History research essay

1

Final Project: Individual Paper Guideline Due Friday December 1 by 11:59 pm via ELMS

LEARNING OBJECTIVES [L.O.] The individual paper is designed to assess students’ understanding and application of three key historical thinking skills:

• Continuity and change • Historical perspectives • Ethical dimensions of historical interpretations

ESSAY PROMPT The year is 2042. It has been over 10 years since the evolved zombies arrived at your compound and gave you an ultimatum. Every team experienced a different outcome based on your decisions to either accept the zombie ultimatum or declare war. Some of you remained free humans, while others became enslaved humans living under evolved zombie rule. Yet others chose to forcibly turn their fellow 500 human comrades into evolved zombies and stand trial for crimes against zombie-manity, while others accepted that becoming zombies was the next stage in human evolution and chose to turn. Regardless of how your encounter with the evolved zombies in the summer of 2032 unfolded, you “survived” the zombie apocalypse (2022-2032). Your task, as a “survivor” of the zombie apocalypse, is to situate your individual experience in the zombie outbreak within the broader narrative of human history. Compare the zombie outbreak with two incidents of apocalypse in history that threatened humanity, and

make an argument about why the zombie outbreak is distinctive from these historical apocalypses. [Note: the two incidents of apocalypse do not have to be related to contagion/disease]

As a “survivor” in 2042, you are participating in the construction of historical narrative. With great power comes great responsibility. How you choose to record the zombie outbreak in relation to previous historical apocalypses will inform how people (evolved zombies and/or humans) remember this transformative moment in “human” history. [L.O. ethical dimensions of historical interpretation] REQUIREMENTS

• 2-3 typed pages, double-spaced • 1-inch margins on all sides • 12 point Times New Roman • 3 citations (at minimum) based on 3 different course-assigned readings • Citation format (Footnotes in Chicago Style) • Works cited page (does not count as part of the 2-3 typed page requirement) • Title • Numbered pages

ASSESSMENT CRITERIA

• Clarity of your introductory thesis • Effective use of at least 3 different course-assigned readings • Analysis of change and/or continuity in apocalypses • The strength and organization of your ideas • The mechanical and grammatical correctness of your writing

2

GETTING STARTED ON YOUR PAPER Refer back to course assigned readings that discuss moments of apocalypse in history, and think about how the zombie outbreak is different and/or the same to these previous apocalyptic moments (continuity and change). You want to brainstorm continuity and change from multiple angles: what happened to the law? How did humans react to the enemies (zombies or otherwise)? Did power change hands (political, social, economic etc)? What caused the apocalypses? How did the apocalypses affect humanity? This is a sample list of questions; you are not limited to them as there may be other angles to consider. After your brainstorming session you will need to make choices about the similarities and differences you find most significant in terms of tracing continuity and/or change across these apocalyptic moments. It is through this process that you will begin to formulate an argument about what makes the zombie outbreak a unique apocalypse within the broader narrative of human history. AVOID THESE PITFALLS

• DO NOT simply write a few body paragraphs about similarities, and then a few body paragraphs about differences. This is overly simplistic. You must have an argument about the significance of the zombie outbreak in the history of apocalypse.

• DO NOT forget to specify the outcome of the zombie outbreak that you experienced. • DO NOT forget to address what is meant by apocalypse and humanity in your recorded history. • DO NOT forget to write a conclusion!

CONCLUSION Expectations This is your last chance to persuade your readers of your argument. You should restate your argument in a brief and cogent manner (1-2 sentences), and end with a discussion about the value of your recorded history of the zombie apocalypse. To answer this question you must think specifically about the outcome of your zombie apocalypse. What is the point of you recounting your zombie outbreak experience? Is it because humans had a pyrrhic victory and this story is a lesson for future generations? Is it because humans have all but died out and this story is a way of remembering their fight to save themselves? There are many different reasons why a recorded history of your zombie apocalypse experience would prove valuable; you just have to think about the outcome of your story and why you would be motivated to write down your experiences. It might also be useful to think about WHO you imagine the audience of your story to be—the remaining humans? The evolved zombies who want to document the history of human beings? A good example of how to identify the value of recording a zombie event is Max Brooks, World War Z. You were assigned the introduction, select chapters, and the conclusion for this very purpose—to provide you with an example of how to write an historical account of a zombie outbreak based on your own experiences. You will note that Brooks tells his audience why he chose to document the outbreak in the introduction, and then reflects on what the zombie outbreak means for the future of humanity in the conclusion. You do not have to follow Brooks’ model, but it is a good example of how to justify recording humanity’s experiences with the zombie apocalypse.

Rubric for Individual Paper

Central Thesis Statement 15 pts

(Clearly communicated, and well-developed central

thesis statement)

Central thesis is clearly communicated and well developed. It is specific and presents a clear vision for how the body paragraph evidence will support the main

argument. 15 pts

Clearly states a central thesis, but may have minor lapses in

development by lacking specificity and/or failing to explain key

concepts necessary for the reader to understand the significance of

the argument. Attempts to present a clear vision for how the body paragraph evidence will support the central thesis, but requires

clarification. 12 pts

Presents central thesis in general terms, often depending on

platitudes or clichés. Makes an attempt to explain key concepts

necessary for the reader to understand the significance of the argument, but requires additional

explanation. May attempt to present a clear vision for how the body paragraph evidence will support the central thesis, but

requires clarification. 9 pts

Presents central thesis in general terms, often depending on

platitudes or clichés. Makes no attempt to explain key concepts

necessary for the reader to understand the significance of the argument. More than likely does not attempt to present a clear

vision for how the body paragraph evidence will support the central thesis, but requires clarification.

6 pts

Does not have a clear central thesis. Thesis may be too vague or

obvious to be developed effectively.

3 pts

Does not respond appropriately to the assignment, lacks a central

thesis. 0 pts

Evidence 15 pts

(Use of direct quotations & sources)

Exceeds expectations by meeting the minimum requirement of three citations, and utilizing more than three course-assigned readings.

15 pts

Meets expectations by effectively citing the minimum of citations from three different course-

assigned readings. 12 pts

Meets minimum requirement of three DIRECT quotations, but does so somewhat ineffectively. May draw from 1-2 course-assigned readings instead of the required

three. 9 pts

Does not meet minimum requirement, but uses relevant

citations. 6 pts

Does not meet minimum requirement, and uses mostly

irrelevant citations. 3 pts

Does not cite sources and/or may rely on outside sources.

0 pts

Historical Context 15 pts

(Significance of historical context)

Effectively demonstrates the significance of historical context to

the argument. 15 pts

Demonstrates an understanding of historical context to the argument,

but may require clarification. 12 pts

Suggests the importance of historical context to the argument,

but does not directly discuss. 9 pts

Vaguely alludes to historical context. 6 pts

Misidentifies the historical context. 3 pts

Devoid of historical context, either directly or indirectly.

0 pts

Analysis of Evidence 35 pts

(Discussion of evidence supports argument)

Uses sources appropriately and effectively, providing sufficient

discussion of examples to convince reader of argument.

35 pts

Discussion of examples may require clarification and/or additional critical analysis to show how

examples support the argument. 28 pts

Discussion of examples in general terms, though an educated reader may extrapolate an argument.

Requires additional explanation to demonstrate the relevance of the

quote to the argument. 21 pts

Discussion of examples is too general and/or vague, though an argument may be somewhat extrapolated by an educated

reader. Assumes that the quote speaks for itself and needs no application to the point being

made. May have lapses in logic. 14 pts

Discussion of examples is unclear or does not respond appropriately to assignment. Discussion may be far

off base. 7 pts

No discussion is offered/attempted. 0 pts

Organization 15 pts

(Structure & coherence)

Sophisticated transitional sentences often develop one idea from the previous one or identify their logical relations. It guides the

reader through the chain of reasoning or progression of ideas.

15 pts

Shows a logical progression of ideas and uses fairly sophisticated

transitional devices. Some logical links may be faulty, but each

paragraph clearly relates to paper's central idea.

12 pts

Shows a logical progression of ideas with lapses in development and/or coherence. While each paragraph may relate to central idea, logic is not always clear. Topic sentences

may be overly general. 9 pts

Unclear as to how some paragraphs relate to paper’s thesis. Paragraphs have topic sentences but may be

overly general, and arrangement of ideas within may paragraphs lack

coherence. 6 pts

Random organization, lacking internal paragraph coherence.

Paragraphs lack topic sentences or main ideas, or may be too general or too specific to be effective. Paragraphs may not all relate to

paper's thesis. 3 pts

No appreciable organization; lacks transitions and coherence.

0 pts

Clarify of Writing 5 pts

(Spelling, grammar, syntax, word choice)

Sentences are structured and carefully focused, not long and rambling. Almost entirely free of

spelling, punctuation, and grammatical errors.

5 pts

Sentences generally clear, well structured, and focused, though

some may be awkward or ineffective. May contain a few

errors, which may annoy the reader but not impede understanding.

4 pts

Sentences may be wordy, unfocused, repetitive, or confusing. Usually contains several mechanical

errors, which may temporarily confuse the reader but not impede

the overall understanding. 3 pts

Usually contains either many mechanical errors or a few

important errors that block the reader’s understanding and ability

to see connections between thoughts. 2 pts

Usually contains many awkward sentences. Often contains so many

mechanical errors that it is impossible for the reader to follow the thinking from sentence to

sentence. 1 pt

Unreadable. 0 pts