’ll find topics that will interest your students.  I also have passages written on a variety of reading levels to help you meet the needs of your students.

Feel free to leave feedback in my TpT store to let me know how these work for you.  Thank you for the 5,236,823 things you do for your students every day!

• No category

BEHAVIOR IMPROVEMENT DETENTION ASSIGNMENT FOR CLASSROOM

Related documents.

Add this document to collection(s)

You can add this document to your study collection(s)

Add this document to saved

You can add this document to your saved list

Suggest us how to improve StudyLib

(For complaints, use another form )

Input it if you want to receive answer

You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly. You should upgrade or use an alternative browser .

Need Behaviour Assignments for Consequences

Discussion in ' Behavior Management Archives ' started by dannyteach , Dec 6, 2010 .

dannyteach New Member

Dec 6, 2010

I'm looking for some help! I am in my 7th year of teaching and have a little guy in my grade 7 class this year. I taught him last year and was blessed with his sweet return to my class list this year. He is the most disruptive, disrespectful, high energy child I have yet to come across. am usually the teacher who invites challenges like this into my class...however this littleguy has got me, my principal, the admin beat! I am looking for support and help in ways to deal with him when he gets into his distructive states. I would like to come up with assignments for him to do that address his poor behaviour choices in class / on the playground. For example, if he swears at a teacher or pretends to shoot his classmates consistantly, having him write a journal entry from his teacher's perspective or classmates on what they may be feeling. Having him do a behavioural report when sent out of the classroom to reflect on his behaviours. I would like to come up with 10 or so behavior related assignments for him to do in the office when he is not ready to be in class. These can be kept with the principal and he must complete one before being permitted to return to class. Any ideas for assignments? reports? projects? readings? etc. It would be very much appreciated! I need to somehow survive this child this year and it is only December!!! Thanks! Danielle  

Advertisement

StellatheSub Rookie

Dec 8, 2010

Age 7 or grade 7?  

Aliceacc Multitudinous

Hi Danielle, and welcome! I'm guessing 7th grade. And I've got to be honest and admit that I'm in a bit over my head; my typical "not bad enough for detention" assignment is to multiply your phone number by your zip code. The next time you stay after, you have to check it by long division. I tend not to have too many repeat offenders. How about an essay on the meaning of "respect", starting with a dictionary definition? Likewise "Civility" and "Cooperation"???  

Cerek Aficionado

The writing assignments sound like a good idea, because it will force him to actually THINK about what he is doing and how it affects other people. Having him describe his actions from the other person's POV might make him think about the impact his actions are having. I also like Alice's idea of writing a short paper on respect, civility, cooperation, etc by beginning with the dictionary definition. Other ideas for writing assignments could be: 1) Describe a typical school day from the time you wake up till you go to bed that night. Write about the things that happen on a normal day for you. (This might provide some insight from HIS POV about why he is so out of control. What is triggering all of that anger and disruption?) 2) List the name of 10 classmates and write one good quality or positive comment about each one. How does the person display this quality? What is unique about him/her? What affect (if any) does this quality or attribute have on other classmates? (Perhaps if he lists positive qualities of others and how it affects the classroom environment, he will begin to think about how some of those qualities or behaviors would work for him. You could also do this assignment several times, making him list 10 different classmates each time until he has eventually written one positive comment about each of them). 3) What do you want to do when you are grown and out of school? What kind of job do you think you would like to have? (hopefully, this will make him think about future goals and help him start focusing on what he needs to do to reach them). 4) If you had 1 day to do whatever you wanted, what would you do? (if he writes something like "play video games all day" or "sit around the house", then future assignments can focus more on describing a favorite hobby or activity OTHER than video games. Try to make him think of something that requires some energy and thought and describe what he enjoys most about that activity) 5) Imagine YOU are a middle school teacher. Describe what you think a normal day of school would be like for you then. What subject would you teach? What kind of lessons would you do? How would you make the lessons interesting for all the students? How much time do you think it would take to grade all the papers from every class you have? Those are some ideas off the top of my head. I'm not sure how much success you will actually have getting him to do any of these, but once he is removed from the situation that is upsetting him and has some time to calm down, maybe he will begin to reflect on these ideas and how he can use them to change his behavior. If he DOES complete the assignments, he will have been forced to think about his actions (and their impact) a little more deeply and will also provide insight to you about what is triggering these reactions and things he wishes were different about his environment.  

teacher12345 Cohort

Some other assignment ideas: 1. Writing a letter of apology to the teacher stating what he did, why it was not acceptable, how his actions impacted others, others point of view and what others think of him when he acts this way, how it makes his teacher feel when he acts this way, and what he could do next time instead. 2. Comparing and Contrasting his behavior with that of other students in his grade or class: IE: Other 7th graders treat their teachers with respect and use respectful words when talking with them, and I sweared at my teacher and then stating what other people may think of him if he keeps doing this behavior, ie: dissruptive, obnoxious, rude, don't want to be around him, direspectful, disobedient, defient, weird, goofs off alot, can't listen and follow directions, annoying to be around etc. 3. Write the following words and their defenitions from the dictionary 3 times each and use them in a sentence; cooperative/cooperate/cooperating, respectful, responsible, polite, curtious, rude, defient, and obnoxious. 4. Make a list of why his behavior was not appropriate: EX: it was disruptive, rude, not respecting teacher or peers trying to learn/teach, spoke out of turn, bad language, others were mad, etc. 5. Cause and Effect note cards: given a situation or behavior he will write down the effect 6. he will write a poem about how his behavior effected others/other people's point of view, teacher's point of view 7. He will write a diary entry as if he was the teacher and had a disrespectful, rude, uncooperative student in his classroom, stating why it was annoying, what the student did, why it made it hard for him to teach etc. 8. Write a diary entry as if he was a classmate of a student who acted like he did, disrespectful, rude, etc.  

paperheart Groupie

Dec 11, 2010

Name 50 careers that require a college education. Name 50 reasons that explain why you are bright, beautiful and just plain awesome. Imagine you are a superhero. Name 50 super powers you would like to have. Now describe 10 qualities you do have that can lead to good.  

Dec 12, 2010

Some of these sound downright fun! Detention in my school involves copying, word for word, a page of typed print. The last time I had detention duty, it concerned Brown vs the Board of Education. It used to be copying a page from the dictionay. Saturday detention is copying the Constitution. As you decide on the assignments, keep in mind: the point is that it's NOT fun. It's something to be avoided.  

Pisces_Fish Fanatic

Aliceacc said: ↑ Some of these sound downright fun! Detention in my school involves copying, word for word, a page of typed print. The last time I had detention duty, it concerned Brown vs the Board of Education. It used to be copying a page from the dictionay. Saturday detention is copying the Constitution. As you decide on the assignments, keep in mind: the point is that it's NOT fun. It's something to be avoided. Click to expand...

swansong1 Virtuoso

Here's my opinion as an ESE teacher: The children that Alice gives detention to are normal children with normal behaviors that have transgressed a little. Therefore, her punishment is absolutely acceptable. This 7th grader exhibits unusual and abnormal behavior ( as in a child with behavioral disabilities). He needs to have behavioral modification strategies to help him learn more acceptable behaviors in school. So, the writing assignments you all have suggested would act as behavioral modification strategies and would be be a good start for him to begin learning ways to change his behavior. I'm guessing he will not find these writing assignments easy. As a matter of fact, the fact that he will have to sit quietly and give some thought to his actions and then compose a response will give him difficulty because he has shown that those types of activities are not something he can handle easily..  

Excellent point swan!  

Teacherella Habitué

Jan 10, 2011

Whatever consequence you decide on, I would make sure that it won't make him hate writing. It would be a shame for him to associate writing as a punishment. I like the idea of him listing 50 positive traits about himself and maybe have him choose one to write about. I'm a firm believer in giving students logical consequences so I think it should directly relate to whatever reason he was send down to the office.  

