Public History and Podcast Essay

HIST 201: Podcast Analysis

DUE: Thursday, October 18

Grade: 15% of total grade

For this paper, you will evaluate a radio podcast as a form of public history, using specific examples from the podcast and making connections to relevant parts of our readings. Ultimately, make a central argument or point about the effectiveness of your podcast as a form of public history.

Begin by reading Ronald Grele’s article, “Whose Public? Whose History? What is the Goal of a Public Historian”[footnoteRef:1] and Susan Porter Benson, Stephen Brier, and Roy Rosenzweig’s “Introduction” in Presenting the Past.[footnoteRef:2] Next, listen to podcast of your choice from Backstory (http://backstoryradio.org).[footnoteRef:3] Click on “episodes” for a list of and access to all podcasts. Backstory is a nationally broadcasted radio program on a range of topics and events in U.S. History hosted by a group of professional historians. [1: Ronald J. Grele, “Whose Public? Whose History? What is the Goal of a Public Historian?,” The Public Historian 3, no. 1 (Winter, 1981): 40-48.] [2: Susan Porter Benson, Stephen Brier, and Roy Rosenzweig, “Introduction,” in Presenting the Past: Essays on History and the Public, ed. Susan Porter Benson, Stephen Brier, and Roy Rosenzweig (Philadelphia: Temple University Press, 1986), xv-xvii.] [3: “The Great War: The Long Shadow of WWI,” August 22, 2014, in Backstory, produced by Brigid McCarthy, podcast, http://backstoryradio.org/shows/the-great-war-4/?segments=word-war-i]

Begin your paper with a very brief description of your podcast: What podcast did you listen to and what major topics and themes did it cover? What central questions about the past is the podcast asking?

The bulk of your paper should be an evaluation or analysis of the podcast as a form of public history. Make sure your evaluation takes the form of a central argument—stated at the beginning of the paper—about your podcast’s effectiveness as a form of public history.

Questions to help you evaluate your podcast (you do not have to answer all of these in your evaluation, but use them to think critically about the podcast as a form of public history):

*What types of listeners was the podcast trying to reach, what methods did it use to engage its audience(s), and did it do so effectively?

*What central argument is the podcast attempting to make, is that central point backed up with appropriate evidence, and does the podcast seem to have a larger purpose?

*What types of sources and resources does the podcast use to tell their story and connect with their audience?

Consider, for example, who was interviewed (historians, journalists, community activists, the public, etc.) and the sources employed (songs, poetry, reading of primary sources, etc.).

*Does the podcast present various or conflicting interpretations of the history topic under review?

*How is the podcast different from a scholarly book used in a university history course?

*How does the podcast illuminate or complicate issues raised by Grele, Benson, Brier, and Rosenzweig? Engage with the texts for a stronger analysis. Grele writes, “Thus the task of the public historian, broadly defined, should be to help members of the public do their own history and to aid them in understanding their role in shaping and interpreting events.”[footnoteRef:4] Ultimately, in what ways did your podcast, as a form of public history, meet that goal? [4: Grele, “Whose Public? Whose History?,” 47-48.]

Paper Instructions

Length: 750-1,000 words

Due date: Thursday, October 18

Format: The paper should be double-spaced, in 12-point font, with one-inch margins. No cover page or sheet is necessary; put your name, course number, date, and the word count of the paper (the word count should not include the paper title, course number, your name, and footnotes) at the top right corner of the first page.

Citations: Use Chicago style footnotes. Since we have not yet covered Chicago style, I’ve provided a model for you here in the assignment. For the articles, make sure you include specific page numbers. Instead of “The Great War” podcast, you will cite the podcast you are reviewing. No bibliography is required.

Submission: Submit in hard-copy format and electronically to SafeAssign on Blackboard.

Late Policy: If you turn in your assignment after class on the date it is due it is considered a day late. For every day late, your assignment will be lowered by a third of a letter grade. For example, if you turn in a B paper the day after it is due, you will receive a -B grade. This includes weekends.

Grading Rubric for Public History Podcast Paper

	A	B	C	D	F
Argument	-Central point is clearly stated in the intro -The central point drives the structure of the paper and is clearly related to each section of the paper -Demonstrates complex, thoughtful analysis of sources; skillfully shows importance of the argument	-Argument is in intro -The central point is not consistent or not highlighted in the body of paper -Argument shows competency but less complex or original than A-level; responds to the “so what” question (larger significance)	-The central point is not a strong argument or not based on an analysis of documents -The paper is largely a summary or description and addresses the main question only indirectly -Does not explore the “so what” question	-No ascertainable argument, or the argument does not address the question or engage the sources	-No ascertainable central argument -The central point is completely unrelated to the question and/or basic theme
Evidence: the podcast of your choice, and the two academic works	-Demonstrates a sensitive reading of the sources -Evaluation of sources answers the question or skillfully/creatively supports the main argument -Ample and appropriate evidence is used to bolster the central point -Citations are used for quotations and paraphrased evidence and are formatted properly	-Uses the required sources -Analysis of sources connects to the question or main point but shows less skill or insight than A-level. -Generally appropriate use of quotations and paragraph in support of the central argument -Demonstrates familiarity with proper citation style	-Limited or unreliable sources; insufficient evidence to answer the question -Simplistic reading of sources/inaccuracies -Inconsistent use of citation for quotes and/or paraphrased evidence.	-Inadequate sources or evidence used to back up the main point -Sources used bear little relation to the question or argument -Little citation used and/or improper formatting	-Inadequate sources and evidence used -Extremely few or non-existent citations -Plagiarism
Writing Style/Mechanics & Organization	-Organization of paper is structured by the argument; paragraphs each contain one main idea related to development of the argument -Writes clearly with sophisticated language; avoids colloquialisms -Superior command of grammar and syntax	-Organization path clearly set up, with competent connection to main argument -Paragraphs may show some variance in quality of organization and/or style -Consistent command of college-level vocab and grammar	-Organization at times is unclear; significant problems with paragraph structure -Relies too heavily on colloquial language -Some patterns of error in grammar and/or spelling and/or lack of editing, but meaning usually clear	-Little organization in paper; serious problems with paragraph structure -Grammar errors are frequent; style or language obscures meaning or argument	-No attempt at organization -Major grammar or language errors that obscure the meaning or argument -Plagiarism