history-206a@stolaf.edu
Dr. Rachel D. Shaw Phone: (507) 646-3143
Office: Holland 513B History Dept.: (507) 646-3167
Office Hours: Monday 10:30-12 and by appointment. E-mail: shawr@stolaf.edu
(You are also welcome to just drop by!)
Welcome to the history of the United States since 1865. As you study the development of American institutions and society from the Civil War to the present, you will examine economic, social, cultural and political themes with a special emphasis on changing interpretations. Major topics are Reconstruction, urbanization, populism, progressivism, depression, New Deal, foreign relations, civil rights, social reform, equality for women, and other recent trends.
Specific Goals: You will read several primary sources exploring the experience of individuals in American society from the turn of the century to the present. Even as the textbook is used to provide a sense of context, these readings will personalize and focus the larger trends of the periods in which the characters live. You will also explore these themes in your own work, through the use of weekly responses, primary source research, oral history interviews, and an analytical historical paper.
Skills: You will learn how to summarize, critically assess and effectively construct an argument, both in writing and in discussions and oral presentations. You will learn how to present your ideas clearly and effectively in writing, discussions, and presentation. You will learn historical research basics. You will learn how to analyze a variety of primary sources, including: text, audio, maps, images, cinema, internet. You will learn how to collaborate with a group on a significant research project.
John Mack Faragher, et al, Out of Many: A History of the American People, Volume II: Since 1865. (Prentice Hall, 2000. 3rd edition.)
Anzia Yezierska, The Bread Givers, (New York: Persea Books, 1975, orig. 1925).
Anne Moody, Coming of Age in Mississippi. (Laureleaf, 1997).
Ron Kovic, Born on the Fourth of July. (Pocket Books, 1996).
Danny Santiago, Famous All Over Town. (New American Library, 1990).
Douglas Coupland, Generation X: Tales for an Accelerated Culture. (St. Martin’s Press, 1992).
Additional materials may be placed on reserve at any time during the course. It is your responsibility to make sure that you keep abreast of any changes or additions.
Class Participation
Weekly Reading Reactions
“Teacher for a Day” Presentation
Primary Source Analyses (2 papers)
Research Paper (Builds on Analyses)
Final Exam
Two Office Visits
Grading Breakdown
Class Participation: 20%
Weekly Reading Reactions: 15%
Presentation: 15%
Primary Source Analysis: 20% (10% each)
Research Paper: 20%
Final Exam: 10%
Grade Scale
In the following grade scale, the grade is centered at the number following it. That is, if you received an 83, it would count as a high B-. Similarly, an 84 would be a low B.
Note that I do NOT grade essays and papers by starting with 100 points and subtracting points for errors. Rather, I weigh each paper or essay on its overall merits, judge it to be falling within a given grade range, and assign the number accordingly. Moreover, my comments on written work will focus on major and/or typical problems or strengths; they will not itemize every flaw or contribution.
If you have questions about how to improve your work, I will be happy to meet with you during office hours. You can also contact me by phone, email, or in person to arrange an appointment.
A+ 98
A 95
A- 92
(90 is counted as an A-)
B+ 88
B 85
B- 82
(80 is counted as a B-)
C+ 78
C 75
C- 72
(70 is counted as a C-)
D+ 68
D 65
D- 62
(60 is counted as a D-)
Below 60 is an F
To calculate your grade, do the following:
Participation grade x 0.20 =
Average of reactions x 0.15 =
Presentation grade x 0.15 =
Analysis 1 grade x 0.10 =
Analysis 2 grade x 0.10 =
Research paper grade x 0.20 =
Final grade x 0.10 =
TOTAL = grade for course
More complete descriptions will be handed out and discussed in class.
Note that the following guidelines for assessing student performance are just that, guidelines.
All student work is assessed on a case by case basis within these general standards.
Participation: You are expected to attend all sections of class, barring emergencies. Beyond attendance, you will be assessed on how well you contribute to class discussion and work. This includes commenting on and asking questions about the reading, and responding thoughtfully and respectfully to others in the class. All students are expected to participate regularly in class discussions and to keep up with the reading and other assignments. If you have concerns about your ability to meet this requirement, you will need to see me within the first two weeks of class to discuss them.