MamaFisch New Member

Mar 7, 2011

I have several specially selected sections from our student code of conduct. Students have to copy it. If it is a short selection, I have them copy it several times and then I send home the page, with a note from me, to be signed by their parent. On our campus, three minor offenses that are documented and addressed result in a referral, so this also provides documentation and proof of parent notification. I also have students who make messes stay to clean up. Writing on desks and walls means erasing marks in the hallway. Students who run in the hall have to do 20 walking laps from one end of the hallway to the other, etc.  

sidhewing Rookie

Mar 11, 2011

Personal Responsibility Grade I believe in the "personal responsibility grade." I would suggest to give this to the whole class. It's a form that grades students on their behavior and is generally 15-20% of their overall grade. Each week you grades students on tardiness, absences, participation and respectful behavior. Allow yourself 2-3 sentences if they did something really disrespectful like curse, hurt a student etc. AND then allow them a space to "agree" or "disagree" with your grade and a space that allows them to answer: What could I do in the future to improve my grade? I've found that it is surprisingly effective and students sometimes are chillingly honest. If you don't want to do that have you considered a Behavior plan? Where you sit down with the students and together your brain storm was is disruptive/ productive and what the consequences/ rewards are? Or what about a progress chart where it's just between you and the student? So, that the students won't be embarrassed in front of his friends? Good luck!!  

m1trLG2 Companion

Apr 17, 2011

How are mom and dad? Here are some things we did in treatment as well as somethings I have used in the classroom. 1) Have him write a letter home to his parent that gets signed about his behavior. Do this in a guided writing style. "Dear Mom and Dad I was very disrespectful today. I made the choice to _______." Get it signed and returned (more effective if mom and dad are involved though). 2) Do "SODAS" with him as part of his journaling. S- Situation O- Options D- Disadvantages A- Advantages S- Solution Here is what it would look like: S- I want to color instead of do the work I'm supposed to do. O- Do my work or chose to color. D- If I chose to color my teacher will get upset, send a letter home, mom and dad will get upset, I will spend the rest of my day arguing. If I chose to do my work I don't get to do what I want and that upsets me. A- If I chose to do my work, perhaps I will finish early and be allowed to color and have some free time. My parents won't be upset, and my teacher won't get upset. If I chose to color, I get to do what I want. S- I think I will do my work and then color later and that way I don't have to deal with the upset people. This can be something he is allowed to do if he can recognize himself "losing control" it's a "stop and think" method. However it can also be used afterwards and then the solution would be the one he picked but why it didn't work out would be made clear in disadvantages. 3) This isn't a "punishment" but can be effective for helping to change behavior. A lot of behavior kids get overwhelmed very quickly and again need to "stop and think". Have him "take a break". This is good for ALL kids but mostly get utilized by behavioral kids. If he is being crazy and hyper and defiant tell him, "I think you need to take a break, please go have a seat facing the wall in the break chair." Give him 5 minutes and then ask him to join you OR tell him, "when you think you can make better choices let me know and you can join us" but if it's over five minutes have him make up the time during recess or with an assignment or something. This way he doesn't just go back to a corner and play. Sometimes these kids just get stuck in a loop and honestly don't know how to get out. 4) Have him do "self awareness" worksheets. Now, prior to teaching I was a behavioral therapist and I am a supporter of the cognitive behavioral school of thought. So, feel free to disagree I just wanted to say this is from that standpoint. A lot of behavioral kids are unable to put themselves in another person's shoes. This kid may be able to write a great response of how it would "feel" to be a teacher dealing with a kid like him but he doesn't "feel" that. He has observed your behaviors and listened and knows what to say. Giving assignments that require introspection will be more effective at changing his behaviors. Here are a few links. http://www.box.net/shared/fp9tziylhr http://www.stressgroup.com/ABCworksheet.html http://practicegroundprojects.wetpaint.com/page/Handouts,+Protocols+&+Client+Learning+Activities These are all similar to the SODAS approach and designed to have the child look inside to assess behaviors and slow down... again Stop and Think. If you google "Behavioral Therapy Worksheets" you will find lots of things he can work on. Also, ask the school guidance counselor if she/he has anything like these worksheets that he could work on. Lots of times the behavior is impulsive and there is no reason the child did it. So, the solution is learning to recognize impulsive behavior and then be able to stop and take charge of it. Hope some of this helps!  

Share This Page

Members online now.

Get the Reddit app

Suggestions for what to have students do during detention.

I am an ed. tech, but am also doing my student teaching in an ESL classroom this year. This is my first year at the middle school - I had been at the primary elementary before this. There is one student in particular in the ESL class who gives my mentor teacher and I (along with any student he doesn't like) a lot of guff. He generally doesn't want to be in school and hates putting effort into anything he doesn't like.

My mentor had to leave on Friday for a half day, leaving me to sub. 20 minutes after she had left, things were going pretty well, and the room was silent as students were working on an independent quiz. As I was writing on the board, the student I mentioned above started moaning and complaining loudly that he didn't want/know what to write as answers on the quiz. Before I can act, another girl across the room called out for him to shut up and gave him the finger. He called out, "yeah fuck you, too." I gave them both detentions. Neither seemed very surprised.

The question:

Detentions are totally teacher-controlled. They will come to my mentor's room after school tomorrow, and even though she is technically responsible for them as the official teacher, I'm going to be taking it over not only for the experience it adds to my student teaching, but also so that these students don't get the impression that they need to listen to my mentor more than to me or that I won't carry through with what I say in the classroom. There is no official protocol for detention activity that I am aware of.

So: what do I have them do? I know that a tedious task really isn't going to teach them anything or get at the cause of the issue, but at the same time, I want their time in detention to be really awful so that the idea of getting another is really unattractive.

By continuing, you agree to our User Agreement and acknowledge that you understand the Privacy Policy .

Enter the 6-digit code from your authenticator app

You’ve set up two-factor authentication for this account.

Enter a 6-digit backup code

Create your username and password.

Reddit is anonymous, so your username is what you’ll go by here. Choose wisely—because once you get a name, you can’t change it.

Reset your password

Enter your email address or username and we’ll send you a link to reset your password

Check your inbox

An email with a link to reset your password was sent to the email address associated with your account

Choose a Reddit account to continue

• Apply to UVU

Writing as a College Student

Download PDF

Writing at the college level involves new expectations that may require new strategies. While specific genres of writing have distinct purposes, college writing helps you develop skills such as thinking critically, communicating professionally, and articulating yourself well. Although common writing expectations and strategies are listed below, always follow assignment guidelines and write with your audience in mind.

General College Writing Expectations

Writing as a college student can seem daunting, but drawing on your previous writing experience and relying on instructors and campus resources can help to ease the transition. Although writing assignments may differ, many have similar expectations to those listed below.

• Understand what the assignment is asking . Assignment guidelines can be confusing or lengthy, and reading carefully and slowly can help to make sense of them.
• Refer to assignment guidelines , rubrics, and class policies for questions about the assignment
• Learn the conventions of your discipline , including genre, audience, citation style, and AI policies. Notice the writing style used in your field, then practice using it in your assignments.
• Ask questions of instructors, writing center tutors, and librarians.
• Present clear, coherent ideas . Consider if a reader would understand what you intend to say.
• Maintain a professional tone appropriate for your audience and their needs.
• Improve writing mechanics , such as spelling, grammar, and punctuation. Writing mechanics can be complicated, but your skills can improve with practice.
• Read feedback on your assignments, and incorporate those suggestions into your future work.

Refining Your Writing Skills

Using effective strategies when approaching writing assignments can help you mitigate worries, strengthen writing skills, increase confidence, and improve writing efficiency.

