Date: Mon, 11 Apr 94 10:28:47 EDT From: David Burr <OLIVI@VTVM1.BITNET>
Last year I taught our required Methods course for the first time. The syllabus seemed itself methodologically sound: An orderly trip through the major aspects of research, accompanied by group projects in which teams prepared presentations on specific historical subjects. Around halfway through the course I decided it wasn't working. Students were simply accumulating data on How to Do History, much as they were accumulating data to recite in the group presentations. They were gaining no insight into the central element in my own activity as a historian.
I threw the rest of the syllabus away and simply gave them a series of passages: Narrative sources at first, like Gregory of Tours and Bede; then more varied sources like wills or court records; then visual sources like a scene from the Tres Riches Heures. They were to write a paper a week. I told them to look as closely and attentively as possible and describe what they saw; to tell me everything that particular artifact suggested about the society that produced it; to ask one good question of that artifact and answer it; any of these things. The important thing was to learn how to see, think creatively, and write well. In class we discussed what they'd written. This was interspersed with rambling presentations on my part, e.g. showing what a contemporary street map of an English town can suggest about the medieval development of that town; asking how an art restorer goes about his or her work; etc.
By the end of the course I was so confused and discouraged that for the first time in years I declined to ask the students to evaluate the course. In retrospect I suspect it was better than I imagined. An abnormally high percentage of these students have now taken my medieval and/or Renaissance classes and two are now registered for the interdisciplinary Med-Ren concentration. I don't know what this means.
David Burr
Date: Mon, 11 Apr 1994 08:40:26 -0700 (PDT) From: Raymond McInnis <rgmc@HENSON.CC.WWU.EDU>
Numerous people on this list have inquired about successful methods of teaching historical methods, historiography and the like to undergraduates. I am both an academic reference librarian and adjunct professor of history. As adjunct prof, once a year I teach the History dept's "Historical Methods and Analysis" class here at Western Washington U, where the main concern is having the students write one competent paper. My formula is based on teaching principles of "audience," "authority," and "evidence."
I think I have had a reasonable amount of success, and would attribute this success to a different approach. As outlined in the article, "Running Backwards From the Finish Line," *Library Trends* 39 (Winter, 1991):223-37, to successfully teach students the three "R"s of Inquiry, "reading, writing, and research," early in the course, you need to assure the students that they know more than they think they do; in addition, students, faced with a steep learning curve, need a crutch. The "crutch" gives me the opportunity to introduce the concepts of audience, authority, and evidence.
Rather than making students write papers from scratch, where they do have a huge learning task, i.e., coming up to speed on the topic, and learning how to write like a historian, both nearly impossible in a ten-week quarter, instead I let them select from a pool an "op-ed" pieces, the "crutch," usually from the NYT, which they are supposed to turn into a paper.
The focus of the course is 20th cent US intellectual and social history. Since the op-ed piece is written for a popular "audience," to redesign it for a scholary one, students need to jump through all the hoops necessary to achieve the "authority" of writing for an audience of professional historians, and in the process of course must appropriately attend to "evidence." (And, for the doubters, inspite of the fact that for this exercise students are using a "crutch," experience suggests that in subsequent courses they write much more competently from "scratch.")
As a rule, these op-ed pieces liberally allude to, but do not document, historical facts and concepts. The class is held in a classroom in our Library, and the Library is treated as a "lab". In the process of chasing down these historical allusions, suitably documenting them, discussing problems in class, and so on, students do acquire a measure of competence, but more importantly, I believe, a measure of CONFIDENCE that they can take risks without fear and not be set up to fail.
Necessarily this account does not do justice to the task, but it might wet somebody's curiosity. If you have any questions, do not hesitate to get in touch. (I have a video of a student showing a class how he wrote a successful paper.)
Raymond G. McInnis
Wilson Library
Western Washington University
Bellingham, WA 98225-9103
Internet: rgmc@henson.cc.wwu.edu
Date: Tue, 12 Apr 1994 13:49:51 -0500 (CDT) From: KJEFFREY@CARLETON.EDU
At Carleton, we have a course on historiography that is required of all junior history majors. Faculty members take turns teaching the course, which has been in our curriculum for about ten years. The major purpose of the course is to give students an orientation to important approaches to history now in use or recently in use. We spend a week on Marxist historiography, a week on the Annales school, a week on the revival of narrative history, a week on gender history, etc. Some topics are used year after year (the Annales school, e.g.) while some depend on the interests of the person teaching the course. I did a week on global history last fall, for example, and used Jerry Bentley's recent book Old World Encounters. A key feature of the course is that we invite in a historian whose work the students are reading. In the term just past, the visitor was Harvey Kaye of UW-Green Bay, author of works on E.P. Thompson and the British Marxist tradition.
Kirk Jeffrey
Carleton College
kjeffrey@carleton.edu
Date: Tue, 12 Apr 1994 12:24:33 -0600 (CST) From: "Patrick Riordan" <riordanp@MAILER.FSU.EDU>
In message Mon, 11 Apr 1994 10:02:51 CDT,
David Burr <OLIVI@VTVM1.BITNET> writes:
Last year I taught our required Methods course for the first time. [Halfway through,] I threw the rest of the syllabus away and simply gave them a series of passages: Narrative sources at first, like Gregory of Tours and Bede; then more varied sources like wills or court records; then visual sources like a scene from the Tres Riches Heures. They were to write a paper a week. I told them to look as closely and attentively as possible and describe what they saw; to tell me everything that particular artifact suggested about the society that produced it; to ask one good question of that artifact and answer it; any of these things. The important thing was to learn how to see, think creatively, and write well.
By the end of the interdisciplinary Med-Ren concentration. I don't know what this means.
I think it means that you engaged them both intellectually and creatively. You hit their forebrains, left brains and right brains. Too bad you didn't let them give you the A+ evaluations that course sounds like it deserved. Keep up the good work.
Patrick Riordan Ph.D. Candidate 1717 Old Fort Dr. Department of History Tallahassee FL 32301 Florida State University 904-656-6552 (voice and data) riordanp@mailer.cc.fsu.edu
Date: Thu, 14 Apr 1994 15:55:22 -0500 (CDT) From: KJEFFREY@CARLETON.EDU
In reply to Elizabeth Ruth Dale's query of April 12 about Carleton's required historiography course for junior history majors, I would say that the primary purpose of the course is to help majors become better readers of works of history. It does not try to develop a history of historical thought or to canvass and critique all major schools and approaches.
Certain constraints shape what we do. First, some of our newly declared majors resist the notion of history as interpretation; they enjoy learning colorful facts about past events. Some move into history because they disliked the complex methodological apparatuses they encountered in other departments, and apparently think of history as method-free. The more sophisticated new majors understand that history is more than "just the facts" and may be quite intrigued by interpretive debates; but they don't quite know how to orient themselves to all this and may lack skills at analyzing the argument and assumptions of a historian.
Second constraint is that we take turns teaching the course. It is nobody's baby to develop and revise over a period of years. This I am afraid has kept the aims quite modest: it is essentially a course on how to read.
The course operates as a discussion seminar. We throw at the students a succession of books or important articles. The students usually have a rough idea that this writer works in the Marxist tradition or that one does gender history, but we don't give background lectures on what is distinctive about the Annalistes or what Marxist historians are about or anything like that. We try to get them to tease out the author's approach and assumptions, to identify the defining features of the book whatever its specific topic might be. The course thus focuses more on concrete examples than on generalizations about schools of interpretation or the history of historical thought.