Excellent participants will join class activities on a regular basis and in a thoughtful and attentive way. They are on time and have excellent attendance. They are prepared, having read the required materials ahead of time and having thought about them. They ask questions that encourage productive discussion of the materials and course themes. In discussion, they direct their comments to the whole class, listen attentively to the ideas of other students, and work with others in order to enhance the understanding of the class as a whole. They are open to constructive criticism, and assess whether they need to reconsider their ideas in light of it; they also defend their ideas with specific examples and clear explanations of their reasoning. In brief, excellent participation means engaging with the materials and other students in a thoughtful and rigorous manner.
Good participants usually join in class discussions, and are reasonably prepared for such discussions. They are on time and regularly attend class. They ask questions about materials that confuse them, and listen to their classmates’ ideas with respect. In discussion, they direct their comments to the whole class (but tend to focus more on the professor’s reactions), and respond to their classmates’ ideas, but often in a merely superficial way. When challenged, they defend their ideas, but not always effectively; they are open to constructive criticism, but don’t always incorporate it into their thinking. In brief, good participants make an honest effort to engage with the materials and other students, but tend to do so in a relatively simplistic way.
Weak participants only speak up occasionally, and usually only in response to direct questions. They may be late or regularly miss class. In discussion, their comments and questions suggest a lack of understanding or familiarity with the material. While they listen politely to other students’ comments, they do not engage with them, either because they are focused only on their own ideas or because they do not join the discussion. Their comments and questions are directed at the professor, rather than to the class as a whole. In brief, weak participants give the impression of not engaging fully with either materials or other students, but are willing to contribute if pressed. NOTE: If you tend to be quiet in class even when interested and prepared, you run the risk of being put in this category. Please see me to ensure that this does not happen.
Students who do not participate at all, or in a way that discourages learning or intimidates other students will not receive a passing grade for participation. Such students should seriously ask themselves whether this is the right course for them, as regular, respectful participation is essential to success in this course.
Weekly Reading Reactions: (1-2 pages MAXIMUM) At the beginning of every week each of you will turn in a short paper in which you respond to the reading for that week.
The reaction should include the following: for each assigned reading identify (which means at least a sentence of description for each) three major events and/or three major characters /historical actors , and at least one major theme . You must then explain why you believe those events, theme, and actors are particularly important, both for the people of the time in question, and for us today. (In other words, why did you choose them, and not something else?)
You may, if you wish, add a brief paragraph giving your personal reaction to the readings; this section will not be graded and doesn’t count toward the page total. You may also include several questions about the material; these can be helpful during in-class discussions.
For these reactions you should treat the chapters from the textbook as separate units, and the assigned readings in the primary sources as single units. (So if you were assigned 2 chapters in the textbook, and 3 chapters in The Bread Givers, you would discuss 6 events (and/or actors) and 2 themes from the textbook, and 3 events/actors and 1 theme from the textbook..)
NOTE: 1-2 pages is not very much, so you need to be both focused and concise.
Excellent reactions demonstrate thoughtful and thorough engagement with the materials. They clearly identify the major events, themes, and actors, making it easy for an uninformed reader to know what they are. The explanation of why each was chosen is clear, thoughtful and persuasive. These reactions identify larger patterns connecting these focal points, and demonstrate awareness of specific historical context. Awareness of connections between and across readings is also apparent. Questions promote consideration of the larger implications of the material.
Good reactions respond to the readings and demonstrate a basic understanding of the material. Reactions identify events/actors/themes as required, and do so fairly clearly. The explanations for their selection are clear and thoughtful but somewhat simplistic compared to those in excellent reactions. There is some awareness of larger patterns and connections, but they are not as well articulated as in excellent reactions. Questions direct attention to the complexities of the historical period and/or the readings, but don’t consider the larger implications.
Weak reactions make an effort to respond to the readings, but do not do it well. Events/ actors/ themes are mentioned, but not identified effectively. The explanations for why they were selected are vague or undeveloped. The sense of the larger historical context is weak, and there is little or no understanding of how the readings might fit together. Assessments consist primarily of superficial statements like “it was easy to read” or “the author used too many big words.” Questions are clear and appropriate but simplistic.
Failing reactions give the impression of having been produced at the last minute. The selections may seem random or haphazard. The reasons for their selection are weak or absent or confusing. There is little or no attempt to consider larger contexts or implications. These reactions suggest a lack of familiarity with the readings or significant difficulty in understanding them.
“Teacher for a Day” Presentation: Each of you will be responsible for directing a class discussion of the weekly reading as part of a small group. How you choose to do this is up to you, but you must choose a format that encourages discussion of and engagement with the themes and contents of the readings. You are strongly encouraged to help your classmates make connections between the textbook and the primary sources. (Successful formats have included small group discussions, skits, game shows, making poster boards, and similar activities.) You will need to create a handout that notes major events, key actors, and connecting themes, and provides questions and topics for discussion. Be sure to make enough copies to for your classmates, yourself, and for me. You will turn this in instead of your weekly reaction for that week. GROUP WORK
Excellent presentations are clear, organized, and encourage participation. Such presentations demonstrate that the presenters are familiar with the material and have begun to think about its larger implications. Presenters ask questions that prompt discussion and deeper exploration of the material. Their outline clearly identifies the main ideas of the material and suggests additional secondary points. Presenters speak clearly, maintain eye contact with their audience, and share responsibility among themselves. They engage regularly with the class as a whole and as individuals. They may also incorporate visual aids or other techniques to encourage class participation; these are well thought out and enhance the presentation. Class activities are well organized, clearly explained, and helpful in understanding the materials. Presenters probably have thought about, planned, and practiced their roles several times before class.
Good presentations are clear and organized and make an effort to encourage participation. These presentations suggest that the presenters are familiar with the material and understand its basic significance. The presenters ask questions that encourage audience participation, but do not encourage deeper exploration of the material. Their outline identifies the major points of the material. Presenters speak clearly, try to maintain eye contact (but do not do so consistently), and share responsibility among the members of the group. Visual or other aids may be used; however, their use is less well thought out. Class activities encourage participation and are reasonably clear in their intentions. Presenters probably have thought about their presentation and discussed their individual roles once or twice ahead of time.
Weak presentations are mostly clear and give a general overview of the material. Presenters may seem unfamiliar with parts of the material and appear to lack confidence in their knowledge of the material. Presenters fail to maintain regular eye contact or direct most or all of their comments to the professor rather than the entire class. Some of the presenters may appear to be doing more work than the others. Weak outlines are brief and give only the most general sense of the material. The questions discourage discussion; presenters may ask mostly yes/no questions or questions that encourage simple answers or answers clearly favored by the presenters. Visual aids, if used, are more confusing than helpful. Class activities are confusing and not explained well. They may be entertaining without helping the class better understand the material. Presenters probably met briefly once before class to discuss general ideas and organization.
Failing presentations are disorganized and demonstrate a lack of familiarity with the material. Presenters are poorly prepared and give the impression of just going through the motions. The outline is the bare minimum and not all that useful. The questions are yes/no questions or create a hostile mood in the class. Class activities are disorganized and lack clear connections to the readings. Presenters ignore questions and do not act as a unified group. They give the impression of having met at the last minute to plan their presentation.
Primary Source Analysis: (2-3 pages) For each of these two analyses, you will select a primary source that deals with an aspect of 20th -century United States history. Along with an oral history interview, these sources will contribute to your research paper, so you will need to select them carefully and analyze them thoughtfully.
Your first primary source should be about some historically significant event or person from the time of your childhood and/or adolescence. This event or person does not have to be something or someone that you yourself remember (although this would be helpful), but rather someone or something that most Americans could be expected to know about. You may choose a more obscure topic, if you wish, but be prepared to spend some time explaining it.
For the oral history interview, I will be asking you to interview an older family member about his or her childhood and adolescence. (This will be explained later in the section on the research paper.) Your second primary source will be about some historically significant event or person from the time of his or her childhood and/or adolescence. Ideally, both sources will have something in common – maybe they consider similar types of events (both about assassinations, for example) or look at different stages in a person’s life, or could be used to track changes in technology or politics, or culture… (a source looking at the development of television, for example, and one talking about DVDs?). The easier it is to make a connection, the easier it will be to pull the paper together later.