• Start assignments early to ensure you have ample time to pace your work.
• Break projects into smaller, manageable tasks ; set reasonable and achievable goals.
• Organize your work by using consistent note-taking techniques, such as highlighting, color-coding, or annotating. Experiment with different ways to accomplish your writing assignments, and keep track of any requirements, deadlines, and rubrics.
• Join a study group to encourage accountability, collaborate with others, and receive support.
• Regulate your time and energy for writing. One part of an assignment may require more effort than another part. Allocate your energy mindfully to help make writing sessions more productive
• Set aside time for both writing and self-care . Scheduling time to work and take breaks can improve your writing capacity and save you time in the long run.
• Create an environment for your writing needs. Consider different times, locations, and comforts that work for you (e.g., morning, evening; library, bedroom; snacks, lighting).
• Approach writing assignments with a positive and confident attitude . Remember that college work is centered on continual learning, and the writing process will have ups and downs.
• Use campus resources and opportunities . Consult with peers, talk with instructors or advisors, explore library services (in-person and online), and attend university workshops.

Developing Your Writing Process

College writing assignments can be complex, and assignments can build on each other within a course. It may also involve in-depth academic research. Create and maintain a personal writing process to organize your writing, research, and personal time.

• Prewriting : Understand the assignment requirements and identify your audience and tone. Brainstorm potential topics to expand on when writing later.
• Outlining : Determine your main point for the writing assignment. Create sections with brief notes and develop your thoughts from prewriting.
• Drafting : Elaborate on your outline and form sentences or paragraphs. Write about your thoughts and arguments in detail. If needed, add sources by using quotations, paraphrases, and summaries.
• Revising : Read your draft and adjust it to clarify points and strengthen the argument.
• Editing : Check for spelling, grammar, and punctuation errors. Change the format according to a style guide, example, or template.
• Writing processes are cyclical and take time . The first draft is not your final draft. Steps such as drafting and revising often occur more than once.
• Read the assignment guidelines carefully, and ask your professor about research requirements such as the number and type of sources required (e.g., primary, popular, peer-reviewed, etc.).
• Adjust your research topic to fit the requirements of the assignment. Narrow or broaden your topic by considering timeframes, locations, demographics, and contemporary issues.
• Identify your audience and adapt to their level of familiarity with your topic. Determine whether terms and concepts need to be explained. Your audience determine your tone or style.
• Identify patterns of feedback you receive from instructors, peers, or writing consultants. Use that feedback (both positive and negative) to inform your future writing.
• Avoid plagiarism by tracking and citing sources using your assigned citation style.
• Contribute to a larger academic conversation by connecting your ideas to sources through summary, analysis, and synthesis.
• Use library resources such as the physical library, online academic databases, and library research tutorials to become familiar with your field of study and help you identify relevant, credible sources to incorporate in your writing.
• Chat with a research librarian or meet with a writing center consultant for help finding, reading, and writing with sources.
• Learn how AI can facilitate or frustrate your writing and learning processes . Understand AI policies and expectations as outlined by your instructor, department, and university. AI policies and expectations may vary by instructor or program.
• Know that strengthening your digital literacy , information literacy , and academic reading skills will help you develop as a college-level writer.

As a college writer, you will continually grow and improve. College is a learning environment. Getting support from others can ease anxiety and build your confidence as a writer. If you feel overwhelmed, remember that you are in college to learn, and faculty, peers and the Writing Center are here to help.

Utah Valley University

• About UNICEF
• Where we work
• Explore careers
• Working in emergencies
• Diversity and inclusion
• Leadership recruitment
• Support UNICEF
• Search jobs
• Candidate login

Search UNICEF

Current vacancies, explore our current job opportunities, contract type, functional area.

• Child Protection

Position level

• Consultancy

National Consultant on Refugee and Migration Law (40-day home-based assignment)

Apply now Job no: 574522 Contract type: Consultant Duty Station: Warsaw Level: Consultancy Location: Poland Categories: Child Protection

UNICEF works in some of the world’s toughest places, to reach the world’s most disadvantaged children. To save their lives. To defend their rights. To help them fulfill their potential. 

Across 190 countries and territories, we work for every child, everywhere, every day, to build a better world for everyone. 

And we never give up. 

For every child, PROTECTION.

How can you make a difference?  

• Analyze the regulations of the Pact on Migration and Asylum from child rights and human rights perspective and analyze its consequences for migrant or refugee children, their families, other vulnerable groups in Poland and prepare the written report on the outcomes of this analysis.
• Analyze the legal situation, the role of the involved authorities (local, regional, country-level) and available support for the children and families staying in the accommodation centers for migrants or refugees (reception centers, shelter for Ukrainian citizens, open camps for other migrants and refuges etc) in Poland and prepare a report on the outcomes of this analysis including child rights and human rights perspective.
• Prepare an analytical report on the detention of children and their families for migration reasons in Poland, including data on detention, Polish law and policies, European and international regulations, case-law of Polish and international and European courts, and recommendations for change.
• Obtain relevant data on issues connected with refugee children in Poland, including children in detention, (e.g. by the preparation of relevant applications for receiving public information).
• Propose, develop, or review the agenda and materials of capacity building activities concerning migration and refugee issues for judges, prosecutors, officers of the Border Guard, Police or other institutions or professionals.
• Propose, develop, or review the information, leaflets, and other types of informative materials on prevention of risks associated with migration such as human trafficking, the exploitation of children for sexual purposes.
• Develop draft advocacy letters concerning ongoing or planned amendments or developments of policies, laws, regulations concerning migration and refugee law, Special Act on support for citizens of Ukraine in connection with the armed conflict on the territory of that country and other relevant documents.

To qualify as an advocate for every child you will have…  

• An advanced university degree (Master’s or higher) in a relevant area; specifically in Law.  
• A minimum of six years relevant professional experience in migration and refugee law, including providing legal consultations for migrants and refugees.
• Demonstrated experience in preparation of legal analysis, developing reports and preparation of advocacy letters.
• Demonstrated work experience in the area of international protection, detention for migration reasons, protection of vulnerable groups, including children (highly desirable).
• Demonstrated knowledge in the field of child rights, and human rights.
• Knowledge of the Polish legal system and international and European acts concerning migrants and refugees.
• Demonstrated work experience in working with a range of stakeholders including governmental partners and public agencies.
• Demonstrated experience in providing trainings or workshops on migration law (highly desirable).
• Excellent analytical and writing skills.
• Fluency in Polish and English (oral and written).

UNICEF's values of Care, Respect, Integrity, Trust, Accountability, and Sustainability (CRITAS). 

To view our competency framework, please visit   here . 

UNICEF is here to serve the world’s most disadvantaged children and our global workforce must reflect the diversity of those children. The UNICEF family is committed to include everyone , irrespective of their race/ethnicity, age, disability, gender identity, sexual orientation, religion, nationality, socio-economic background, or any other personal characteristic.

UNICEF offers reasonable accommodation for consultants/individual contractors with disabilities. This may include, for example, accessible software, travel assistance for missions or personal attendants. We encourage you to disclose your disability during your application in case you need reasonable accommodation during the selection process and afterwards in your assignment. 

UNICEF has a zero-tolerance policy on conduct that is incompatible with the aims and objectives of the United Nations and UNICEF, including sexual exploitation and abuse, sexual harassment, abuse of authority and discrimination. UNICEF also adheres to strict child safeguarding principles. All selected candidates will be expected to adhere to these standards and principles and will therefore undergo rigorous reference and background checks. Background checks will include the verification of academic credential(s) and employment history. Selected candidates may be required to provide additional information to conduct a background check. 

Remarks:   

Only shortlisted candidates will be contacted and advance to the next stage of the selection process. 

Individuals engaged under a consultancy or individual contract will not be considered “staff members” under the Staff Regulations and Rules of the United Nations and UNICEF’s policies and procedures, and will not be entitled to benefits provided therein (such as leave entitlements and medical insurance coverage). Their conditions of service will be governed by their contract and the General Conditions of Contracts for the Services of Consultants and Individual Contractors. Consultants and individual contractors are responsible for determining their tax liabilities and for the payment of any taxes and/or duties, in accordance with local or other applicable laws. 

The selected candidate is solely responsible to ensure that the visa (applicable) and health insurance required to perform the duties of the contract are valid for the entire period of the contract. Selected candidates are subject to confirmation of fully-vaccinated status against SARS-CoV-2 (Covid-19) with a World Health Organization (WHO)-endorsed vaccine, which must be met prior to taking up the assignment. It does not apply to consultants who will work remotely and are not expected to work on or visit UNICEF premises, programme delivery locations or directly interact with communities UNICEF works with, nor to travel to perform functions for UNICEF for the duration of their consultancy contracts.

Applicants are required to include in their applications a financial proposal which includes a lumpsum amount for consultancy fees, local transportation and other miscellaneous costs. Breakdown or details of the fee will be much appreciated.

Advertised: 09 Aug 2024 Central European Daylight Time Deadline: 25 Aug 2024 Central European Daylight Time

Back to search results Apply now

We will email you new jobs that match this search.

Great, we can send you jobs like this, if this is your first time signing up, please check your inbox to confirm your subscription.

The email address was invalid, please check for errors.

You must agree to the privacy statement

If you are a committed, creative professional and are passionate about making a lasting difference for children, the world's leading children's rights organization would like to hear from you. The UNICEF Refugee Response Office in Poland is recruiting a child protection consultant to support Child Protection team in legal analysis and advocacy on refugee and migrant law and policies, especially concerning children and other vulnerable groups of refugees.

Deadline: 25 Aug 2024 11:55 PM

Powered by PageUp

Manhattan Project Director’s Files Illuminate Early History of Atomic Bomb

Photograph of General Leslie R. Groves used on his Manhattan Project identification badge (Photo from Los Alamos National Laboratory )

Leslie Groves Papers Include Oppenheimer’s “Personnel List” for Staffing New Weapons Laboratory

Groves “Unwilling to Accept … Setback” on Construction Schedule for Secret Plutonium Plant

Post-War Development of Nuclear Reactors Needed to “Maintain the Country in a Supreme Military Position”  

Washington, D.C., August 8, 2024 – On the week of the 79th commemoration of the U.S. atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, Japan, the National Security Archive today publishes a fascinating new collection of papers from the office files of Leslie Groves, the director of the Manhattan Project, the U.S. effort during World War II to develop and produce the world’s first nuclear weapons. Among the newly available records are candid memos and other correspondence from inside the Manhattan Project on the role of nuclear technologies in the post-war environment and the importance of being the preeminent atomic power.

In one revealing document from 1943, Arthur Compton , director of the Manhattan Project’s “Metallurgical Laboratory” at the University of Chicago, considered the post-World War II role of heavy water nuclear reactors. Assuming that production of plutonium-239 would be relevant to the “balance of military power” after the war, Compton wrote that “the post-war situation will still be greatly confused and it will remain of prime importance to maintain the country in a supreme military position.” Keeping the U.S. in its leading role was important to Compton, who was “sure that all of the major powers will be extending themselves to develop the tube-alloy [atomic bomb] program as far as possible.” To help the U.S. maintain its lead and seeing “inherent advantages” in using heavy water in nuclear reactors, Compton believed that their “development will certainly play an important part in this post-war effort.”

Compton’s letter and the other records published today were found in a long-overlooked collection of office files of the Manhattan Project. The two cartons of “Leslie Groves Papers Concerning the Manhattan Project, 1942–1946” were found in Record Group 77, pertaining to the Army Corps of Engineers, held at the National Archives. When it reviewed the collection, the Department of Energy classified at least half of it, but what is available sheds interesting new light on the first two years of the Manhattan Project, including on Groves’ day-to-day decisions and his demanding management style. NARA's National Declassification Center made the Groves collection available in response to an indexing-on-demand request by the National Security Archive.

The collection includes a letter to General Groves from J. Robert Oppenheimer, the recently appointed director of the Manhattan Project’s new weapons laboratory. Oppenheimer’s 9 November 1942 letter included the “personnel list” for the prospective laboratory that he had promised Groves. Oppenheimer listed cadres of experimental and theoretical physicists “who were now working for us” and a wish list of physicists that he hoped to sign on. The names included such prominent scientists as Edward Teller, Hans Bethe, Robert Bacher, Richard Feynman, Enrico Fermi, Robert F. Christy, and Luis Alvarez, all of whom worked at Los Alamos.

With so much on the Manhattan Project already declassified and the subject of numerous books and articles, the documents in the Groves files are unlikely to change the big picture of the weapons design/production work at Los Alamos, the uranium enrichment project at Oak Ridge, or the plutonium production effort at Hanford, WA, all if which were under Groves’ supervision and general direction. Nothing in the new materials sheds any light on plans for the military use of atomic weapons, for example. Nevertheless, the documents provide interesting and useful nuance to important elements of the story, especially on developments at the secret Hanford Engineer Works (HEW) in Washington state, which produced the plutonium used for the Trinity Test and the bomb that exploded over Nagasaki.

The Groves collection contains a variety of documents on HEW and its operations. Colonel Franklin Matthias , HEW’s director, played a key role in its development, including choosing the land that Hanford would occupy. [1] Several items demonstrate the precondition for acquiring these 600,000 acres: the dispossession of farmers and other landowners in the area. Legal challenges to government valuations of these properties also had interesting implications for official secrecy.

Other material documents the challenge of developing and maintaining a huge labor force to construct reactors and reprocessing plants at HEW and how managers tried to improve labor morale, as it was difficult to retain workers workers in a remote area during a wartime situation when the demand for labor was high.

Some of the Groves documents illustrate the task of creating a “government town” and a “company town” in Richland, WA, where managers and scientific workers would be living. One example was the dispute between HEW leaders and the Du Pont Corporation, the contractor for Hanford, over how many bedrooms were appropriate for the new houses. Another challenge for the HEW was ensuring that Richland would have the stores and shops needed to support a growing population. [2]

The new documents also include estimates of the costs of the Hanford facilities and schedules for the production of plutonium and the completion of the work at Hanford. The estimates for Hanford, produced in February 1944, have detailed breakdowns, including the costs of the reactors and the reprocessing plant. In one chart, the estimated price for the three reactors was over $101 million dollars, which in 2024 dollars is in the range of $2 billion. The cost for the reprocessing plants was over $47 million. In 2024 dollars, this is in the range of $960 million. The spending on Hanford was substantial, but 63 percent of the Manhattan Project’s outlays were for the uranium enrichment facilities at Oak Ridge, which cost over $1 billion in 1945 dollars .

Historians have observed that what made General Groves an ideal candidate for directing the Manhattan Project and accomplishing its goals was that he was a “blunt, impatient, and energetic officer with a well-deserved reputation for getting things done.” Moreover, he was skilled in delegating authority to close associates with whom he had worked on earlier projects. Before taking on this task, Groves had helped build the munitions industry and then played a key role in the construction of the Pentagon. [3]

One document in particular sheds light on his management style. In November 1943, the Du Pont Corporation was having trouble finding enough workers to construct the highly secret facilities at HEW. Groves was displeased with the “super-cautious” tone of one of the Du Pont executives, who informed him about a schedule setback for construction at Hanford. But Groves was “unwilling” to accept any delays. His tough response produced a letter from a Du Pont executive who assured the General that the job will be done “at the earliest date possible.” That is what Groves wanted to hear.

