Test #2 Results November 6, 2009
Posted by jdresner in administrative, grading, hist 102 (Fall 2009), study terms.add a comment
The top terms were:
- Abraham Lincoln
- Industrial Revolution
- Napoleon Bonaparte
- Isaac Newton
- Declaration of Independence
- Charles Darwin
As with the pop quizzes, I scored each answer on a 4-point scale, then added up the results. The high score in the class was 42 out of a possible 48 (before extra credit) again, which I used as the 100% mark (which again raised everyone’s grades a lot). The median score was between B and B-. Here’s how the grade scale worked out:
| Grade | minimum points | distribution |
| A+ | 42 | |
| A | 39.8 | 20% |
| A- | 37.8 | |
| B+ | 34.8 | |
| B | 30.3 | 40% |
| B- | 27.3 | |
| C+ | 24.3 | |
| C | 19.8 | 30% |
| C- | 16.8 | |
| D+ | 13.8 | |
| D | 9.3 | 10% |
| D- | 6.3 | |
| F | 0 |
If you compare it to the last quiz, you can see some movement from B to A and some movement from D to C. But not much.
Book Context due Monday* November 4, 2009
Posted by jdresner in Schedule Change, doing history, hist 102 (Fall 2009), homework.add a comment
Under the category of “Context” the book review assignment says:
Context: What is the background of the author? Is their personal background relevant to the subject of the book? What is the historical context, the time period discussed by the book? What other books discuss the same kinds of things, and how does this book compare? Note that your textbook is an invaluable resource for comparisons and context.
Obviously, there are several different issues going on here, but they basically fall into two categories: Historical context and Historiographical context.
Historical context is about how the material in your book fits with the rest of what’s going on in the world at the time: if you’re writing about Japanese 19th century industrialization, for example (nobody is, unfortunately), you’d want to note that Japan was a late industrializer compared to other major industrial nations, that it was the age of unequal treaties, and that industrialization happened at the same time as the rise of nationalism, parliamentarianism, and imperialism.
Historiographical context, on the other hand, is about how the book fits with the rest of the books written on the same topic: what are the normal interpretations of this event and how does this book change that; who is this book arguing with, and why?
In both cases, your textbook is a good starting place, because it does look at the broader context, and because it represents a kind of “current consensus” on most issues. Sometimes the book itself will describe the context for you; sometimes you have to work at it a bit.
* Yes, the context assignment was supposed to be due Friday the 6th, but I forgot to mention it in class, so I’m pushing it back to Monday the 9th.
A few announcements October 21, 2009
Posted by jdresner in administrative, doing history, hist 102 (Fall 2009), homework, not homework.add a comment
Reminder: No class for either section on Friday the 23rd, due to the Presidential inauguration. Students are encouraged to attend — and see your instructors in academic regalia! — at the front of Russ Hall (or in Weede, if the weather is poor) at 2.
While I didn’t require resubmission of thesis statements that missed the mark this time, I’m adding an element to the next book review assignment, the discussion of the argument and evidence of the book: you must include a clearly marked, one sentence statement indicating what you think the thesis of the work is. This is quite important for the argument and evidence discussion: if you don’t know what the author is trying to prove, you can’t evaluate the effectiveness of the argument they make or the quality of the evidence they present.
As you try to summarize and discuss your chosen books, be careful of how you use the book and any related sources you may find. Obviously, using the actual words of a source — textbook, internet or otherwise — without quotation marks or other acknowledgement is clearly and blatantly plagiarism. Weak paraphrasing can constitute plagiarism: if you don’t thoroughly alter the language of your source, it is a form of intellectual theft. Even something fully paraphrased in your own words can be considered plagiarism if you don’t acknowledge your source(s) — this is what footnotes, endnotes and parenthetical citations with works cited pages are for. Plagiarism is academic dishonesty, theft of intellectual property, and a violation of University policy, and will not be tolerated in this course.
Finally, a little 19th century union history — the struggle between wage-earning workers and capitalist owners — in early baseball.
Comments on Book Summaries October 12, 2009
Posted by jdresner in Schedule Change, hist 102 (Fall 2009), homework.add a comment
I’ll be handing back the book summaries today. Many of them are actually inadequate as summaries — too short, too confused or too much of your thoughts and not enough of the book’s content. If I’ve included “Try Again” or “revise and hand in again” in the comments on your summary, then I will be expecting to see a more complete — or clearer, or more focused, etc. — summary handed in with your statements of the book’s thesis.
In order to make it easier, I’ve moved the Thesis statement due date back to Monday the 19th, giving you most of an extra week. The Thesis statement should be just that, by the way: a sentence or short paragraph clearly stating what the author’s purpose is in writing the book, what they hope to prove by the evidence and argument they provide. Sometimes that thesis will be explicitly laid out by the author in a form you can quote; sometimes (especially with autobiographical writings or seemingly straightforward surveys of major events) it is more work for you to figure it out.
Finally, a note on form: I don’t insist that you all use the Chicago Manual of Style footnote method for history papers, but if you quote something, then I expect to see a citation including a page number. It can be in parentheses, footnote or endnote, but a quotation without a specific source, including a page number, is a grave error.
Test #1 Results October 5, 2009
Posted by jdresner in administrative, grading, hist 102 (Fall 2009), study terms, textbook.add a comment
The most popular term, by far, was “Columbian Exchange” followed by “Martin Luther,” “Abolition” and “The Bill of Rights.”