Having found your source, you will describe it, explain where you found it and how, place it in historical context, and explain what it can (or cannot) tell us about the American past. A copy of the source must be included along with your paper (if you are planning to use a film or television source, see me first). If you wish, you may add an extra section giving your personal reaction to the source; this will not be graded, and it will not count toward the page total.
Excellent analyses are thoughtful, thorough, and make full and sophisticated use of the course materials to explain the source and place it in context. Descriptions of the source are clear, thorough, and give a strong sense of the source’s character and important features. The complexities of the source are recognized and acknowledged. The student’s assessment of the source is clearly stated and defended with appropriate examples and evidence.
Good analyses are thoughtful and use the course materials to gain a basic understanding of the source and its context. Descriptions of the source are clear and informative. They convey a basic sense of the source, but miss subtleties. The student’s assessment is reasonably clear and supported.
Weak analyses attempt to use the course materials to make sense of the source, but do not always succeed. Descriptions are not entirely effective; they fail to convey a good sense of the source and may misrepresent parts of it. The student’s assessment is unclear or weakly defended.
Failing analyses fail to incorporate course materials in any significant way. Descriptions distort the source or are so vague that in effect they say nothing. Source chosen may be inappropriate for the course topic. It is not clear what the student’s assessment of the source is.
Oral History Interview: This interview will not be graded, but a summary or transcript or recording of it must be turned in with your research paper.
For this assignment, you will be interviewing an older member of your family about their childhood and/or adolescence. (If there is some reason that you cannot or wish not to do this, please see me to discuss alternatives.) You will be looking for three things: (1) what was it like growing up then? (2) how did historical events/trends/people affect your relative’s experiences? (3) in what ways was his or her childhood/adolescence like or unlike your own?
In conducting this interview, I recommend that you start with simply asking your relative to reminisce about their youth and let them decide where to take the conversation in the beginning. (Bringing out an old photo album can often be a good way to get things rolling.) You can ask more specific questions later (it is not a bad idea to write them out beforehand) once the two of you feel more comfortable with the conversation. Note that question (3) may be one that you prefer to answer later on your own, after the interview, or which you would like your relative to answer as well.
Research Paper: (7-10 pages) In all of the primary source readings we are exploring this semester, a recurring theme is conflict and connection between generations. For this paper, you will start with your two primary source analyses and your interview of an older family member. Working from this base, you will produce an argument (thesis plus supporting and explanatory evidence) addressing the following questions: (a) is conflict between generations inevitable? (b) is generational conflict due to internal dynamics (such as personality clashes) or changing historical context? (c) do the experiences of different generations seem more different or more the same?
It is your choice whether you want to focus on generational relations within your own family, or look at generational relations in a more general way (with your family being but one example among many). In either case, you must be sure to consider the larger historical context, and the ways it does/did or does not/did not affect these relationships. (This means that you will need to use secondary sources at some point.)
Consideration of the larger historical context and significance of your topic are essential. There should be a clear thesis for which the readings and your experiences will serve as supporting and explanatory evidence. If you are unsure of your writing abilities, a draft is a good idea!
Excellent analyses carefully interweave historical narrative with effective argument. They provide not only a clear and detailed portrait of intergenerational relationships, but also build on that to make an argument of larger significance. In other words, specific subjects are not only presented and analyzed for their own sake; they form the support for an argument about larger issues. Specific examples are detailed and carefully chosen to present a particular point of view or illustrate a particular point. Course materials are used to place the specific experiences in larger context and may be used to provide or enhance analytical frameworks. Secondary sources are used deftly to explain and support the student’s argument, and do not substitute for it.
Good analyses provide a clear look at generational relations, and place them in a larger context. Course materials are used to help provide context, but not much in the way of analytical approaches. The larger argument of the paper is somewhat unformed; while it is clear that the specific history has something to say about larger issues, the main point of the paper isn’t as clearly spelled out as it may be in an excellent history. Specific anecdotes appear to have shared themes in common; some of these may be explicitly spelled out. Secondary sources are used for specific information and some ideas, but not skillfully; at times they obscure the student’s own ideas.