It is worth noting that the Du Pont Corporation had been reluctant to get involved in projects like Hanford in the first place, but pressure from Groves and the U.S. Army was unrelenting, and its executives acquiesced. Having little choice in the matter, the Du Pont leadership put up with Groves but not for monetary reward. Having been tagged during the 1930s as “merchants of death” for its World War I munitions sales, Du Pont had become skittish about profiting from war production. To build the facilities at Hanford, Du Pont waived all profits and asked only for reimbursement of expenses on a cost-plus-fixed fee basis. The fixed fee was one dollar. During the war, corporate executives routinely worked for the government on a “dollar-a-year” basis. Such was the political climate of the time. [4]

The Groves files also include records capturing early discussions about the role of heavy water nuclear reactors in the Manhattan Project and in post-war development. While top officials such as Arthur Compton thought that heavy water reactors could fill the gap in the event that HEW’s graphite-moderated reactors did not pan out, that did not ultimately prove to be necessary. Heavy water reactors had low priority during World War II, but Groves approved the deployment of one at Argonne, IL, in part to support work at HEW. Compton also developed suggestions for information exchanges with British and Canadian scientists (who were already producing heavy water and had plans for a reactor).

The Department of Energy classified close to 2,800 pages of the Groves files, presumably on restricted data grounds. The National Security Archive has filed a Freedom of Information Act request for the withheld documents. Most of the withdrawals consist of entire files, sometimes running to hundreds of pages, with exempted folders on topics such as “University of California,” “Hanford: Threshold of an Era,” and “Proposed Program for Metallurgical Project 1945-46.”

The files on the University of California may provide some detail on its institutional relationship with Los Alamos, for which it was the official manager and supplier. The university’s leaders knew nothing about Los Alamos, although they would have to learn enough to buy insurance for the laboratory. If any of the classified files relate to military use of the bomb issues, it will likely take years to find out, given DOE’s underfunded FOIA system.

Note: Thanks to Stephen Schwartz (“ Atomic Analyst ”) for invaluable guidance on adjusting the cost estimates of facilities at HEW into current dollars, and to Alex Wellerstein, Stevens Institute of Technology, for his insights.

The Documents

I. oppenheimer letters.

RG 77, National Archives, Leslie Groves Papers Concerning the Manhattan Project, 1942–1946 (Groves), box 1, 231.001

Appointed by General Groves to direct a weapons laboratory in mid-October 1942, Oppenheimer began an active effort to recruit top scientists. He wrote to Harvard University President James Conant about his interest in acquiring Robert Bacher, then with M.I.T.’s Radiation Laboratory; Franz Kurie at the U.S. Navy’s Radio and Sound Laboratory; and Raymond G. Herb, University of Wisconsin, who was also working at M.I.T.’s Radiation Laboratory. Apparently, neither Herb nor Kurie was interested or recruitable, but Oppenheimer went to great lengths during the months that followed to persuade Bacher to join and was eventually successful. This carbon copy was part of the package that Oppenheimer sent to Groves on 9 November (see Document 2). [5]

Groves, box 1, 231.001

The first page of J. Robert Oppenheimer’s letter to General Groves can be found on the Department of Energy’s OpenNet , but the signed original in the Groves office files may be the only available version with the “personnel list” attached. In the letter, Oppenheimer demonstrated that, by early November 1942, he had been busily recruiting top physicists to staff the new laboratory for “our program” even before there was an agreed site. The “personnel list” that he sent to Groves included a core group of experimental and theoretical physicists “now working for us” and a wish list of others whom he saw as essential. Oppenheimer included a separate page with an “explanatory note” for the lists, with various initials noting who had approved them (either Oppenheimer, Edwin McMillan or Ernest Lawrence). The list also included coding indicating who was “essential” (or just “good”), whether they were “aliens,” and whether they were married or not, among other characteristics. As Oppenheimer noted, the list did not include the “very large” number of graduate and undergraduate students “who are working with these men.”

The list of those “men now working for us” included a few who never worked at Los Alamos, but it included many who played important roles there, including Edwin M. McMillan, John H. Manley, Joseph L. McKibben, Charles P. Baker, Emilio Segre, Robert Serber, Edward Teller and Hans Bethe. The list of “Men Whose Prompt Release We Desire” included some who later joined the project, such as Robert Bacher, Richard Feynman, Enrico Fermi, Robert F. Christy, Herbert L. Anderson and Luis Alvarez. Others proved unobtainable, such as Raymond Herb, Franz Kurie, Percy Bridgman and James L. Lawson. Oppenheimer wrote in gendered terms about those who would staff the new lab; he may have used the word “man,” as was typical then, to describe people in general, but he listed only males for these positions. Yet in those days, men were the ones with standing in the field and the requisite education and skills. A few female scientists would work at Los Alamos.

In his letter to Groves, Oppenheimer mentioned several documents that he had enclosed, one concerning a “major equipment problem,” the other about a “young man who is now in the army and whom we would like to have assigned to us.” Neither show up in the file, but they may be in the classified papers in this collection or in some other group of records altogether.

At the close of the letter, Oppenheimer wrote that he hoped to see Groves in New Mexico. Six days later, on 16 November 1942, when Oppenheimer was traveling in the state with Edwin McMillan and Major John H. Dudley to select a site for the laboratory, Groves joined the group. After visiting Jemez, which they ruled out, they inspected the site of a prep school in Los Alamos, which Groves readily accepted for what became known as “site Y.” [6]

II. Building the Hanford Engineering Works

Document 3A

Groves, box 2, Hanford 620

Document 3B

Constructing the HEW plutonium production complex required thousands of skilled and semi-skilled workers (the peak number of construction workers neared 45,000 ), housing arrangements, and amenities to encourage them to stay on the job (See Document 14). It also required managers to oversee construction along with technicians and scientists to operate the reactors, reprocessing plants and related facilities. They also needed suitable housing, especially if they brought their families. To make that possible, the Manhattan Project paid for new housing in Richland, WA, paying for everything, including lightbulbs and furniture. This was not an easy process because Groves and Du Pont did not agree completely on housing requirements or their costs, among other issues concerning the development of Richland. While Du Pont wanted to support the housing needs of managers and scientists, Groves and Matthias wanted to keep costs down.

In what amounted to a directive to E.B. Yancey, the General Manager of Du Pont’s explosives department, HEW “area engineer” Colonel Franklin Matthias noted that the company wanted to construct the remaining unbuilt houses in three- or four-bedroom units. He cited the company’s “reluctance to build one or two bedroom units for … for remainder of program.” Matthias instructed Du Pont to “fit housing to actual estimated family sizes.” According to Matthias, “peace time experience as to needs for space does not apply now when it is of the utmost importance to conserve manpower and materials.”

In his response, Yancey made the point, among others, that the remainder of the unbuilt houses should have mainly three bedrooms, which he saw as “minimum requirements.”

Backing up Matthias, Groves sent a telegram to Yancey saying that he saw “no reason for not complying” with the request, although he was willing to discuss the matter further.

Groves, box 1, 600.1 Hanford

When the Manhattan Project designated land in Washington state as the site for the Hanford Engineer Works, it began proceedings to acquire large swathes of land, over 400,000 acres—some 600 square miles—so that the secret plants could be built and operated safely and far from the view of unwanted observers. In implementing federal policy to acquire the land and compensate private landholders, Assistant U.S. Attorney General Norman M. Littell played an important role. With political ambitions in Washington state, Littell was concerned about the slow procedures for compensation and wrote that “residents being dispossessed from this big area of our State ... will suffer very considerable hardships from delay in payment.” However, did not take secrecy all that seriously, as he made clear in this comment to Senator Wallgren [D-WA]: “The War Department considers this project to be ‘secret’ and asks for no publicity on it, although I do not quite see how so great an event in the State of Washington, inevitably attended by considerable comment and the conducting of public proceedings in the courts, can in any way be maintained as ‘secret.’”

