You get the idea. The tricky bit is that this isn’t just a matter of opinion: you need to be able to back it up. WHY is this a problem? What could the author have done to make it better?

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.

African Association
Carl Linnaeus
Encyclopedia
enlightened despots
Enlightenment
Great Trigonometrical Survey
Isaac Newton
James Cook
John Locke
Joseph Banks
laissez faire
Lewis and Clark Expedition
Philosophes
problem of longitude
René Descartes
Sir Francis Bacon Chapter 22

caudillos
Congress of Angostura
Congress of Vienna
Constitution of the United States
Declaration of Independence
George Washington
Jacobins
Joseph Brant
Louis XVI
Miguel de Hidalgo y Costilla
Napoleon Bonaparte
National Assembly
Simón Bolìvar
Third Estate
Toussaint L’Ouverture
Tupac Amaru II Chapter 23

Alexander Herzen
Charles Darwin
Crimean War
Emancipation Edict
Frankfurt Assembly
Giuseppe Garibaldi
Industrial Revolution
John Stuart Mill
Karl Marx
Louis Blanc
Louis Napoleon
Muhammad Ali
Otto Von Bismarck
The Reform Bill of 1832
Tanzimat reforms
Tsar Alexander II Chapter 24

Bal Gangadhar Tilak
Boxer Rebellion
Commodore Matthew Perry
Empress Ci Xi
Fukuzawa Yûkichi
Gopal K. Gokhale
Indian National Congress
Indian Revolt of 1857
Meiji Restoration
Partition of Bengal
Rammohun Roy
Russo-Japanese War
Self-Strengthening Movement
Sino-Japanese War
Taiping Rebellion
Treaty of Nanjing Chapter 25

Abraham Lincoln
Andrew Jackson
Benito Juàrez
Confederations of Canada
Gilded Age
Indian Removal Act
Métis Rebellion
Pauline Johnson-Tekahionwake
Porfirio Diáz
Reconstruction
responsible government
Sir John A. MacDonald
Sitting Bull
War of the Pacific
Yucatán Rebellion Chapter 26

Asante Kingdom
Berlin Conference
Cecil Rhodes
Chulalongkorn
David Livingstone
Federation of Indochina
King Khama III
King Leopold II of Belgium
The Mahdi, Muhammad Ahmad
Menelik II
New Imperialism
Samori Toure
Shaka
Suez Canal
Union of South Africa
Xhosa Cattle Killing ]]> http://dresnerworld.edublogs.org/2009/10/30/study-terms-for-chapters-21-through-26/feed/ 0 http://dresnerworld.edublogs.org/2009/10/21/a-few-announcements/ http://dresnerworld.edublogs.org/2009/10/21/a-few-announcements/#comments Wed, 21 Oct 2009 18:49:04 +0000 jdresner http://dresnerworld.edublogs.org/?p=269 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.

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.

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.

The answers I’m looking for have three important components:

• Definition: Basic information about what the person did or what the event involved or what the term means.
• Context: What country or region, what time period does this fit into? What else is happening around this term that’s important to know? What other people or events or concepts play a role?
• Significance: Why is this an important person or event or concept? What does this change about the world, and what comes after this that couldn’t have happened without it?

Definition alone, which is what you get if you memorize the textbook sidebar or a sentence or two from the text, gets you up to about a C. Context gets you to B-range. You need all three to make an A. (All of this assumes that you’re getting it right, of course.) You can get all that from the textbook, if you read it carefully, but it’s a lot easier if you listen to the lectures, too. Your answer on tests need not be limited to the material in a single chapter: many names and terms and processes will appear in multiple chapters; pop quizzes, on the other hand, will focus on the term as defined in the chapter assigned for that day.

You can find some exemplars of good work from previous semesters here and here.

I grade the individual questions on a 4-point scale: 4=A, 3=B, etc. On the tests, I then total those up and, taking the highest grade in the class as 100%, convert them back to a letter grade with pluses and minuses. I record that grade (on a hundred point scale, so F is still worth more than zero) as your grade on the test.

Voyages in World History: Volume 2 Since 1500 by Valerie Hansen and Kenneth R. Curtis.

If you want to order it online, make sure that you get the second volume: the ISBN for that is 978-0618077250

This is a new textbook for me, and looks quite readable and complete. I’ve used Valerie Hansen’s textbook on early China for years and have great respect for her scholarship and writing.