As with the pop quizzes, I scored each answer on a 4-point scale, then added up the results. The high score in the class was 42 out of a possible 48 (before extra credit), which I used as the 100% mark (which raised everyone’s grades a lot). The median score was a B or B-. Here’s how the grade scale worked out:
| Grade | minimum points | distribution |
| A+ | 42 | |
| A | 39.8 | 15% |
| A- | 37.8 | |
| B+ | 34.8 | |
| B | 30.3 | 45% |
| B- | 27.3 | |
| C+ | 24.3 | |
| C | 19.8 | 20% |
| C- | 16.8 | |
| D+ | 13.8 | |
| D | 9.3 | 20% |
| D- | 6.3 | |
| F | 0 |
This looks pretty good, but remember two things. The extra credits were a very helpful: most people got both right, and each grade scale was only three points or a bit more. The top score is very likely to go up in later tests, which means that everyone has to improve just to stay even.
Finally, I was, as I noted, very disappointed by the number of answers which parroted back the textbook’s sidebar definitions. Here are a few examples of how those definitions compare to answers which actually got good scores (3.5 or 4 out of 4) below the fold. My favorite example is the last one: notice how the textbook sidebar definition almost entirely fails to mention what makes Cornwallis important in this chapter, but the student definition ignores all the irrelevant stuff and goes right to significance? Note that the student definitions aren’t perfect but they very clearly cover the context, often mention and define related terms, and are especially good on significance, why the term/person/etc. mattered:
Study List for Test #1 September 25, 2009
Posted by jdresner in administrative, hist 102 (Fall 2009), homework, study terms.add a comment
Here is the collected list of terms from the chapters to be covered by Test #1. As I said previously, I will give you a few terms from each chapter and you will answer twelve, including at least one from each chapter.
| Chapter 15 Altepetl Chapter 16 Catholic Reformation Chapter 17 Abbas I |
Chapter 18 Carolina Chapter 19 Abolitionist Chapter 20 Aurangzeb |
Miscellaneous announcements: Guest Lectures, Test, Fun September 22, 2009
Posted by jdresner in Napoleon, Schedule Change, administrative, extra credit (F09), grading, hist 102 (Spring 2009), homework, military, not homework, resources.1 comment so far
We’ll have two guest lectures from PSU Grad student, military historian and WWII reenactor Dustin Strong: “Napoleon and his Wars” on October 9 and “WWII” on November 16. Mr. Strong’s lectures, like my own, are required, and I will expect to see his presentation reflected in your test answers and essays where appropriate. Mr. Strong has also announced two WWII reenactments open to the public as extra credit opportunities: Sept. 26-27 at Bristow Jones Memorial Airport (Bristow, OK) and Nov. 7 at Forest Park (Ottawa, KS). For the extra credit, include in your summary/reaction paper a description of the battle, and those of you doing WWII topics for your book review are strongly encouraged to talk to members of one of the units, as they are usually very well-informed on the equipment and history of the units they portray.
My apologies to the 2pm section for missing Monday: I have put the lecture outline online, so that anyone who missed class due to the weather or illness can review it. Those of you were there for the 11am class are welcome to look at it as well, obviously.
Regarding the Test on Monday, covering chapters 15 through 20, inclusive, and the lectures, the format will be very much like the pop quizzes: I will choose four or five (or six) terms from each chapter — the terms in the “Key Terms” lists, of course — to put on the test. From those, you will pick twelve (12) to answer: at least one from each of the six chapters, and the rest from any of the remaining terms. I will supply the test and paper; you bring something to write with and everything you can remember about the last month’s readings and lectures.
Finally, for fun, here’s pre-Revolutionary satires on French aristocratic hairstyles, including a recreation of the Battle of Bunker Hill [mildly adult content]. The one that made me laugh was the one with the hairdresser using a nautical navigational tool — the sextant — to arrange the hairstyle.
Oops…. September 11, 2009
Posted by jdresner in Schedule Change, administrative, hist 102 (Fall 2009).add a comment
Looking at the schedule, it turns out that I’ve made an error which means that we’re technically a day behind where we should be. I think I have a solution, but I need time to work it out. Meanwhile, stick with the schedule as we’ve been doing it: read Chapter 18 for Monday.
Non Sequitur: The World’s Oldest Person has died, at age 115. There are a few people left in the world who were born in the 19th century!
Pop Quiz Grading September 11, 2009
Posted by jdresner in administrative, grading, hist 102 (Fall 2009).add a comment
As I said previously, I grade ID questions on the familiar 4-point scale, with half-points. I give some credit for incorrect identifications — when you identify the wrong thing — if you actually identify that thing reasonably well. Your pop quiz grades for the semester will be handled much like the tests: I total up everyone’s scores and take the highest as 100%.
Also, I hand back pop quizzes when I have them graded — and I’ll try my best to make sure that’s the next class — but if you’re not there when I hand them back, I’ll just hold onto them until next time I have something to hand back. If you missed my handing them out, feel free to ask me for them before or after class.
Schedule Shift for November/December September 2, 2009
Posted by jdresner in Schedule Change, administrative, hist 102 (Fall 2009).add a comment
In order to allow students and faculty to attend the inauguration of PSU’s ninth president, Dr. Steven Scott, classes from 1-5pm on Friday October 23rd will be dismissed. Since I have one section before that and one during, I’m cancelling both sections and shifting the schedule back a day. Fortunately, I built a few catch-up days into the schedule: using one of them, I’ve pushed all the readings and assignments back a day until the end of the semester. You can see the complete schedule, as always, here, or at the course link above; the schedule for September and most of October remains unchanged.