Littell’s concerns about compensation and his skepticism about secrecy presaged run-ins that he had with Groves and that contributed to a White House decision to fire Littell in 1944. [7] In any event, Littell greatly underestimated the determination of War Department officials to maintain the secrecy of Hanford operations. For example, HEW project director Franklin Matthias successfully appealed to the patriotism of local newspaper editors by asking them to stay clear of stories of government land acquisition, dispossession of farmers, and subsequent construction activities at Hanford. The HEW’s existence remained secret until after the atomic bombings of Japan. [8]

Groves, box 2, 601 (Hanford)

Prepared by some unknown compiler for the use of General Groves and other top officials, this report provided a full picture of the land in Washington state that the War Department acquired for HEW operations. The compendium provided detail on land ownership, population, agriculture, irrigation districts, transportation, schools, and land acquisition procedures. At the end of the compilation is a set of photographs. If the maps mentioned in the report are in the Groves files, the Archive’s FOIA request may ultimately open them up.

The compendium gave an overview of the history, noting the 1942 laws that authorized the Secretary of War to acquire by “purchase, donation, transfer, or condemnation” real property required for military purposes, and citing a 9 February Secretary of War directive to acquire the land. According to the report, “Area A,” consisting of over 193,000 acres, was “situated in the center of the project.” Thus, a few weeks later, on 23 February, the War Department took the first step by filing a petition of condemnation with the U.S. District Court for “immediate possession” and occupation of Area A. The estimated cost to acquire that area was $3.2 million, while the estimated cost for all of the land—areas A, B, C, D, and E—was over $5.1 million. As it turned out, by December 1946, litigation brought by claimants would bring land acquisition costs to over $5 million. Not mentioned in the report was the Native American tribal group, the Wanapum, which had fished in the Columbia River for centuries. [9]

Included in the photos—numbers 11 through 14—is Gable Mountain, the area south of which would become the site of the plutonium separation plant. Other photos depict orchards, some destroyed or abandoned, irrigation ditches, a dam, the village of White Bluffs, and power lines.

Groves, box 1, 600 Hanford

Getting enough workers to build the reactors, reprocessing facilities and other sites at Hanford was a huge task, and General Groves was doubtful that Du Pont executives were handling it with the right attitude. A letter from Walter O. Simon, a Du Pont manager at HEW, irritated Groves because of its “super-cautious” tone and a statement about a schedule “set back” for the construction of Areas 100 (reactor) and 200 (reprocessing plant). Groves refused to accept any delays, and his response produced a somewhat aggrieved letter from Ackart, who blamed “stringent” government controls over labor but assured the General that the job will be done “at the earliest date possible.” The last point is what Groves wanted to hear because, in his view, “it is mandatory on all of us to handle the job in such a way that the important areas will be completed at the earlies possible dates regardless of any previously suggested schedules or any difficulties which may be thrown in our respective ways.”

Prepared by top Groves’ aide Colonel Kenneth Nichols months before any of the reactors or the reprocessing plant were operating, the first memorandum provided estimates for the labor force needed to build “three operating units”—presumably two reactors and one reprocessing plant—and requisite supplies of plutonium at various time intervals. The quickest completion time for the three units, in two-month intervals—would require 48,000 workers. (As it turned out, the peak workforce was around 43,000). The basis for the labor force estimates was a production schedule for 12- or 18-kilogram units of plutonium based on the time intervals. For example, one 12-kilogram “unit” would be produced 13 months after the reactors (pile) started operating, assuming a two-month interval for the completion of reprocessing plants.

Nichols recommended trying to “complete all three units at two-month intervals.” While there was little difference in estimated plutonium output between the 2-4 and the 2-6 schedules compared to 2-2, he favored the “faster schedule” to “provide for contingencies.” By the point where HEW could produce 12 or 18 kilograms of plutonium-239, it would have been close to operating at full capacity because it would already have been producing small amounts.

The minimum critical mass of a sphere of plutonium-239 is around 10 kilograms, so that may have made a capacity to produce 12 kilograms a desired goal. When Nichols prepared his report, weapons designers at Los Alamos were assuming that they could use the plutonium to produce a usable gun-assembly weapon. That proved technically impossible, and Los Alamos found an alternative design based on implosion technology. [10]

Plutonium production later moved beyond Nichols’ estimate. By September 1944, the “B” reactor had reached criticality, and in late December 1944, spent fuel arrived at the “T” reprocessing plant. Soon, Hanford was producing plutonium, making its first delivery to Los Alamos on 4 February 1945. Production grew fairly rapidly, especially after Groves and HEW leaders found ways to accelerate it to provide enough plutonium for a test device and a weapon.. [11] According to a recent estimate , by August 1945, eight months after the reprocessing plant was operating, Hanford had already produced 17.5 kilograms of plutonium, more than enough for the Trinity Test and the bomb that exploded over Nagasaki.

The second memorandum concerned recommendations for the possible suspension of heavy water (P-9) production as a cost-saving measure. That such a significant heavy water production capacity had been built speaks to the huge resources that the Manhattan Project had its disposal but also to the ability of its managers to put on the back burner investments whose importance had lessened. This was implicit in the decisions that Groves made in October 1943 to give low priority to work on a heavy water reactor for producing plutonium. (See Document 17)

Two of the plants recommended for closure, Alabama and Wabash River, had higher production costs compared to the Morgantown plant. The report included contractual data for the Consolidated Mining and Smelting plant at Trail in British Columbia. Operated by the Manhattan Project, the plant’s entire output would be designated for the heavy water research reactor at Argonne, Illinois. [12]

Building a hitherto unknown, complex, and hazardous technology made Du Pont executives “apprehensive” about safety, which had been important to their corporate culture. [13] They wanted to be sure that, if the world’s first nuclear production reactor failed, that nearby workers would be safe. Granville Read sent Groves two sets of maps “indicating the number of people associated with our construction organization and the distance they will be working from the operating units.” According to Read, when the ‘B’ [reactor] unit began operations there would be “approximately 50,000 people within a 12-mile radius of the operating unit.” Read wanted Groves’ assurances that, “under conditions in which the performance of the operating unit did not proceed in a controllable manner and that all of the safety control mechanisms fail to function, the distances given on our maps are adequate protection for the health and safety of the employees involved.” If Groves was confident that the maps were correct, Read asked him to sign one of the sets of maps and return them.

In his reply, Groves wrote that, after consulting scientists, it was their and his opinion that “the distances on the maps ensure proper protection for the health and safety of the employees involved.” Accordingly, he signed the maps, copies of which remain classified in the Groves collection.

Responding to a request from Colonel Nichols, Stowers sent estimates of construction costs at the HEW, including costs for the reactors and reprocessing facilities. The estimates include the costs for each category of installation: $100 for reactors, $200 for reprocessing plants, $300 for fuel fabrication, and $700 for administrative and other offices. One important problem that managers would have to grapple with, if far from systematically, was storing nuclear waste, including the poisonous chemical byproducts from the reprocessing plant. Some of the items in this document may relate to waste management, such as items 282 (reservoir & pump house), 611 (waste settling basin) and 612 (open storage ditch), although their purposes are far from clear. In any event, by 1944, HEW had begun the infamous “ tank farm ” for storing waste from the T plant. [14]

The numbers used in the chart are in 1944 dollars, but it is possible to take into account price level changes since then to get an approximation of the costs in 2024 dollars. This can be done by using Department of Defense deflators. Unfortunately, the earliest military construction deflator provided by Defense is for 1945, but that is reasonably close. In the chart, the estimated cost for the three reactors (“100 area”) was over $101 million dollars. Using the deflators, the estimate in 2024 dollars is in the range of $2 billion. According to the chart, the cost for the reprocessing plants (“SP Process Area”) was some $47 million dollars. Using the deflators, the adjusted cost in 2024 dollars is in the range of $960 million. For the fuel fabrication facility (300), the estimated cost was over $2.1 million. Adjusted for 2024 dollars using Defense Department deflators, the cost for that facility is over $42 million. [15]