Works that we use more or less regularly include Mattingly's The Armada, Darnton's The Great Cat Massacre, Davis's The Return of Martin Guerre, papers by E.P. Thompson such as "Time, Work-Discipline, and Industrial Capitalism" and "The Moral Economy of the English Crowd," and excerpts from Novick's That Noble Dream. I think we may start using the new book by Appleby, Hunt, and Jacob, Telling the Truth about History. We also use a number of articles recently published in the journals that exemplify current thinking.
The list obviously shows the shaping hand of Europeanists in our department and the formative influence for many of us of the kind of social history that flourished in the 1960s and 70s. The list is changing as younger members of the department, mostly non-Europeanists, take their turn as instructors.
Kirk Jeffrey
Carleton College
kjeffrey@carleton.edu
Date: Thu, 14 Apr 1994 14:25:14 +0100
From: M. Haynes <le1958@ccub.wlv.ac.uk>
University of Wolverhampton UK
le1958@ccub.wlv.ac.uk
It seems to me that a lot depends on the level of the course. When I started teaching many years I was a great enthusiast for bringing in historiography at the lowest level. The way I did it was a disaster - much as described by someone else and the worse thing was the student who came at the end and said he loved history but I had put him off for life. Rather than abandon the idea of introducing students to importance of historiography, however, I persisted and developed a small introductory seminar package to front an introductory European history survey course that I think works very well.
Week 1 involves a discussion of a list of books and articles to try to identify what was a primary and a secondary source. The discussion always starts at a very elementary level but could get quite sophisticated as students speculated about the nature of book. We start with a simple one that tripped everyone up about the second world war - published in 1980s - obviously secondary they say - but was he there, is it memoirs, a diary, what would it be if it was Churchill's History of the Second World War?.
Week 2 involves a discussion of the introduction to George Rude's Debate on Europe where he sets out the various influences affectuing how historians work. This is a very simple and straightforward account of the role of class, nationality, religion, time etc. plus he forgets some important things which gives the studnts some extra space. This book is a must. When Rude died last year Eric Hobsbawm wrote that it was his best book. I wouldn't go this far but it is a superb discussion of the historiography of European history in the years 1815-1848. During this seminar I make a deliberate point of banning the use of the term bias in favour of interpretation but promise to confront bias later. But I also ensure that we have a discussion of the question of whether all interpretations are equally valid and especially whether the solution is that the truth lies in the middle - I found the holocaust a good example to warn people against this view.
Week 3 involves a deliberate return to analyse sources to try to see both what they might tell us and how interpretations might differ. I deliberately used an orla source - a folk song and contrasted it with an official government report of witnesses - British 1842 Report on Women and Children in the Mines. This enables a discussion to take place both about the way the evidence was constructed at the time and reactions to it later. Most first year students start by assuming that an official report has more credibility than a folk song but the report in question is merely oral evidence written down.
Week 4 involves a discussion of the crucial issue of interpretation and bias. I begin with a series of photos of the same thing cut in different ways and then ask the students to interpret them. As the cut of the photo changes so their interpretation changes. Then we discuss which photo shows what happened? The brightest ones see without help that even the photograph taken by the photographer was itself an interpretation since a selection had to be made. We then move to a discussion of chapter 1 of E.H.Carr's What is History. Here he discusses what is a fact. The first part helpfully shows why facts do not speak for themselves but the second part of the chapter explicitly warns against assuming that all interpretations are equal. He uses the nice analogy of the mountain - depending on where we stand the mountain has a different shape but this does not mean it has no shape or a multiplicity of shapes. We then try to discuss the way in which we can distinguish between the validity of different types of interpretations and when a differnence of interpretation becomes bias.
Week 5 - at the end of this week the students are asked to submit an assignment based on 1. summarising Carr's arguments in 1000 words. 2. Writing a 750 word comparison of extracts from the introduction to E.Hobsbawm's Age of Revolution; P.Stearns, Europeran Society in Upheaval and D.Thompson, Europe Since Napoleon - as examples of marxist, conservative and liberal interpretations as well as different types of history etc. I tell the students that each one represents one of these historiographical traditions as well as reflecting different nationalists, timing etc. but deliberately do not tell the students which are which. Finally the studnets are asked to say in 250 words how Carr helps them and whether they agree with him. The first chapter contains the famous advice 'study the historian before you study his work'.
Being at an intrudctory level I try to mark this generously and encourage the students who will know nothing of the historians to make informed speculations or look for evidence. But I insist that they do not have to read widely beyond the extracts since the point is largely to read between the lines. What Carr calls listening for the buzz.
What does this achieve? I have used this with first year European history groups for many years and believe that in this way it does introduce students to the problems in a way they find manageable. It will not be what one would do at a post-graduate level but here the students are more sophisticated and aware and not so easily put off. As the course subsequently progresse with more traditional seminars it is then possible to build on this introdution to develop the ideas of different historiographical traditons around key issues like the French Revolution, 1848 or whatever.
Date: Tue, 18 Oct 94 08:27:56 CST
From: Ken Wolf <A23211F@MSUMUSIC>
Judy, for the historiography section of your course, I would highly recommend several books which my beginning MA students here have found interesting, challenging, and (in the second case) positively exciting. The first is Peter Novick, "The Noble Dream: The `Objectivity Question' and the American Historical Profession (Cambridge, 1988 paper) and James Davidson and Mark Lytle, "After the Fact: The Art of Historical Detection" (McGraw-Hill, 1992; third edition paper).
The first is a work of intellectual history but one that is very well organized. The vocabulary troubles some of the students who puzzle over words such as "comity" and "adumbrate"--but I tell them that this is just part of growing up intellectually and that when I began graduate school and was troubled by such words, I just quietly looked them up, lest I embarrass myself (they complain aloud; times have changed). This is, in my judgment, the best book currently available on the history of history in the United States. After the Fact is an exciting interdisciplinary look at problems in American history/historiography but mainly talks about the methods historians can and have used--including psychohistory, textual analysis, use of models and other forms of social scientific analysis, photographic evidence, etc. etc. Much of the book reads like a detective story. It was designed originally to be used in a US Survey course as an adjunct to a textbook, though I think it has been used mainly in methods and historiography classes. Our students here from beginning History majors to graduate students all love it. Good luck.
Ken Wolf, Department of History
Murray State University
Murray, KY 42071 (502) 762-6582 or 762-2232
e-mail <A23211f@MSUMUSIC.Bitnet>
For those interested in getting a first cut on a variety of "new" fields (always a dubious proposition), which fall under the broad category of "new Social History", see Peter Burke, ed., New Perspectives on Historical Writing (University Park, Pa., 1992). I used this with great success one week in my graduate class on history theory this term. Of course, Joyce Appleby, et.al., Telling the Truth about History, is the most recent narrative of the development of the profession.
Judy,
A recent book you might try is Telling the Truth About History by Joyce Appleby, Lynn Hunt, and Margaret Jacob (Norton, 1994).
Jim Brown
Sun0.elon.edu
Elon College
Date: Thu, 20 Oct 1994 09:39:10 -0500 (CDT) From: KJEFFREY@carleton.edu
Another book on recent developments in historical thought to consider with Novick's That Noble Dream is the new book by Joyce Appleby, Lynn Hunt, and Margaret Jacob entitled Telling the Truth about History. It is not out in paperback yet but soon will be.
I have been using the book this fall and my students find it easier going than Novick. It is a lot shorter, for one thing. Yet its scope is quite broad: it discusses the scientific revolution and the authority of science in modern intellectual life, the recent questioning of scientific authority, and the way history as a discipline has been thrown into some disarray by the declining authority of the scientific model. It also discusses issues of national identity and multiculturalism in the American context.
