Successful papers ( earning 5 points) will do the following:
Introduction: raises a dilemma, sets out stakes, identifies what other historians have argued, lays out clear argument, tells reader a bit about how will go about demonstrating that argument.
Writing: clear writing, few to no grammar, spelling, or usage mistakes.
-uses proper (consistent) footnotes/citation (preferably Chicago Manual of Style).
Sources: Employs a range of primary sources (publicly available online documents, newspaper articles, photos, etc.) and not just one kind (say, nothing but documents from FRUS).
-utilizes at several secondary sources (article or book) about your topic.
Citation – your paper must cite sources for any quotes, analysis, facts that you borrow from another author. Please use footnotes and Chicago Manual of Style for your citations: https://guides.lib.uconn.edu/citationguides/chicago.
Bibliography: Will offer a bibliography of all sources used PLUS links to the UConn Library Catalog, Jstor or other database link for that source.
Plagiarism- if you have questions about what constitutes plagiarism read here: https://www.historians.org/teaching-and-learning/teaching-resources-for-historians/plagiarism-curricular-materials-for-history-instructors/defining-plagiarism
Argument/Narrative: Successful papers will make a clear arguments about the roots, meaning, or dynamics of the topics they focus on. They will do more than simply narrate a series of events or provide a series of statements of fact (premises). Rather, they will ask who, what, when, how, why questions.
Above Average papers (earning 4 pts) will do most of the above things, but will display one or more of the following:
– be marked by writing, usage, or grammar errors
– have an introduction which misses one or more of the components outlined above; may lack a clear argument for which the intellectual stakes of the paper are spelled out.
– employ a limited number of sources, or be heavily reliant on a single source
– be marked by inconsistent or inadequate citation
– a narrative which does not interpret events, but merely provides a blow by blow account of events
Poor papers (earning 3 points or less) will do few of the things successful papers do, and display several of the deficiencies outlined above: poor writing; poor citation; lack of sufficient sources, an introduction missing several components; lack of argument or clear narrative; apparent use of Chat GPT or other AI software
For your class project you will choose a topic of your own design and develop a historical argument about it, using primary (where available) and secondary sources, writing about 2500 words. There are no topic restrictions, as long as you can analyze change over time. You might choose a particular place, an exchange, a flow or circulation, an encounter, the environment and/or non-human actors. I would encourage you to use a small collection of primary sources about your topic and put them in conversation with a small collection of books and articles about that topic.
When writing this paper please use Scholary articles and make sure they are in Chicago Manual of Style for your citations:
