|
Related Links:
Three Parts of a History Paper
Writing an argumentative essay
Greater (lesser) truth
Class
note taking
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||
PART II. Body of the essay (paragraphs that follow--number varies). |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
__On overview of the issue, showing the complexity of
the issue with a brief summary of some viewpoints. |
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
PART III. Conclusion __ Here you restate the main argument and remind the reader of the strengths of the argument: that is, it reiterates the most important evidence supporting the argument. Make sure, however, that your conclusion is not simply a repetitive summary as this reduces the impact of the argument you have developed in your essay. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
M An example of this is the baseball player Barry Bonds (at right). Depending on who you ask, one will argue that he was a "good" baseball player; another would counter that he was a "bad" player. The different responses derive from a difference in the basis of judgment. One who argues that he was a "good" player might state the supremacy of statistics as being the primary basis of judgment: he hit many home runs. However if you cannot convince someone to accept this basis of judgment, then the case stands little chance of being persuasive. The same in the opposite case: one who argues that he is a "bad" baseball player might state that the use of steroids is cheating. Again, one must make the case as to why this standard should be the primary one or else the reader is not persuaded. As you develop your argument, therefore, do not neglect to make the direct, explicit case for why your basis of judgment should be accepted. Why is this preferable to another? Why does your basis of judgment yield the Greater Truth? |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||
 WHY ESSAY EXAMS? INTRODUCTION. In today’s world there is a premium placed on writers who can develop sound arguments and make persuasive cases through the written word. In the academic world argumentative essay writing is among the most common of assignments, and mastering the art of the persuasive argument will make you a more successful student. The argumentative essay means taking a position on a matter in a well structured, well reasoned, and well supported essay. WRITING IS THE MIRROR OF THE MIND.
When you want to see what you look like, you look in the mirror.
But where do you look to see what is in your mind? A reflection of
what is in your mind, visible to yourself and others, is what you
write.
Essay exams are a
useful tool for finding out if you can sort through a large body of
information, figure out what is important, and explain why it is
important. Essay exams challenge you to come up with key course
ideas and put them in your own words and to use the interpretive or
analytical skills you've practiced in the course. Instructors
want to see whether: |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Sample 1: "The Big
Adios" Introduction. This is an argumentative/persuasive essay because you are endeavoring to persuade the reader of your position. Begin with a clear thesis statement--something that can be supported by the evidence you build into the rest of the essay. For example: Shaquille O'Neal made the inevitable official, thankfully the Lakers seem to be doing the same. As soon as O'Neal tweeted to the world Wednesday he was calling it quits after a 19-year, mostly incredible, memorable, illustrious, outrageous, dominant, brilliant NBA career, the Buss family and the Lakers front office implied that they are ready to honor their former big man with the highest of tributes. (thesis) It looks like O'Neal's No. 34 will be retired and his jersey will be permanently up on the Staples Center wall. And that's a good thing. O'Neal absolutely deserves to be up there with fellow Lakers greats Kareem Abdul-Jabbar, Magic Johnson, Jerry West, Elgin Baylor, James Worthy, Wilt Chamberlain and Gail Goodrich. Now the city of Los Angeles needs to embrace the idea warmly, willingly and with no strings attached. And when it happens, he needs to get a long, loud, standing ovation. Counter (negative thesis) claims. As you are certainly aware, not everyone is going to answer this question the same way. There are various alternative responses vying with yours, and oftentimes the reader is aware of these alternatives; i.e., you cannot pretend they do not exist. The effective persuasive essay takes on the some of the strongest counter claims or arguments in an effort to demonstrate that they are off the mark/less convincing/lesser truth.
It should be a given that Lakers fans
are good with this, but maybe not. [here come the counter-claims] We couldn't understand how two brilliant superstars could no longer co-exist, how a pair of dominant players who won three championships together could not set aside their differences to try to win many more. It was unprofessionalism at its worst, and it forced an entire city to choose sides between players it loved equally and unconditionally. While Bryant may never redeem himself in the eyes of some Lakers fans because of the breakup, it was O'Neal who absorbed the brunt of the anger and hurt. As a result, some people might be hesitant to acknowledge his contributions by retiring his jersey, perhaps even some people within the Lakers organization. If so, they are wrong. [see how the counter-claims are directly acknowledged? Now why this position is off the mark:] Enough time has passed since the breakup. If any hard feelings remain, it's time to get over them. Shaquille is, was and always will be a member of the family. And he needs to know that. As badly as things ended, the Lakers ultimately rebounded and O'Neal went on the win another championship with the Heat. And in no way should the ending overshadow the overwhelming positives of O'Neal's career here. No, it wasn't the script we all wrote, and it didn't work out exactly as we planned, but it did work out, for everyone. Claims (Pro-thesis) claims. Now that O'Neal is officially retired, it's time to welcome him back to the family once and for all. No matter what you think about him, there is no disputing that O'Neal changed the course of the Lakers' future when he decided to leave Orlando for Los Angeles as a free agent in 1996. The Lakers were floundering at the time, still reeling from Magic's retirement five years earlier after contracting HIV. The reality is there was no guarantee they'd find their way again without a gigantic amount of luck falling their way. It doesn't get any bigger than O'Neal, a one-of-a-kind player the likes of which the world had never seen before and likely won't see again. O'Neal wasn't just better than everyone else he played with and against. He was unstoppable and dominant. He crushed opponents, demoralized them. He went around them, over them and through them. As wonderful and great as Michael Jordan is, I've already seen two pretty close imitations of him in Bryant and LeBron James. I've never seen any come close to the dominance of O'Neal. Before, during and since he came into the league. And I don't anticipate another one anytime soon. Somehow, someway he ended up with the Lakers as a free agent. I still remember what I was doing when the news leaked out he was on his way, and there isn't a Lakers fan worth his or her salt who doesn't recall their exact location and reaction when he announced he was joining the Lakers. When O'Neal came aboard - ironically the same year West traded for a young rookie named Kobe Bryant and drafted a kid by the name of Derek Fisher - the Lakers instantly became a championship contender again. But it all started with O'Neal, the incredibly gifted, agile 7-foot freak of nature. Without O'Neal, Phil Jackson never comes to Los Angeles. Without O'Neal, the Lakers don't three-peat in the early 2000s. Without O'Neal, Kobe is a great player but maybe not one of the all-time greats. With O'Neal, the Lakers and Jackson and Bryant formed one of the most dominant trios in NBA history, and before you knew it, the Lakers ended the decade with five titles and seven trips to the Finals.
O'Neal was the catalyst for everything, make no mistake about it. And to think that the Lakers could have equaled their success over the past decade without him would be presumptuousness of epic proportions. Now that he's retired, it looks like the Lakers are doing the right thing. And all Lakers fans need to embrace that. No. 34 needs to be hanging from the wall at Staples Center, ASAP. It is absolutely the right thing to do.
Question: What was the most important event, episode, period, or development in the history of American labor relations since the Civil War? Introduction. This is an argumentative/persuasive essay because you are endeavoring to persuade the reader of your position. Begin with a clear thesis statement--something that can be supported by the evidence you build into the rest of the essay. For example:
The passage of the Wagner Act and the
formation of the CIO in 1935 marked an important landmark in the
history of American labor relations. For the first time, the Wagner
Act clearly specified the right to bargain collectively. American
workers suffered tremendously through the rapid industrialization of
the late nineteenth century. Their efforts to organize were
routinely frustrated by a very limited sense of their collective and
individual rights. Employers, politicians, and the law all
privileged property rights over bargaining rights and viewed workers
only as individuals. When workers' organizations threatened "order"
or the "rights of property" they were summarily crushed-most
famously in the great railroad strikes of the 1870s and 1880s.
Claims
(Pro-thesis) & Counter (negative thesis) claims.
As you are certainly
aware, not everyone is going to answer this question the same way.
There are various alternative responses vying with yours, and
oftentimes the reader is aware of these alternatives; i.e., you
cannot pretend they do not exist. The effective persuasive essay
takes on the some of the strongest counter claims or arguments in an
effort to demonstrate that they are
off the mark/less convincing/lesser truth.
Here are some sample paragraphs that show factual knowledge: Even the Progressive era did little to advance workers' rights-indeed, many Progressive reforms such as welfare capitalism were meant to encourage loyalty to employers and discourage solidarity with other workers. When Progressives spoke of industrial democracy, they meant little more than the improvement of industrial conditions to the extent that workers would be happier and less likely to strike. In the wake of World War I, the rhetoric of industrial democracy collapsed into a series of bitter postwar strikes (most notably the great steel strike of 1919), which rolled back many wartime gains. The 1920s were marked by further union losses and the growth of the "open shop" movement. The open shop was articulated as an alternative to a "closed shop" in which workers all belonged to a union. With this rhetoric, employers were largely successful in selling the idea that the "open shop" preserved individual rights. Labor, on the other hand, argued (with little effect) that the closed shop reflected the classical principal of democratic majority rule. A union elected by a majority of workers represented all workers. The law remained with employers, who went so far as to employ "yellow dog" contracts by which union activity was grounds for dismissal.