Appleby et al. come down more in the epistemological center than does Novick. They consider but ultimately step back from the rejection of objectivity.
Those interested in Novick's critique of objectivity might find Tom Haskell's critique of Novick interesting too. It appears in History & Theory, vol. 29 (1990, no. 2). Haskell argues that Novick rhetorically trashes objectivity but in practice scrupulously follows traditional canons of objective analysis.
Haskell also suggests that Novick's definition of objectivity is peculiar, not the one that in fact reigns among practicing historians.
Kirk Jeffrey
kjeffrey@carleton.edu
The course we teach here (Kansas State Univ) in historiography is similar to that described by Ken Wolf. In the first part of the course students read and discusss several historiographical works: Breisach, HISTORIGRAPHY which serves as a text to cover the history of historical writing P Novick THAT NOBLE DREAM for its review of American historical writing, as well as introducing questions about objectivity and relativism. Georg Iggers, THE GERMAN CONCEPTION OF HISTORY which is above all useful for it's discussion of the origin and development of historicism, as well as the i pact of Nazism on historical writing--the chapters on Troeltscha and Meinecke are particularly valuable Peter Gay, FREUD FOR HISTORIANS which provides a critical but sympathetic discu ssion of psychohistory Paul Buhle, HISTORY AND THE NEW LEFT which discusses the new left and Madison in the 60's and gives a concrete setting to the issues of historical writing and studying in the 60's Students also read Peter Loewenberg's essay on graduate study (in DECODING THE PAST), a psychohistorical investigation of graduate study which suggests that both student and teacher at times act out a unstated agenda. and for writing I have found Howard Becker, WRITING FOR SOCIAL SCIENTISTS of unestimable value. (Students also buy Kate Turabian's MANUAL FOR WRITRS for the nuts and bolts of footnoting etc.
The second part of the courses consists of a discussion of papers previously Xe roxed and distributed to all members of the class. These vary from semester to semester--this time around they include papers on Spengler, Women's history, the Annales, the Historikerstrei, Max Weber and Gerhard Ritter.
George M. Kren,
Eisenhower Hall,
Dept of History,
Kansas State University,
Manhattan, KS 66506
Date: Tue, 1 Nov 1994 09:44:53 -0600 (CST) From: Kristin Eldyss Sorensen Zapalac <kzapalac@artsci.wustl.edu>
Barbara --
We seem to have the greatest difficulty around the area of religion (Xianity is "true religion" others are "magic" and "superstition," etc. I find myself -- for the first time in an undergraduate classroom -- acknowledging my own Xian beliefs in order to stress that I as historian, if I am to understand my subjects, must avoid judging their beliefs because that blocks understanding. My usual trite example when pushed by them is that it's much more useful to understand even a Hitler and certainly why he was able to sway so many people than simply to judge him). I try to focus on issues of perspective and the ways in which "history" has been used in the past (Bruni's revision of the founding date of Florence when the city is under attack from non-republics [aka a simplified version of the Baron thesis] is a recent case in point]....
Another example: I stress the changing views of the meaning of "Greece" and Periclean Athens: beginning with bits of Charles Kahn's old video on "The Golden Age," and wearing a regimental tie as he does (I'm female) I announce that I still can't adopt his perspective because I'm standing at a differnt point, 25 years later. I retell (using the overhead projector) the part of the Agamemnon he has just massacred, by showing the chorus' (Aeschylus'?) very different view of the Trojan War and Agamemnon's return. Then I go on to show how the stress he lays on Athenian democracy under Pericles wasn't Thucydides's view or that of subsequent thinkers... how most referred to the Roman Republic when they wanted to justify some form of quasi-representative government. How even American writers of the colonial period often stressed the dangers of democracy, the need for slaves to maintain a politically active citizenry, etc. In other words, we try to give them both the tradition and to show how useful that tradition has been from some perspectives. To revise the tradition where necessary. And always, always, to emphasize perspective.
Kris Zapalac
History
Washington University in St Louis
kzapalac@artsci.wustl.edu
PS. I taught with an anthropologist (another course) last year and was astonished to hear him use the term "primitive" without discussion or analysis.... Hope this helps.
Date: Sat, 29 Oct 1994 22:58:07 -0500 From: Barbara.T.Norton@cyber.Widener.EDU Subject: Presentism in students
Having just graded the semester's second set of Western Civ exams, I find myself wondering yet again how to combat the fallacy of presentism so prevalent among students. How do the rest of you deal with the understandable but unhelpful inclination on their part to judge--and, too often this means condemn as "primative," "ignorant," "stupid," etc.--the customs, attitudes and ideas of the ancient and medieval worlds? Reminding my classes about their 20th century perspective is obviously not enough. Has anyone got any "tricks" that will drive the point home?
Barbara T. Norton
(barbara.t.norton@cyber.widener.edu)
Skip Knox Boise State University Boise, Idaho
cogito ergo spud: I think, therefore I yam
Date: 1 Nov 1994 02:33:31 U From: "Lucy Moye" <lucy.moye@ac.hillsdale.edu>
I, too, have been pagued and disturbed by my students' recurring assertions that the Greeks are more advanced than the Mesopotamians, the Romans conquered other peoples due to their superior intellect and, most often, that monotheistic religions, especially Christianity, are more effective and complex than polytheistic religions. Unfortunately, the most effective argument I've found to convince them is "It's just not right to phrase it that way." It disturbs me even more that my students find arbitrary rules the most effective argument, since I'm convinced they still think the various cultures we study are all naturally progressing toward modern America. However, I guess getting them to talk correctly is better than nothing.
Aren't we dealing with two phenomena here? One is the tendency of students (and others) to think modern culture is wonderful, in which case the antidote to their dismissive judgment of the past is to point out that we live in a house made of the thinnest plate glass. The other is simple fact that Western historical thinking tends to be linear. Things from the past contribute to other things in the future. We teach introductory history, at least in part, to show students that the world they live in is a product of many centuries of development. For that reason, I don't have any problem with their thinking that the Greeks were more advanced than the Mesopotamians--provided they don't think that makes them *better* than the Mesopotamians. Nor would I presume to attempt to convince my students that Christianity and polytheism were morally equivalent. But I like to think that they can begin to learn to deal gently with the past, giving the dead credit for their achievements and trying, at least, to understand them as they understood themselves.
Surely getting them to talk correctly--by pointing out that it's the historian's job to describe and to analyze, not to judge, and by being scrupulously even-handed in one's own lectures--is a prelude to encouraging them to think correctly?
Lucy Moye
Hillsdale College
lucy.moye@ac.hillsdale.edu
Date: Tue, 1 Nov 1994 20:02:11 -0500 From: DKLewis@aol.com
This problem is a bit easier for us teaching the modern era. The Western faith in progress represents a key component of 19th century "scientific" thought, after all. By shifting students' focus to the artistic and intellectual rebellion against such faith or by spending time on the cultural impact of events like World War I, it is relatively easy to show students the mistake that "presentism" represents (a mistake we all easily fall into).
Date: Wed, 02 Nov 94 13:13:23 CST
From: Ken Wolf <A23211F@MSUMUSIC>
To Jody Ross in particular--what is a historiographical essay and why is it so dreaded by many?
The biggest problem which beginning MA students here have with historiogrphical essays is understanding what historiography is (as well as how to spell it!). I tell them that historiography is, in short, the history of history. This means that the primary sources for a historiographical essay are the works written by historians and others about an event, i.e. their interpretations of the event. Such interpretations would be normally considered secondary sources if one were doing a research essay on the event itself. Some very good students find themselves excited by a particular controversy and want to look at the many different points of view on it so they can unravel "what really is the truth." OK, say I, but remember that in a HISTORIOGRAPHICAL essay, the focus must be on what others say, not your own unraveling of the mystery. You must analyze the views of others; these, and not the event itself, must be the primary subject of the essay, of the analysis and of your judgments. I hope this doesn't sound too silly. It is a real point of confusion for some. Have I helped any?