Weak analyses are mostly narratives without analysis. There is some effort to place the specific history into a larger historical context, but it is not a strong effort. Such histories seem more concerned with telling a story than making a point, but they tell their stories in a fairly clear way. They tend to be more general than detailed, and there isn’t a strong, clear theme tying all the parts together. There is heavy reliance on secondary sources for argument as well as information, with little if any original ideas. It is frequently difficult to discern where the student’s ideas leave off and those of the source begin (and vice versa).
Failing analyses address the assignment in only the most cursory way. The paper may give the impression of being just a random collection of anecdotes rather than a thoughtful reflection. The examples are vague or have no clear point to make. Sometimes, the history may be clear and well written, but not address the assignment. Secondary sources, if used, are overused to the point where it is very difficult to determine what contribution is made by the student; seeming or actual plagiarism is a concern.
Final Exam: The final exam will assess what you have learned as a result of taking this course. Part of it will assess your familiarity with the readings; part of it will test your comprehension of important themes and elements in 20th-century American history; and part of it will ask you to reflect at greater length on what you have learned in this course.
Two Office Visits: You must come visit me in my office at least twice during the term – once during the first half, and once during the second. This meeting should last at least fifteen minutes. During this time we will discuss anything related to the course that interests or concerns you – the purpose of the visit is for you to learn where my office is, see what an office visit is like, and get help or feedback on course materials and topics. It is also a chance for me to get to know each of you on an individual basis. This visit will not be graded, but a failure to make these visits will reflect badly on your participation grade. If you cannot make my regular office hours, please be sure to schedule an appointment.
Please note two things about the following schedule:
First, it may change slightly over the course of the semester to accommodate unforeseen problems, etc. It is your responsibility to keep abreast of any such changes by regularly attending class and checking your email.
Second, you may note that the reading load is significantly higher during the first half of the semester than during the second. This is to give you both the background needed to make sense of the readings, and the extra time needed to draft, edit, and revise your research paper. Please make your plans accordingly.
3-9 February
10-16 February
Out of Many, Chapters 17 and 18 (“Reconstruction, 1863-1877” and “Conquest and Survival: The Trans-Mississippi West 1860-1900”).
Harris, “Introduction” in The Bread Givers.
Yezierska, The Bread Givers, Chapters 1-9 (Book I).
17-23 February
Out of Many, Chapters 19 and 20 (“The Incorporation of America, 1865-1900” and “Commonwealth and Empire, 1870-1900”).
Yezierska, Chapters 10-16 (Book II)
24 February – 2 March
Out of Many, Chapters 21 and 22 (“Urban America and the Progressive Era, 1900-1917” and “World War I, 1914-1920”).
Yezierska, Chapters 17-21 (Book III)
3-9 March
Out of Many, Chapters 23 and 24 (“The Twenties, 1920-1929” and “The Great Depression and the New Deal, 1929-1940”).
Moody, Coming of Age in Mississippi, Part I (“Childhood”).
10-16 March
Out of Many, Chapters 25 and 26 (“World War II, 1941-1945” and “The Cold War, 1945-1952”).
Moody, Part II (“High School”).
17-23 March
Out of Many, Chapter 27 (“America at Midcentury, 1952-1963”).
Moody, Parts III and IV (“College” and “The Movement”).
24-30 March
31 March – 6 April
Out of Many, Chapter 28 (“The Civil Rights Movement, 1945-1966).
Kovic, Born on the Fourth of July, Chapters 1-3.
7-13 April
Out of Many, Chapter 29 (“War Abroad, War at Home, 1965-1974”).
Kovic, Chapters 4-7.
14-20 April
Out of Many, Chapter 30 (“The Overextended Society, 1974-1980”).
Santiago, Famous All Over Town , Chapters 1-14.
21-27 April
Santiago, Chapters 15-33.
28 April – 4 May
Out of Many, Chapter 31 (“The Conservative Ascendancy, since 1980”).
Coupland, Generation X, first half.
5-11 May
Coupland, second half
12-18 May
Re-read initial in-class essay, and write your response on it.
NOTE: We may have a take-home final in lieu of an in-class exam. It is your responsibility to attend class regularly so as to be aware of any possible changes, and to check with me if you are unsure about materials covered in class or if you miss a section due to illness.