One object of an upper division history seminar, especially the junior seminar, is that you will learn something about American history by becoming engaged in its discourse and its methods through the course reading and your own research. Papers are not simply a commodity which you produce in exchange for a grade.
What follows is a set of general guidelines for the composition of your junior seminar research paper. While I would like you to read them through and think about them, I do recognize that they may not wholly suit your individual paper topics, and that some of you may have to tailor them accordingly. I urge you to study the guidelines before you begin to write, and to contact me via telephone or email if you have questions. If you have not already drawn up an outline for your paper, it may help you to do so before you begin to write, and these suggestions may be of use in creating an outline.
With the exception of the introduction stating your topic and your arguments about it, which should be put in the opening paragraphs of your paper, the ordering of the rest of your information is up to you. You may feel that your topic requires a different order than what I have outlined below--for example, you may want to describe your sources and methods before presenting the historical context for your subject, or you may want to incorporate the general historical overview into the narrative of your paper.
I. Introduction to the paper
In the opening paragraphs of the paper, introduce your topic, and your arguments. Tell the reader briefly what the paper is about, and outline the arguments you will make based on your evidence. This can also include statements about why you became interested in the topic, what your original hypotheses were and how they have been changed or substantiated by your research, and how your argument compares to that of others doing research on similar subjects (e.g., "Though Robert Wiebe argues x, I have found y to be true." or "Like Nell Irvin Painter, I too found x to be true."). This section should introduce the reader to the hypotheses and arguments which will be elaborated and supported in the rest of the paper.
II. Body of Paper
The body of the paper should contain the bulk of your research findings or textual analysis. Depending on your topic, it may make sense to separate the arguments gleaned from secondary sources from your own research into primary documents or your own reading of a literary text.
Include a brief discussion of how your topic fits into the history of the period under study, especially the relevant historical debates. Where does the policy, literature, event, etc., under study fit in? You may also need to briefly describe the earlier history of the policy, event, literary genre, etc. that you are dealing with. Some topics lend themselves to chronological presentation, while others do not; for example, tracing the changes in a particular government policy requires different presentation than charting changes in a literary style.
For those of you who are grappling with large theoretical issues, some explanation of the theories, models, etc. which you are employing and/or contributing to is necessary. Present what you found in your research and reading, and what you think it means. Make sure to accurately cite your sources. If you are not sure when to cite a source, consult the instructions on when to footnote below.
III. Conclusion
In the conclusion you should briefly restate your arguments and assess how well you have been able to support them in the paper, as well as what you think the larger significance of your findings may be. You may also want to note directions for future research that are indicated by your findings.
A Note on Style and Word-processing:
Since most of you will be using a computer to produce your papers, you should give some consideration to the font size and print quality of the paper. Please do not use painfully small font sizes--10 or 12 point is acceptable. Font sizes larger or smaller than this are difficult to read. Try to use a good quality printer (read: dark, legible print) for both your rough and final drafts. If you must resort to a worn ribbon, please leave time to photocopy your paper, and give me the original and the copy--photocopying will often darken the print. It is in your interest to make your paper as legible and easy to read as possible, especially given the available technologies.
In general, it is a bad idea to try to make a short paper meet the required page length by using large font and/or wide spacing of lines or margins. (I may be dumb, but I am not stupid.) Your History Junior Seminar paper should be approximately thirty pages (and under no circumstances longer than thirty-five pages) when completed. Longer papers are usually met with more toleration than shorter papers, unless their length is a result of an inability or unwillingness on the writer's part to revise and edit.
The greatest advantage of word-processing is the ease with which you can make revisions. Unfortunately, the end of term pressures of completing many papers and assignments often means that there is little time to revise. If you can plan ahead, try to leave time to print out a draft copy, read it over, and make additions, corrections, changes in order, etc. This should only take an extra hour or two, and the benefits can be enormous. Even if there is no time for extensive revisions, you can often catch incomplete sentences and spelling or grammatical errors. Finally, take advantage of your word-processing program features like Spell Check and dictionaries--you have the technology.
When to Footnote Sources
Taking accurate notes will insure that you have all the necessary information to compose a complete footnote. The issue of how historians use footnotes is an especially interesting one, which some teachers have begun to discuss. Anthony Grafton has noted that, while footnotes have fallen out of favor in many fields, they remain crucial to historians:
In history, however, footnotes play a vital, double role. One the one hand, they support historians' narratives, showing that their authors have done the necessary amount and kinds of research. On the other hand, they democratize historical debate, enabling and even encouraging readers to argue with authors about their interpretations of the record. They show not only that any given piece of historical writing rests on solid work but also that it is inevitably provisional; they invite criticism and revision. Without them, the argument without end, characteristic of modern, professional history, could not go on (1).
Many of the extant writing guides and Web sites that instruct students in proper footnote form offer only guides to the Modern Language Association (MLA) or American Psychological Association (APA) standards. Most historians still favor numbered (rather than parenthetical) footnotes, following the most recent editions of Kate Turabian's A Manual for Writers or the Chicago Manual of Style. Undergraduate history majors need instruction in these differences and some understanding of how historians compose content footnotes. It is also important that students learn to properly cite electronic sources; here again, there are differences between historians and scholars in other disciplines.
Accurate citations are also necessary in order to avoid plagiarism. If you borrow someone else's words, language or ideas without crediting that person, even if you do so unintentionally, that is plagiary. This is why it is crucial to take accurate notes and develop some systematic method of keeping track of where your ideas come from. To avoid plagiarism, you need to footnote all direct quotations. You also need to cite places where you have summarized or paraphrased others' ideas or arguments. Direct quotations must be accurate, word for word what the author wrote. Short direct quotations (one sentence) should be included in the body of the text and placed in quotation marks. Make sure that quotations of more than three lines are single-spaced and set off from the rest of the text, for example:
People often argue that writing cannot be taught, and if they mean that inspiration cannot
be commanded nor laziness banished, then of course they are quite right. But stylistic analysis--revision--is something else, a method, not a mystical rite. How we compose--pray for the muse, marshal our thoughts, find the willpower to glue backside to chair--these may be idiosyncratic, but revision belongs to the public domain. Anyone can learn it (2).
You also need to provide accurate citations of all primary material. Historians use evidentiary footnotes not only to evaluate historical arguments, but to identify sources for their own work. If you are using archival sources, you may want to use abbreviations in footnotes referring to them (e.g., "Henry Luce Papers, hereafter HLP.") and you should note the box and folder numbers of the documents, if you know them. Those using material from interviews should use the proper format to note the name of the interviewee (if you have been authorized to use it) and the date of the interview.
If you have questions about the appropriate use of sources, consult the handy guide Sources: Their Uses and Acknowledgment published by Dartmouth College. Acknowledging your sources is crucial not only to avoid plagiarism, but also to help your reader distinguish (and appreciate) your arguments from those of others.
Miscellaneous Advice
In general, it's less confusing to the reader if the writer uses the past tense when describing historical events.It is bad form to address historical subjects by their first names, unless the writer has personal knowledge of the person in question.
(1) Anthony Grafton, "Birth of the Footnote," *Lingua Franca* (November 1997): 59.
(2) Richard A. Lanham, *Revising Prose* (New York: Charles Scribner's Sons, 1979): viii
|
|