Ken Wolf, Department of History
Murray State University
Murray, KY 42071 (502) 762-6582 or 762-2232
e-mail <A23211f@MSUMUSIC.Bitnet>
Jody:
On the "great historiographical question" suggest you check out Gilderhus' introductory but important HISTORY AND HISTORIANS 2nd edition (1994). Two chapters on speculative and analytical interpretations worth a quick glance. Always glad to see colleagues interested in fundamental issues of history.
Cheers to you and the gang at MSU
Chris Hamel
Date: Sun, 26 Feb 95 14:01 EST
From: lr20 <Leslie_S_ROWLAND@umail.umd.edu>
My department's undergraduate committee is discussing the possibility of creating a required course for history majors on the methods and skills of history. We have found that most of our majors are not adequately prepared when they arrive at the required "capstone" course (proseminar in history writing), in which they are expected to write a sizable paper based upon primary sources. Our idea is to create a new methods/skills course as a prerequisite for the capstone seminar. The new course would be taken in second semester sophomore year or first semester junior year.
Thusfar we've been thinking about a course with many short writing assignments, not a long paper. Among the topics and skills that might be included: identifying an historical argument, the questions historians ask, context, modes of historical writing, types of evidence, library skills, analyzing primary sources, interpretation, maybe a little historiography, scholarly citation.
A major question is whether such methods and skills can be taught apart from a particular geographical/chronological content; i.e., can we devise an effective course that would include students whose areas of concentration range from African history to East Asian to Latin American to European to U.S., etc? One approach might be to work through the skills generically, with examples and exercises drawn from all areas of history. Another would be to structure the course around a "big" theme--revolutions, for example, then divide the course into three parts, each focusing on a different revolution. Perhaps there are still other possibilities.
Another big question is proper size for such a course. How large can it be and still be effective?
We would appreciate advice about what works and doesn't work from folks who have ever taught (or taken) such a course. Syllabi and/or reading lists would be particularly helpful. If you do not think your responses would interest the whole list, send directly to me (Leslie Rowland):
e-mail: lr20@umail.umd.edu
regular mail: Department of History, University of Maryland, College Park MD 20742
Date: Sun, 26 Feb 95 17:26:47 EST
From: SMUMM@VM2.YorkU.CA
We've been developing a course at York for second year students, tentatively entitled The Historian's Craft. It is designed to provide a framework in which most subject specializations can be taught. It essentially combines a little simple historiography, some sessions on historical writing, the uses of computers in history, how to read primary sources, basic research methods, etc. We may use Lowenthal's The Past is a Foreign Country as the primary text, supplemented by books appropriate to the instructor's interests (2 instructors per course).
Susan Mumm,
History, Atkinson College,
York U, Toronto
Date: Mon, 27 Feb 1995 10:33:56 -0500 (EST) From: MAJ Robert G Baker <rbaker@norfolk.nadn.navy.mil>
AT THE US NAVAL ACADEMY WE DO THIS IN THE SOPHOMORE YEAR (EITHER 1ST OR SECOND SEMESTER) THE COURSE IS CALLED HH262--PERSPECTIVES IN HISTORY. IT INTRODUCES THE MAJOR TO HISTORIOGRAPHY AND RESEARCH METHODS. TOPICS VARY. FOR EXAMPLE, THIS SEMESTER WE HAVE 6 SEMINARS WITH THE FOLLOWING TOPICS: SPORT AND CULTURE IN AMERICA; WORLD WAR II IN THE PACIFIC; WORLD WAR II IN EUROPE; VICHY FRANCE; IMPERIAL JAPAN; HISTORY OF THE US NAVY. NEXT SEMESTER WE WILL OFFER: SPORT AND CULTURE IN AMERICA; HISTORY OF SOUTH AFRICA; HISTORY OF THE US MARINE CORPS; TRADITION AND REVOLUTION IN MODERN CHINA. EACH SEMINAR IS LED BY A DIFFERENT PROF.
Date: Sun, 26 Feb 95 14:01 EST
From: lr20 <Leslie_S_ROWLAND@umail.umd.edu>
My department's undergraduate committee is discussing the possibility of creating a required course for history majors on the methods and skills of history. We have found that most of our majors are not adequately prepared when they arrive at the required "capstone" course (proseminar in history writing), in which they are expected to write a sizable paper based upon primary sources. Our idea is to create a new methods/skills course as a prerequisite for the capstone seminar. The new course would be taken in second semester sophomore year or first semester junior year.
Thusfar we've been thinking about a course with many short writing
assignments, not a long paper. Among the topics and skills that might be
included:
identifying an historical argument, the questions historians ask,
context, modes of historical writing, types of evidence, library
skills, analyzing primary sources, interpretation, maybe a little
historiography, scholarly citation.
A major question is whether such methods and skills can be taught apart from a particular geographical/chronological content; i.e., can we devise an effective course that would include students whose areas of concentration range from African history to East Asian to Latin American to European to U.S., etc? One approach might be to work through the skills generically, with examples and exercises drawn from all areas of history. Another would be to structure the course around a "big" theme--revolutions, for example, then divide the course into three parts, each focusing on a different revolution. Perhaps there are still other possibilities. > > Another big question is proper size for such a course. How large can it be > and still be effective? > > We would appreciate advice about what works and doesn't work from folks who > have ever taught (or taken) such a course. Syllabi and/or reading lists would > be particularly helpful. If you do not think your responses would interest > the whole list, send directly to me (Leslie Rowland): > > e-mail: lr20@umail.umd.edu > > regular mail: Department of History, University of Maryland, College Park > MD 20742 > > Editor's note: please do consider sending responses to the whole list: > this sounds a topic very much of interest to H-Teach members. SWTucker
Re previous post:
Date: Sun, 26 Feb 95 14:01 EST
From: lr20 <Leslie_S_ROWLAND@umail.umd.edu>
My department's undergraduate committee is discussing the possibility of creating a required course for history majors on the methods and skills of history. We have found that most of our majors are not adequately prepared when they arrive at the required "capstone" course (proseminar in history writing), in which they are expected to write a sizable paper based upon primary sources. Our idea is to create a new methods/skills course as a prerequisite for the capstone seminar. The new course would be taken in second semester sophomore year or first semester junior year.
I do not have the experience requested, but I have considered such a course for our students and recommend at least looking at History: A workbook of skill development, by Conal Furay and Michael J. Salevouris, published by New Viewpoints. I met Salevouris at an NEH seminar twenty years ago and was very impressed with him, and I think I might try this workbook for a sophomore course in methodology.
Owen Duncan
Simpson College
duncano@storm.simpson.edu
Date: Mon, 27 Feb 1995 11:08:30 -0500 (EST) From: 00aoedmonds@bsuvc.bsu.edu
To those looking for info on history methods courses, try the most recent issue of the OAH Department Chairs Newsletter. I edited the issue on just such courses at Ball State and Western Washington.