The Case.
A good answer must be carefully
organized, and it must develop an argument which covers the entire
time period under consideration. It must demonstrate mastery over
course material by providing appropriate historical examples or
illustrations. Here are some sample paragraphs making the general case: The economic crisis which began in 1929 transformed American labor relations. Labor increasingly understood the importance of secure representation. And politicians increasingly understood the importance of an economic policy which would both garner workers' votes and bring about economic recovery. The first glimmer of reform came in 1933, when the National Recovery Act included a section on collective bargaining rights. Employers interpreted this to mean that proprietary "company unions" would fit the bill, but workers were able to press the administration and the courts to a defense of "real" collective bargaining. The NRA was thrown out in 1935, but was followed by the Wagner Act, which firmly established the right to collective representation and bargaining. For workers, this was the fruit of a long struggle. For the New Deal, it was the only avenue for reform and recovery left after the debacle of the NRA. For most employers, the Wagner Act was an unwelcome threat. With the AFL's reluctance to follow up on the Wagner Act, a group of industrial unionists formed the Congress of Industrial Organizations (CIO) to organize mass production industry. The CIO counted a number of impressive early gains in the automobile and steel industries, but ran into tougher sledding in smaller firms and the industrial South. The Second World War gave the CIO the opportunity to solidify its gains, but it also slowed new organization or growth. In 1947, the Taft-Hartley Act rolled back much of the Wagner Act, both by forcing CIO unions to submit anti-Communist affidavits and allowing states to draft "right to work" laws which re-established (especially in the South) the "open shop." Labor could do little more than sign on to the "politics of growth."
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
DR. Y's TEACHING APPROACH THE FACTOID & INQUIRY APPROACHES TO HISTORY. I understand that how I have chosen to approach this course is problematical for some students. Briefly, there are two ways to approach the teaching of history: the factoid and inquiry approaches. The factoid is about finding the answers, whereas the inquiry is about ascertaining the facts but going beyond that to learn how to ask questions. I proceed with the premise that BOTH are necessary. I follow the sentiment
voiced by James Loewen who declares that
"history
is not a fixed story students have to swallow but a way of
thinking they can apply to life."
If history will ever move from being something ornamental to
something useful, then we have to be able to find a way to look
beyond the mere acquisition of a list of facts.
Levels of learning / knowledge The college goal is to impart
higher-order skills (see image). Here we must
challenge ourselves to go beyond just the facts. What B and A students understand is that they
cannot stop just with a list of facts. Most people with ordinary intelligence can
memorize a list of facts. What sets one apart as above-average [B grade] or excellent [A grade] is the realization that
one must go beyond the facts to explore their significance.
In other words, NO
inquiry, NO thinking.
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
FOCUSED "LEADING QUESTIONS" vs. OPEN-ENDED "EXAM PROMPTS" Many history essay questions can be structured as followed to lead to a response: -How was World War I different than World War II? -What made the second wave of European exploration different from the first? -Why is history so important to learn well? -How did the Patriots make the case for American independence? The strength of using "leading questions" is that the student has a clear direction; the weakness is that the student has a limited direction and it may be not be what the student holds to be of most significance. Here instead we use open-ended exam prompts. This allows the student to formulate his or her own leading question: you set up the topic to talk about mostly what you want to talk about within the parameters of the assigned course work. For each lecture topic YOU formulate the direction of the discussion. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
MAKE-UP OF IN-CLASS EXAMINATIONS. Exams are given on pre-determined days as listed in the syllabus. Make-up exams are possible if a student:
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Related Links: The Three Parts of a History Paper Writing an argumentative essay Greater (lesser) truth Class note taking |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||
EXAM
PREPARATION
GRADING
CRITERIA. 
AKING
THE CASE FOR YOUR BASIS OF JUDGMENT
Without facts
(evidence/recorded facts/dates/names--call it what you will)
history is impossible. Evidence is the difference between
history and the past. Unfortunately, the trap that some
fall into is to think that once you have a pile of facts now you
know history and then you stop there. Thus they settle for
the limited definition of the task of the historian as beginning
and ending with being only a detective. What about the
historian as judge? What about the historian as
philosopher? What about the historian as storyteller?
These too are essential to our practice.
Aristotle: