Assignments

One of the objects of the semester is to keep you writing. So there will be several smaller assignments of various sorts. The following are the graded assignments: But the semester concentrates on only one long assignment. I am also going to ask that you email me the file of your assignments (.doc or .wpd file; .rtf is you use MAC) as well as handing in a hard copy. This will allow me to easily reproduce sections of papers for class discussion. I may also try editing on the fly.

Descriptions of Assignments

Historical Report

This assignment will be a report (1000-2000 words) supported through archival research. The report can be (1) an argument to establish a novel historical fact ("Richard Nixon used John F. Kennedy's Inaugural as a primary model of this own"), or (2) a narrative of a speaking event (Nichols on Lincoln's First Inaugural). This project may relate directly to your criticism, but it need not do so. Due March 11. 20 percent of grade.

Major Criticism

This will be a criticism (3000-5000 words) of your choice. The object of your critical eye may be historical or contemporary, single event or phenomenon. I do not mean to be limiting in what you look at for this project. Feel free to bounce ideas off me early. You should plan this work across the semester with the following benchmarks:

March 4– Announcement and explanation for topic of project. You will hand in an explanation of why you chose the object of criticism that you did and why you are pursuing your research question or thesis. (15 percent of grade)
March 11– You have located literature that serves as a context for your criticism and literature that you want to model
March 18– A revised research question or thesis ready for your first draft
April 1– First submission of project (25 percent of grade)
May 6– Final submission (35 percent of grade)

This project is designed to develop your sense for the importance of rewriting. Please note that the first submission is a heavy part of your grade. You should take this deadline very seriously and have an accomplished work. I will respond to this version, then you will rewrite. We will also work with your submissions in the workshop section of the course.

Grading

Papers and presentations will be graded on: (1) insight or significance of project; (2) cogency and clarity in explanation and argument in all assignments; plus (3) quality of writing or presentation; and (4) following of proper form in the written assignment. An "A" paper will be superior in all ways. I recommend Chicago Manual of Style, although APA is acceptable.

Late papers? You may give me a request for a paper to be late before the due date of the paper. You will need to request a form to make such a request, or download it from my website. That request should include a new due date. Papers that do not arrive by the due date will have a grade assigned, but have no comments. Obviously, no late group work or oral presentation.

Provenance of your work

Scholars working on projects – your paper for this course being an example – always see their work within a broader frame of reference than a single iteration. Projects inevitably balance novelty with long periods of development. I expect that your work in this seminar will be both original and a part of your ongoing program of research. To facilitate your thinking on this relationship I offer the following observations:

Rewriting is a part of any quality project. I expect that the final product you hand in to me will be the culmination of a process of research that includes multiple rewritings of the document I receive.
I expect that most of you will frame your project beyond the end of this course. After receiving my comments, you will revise for presentation at a convention, conference, or symposium, and eventually you will be rewrite again for submission to publication. There is an ethical dimension to this process that you should become familiar with. In later iterations, you should credit this course as an important moment in the work. Similarly, if you present the material orally at a scholarly venue you should credit that in a journal submission. This is called the "provenance" or "acknowledgment" note for an essay.
You may well want to work in this course with an idea or even an essay that you have written in the past. If you choose to do this, ethics (and academic integrity) dictate that you discuss the plan with me, identifying the advances that you plan for the project. In addition, your provenance for the paper should identify its earlier iterations. The key to such a process is to use the scholarship of this course to advance the project. In this course I expect the project to have original content added that makes the paper you hand to me substantively advanced from its earlier iteration.
Having said this, I understand that some papers ought to die in the seminar for which they were originally prepared. Let them die. They may do so because they are not directly relevant to where you wish to devote your energies in your research program (you have taken the seminar to expand the breadth of your understanding), or they did not result in a vision of further work on your part. Developing the judgement to place particular projects into the overall plan for one's research involves making this judgement. Such a judgement does not necessarily say that a paper lacks quality, (It better not lack quality!) but that it serves its purposes best standing alone without further pursuit.