Tony Edmonds, History, Ball State U
Date: Mon, 27 Feb 95 10:58:52 EST
From: Randy Patton <rpatton@kscmail.Kennesaw.Edu>
Here at Kennesaw State College, all history and history education majors are required to take, hopefully by the end of their sophomore year, "History 275: An Introduction to Local History and Methodology." The instructors use the book AFTER THE FACT to introduce methodology to students. Students also are required to visit various local historical archives (one of the perks of being in the Atlanta area). The major requirement of the course is a research paper based on primary sources on a local history topic. Focusing on local history topics helps students pick subjects for which they can literally almost exhaust the sources. Just last year, a Kennesaw State History 275 student won a National Archives (East Point, GA branch) essay contest for a paper on the Atlanta viaduct based on papers from the Archives and the Atlanta History Center. We have found the combination of methodology and local history to be an effective way to stimulate student interest and move away from traditional, greatly overdone research topics.
Randy Patton
Date: Mon Feb 27 09:28:31 CST 1995
From: mforet@uwspmail.uwsp.edu
My colleague Eric Yonke and I are also in the process of developing an introductory course for history majors, to be taken in the sophomore year, and for the same reason: too many of our upper level students were unprepared for advanced work, even in their final semesters. We will be working on the details during the summer, and Eric will offer the course for the first time during Fall 1995. We too are still working out how best to approach it, whether to tie it to some topic course, or simply do it as a straight methods approach to historiography, specialized fields, documentation, schools, etc.
Based on my own personal experience and that of my students, I think we can no longer afford to pretend that our students absorb an understanding and knowledge about the profession and its practice through osmosis. Whether it is the fact that they do not read as much as past generations of college students, or that they had social studies rather than history in high school, or that we're just trying to cram too much material into our courses, they`re getting to upper level courses without appropriate knowledge and skills.
Like Leslie, I hope others are doing the same thing, and will contribute their ideas or experience to this discussion. I look forward to lots of interaction on this.
P.S. Having a sophomore course laying the foundation for the senior courses should make assessment easier and more useful, which is another good reason for doing this.
Michael Foret
University of Wisconsin-Stevens Point
mforet@uwspmail.uwsp.edu
Date: Mon, 27 Feb 1995 22:42:05 -0500
From: Daniel Klenbort <klenbort@halcyon.com>
Re previous posts including:
I do not have the experience requested, but I have considered such a course
for our students and recommend at least looking at History: A workbook of
skill development, by Conal Furay and Michael J. Salevouris, published by
New Viewpoints. I met Salevouris at an NEH seminar twenty years ago and
was very impressed with him, and I think I might try this workbook for a
sophomore course in methodology.
Owen Duncan
Simpson College
duncano@storm.simpson.edu
I also have no experience teaching such a course, but I have used bits of the above Furay and Salevouris in history majors' class and find it helpful.
Daniel Klenbort, Morehouse College Klenbort@Halcyon.com "Never argue with a man who is convinced the earth is flat. You have thought about why it is round for maybe five minutes. He spends every waking minute thinking up arguments that it is flat and, he believes if only he could convince everyone, then the problems of the world would be solved" Bud Foote
Date: Tue, 28 Feb 1995 1:01 pm EST (18:01:17 UT) From: George C. Browder <BROWDER@fredonia.edu>
At SUNY Fredonia, we have been using the Fury and Salevouris Workbook for several years in a sophomore methods course, and it has been very successful as the core of our program - not popular, even feared by insecure students until they have mastered it, but usually appreciated thereafter.
Date: Tue, 28 Feb 1995 11:03:51 -0800 (PST) From: Robert Cherny <cherny@mercury.sfsu.edu>
[Re previous post, exerpts to follow:]
My department's undergraduate committee is discussing the possibility of creating a required course for history majors on the methods and skills of
I've been teaching such a course off and on for twenty years, and nearly every semester in recent years. We require two undergraduate seminars of our majors: History 300, which introduces the methods and skills of history, and which we urge them to take at the end of their sophomore year or beginning of their junior year; a proseminar, which is their culminating experience and taken in their senior year.
A major question is whether such methods and skills can be taught apart from a particular geographical/chronological content; i.e., can we devise an
My experience says yes, and that it is advantageous to do so. I emphasize that the purpose of the course is to focus on the historian, not the particular subject matter, and I keep them focused on the historian throughout. Thus, the course can be taught by instructors from a variety of specializations and can be worthwhile for students regardless of their special interests. I require a term research project and permit them to chose a topic of interest to themselves, but require that the topic be one for which primary sources are easily available, because I want to them spend their time working with the sources and not finding them. I also veto topics that I know little about, because I want to be able to provide constant guidance as their projects develop. They do a series of papers on this topic, and I stress the process as much as the final result.
Their second seminar, the culminating experience, is focused on a topic, preferably one of interest to the students.
We usually run four sections of each every semester, so there are always choices for topic of the culminating experience course; for the proseminar, we usually have two in American history, one in European history, and one in world history that permits individual research on any region.
Another big question is proper size for such a course. How large can it be and still be effective?
Undergraduate seminars are limited to a maximum enrollment of 20, but my experience has been that I can enroll up to 25 and end up with about 15. Fifteen is ideal.
My syllabus follows. I've occasionally inserted comments in square brackets to explain why I do certain things that may otherwise seem curious.
HISTORY 300
SEMINAR IN HISTORICAL ANALYSIS
Section 2: 7:00-9:45 p.m., Mondays, Burk 204
Spring 1995 Robert W. Cherny
Course Overview: Unlike most history courses, which focus on past events, this course focuses centrally on the work of historians--the nature and location of sources for historical research, written and oral presentation of research findings, and criticism of others' work. You will each practice these skills. We shall also briefly explore the development of history as a field of knowledge, from its beginnings in the ancient world, through its emergence as a profession, to twentieth-century developments in historical analysis. As you complete the assignments, you will find opportunities to apply the skills you have learned in Segment I of General Education: written and oral communication, critical thinking, and quantitative reasoning. If you have not completed Segment I, please see me to discuss your situation.
Course Requirements: During the first six weeks of the semester, you will prepare a paper for every class meeting; after that, there will be one inclass examination, dealing with the history of history. You will also present your research project in both in writing and orally, and you will criticize the research projects of two other students, orally and in writing. These requirements have the following weight in determining course grades:
Date Requirement Percent of Course Grade
Research Project:
2/6: #1--Preliminary Statement of
Research Interest ungraded
2/27: #3--Preliminary Research Plan 5
3/13: #5--Survey of Secondary Works 10
3/20: #6--Survey of Primary Sources 10
4/24: #7--First Draft of Paper (3 copies) 5
5/1-5/15: Oral Presentation, Research Project 5
5/22: #9--Revised (Final) Draft of Paper 20
(Total, research project (55)
Other Required Written Work:
2/13: #2--Review of Hofstadter, ch. 1-3 5
3/6: #4--Comparative Review 15
4/17: In-class Examination (history of History) 15
5/1-5/15: #8--Critique (oral & written, 3 copies) 5
Class Participation 5
Do not cut class just because you do not have a paper that is due; cutting only compounds your problems. Plagiarism is the presentation of another person' s work as your own. It may well be the most serious academic transgression possible; it will result in a course grade of F and will be reported to the University disciplinary officer.
Office Hours and Related Information:
Office hours: 3:30-5:00 p.m., Mon. and Wed.; noon-1:45 p.m., Tue.
Office: Psychology 411 Office phone: 338-7561
E-mail: cherny@sfsu.edu
Call me to arrange other times; if I'm not there, leave a message. I'll probably
call back during my office hours, so leave a number where you can be
reached at those times. If you want to leave a written message for me, do not
put it under my office door; instead, take it to PSY 405, the history department
office, and put in my mailbox.
Virtual Office-hours: I usually check my e-mail every day and will usually respond immediately. Don't hesitate to write if you have a question or concern about class.
Recommended Reference Works: You will want the following books in your personal library if you are serious about writing.
William Strunk, Jr., and E.G. White, The Elements of Style.
Kate L. Turabian, A Manual for Writers of Term Papers, Theses, and
Dissertations.
A good dictionary; I prefer the Oxford American Dictionary, but any good
one will do.
Required Readings (available at the bookstore):
Richard Hofstadter, The Age of Reform.
Jules R. Benjamin, A Student's Guide to History.
Other required readings will be available in on reserve or in class. Optional Readings (also at in the bookstore):
Paul K. Conkin and Roland N. Stromberg, The Heritage and Challenge of History.
CLASS SCHEDULE
Note that all the reading assignments and most of the written assignments fall before the middle of the semester, leaving the last half free for research and writing on the term paper. Keep up with the assigned reading, as we shall follow this schedule very closely.
Jan. 30: Introduction to the Study of History Introductions; course overview and course objectives; history as a field of study; the role of the historian. FILM: Indians, Outlaws, and Angie Debo
[This is a very good film for getting the students to talk immediately about things as the historian's purpose in beginning a particular study, the use of sources, and the historian's thesis.]
Planning a research project: selecting a topic; exploring the secondary literature; developing a thesis question; locating appropriate primary sources.
Feb. 6: SUBMIT 1ST PAPER (prelim. statement of research interest) Feb. 6: Using the Internet in Historical Research Introduction to e-mail, INVESTIGATOR, GOPHER, MELVYL, CARL, America: History and Life; meet in HSS 383. If you have not yet done so, complete the library requirement. REQUIRED READING: Benjamin, chs. 1-4, appendix A
Jan. 31, Feb. 1, 6, 7, 8, 13, 14, 15: Individual consultation with instructor on research project: Sign up in class on January 30 or February 6.
Feb. 13: SUBMIT 2ND PAPER (review of Hofstadter, chs. 1-3) Feb. 13: Using an Archive Tour of one of the archives in the area, location and directions to be announced on February 6; archival research procedures. TO DO: Investigate libraries and archives relevant to your research project.
Feb. 27: SUBMIT 3RD PAPER (preliminary research plan) Feb. 27: Interpreting the Past; Revising Past Interpretations Identifying the historian's thesis; evaluating the historian's evidence; revision as a central part of historical analysis; example: Hofstadter's Age of Reform, chs. 1-3; other examples from major interpretations in American history. REQUIRED READING: Two articles, to be announced on Feb. 13.
Mar. 6: SUBMIT 4TH PAPER (comparative review) Mar. 6: Evaluating and Using Primary Sources Using documents, oral histories, statistics, and artifacts as sources; case studies. REQUIRED READING: Jerold S. Auerbach, "Woodrow Wilson's `Prediction' to Frank
Cobb: Words Historians Should Doubt Ever Got Spoken," Journal of Ameri-
can History 54 (1967): 608-617--ON RESERVE.
Mar. 13: SUBMIT 5TH PAPER (survey of secondary works)
Mar. 13: Presenting Research Findings; Organizing written and oral
presentations of findings; when to quote, when to summarize; citing sources;
examples.
REQUIRED READING: Benjamin, chapter 5; Turabian.
Mar. 20: SUBMIT 6TH PAPER (survey of primary sources)
Mar. 20, 27, Apr. 3: The History of History The development of history as a
field of knowledge, from the ancient world to the present; relation of history
to the other social sciences.
REQUIRED READING: examples from past historians, available in class
RECOMMENDED READING: Conkin and Stromberg, Part I.
Apr. 17: EXAMINATION on the history of History
Apr. 24: SUBMIT 7TH PAPER (first draft of research paper) Apr. 24: Careers in History What have SFSU graduates done with a history major other than teach? What should you be doing now to prepare for using your history degree in a career? Presentation by Suzanne Rubel of the Career Center.
May 1: SUBMIT 8TH PAPER (critique of two student papers) May 1, 8, 15 (and perhaps May 22): PRESENTATION AND CRITIQUE OF RESEARCH FINDINGS
May 22: SUBMIT 9TH PAPER (revised draft of research paper)
REQUIRED WRITTEN WORK
All required papers should be done on a word-processor, double-spaced, with one-inch margins on all sides. (If you don't yet use a word-processor, take one of the orientation courses in the first two weeks of the semester; if this is a problem, discuss it with the instructor promptly.) For this class, staple each paper in the upper left-hand corner; do not put your paper in a binder. There is no need for a separate title page; instead, begin at the top of the page with your name and the title of assignment. Citations should be footnotes, numbered consecutively from first to last; if your word-processing program will not do footnotes, see me to discuss that situation. Follow all rules of citation in Turabian. There should be no errors of grammar or spelling; word processors have a spelling checker, so use it. Papers will be evaluated for both content and composition, and errors in form will be penalized; review and apply what you learned in your required composition courses (English 114 and 214 or equivalents). For each paper, I have specified a minimum and maximum length. I doubt that you can do an adequate job in less space than the minimum, but I'm willing to be persuaded; the maximum is intended to restrain your enthusiasm and to keep the assignments in proportion. If you go beyond that limit, edit your work down to that maximum. Always keep a copy of any paper you submit to an instructor.
Late Papers: Papers are late if they are not submitted on the day they are due. Papers that are missing at the end of the semester are graded as F. If I am not in my office, submit late papers in the history department office (PSY 405) so they can be put into my mailbox; do not put late papers under the door of my office. All late papers will be penalized by reducing the grade by one level (e.g., from A to A-) unless you present a written excuse based on a medical, family, or work-related emergency. Papers more than a week late may be penalized further.
1ST PAPER (due Feb. 6 or earlier): Preliminary description of research interest. What would you like to explore in your research project? This will be ungraded; its purpose is get you to focus your interest and let me to make suggestions. Length: 1-2 pages.