Document 10

By March 1944, Groves was greatly concerned about the slow pace of the settlements with property holders in Washington state who had gone to court to seek better compensation for their land. Over 1200 cases remained unsettled, procedures were slow, and Groves was aggrieved by jury decisions to award values “greatly in excess of the Government appraisals.” To protect the HEW’s “essential secrecy,” Groves wanted the cases closed, payments made expeditiously, and juries kept away from the properties at issue. Specifically, he wanted the Justice Department to make arrangements with the Courts to “eliminate the practice of the jury viewing the land” before they made a decision on compensation. Groves did not have his way on this point until March 1945. [16]

Groves sent this memo to General Brehon Somervell, chief of U.S. Army logistics, whose organization was an important source of secret funding for the Manhattan Project and whose role gave him a voice in overall policy, including land settlements. [17]

Document 11

Groves, box 2, 620 Hanford

To accelerate the availability of housing for managers, scientists and others in the HEW’s more permanent staff, Matthias arranged to have 2,300 prefabricated houses built in Oregon and shipped to Richland. [18] To see how the “general living conditions” were compared to other housing, Groves asked Matthias to arrange a survey. The results showed that there were few complaints, but an important difference was that “the prefabricated houses show a considerable higher temperature both inside and outside.” Nevertheless, the prefabricated houses were “more comfortable than the average houses in this area excluding the new houses built.”

Document 12

Read sent Groves a chart with a schedule for the completion of major facilities at Hanford. On the most critical goals, both the B reactor (100 category) and the T reprocessing plant (200 category) were already or nearly completed. The T plant would start operations at the close of September. More reactors and reprocessing plants were to be completed and begin operations during the months after September 1944. Other categories scheduled for completion were offices for maintenance, operations, and administration (700 category) and housing (1100). Also included in the chart was a “force reduction curve” indicating a steady decrease in the HEW labor force in the following months.

The labor force curve is broken down into two parts: with most of the work done on a “fixed fee” basis: the $1 fixed fee and reimbursables. Some work was done on a “lump sum” basis, apparently a specific payment for agreed work, including costs only.

Document 13

Box 1, Groves, 319.1 Inspection of Records

For the towns of Hanford and Richland, the HEW leased concessions to private operators so that they could supply food and other necessities to workers, managers, scientists, and others. In Richland, HEW also made arrangements for a hotel, cafeterias, a coffee shop and a news stand. For concessions, including the hotel, the U.S. government shared in the gross receipts on a percentage basis, while the cafeterias and coffee shop paid monthly rent. The coffee shop operated at a loss but was a necessity for hotel guests and others.

With the Office of Price Administration (OPA) regulating and monitoring prices, Kirkpatrick found that “prices charged in stores at Richland have been in line with OPA ceiling regulations” and had “been competitive with those charged in the general territory.” An exception was the drug store, whose prices were a “little high,” while Safeway prices were “the minimum that can be charged in the area.”

Kirkpatrick recommended reviews of each concession contract with the amount of profit to be determined and earnings carefully watched, but also to ensure that the concessions stayed in place until the HEW’s work ended. Groves approved the recommendations instructing Kirkpatrick to carry them out “insofar as practical.”

Document 14

Poor bookkeeping and excessive profits to a contractor operating games of skill led to an investigation of the Hanford Employees’ Association that HEW managers had established in December 1943. With labor turnover high during the construction phase, managers decided that the creation of an employees’ association was a “must” to improve morale. According to the reports, workers were “leaving their jobs simply because there was no welfare or athletic program to provide entertainment in their leisure hours.” While Du Pont had set up a recreation building with pool tables, bowling alleys and games of skill, among other features, for HEW managers, that was not enough. [19]

The Hanford Employees Association published a newspaper and sponsored nationally known dance bands, baseball games, baseball leagues, football games, concerts and lectures. Apparently, some in HEW management saw bringing in dance bands and professional sports teams as “unwise,” probably for security reasons, but nevertheless necessary for morale purposes.

With construction winding down, Matthias wanted to scale back the Employees’ Association but not eliminate it yet. Du Pont had been involved in managing the association but did not “favor” it, probably because it wanted employees to have responsibility for organizing their social activities. Du Pont was more interested in meeting the needs of the operations personnel who were settling down in Richland. In contrast to “building craftsmen” who were “accustomed to short employment [and] high wages, operations employees were supposedly “older, usually married and possibly with a family of two or three children.” Their “primary interests” were a “home and its maintenance,” which they wanted to look “as nice as possible.” In that context, it “is the Du Pont policy to lend encouragement to and foster the formation of civil groups in the village and the formation of recreation groups by the inhabitants themselves.”

Colonel Antes recommended a “detailed audit of funds and fiscal procedure,” the recovery of excess profits from a contractor, and the termination of the Association when construction ended. Groves signed off on the findings and recommendations.

III. Nuclear Reactors

Document 15

Groves, Box 1, Polymer

The “Met Lab,” directed by Arthur Compton, had demonstrated that a nuclear pile could produce a chain reaction and then be used to produce plutonium. With the Du Pont Corporation secretly building huge piles and reprocessing facilities at Site “W” in Washington state, Compton found supporting roles that “Met Lab” scientists could play, for example, by developing the next generation of nuclear reactors fueled by heavy water (“P-9”). As Compton informed Colonel Nichols, Groves and the Military Policy Committee agreed that a heavy water reactor for producing plutonium would not be authorized “until serious troubles have been encountered with the present graphite plant,” referring to the plans for reactors at the HEW.

Compton relayed what he understood as General Groves’ requirements. They included the construction of a heavy water reactor at the Argonne Forest, outside of Chicago, partly as “a performing experiment designed to test aspects of the W pile at relatively high levels of gamma and neutron radiation.” By June 1944, the Argonne reactor was operational. Groves also requested preparation of a design for a heavy water plant that could produce plutonium. The only reason to build such a plant “during the present war following this design will be presumably in the case of failure of the W plant to give satisfactory results.” Compton observed that “it is hoped that the present war will be over before this investigation can lead to important practical results” that could “have a great effect ... on the post-war military position of the nation.”

The instructions also included what information could or could not be shared with the Canadians, who were already producing heavy water and had plans for developing a heavy water reactor. [20] Compton approved sharing technical data and calculations for developing such reactors and explaining instruments for investigating and constructing heavy water reactors. Not approved was sharing information, such as progress, plans, production capabilities, or technical aspects of the graphite reactor used for producing plutonium or the U.S.’s own plans to produce heavy water.

Document 16

Groves informed Compton that the Manhattan Project’s Military Policy Committee had decided that the “scope of the heavy water work should not be determined” until after a meeting with the British and the Canadians in Montreal. According to Groves, “our effort should not exceed the construction of a lower-powered heavy water pile for use as a general experimental tool” and as preparation should “it become necessary to carry on rapid development” of such a reactor.

Document 17

Writing to Major A.V. Peterson, the District Engineer for Oak Ridge, TN, also known as “Site X,” Groves made detailed comments on Compton’s 22 September memorandum (Document 15). For example, regarding the design of a heavy water reactor for producing plutonium, the “effort should be held to the barest minimum.” On Compton’s point five, concerning information exchanges with the Canadians, none “will be undertaken without my prior approval until such time as the definite producers for interchange are established.”

Document 18

Nichols informed Groves that Major A.V. Peterson had approved Compton’s 22 September memorandum before Groves had sent his comments. He informed Groves that his comments had been “called to the attention of Major Peterson and Dr. Compton with your instructions to modify the program” accordingly.

Document 19

In this letter to Harold Urey, Compton shared his thinking on the role of heavy water reactors for producing plutonium (49) during and after the war. He took it for granted that there would be a directive to prepare a “satisfactory design” for a heavy water reactor and that the design could be used if needed. He further believed that the 1944 design “will go into construction.”

