The West and the World since 1500

history_paper_rubric.docx

Home >History homework help >The West and the World since 1500

History Paper Rubric

A good paper convinces the reader of the validity of its main point. It does this by stating the point clearly and supporting it with evidence. To prove its point, a good paper organizes the evidence in an ordered way so that it makes sense to the reader and uses language that is readable and free of mistakes.

A good paper also provides an insightful analysis of the subject at hand. It displays original thought and includes interesting ideas. A history paper in general is not about passing judgments on historical figures but rather about analyzing why they made the choices they did. For example, the point of a history paper is not to say that such-and-such person was right or wrong. Instead a history paper should provide an explanation of what such-and-such person believed, why such-and-such person behaved in this or that way, or why this or that historical event occurred the way it did.

A history paper should demonstrate that you are thinking historically: you place a subject in a particular place and time and you consider issues of historical context and change over time.

Outline of a good paper:

Introduction: The paper begins with an introduction that presents the topic the paper will discuss and why it is interesting. It clearly states the argument that the paper will make about the topic. It briefly summarizes the evidence that will be presented in order to support the argument.

Supporting point 1: In one or more paragraphs, the paper clearly states the first element that supports the argument. It then explains why it contributes to proving the argument.

· This section also includes the evidence that demonstrates this point. In general, this evidence will be quotes from primary documents or historical facts from a secondary source.

Supporting point 2: The paper presents as many supporting points as is necessary to prove the main argument of the paper. You do not need to include three supporting points if you can prove your argument with two or four supporting points.

· All the evidence taken from another source should be followed with a citation, describing the source from which the evidence was taken. Citations must be written in a proper format, such as Chicago Style or MLA.

Supporting point 3: For the sake of organization, each supporting point should be distinct. A paper should not jump back and forth between different points. Gather all the material about each point into its own section.

· Each paragraph should contain one main point, and should not include material that belongs with another point.

Conclusion: A conclusion restates the main argument and sums up the supporting points that were used to prove this argument. It should explain to the reader why this is interesting or important. Why should the reader care about the argument that has been made? What can be learned from it?

Elements of a good paper:

· Introduction

· Introduces the topic in an interesting way

· Clearly states the argument

· Briefly states the supporting points

· Supporting points

· Presents a series of points that prove the argument

· Each supporting paragraph has its own topic sentence

· Provides evidence that demonstrates the supporting point

· All evidence has a proper citation

· Conclusion

· Wraps up the paper by summarizing how the supporting points prove the main argument

· Tells the reader why the argument is interesting or important

· Writing

· Uses transitions between paragraphs so that the paper flows from one point to another

· Uses interesting, grammatically correct language

· Avoids repetition

· Content

· The main point is interesting and is not banal or obvious

· Demonstrates historical analysis

· The use of evidence is insightful

Mistakes that weaken a paper:

Writing:

· Lacks an argument

· Lacks structure

· Lacks evidence

· Lacks citations

· Includes many grammar mistakes

· Uses uninteresting, repetitive language

Content:

· Lacks original or complex thought

· Judges subjects rather than analyzing them

· Lacks historical thinking