2ND PAPER (due Feb. 13): Review of chapters 1-3 of Hofstadter's The Age of Reform. Identify the subject matter, thesis, evidence, and methodology. The title of this paper is Review. The first item following the title should be a complete bibliographic citation (see Turabian) of the book being reviewed. For examples, look at the reviews in the American Historical Review (available in the library or the history seminar room). The purpose of this paper is for you to practice identifying these elements in a historian's work. Length: 2- 3 pages. (5% of course grade)
[This paper, on the first 3 chapters of Hofstadter, counts virtually nothing toward the final grade. I require it as a means of making they read and think carefully about those three chapters, because I then use those chapters as the basis for a discussion on how to read a work by an historian--how to identify the purpose, how to read footnotes and critique the use of sources, how to identify the relation of a specific work to other works, and, most of all, how to identify the author's thesis. I also use this to warn the students about the dangers of extending an interpretation beyond the point where the sources permit, using the article by Collins on the supplementary reading at the end
3RD PAPER (due Feb. 27): Present a preliminary research plan for your research project. Indicate the topic you intend to explore; insofar as you know at this point, present a brief summary of what historians have said about the subject; indicate the question or questions you hope to answer by your research. Attach a preliminary bibliography. The purpose of this paper is to focus your research project and to produce drafts that may form part of your introduction and bibliography. Length: 1-2 pages not including bibliography. (5% of course grade)
4TH PAPER (due Mar. 6): This paper will be a comparative review, similar to that by Ridge. In this paper, you will compare Hofstadter's treatment of progressivism in The Age of Reform, chapters 4-5, with the treatment of urban reform provided by Samuel P. Hays in "The Changing Political Structure of the City in Industrial America." Journal of Urban History 1 (1974): 6-38, which is available on reserve. Organize the heading as for the 2nd paper, but include full bibliographic citations for both items being reviewed. In your paper, summarize each author's thesis, consider their methodologies and evidence, and compare the two interpretations of political change in the early 20th century. Length: 4-7 pages. (15% of course grade)
5TH PAPER (due Mar. 13): Use MELVYL to compile a list of five or more books by historians that may be related to your topic. Use America: History and Life or CARL to compile a list of five or more articles in scholarly journals that may be related to your topic. In your paper, first analyze one of the works (preferably the one you think is most significant). How does it address your subject? What evidence does it employ? Is there a distinctive methodology ? What is the author's thesis? What questions does it raise for your research ? Does it change your thinking about your research? Second, present an annotated bibliography of three or more secondary works (books or articles) that you know are relevant to your research project. Finally, attach the list of five books and five articles; you may simply attach the print-out from your computer. Part of the purpose of this paper is to give you experience in conducting a literature search, to refine your research topic by examining the work of previous historians, and, in the process, to draft more of your introduction and bibliography. Length: 2-3 pages of analysis, 1-2 pages of bibliography, 1 page list of books and articles. (10% of course grade)
6TH PAPER (due Mar. 20): Survey some of the primary sources relevant to your project and available in the Bay Area. Treat one of these sources in some depth, preferably the one you anticipate will be your most important primary source (e.g., a manuscript collection, an autobiography, a newspaper). You may not have completed all your research into this source at this time, but tell me what you have learned about it so far. How reliable is it? How comprehensive is it? Does it seem likely to provide information that will permit you to answer the questions you developed in the 3rd paper? Does this source raise questions for you that you will need to explore in other sources? Include an annotated bibliography of all the primary sources that you have explored so far. Part of the purpose of this paper is to focus your research into primary sources and, in the process, to draft more of your bibliography. Length: 2-3 pages of analysis, 1-2 pages of bibliography. (10% of course grade)
EXAMINATION (Apr. 17): This in-class examination will cover only the history of history, based on the in-class readings, class lectures, and discussions. It will be in two parts: part I will provide seven or so items (people, quotations, works, concepts), of which you will select five to identify (one page or so of a blue book per item); part II will provide two or more broadlyphrased essay topics, of which you will chose one as the basis for an essay. (15% of course grade)
7TH PAPER (3 copies due on Apr. 24): This is the penultimate written phase in your research project--the first draft of your paper. The paper must be based largely on primary sources, and should include footnotes and a bibliography. Organize your paper in the following sequence: (1) introduction, in which you indicate your topic (a refinement of your 3rd paper), introduce the conclusions of one or more historians on the topic (a refinement of your 5th paper), and indicate the thesis question(s) you are exploring (based on your 3rd, 5th, and 6th papers), all in about 2-3 pages; (2) analysis based on primary sources (an expansion of your 6th paper), about 5-7 pages in length; (3) a summary of your conclusions, briefly relating your analysis to your thesis question, to the work of previous historians, and, perhaps, posing questions for future research, all in about 1 page; and (4) an annotated bibliography (based on your 5th and 6th papers), 1-2 pages. (5% of course grade)
8TH PAPER (3 copies due on May 1): See instructions below, for critiques.
9TH PAPER (due May 22 or sooner): Revise your 7th paper in the light of the critiques (mine and other students') and class discussion of it. This paper is optional; if you submit no revision by May 22 (or fail to make other arrangements for submitting it), the grade assigned to paper #7 will also be recorded for #9 (and will account for 25% of your course grade). Length: please don't go over 12 pages plus 2 pages of bibliography. When you submit this paper, include with it your 7th paper. (20% of course grade)
REQUIRED ORAL PRESENTATIONS
Oral presentation of information is used by historians almost as much as written forms. At professional meetings, historians present their research findings orally and invite the criticism of other historians. In seminar rooms, history teachers and students discuss their research. When preparing your presentations, review and apply what you learned in your oral communications course (Speech 150 or equivalent).
ORAL PRESENTATION OF RESEARCH FINDINGS (May 1-May 15): In this presentation, you will summarize your research findings for the class. Organize it carefully. This should not be simply a reading of your paper, but should be an adaptation of your paper for the purposes of an oral presentation. We shall discuss how to do this in class. Maximum length: either 15 or 20 minutes (to be announced in class). During each of these classes, we shall begin with two or three presentations, followed by the critics, then a short break, and then two or three more presentations and critiques. There is not a great deal of flexibility in the schedule; if possible, we may begin meeting a bit earlier when we reach this point in the semester. The time indicated is both a target and a maximum; practice your presentation by actually speaking aloud and timing yourself. Do not exceed this maximum, but don't be so frightened of going over your time that you make only a five or ten minute presentation; that is as troublesome as going over the limit. Practice makes perfect, so far as timing goes. I know that some of you may find it very difficult to make this sort of oral presentation; please talk to me about your situation early in the semester, so we can explore options. (Oral presentation of research findings
CRITIQUE OF RESEARCH FINDINGS (May 1-May 15): I will assign a critic to each paper. Each critic will comment to the seminar on two papers, following the presentation of the papers themselves. In preparing your critique of other students' papers, your task is very similar to preparing a book review. There is one important difference: you will be dealing with the work of someone in the same room with you. Please keep your criticism constructive. You should develop your critique in writing, about 5 pages, equivalent to about 10 minutes (total, covering both papers). You need not develop these points in this order, but they are the central points to develop in any critique: (1) Briefly identify the subject and thesis of the paper and indicate the nature of the evidence used to develop and support the thesis. Is the paper organized effectively? Do the conclusions follow logically from the presentation of the material? Is the paper clearly written? (2) As appropriate, indicate questions for the author, including questions that he/she may want to clarify in revising the paper for final submission. Do not address the author as "you," but instead keep your critique in the third person. You will present your critique orally to the seminar, but you should also provide a written version to me and to the author of the paper (bring 3 copies to class). In the written version for me only, indicate what grade you would assign this paper. (Critique = 5% of course grade).
POSSIBLE RESEARCH PROJECTS
I don't want to you to do a research project that requires you to spend a great deal of time just locating primary sources. I want you to spend your time analyzing primary sources rather than looking for them. Primary sources for topics related to San Francisco or California, since roughly the 1860s or so, are much more easily available than for topics involving distant parts of the world or earlier time periods.
Possible topics:
Topics of some interesting and successful student papers in recent semesters:
Women's charitable organizations in San Francisco in the 1860s and 1870s.
A comparison of treatment of divorce in popular magazines and newspapers for
1900, 1905, and 1910.
Reaction in San Francisco to state efforts to close down brothels, 1914.
The 1934 California gubernatorial election (esp. the defeat of Upton Sinclair).
The 1934 streetcar workers' strike in San Francisco.
Anti-Filipino riots in Watsonville in the 1930s.
The experience of women in the Boilermakers' Union during World War II (using
records from the Labor Archives).
The 1966 California gubernatorial election (esp. the victory of Ronald Reagan).
A biography of a woman faculty member at UC Berkeley, based on an oral history.
Events leading to the San Francisco State strike of 1969.
MAJOR RESEARCH ARCHIVES IN THE BAY
AREA, OPEN TO S.F.S.U. STUDENTS
On campus:
De Bellis Collection, 6th floor, library. Italian history and culture,
especially music.
Labor Archives and Research Center, 480 Winston Dr. Labor and the left in
northern California.
Special Collections/Archives, 6th floor of the library. History of SFSU.
Sutro Library, 480 Winston Drive. Family history and genealogy, the West,
Mexico, history of printing, more.
Elsewhere in San Francisco:
California Historical Society, San Francisco. History of California; severely
restricted hours, may be closed.
San Francisco History Room, San Francisco Public Library (Civic Center).