Compton summarized the discussions that he, Groves, Eugene Wigner, Robert Tolman, and Smyth had with the British in Montreal to discuss “problems of mutual interest in connection with the 49 production program.” Concerning the British experiments on the use of heavy water, “it seemed evident that they were not expecting any results ... that would be used in the present war.” In general, the British “see 49 production as an important factor in determining the balance of military power in the post-war world.” They “are getting ready for full-scale activity ... as soon as immediate demands of the present war permit.”

Compton assumed that the U.S. should not supply the British with “larger quantities of our P-9 since this may be become of importance in our war program.” Believing that U.S. heavy water work “must now be organized around the possibility” that the U.S. will need a heavy water reactor to “pinch-hit in our 49 production program,” he was certain that “immediate post-war developments will call for use” of such plants.

Taking the British point about the relevance of plutonium production to the post-war “balance of military power,” Compton wrote that the “the post-war situation will still be greatly confused and it will remain of prime importance to maintain the country in a supreme military position.” Using the British code word for the nuclear weapons program, Compton was “sure that all of the major powers will be extending themselves to develop the tube-alloy program as far as possible.”

Plainly, he wanted the U.S. to maintain its lead. With the “inherent advantages” of using P-9 for nuclear reactors, “its development will certainly play an important part in this post-war effort.” Compton did not specify the advantages but probably had in mind the possibility that using uranium metal to help fuel the reactor would be less costly than using enriched uranium. In any event, Compton would not give “first place” to use of heavy water reactors to produce 49, “but it must be developed as rapidly as possible.”

Document 20

Compton’s thinking about the heavy water and nuclear reactor requirements shifted since he had considered the issue during the fall. With plans for building reactors and a reprocessing plant at Hanford underway, he found “the present outlook … [to be] so encouraging that I see no value in introducing a P-9 pile at this time for the purpose of insurance.” Nevertheless, Compton assumed that, for the post-war period, the U.S. would need to develop reactors, some possibly using heavy water, for power production purposes, including powering U.S. Navy ships. To strengthen their post-war position, he believed that the British would take a similar course.

When, during the post-war period, the U.S. developed reactors for power production, plutonium (“49”) would be a “by-product” of nuclear reactor operations. Compton believed that it would be unwise “to complicate” the initial stages of a power development program to require “49 production as a part of the pile operation.” For example, a “power unit for propulsion of a ship should not need to consider whether the 49 that is produced can be recovered.”

Considering whether the United States should cooperate with the British on developing reactors, Compton opined that the U.S. would have to determine whether it was advantageous or not. For example, he observed that it “has frequently been found desirable for a strong industry to collaborate fully on a research level with a weaker industry in development of new products of common interest.” That, he believed, could apply to a U.S.-U.K. collaboration on “pile programs.”

A related issue was the exchange of information with the British. Compton supported exchanges on the “fundamental physics and chemistry of the pile process,” including the properties of plutonium and other products” as well as “the design and construction of power piles in successful operation, as long as the British are ... actively at work in these fields.” But he ruled out information exchanges on such matters as plutonium separation or decontamination, and the “design and construction of piles in the course of development,” perhaps referring to the developments of reactors for producing plutonium.

[1] . For Matthias’s assignment to the Hanford project and his early role, see Steve Olson, The Apocalypse Factory: Plutonium and the Making of the Atomic Age (New York: W.W. Norton, 2020), 1-2, 65-69.

[2] . For useful information on the development of Richland, see Olson, The Apocalypse Factory, 107-109. Olson further observes that Richland was a “detention center”, which may be too strong, but certainly, the residents were under steady surveillance, as he demonstrates.

[3] . Quotation from J. Samuel Walker , Prompt and Utter Destruction: Truman and the Use of Atomic Bombs Against Japan (Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, Third Edition, 2016), 11; Robert S. Norris, Racing for the Bomb: General Leslie R. Groves, The Manhattan Project’s Indispensable Man (South Royalton, VT: Steerforth Press, 2002), 5-6. See also Barton J. Bernstein, “Reconsidering the ‘Atomic General’: Leslie R, Groves,” The Journal of Military History (2003): 883-920.

[4] . Norris, Racing for the Bomb , 212; Vincent Jones, Manhattan: The Army and the Atomic Bomb , (Washington, D.C.; U.S. Army Center of Military History, 1985), 106; Olson, The Apocalypse Factory , 60.

[5] . This letter, found in an Oppenheimer collection at Los Alamos National Laboratory archives, is cited by James Hershberg in James B. Conant: Harvard to Hiroshima in the Making of the Nuclear Age (New York: Knopf, 1993), at page 807, note 48.

[6] . Jones, Manhattan , 83; Kai Bird and Martin Sherwin, American Prometheus: The Triumph and Tragedy of J. Robert Oppenheimer (New York: Vintage, 2006), 205-207.

[7] . Norris, Racing for the Bomb, 218-221.

[8] . Olson, The Apocalypse Factory , 65, 68.

[9] . Jones, Manhattan , 342; Olson, The Apocalypse Factory , 69-70.

[10] . Norris, R acing for the Bomb , 361-363.

[11] . Olson, The Apocalypse Factory , 111; Norris, Racing for the Bomb, 368-376.

[12] . Stephen A. Andrews, Madison T. Andrews & Thomas E. Mason, “Canadian Contributions to the Manhattan Project and Early Nuclear Research,” Nuclear Technology 207 Supplement 1 (2021): S 141.

[13] . Barton C. Hacker, The Dragon’s Tail: Radiation Safety in the Manhattan Project, 1942–1946 ( Berkeley: University of California Press, 1987), 53.

[14] . For early measures taken to store nuclear waste, see Olson, The Apocalypse Factory , 104-106.

[15] . To make these approximations, the editor used the deflator for military construction in 1944 found in the 1986 edition of the Defense Department’s “National Defense Budget Estimates” (see page 50), generally known as the “Green Book”. Using the .1195 deflator made it possible to formulate numbers in 1986 dollars. To adjust those numbers in 2024 dollars, the current version of the “Green Book” includes a .4126 deflator for military construction as of 1986. It is also possible to develop numbers by using the Office of Management and Budget’s Historical Tables , especially table 10-1, but it is based on fiscal year 2017, so the resulting numbers do not reflect major changes in price levels since then.

[16] . Jones, Manhattan , 342.

[17] . Jones, Manhattan , 116, 338.

[18] . Carl Abbott, “Building the Atomic Cities: Richland, Los Alamos, and the

American Planning Language,” in Bruce Hevly and John M. Findlay, eds., The Atomic West (Seattle: University of Washington Press, 1998), 96

[19] . For morale issues, see Norris, Racing for the Bomb , 223, including note 93 on page 621.

[20] . Stephen A. Andrews et al., “Canadian Contributions to the Manhattan Project,” S131-S146.

Detention Writing Prompts

Description

Questions & answers, stephanie gibson.

• We're hiring
• Help & FAQ
• Privacy policy
• Student privacy
• Terms of service
• Tell us what you think

1 hr 14 min

GMMTV Breakfast Club The Conversation

School's in at GMMTV, but we gotta put two series in detention for not fulfilling the assignment. The actors were charming, but the finishes were...rough. Ben, NiNi and Ginny talk 23.5 and Only Boo, the merits of high school stories, and the specific challenges of telling stories about queer high schoolers. Episode transcript available here. 00:00:00 Welcome 00:01:15 Introduction 00:02:18 23.5: Early Reactions 00:14:18 23.5: Supporting Characters 00:21:27 23.5: Frustration with the Writing and Execution 00:33:42 23.5: Final Arc and Ratings 00:38:42 Only Boo 00:48:06 Only Boo: Popping the Bubble 00:58:42 Only Boo: If You're Gonna Do An Idol Story, Commit 01:05:06 Only Boo: Final Thoughts and Ratings 01:08:45 Outro: High School Blues

• Episode Website
• More Episodes
• Ben and NiNi