History of the city.
On the peninsula:
National Archives, Pacific Sierra Branch, San Bruno. Federal agencies active in
the West and in the Pacific.
Microfilm copies of U.S. census manuscripts.
In the East Bay:
Bancroft Library, University of California, Berkeley. U.S. history, especially
California and the West.
LIBRARIES OPEN TO S.F.S.U. STUDENTS
Libraries: SFSU, all CSU campus libraries, UC-Berkeley, San Francisco Public
Library, California State Library (Sacramento). Law libraries: Hastings, Boalt.
A Final Note: Timeliness.
Please note that this class is scheduled to begin at 7:00. I shall usually be
in the room at 7:00 and shall expect to begin at that time. When students
arrive in class anytime during the first half-hour, I find it distracting and
it disturbs the other students. Sometimes it is impossible to avoid being
late; being consistently late is simply rude.
[The following is a supplement to the syllabus, because some eager students looked ahead and read the Collins article before I wanted them to do so. So now I have them turn in a paper on the first three chapters in Hofstadter, then I give them this supplement with the articles by Collins and Ridges that form a basis for a class discussion of the way Hofstadters was operating as a historian. We focus on purpose, use of sources, methodology, conceptual framework, thesis--especially identification of thesis.]
History 300
Seminar in Historical Analysis
Section 2: 7:00-9:45 p.m., Mondays, Burk 204
Spring 1995
Robert W. Cherny
Supplementary Reading List:
February 27 and March 6
Read before class on Feb. 27:
Collins, Robert M. "The Originality Trap: Richard Hofstadter on
Populism." Journal of American History 76 (1989): 150-167.
Ridge, Martin. "Populism Redux: John D. Hicks and The Populist
Revolt." Reviews in American History 13 (1985): 142-154.
Use as part of the essay due on Mar. 6:
Hays, Samuel P. "The Changing Political Structure of the City in
Industrial America." Journal of Urban History 1 (1974): 6-
38.
They are available on reserve.
Date: Tue, 28 Feb 1995 15:50:16 -0800 (PST) From: Clark Davis <cdavis@lasierra.edu>
At La Sierra University in Riverside, California, we require all sophomore history majors to take a four unit course entitled: HISTORICAL RESEARCH METHODS: THINKING AS A HISTORIAN. We find that in taking this course early, students are much better prepared for the kinds of assignments they will encounter in upper division courses. The basic structure of the course and the required assignments are as follows:
bibliography due
response paper
precis due
primary source analysis secondary source analysis
book review
critical argument paper
cultural analysis paper
In the last three weeks of the course, students work on independent research projects, obviously rather small in nature, in which they are supposed to show an understanding of the varying ideas and methods mentioned above. The course needs more refining and particularly more attention to theoretical issues and controversies, but students do seem to leave the course with a good grasp of the tools they will hone with more precision later on.
Clark Davis
Assistant Professor of History
La Sierra University
Riverside, CA 92515
cdavis@polaris.lasierra.edu
Date: Wed, 1 Mar 1995 08:29:16 -0600 (CST) From: cecil-fronsman bill <zzceci@acc.wuacc.edu>
The question was raised about history courses that cover both the subject material of history and historical method. DC Heath publishes a workbook that parallels the US survey course that offers introductions to "the Historian's Craft". It is by Peter Charles Hoffer and William W. Stueck and is called Reading and Writing American History: An Introduction to the Historian's Craft. It has chapters dealing with primary souces, secondary sources, use of the library, etc. It incorporates them in chapters that deal with specific times. For example, the chapter on primary sources in the second volume deals with late 19th century America. The chapter on secondary sources deals with Progressivism.
The book has its problems -- but it may help someone trying to combine content and methodology in a single course.
Bill Cecil-Fronsman zzceci@acc.wuacc.edu Department of History Office: (913) 231-1010 x1317 Washburn University Fax: (913) 231-1084
Topeka, KS 66621
Date: Wed, 1 Mar 1995 08:29:16 -0600 (CST) From: cecil-fronsman bill <zzceci@acc.wuacc.edu>
The question was raised about history courses that cover both the subject material of history and historical method. DC Heath publishes a workbook that parallels the US survey course that offers introductions to "the Historian's Craft". It is by Peter Charles Hoffer and William W. Stueck and is called Reading and Writing American History: An Introduction to the Historian's Craft. It has chapters dealing with primary souces, secondary sources, use of the library, etc. It incorporates them in chapters that deal with specific times. For example, the chapter on primary sources in the second volume deals with late 19th century America. The chapter on secondary sources deals with Progressivism.
The book has its problems -- but it may help someone trying to combine content and methodology in a single course.
Bill Cecil-Fronsman zzceci@acc.wuacc.edu Department of History Office: (913) 231-1010 x1317 Washburn University Fax: (913) 231-1084
Topeka, KS 66621
Date: Tue, 07 Mar 1995 15:38:58 -0600 (CST) From: CLM1B36@PANAM1.PANAM.EDU
Re Theron Davis post:
Second, I'm offering a class during the summer that will be split between graduates and undergraduates and find myself wondering exactly how to engineer the course so that the graduates are doing the appropriate amount of work.
Briefly, I have arranged the class to address 9 topics, one for each week that we meet, with a list of articles/books they must prepare as readings. I had thought to assign several undergraduates one article each and all the graduates two articles or one book, then require a formal presentation from each student the following week. I will also require a paper from the entire class, but shorten the length of the undergraduate paper.
How do any of you handle a similar situation?
I have taught joint graduate/undergraduate courses on several occasions. Some have been research seminars, which permit me to make quite different demands concerning length, depth, and sources for papers. Topically oriented classes are a different sort of problem. In courses like the one you're describing, I often have a graduate student set the context for a given class session by researching and writing a historiographical essay which includes any required reading on the topic and presenting that to the class (when necessary, I coordinate with the student in order to present any necessary background material in a preparatory lecture). The graduate student then leads a class discussion covering the required reading. I find that this method takes best advantage of the situation by exposing undergraduates to a level of historiographical discourse from which they are usually barred and gives the graduate students an excellent opportunity to think on their feet in advancing, and in some cases defending a position. The graduate students are then graded on their research and presentation as well as on the other work required of all students.
"it is best for intellectuals to be politically unpredictable."
Stephen L. Carter
Date: Tue, 7 Mar 1995 23:02:00 -0800 (PST) From: Gregory Monahan <gmonahan@eosc.osshe.edu>
At our small college, we have a senior thesis as a capstone. We offer as many topics as there are students in the introductory "thesis seminar" and let the students parcel them out. We used to let students choose their own topics, but discovered that they too often chose topics which turned out to be undoable or worse, chose too many topics in one field or another with unbalanced our loads to an intolerable extent. At any rate, we use the seminar to discuss research methodologies, bibliographies, footnote form and such, and assign an "I" in the seminar which we then hold over their heads through a severe schedule of draft deadlines. One late paper, and the "I" becomes an "F".
The primary reader scours the first draft, then the second draft goes directly to the second reader who comments and returns it to the primary reader, who goes over it again. There's a third draft followed by an oral presentation to the rest of the seminar in the spring term. It's a year-long ordeal. We get some wonderful papers, some ok papers and occasional lousy papers, but we do find that it acts as a valuable capstone. We're on a term schedule, and the thesis is worth a total of 6 term hours, which would be around 4 semester hours of credit.
I'd be interested in knowing if other institutions use a thesis, and how they handle it. We're forever tinkering with it.
Greg Monahan
gmonahan@eosc.osshe.edu
Return to H-TEACH Home Page.
| ||||
