Robert Hatch

This course follows a seminar format. Seminar discussion has a long tradition and is based on criteria not far removed from those of the ‘critique.’ These guidelines should be considered in all phases of seminar communication, in preparing critical reviews of shared texts as well as in seminar discussion. Written & Oral communication follows Mantra Two: Thesis; Objectives; Structure (Read: Argument & Evidence); Tradition & Genre; Audience; Absent = How to Improve.

1. State the Thesis. It is important to state succinctly, in one sentence, the author’s thesis. If possible, quote it. If necessary, quote several of the best candidates. The thesis statement represents the author’s position and interpretation regarding the main subject of the writing. The thesis statement is the key point the author wishes to make. It is critical for readers and writers to know the thesis statement, it is central to the entire enterprise, it controls and directs the author’s objectives, argument, and evidence, it tells the story of the author’s assumptions and possible motives. Find the thesis first. Quote it up front. Use the thesis as the basis for your analysis of issues. Avoid narrative and description. Instead, analyze issues.
2. What are the author’s objectives? Why do you think the author chose this topic, selected this problem, asked these questions? What is the purpose in writing this piece? Is it good problem selection? Does the work continue an historiographic tradition; does it respond to different traditions? Does the author have an ax to grind?
3. After addressing the thesis, purpose, and objectives, what are the most important claims? Conclusions? Use succinct direct quotation to support your position or interpretation. Use three or four carefully selected quotations to support your analysis. Develop reading skills that aim to isolate the key claims; then analyze those claims as part of the author’s argument.
4. Good scholarly writing involves argument and evidence. Describe the structure of the book and hence the main argument. Show how the organization of the book or chapter relate, show how the argument and evidence work together. Are assumptions explicit? Are there superfluous and irrelevant parts? Is something missing? Is the presentation cogent? Are counter arguments anticipated? Are potential examples or potential forms of evidence overlooked or overstated? Why is the reading organized as this way — could things be added, removed, re-organized? Are the parts well connected, are there good transitions?
5. What kinds of evidence are used? Does the writer use relevant examples? What types of examples and evidence are omitted? What kinds of evidence are used–factual, empirical, statistical, textual, literary, anecdotal? Does the author employ hypotheses — are there speculations and contingencies noted? If so, are they signalled to the reader as fact or as imaginative possibilities? Is the author clear when using interpretive models?
6. How does the author appeal to authority: Are citations numerous? Do citations refer to descriptive, summary statements; close arguments? Are there direct quotations from contemporary authors and from contemporary ‘historical texts’? How are more recent secondary authors cited — as evidence for factual materials or perhaps for broader interpretations of actions and events?
7. Characterize the audience: How would the author characterize the audience? What is the format and context of the writing: essay, chapter, journal, publisher, country, discipline, specialty? How does format affect argument, evidence, style? Is it ponderous, flip, breezy, measured? Do you trust the author? Explain. How do authors earn your trust and respect as a reader?.
8. Characterize the author’s use of language and tone; do definitions serve the purpose? Does the author use metaphor, mathematics, statistics, technical language, diagrams, pictures, jargon?
9. Is the writing convincing and persuasive? Why or why not? Relate your evaluation to the thesis, purpose, and objectives; make clear what standards or criteria you are using to analyze the argument. How is the author’s writing best described? Is it descriptive; prescriptive; explanatory? Is it issue-oriented? Is it basic chronological narrative? It is directed toward problem-solving or perhaps to solution-presenting? Is the problem or solution defined and discussed adequately? Do you find unsupported opinion or bias, does the author have an ax to grind; what historical tradition, theoretical school, interpretive genre does the author represent?
10. What are the strengths and weaknesses of the work? Specifically: How could this work be improved? Formulate one or two questions that need to be addressed. Attempt to describe where in the text you would engage this writer in order to enter into the reformulation of the problem and/or argument. Refine your position; consider your assumptions, thesis, objectives, purpose, argument, evidence, structure, tone. Read Strunk & White, Elements of Style annually. r.hatch.98/2005

SEMINAR DISCUSSIONS – PRESENTATIONS – TEXTS

Seminar discussions are invaluable for developing intellectual and verbal skills. If language is the common coin of academe, students must develop critical skills in thinking and writing. But these analytic skills do not translate automatically into effective seminar discussions or productive conversation. The following suggestions may prove useful to seminar participants.

Discussion of Readings

1. Read the material with care (re-read key sections) keeping in mind criteria discussed in the ‘Academic Reading’ handout above. Make annotations in your text as appropriate. If you wish, use ‘post-’ems’ or slips of paper at key places in the text. Points for discussion arise from ‘close reading’ and thoughtful reflection. Good writing in history is not just telling a good story with a chronological narrative. It involves ideas, issues, interpretation.
2. Make a separate list of questions and concerns with specific reference to pages in the text. Be prepared to defend your selection of examples. Issues are the key: identify; define; classify; illustrate; compare and contrast; analyze. Read the material carefully, critically, creatively. Reading is interpretation. You must be able to defend your interpretation with argument and evidence.
3. What are the issues and what is the argument about: evidence; reasoning; means of persuasion. Do the issues involve description (what is the major impression?); narration (relate the time, pattern, point of view, selection of material, meaning). How is the argument affected by structure, diction, metaphor, tone? Audience? Finally, stick to the text; resist the seductions of free association. Readings are shared.

Presentations in Seminar

1. Be very clear from the outset about presentation criteria; recall the importance of time, place, theme. If 30 minutes or 10 minutes is allotted, prepare strictly and accordingly. The place brings expectations about the format (sitting/standing; formal readings or prepared outline). The time, the place, and the theme frame your presentation. Be mindful of each element.
2. Be prepared. Research your topic thoroughly, then practice your presentation. Confidence is fostered by effort and understanding (careful research and preparation). Effective communication requires the added effort of acknowledging your audience. Pay attention to reasoned and creative strategies for your presentation. Your first obligation is clarity; your second obligation is rigor. Have textual evidence at hand.
3. If you evaluate your subject with care, you will know what should be emphasized and what can be omitted in the give-and-take of discussion. Think critically about your arguments, evidence, and examples.

How to critique a Presentation in Seminar

1. Learn to listen critically and sympathetically. Listen for what the presenter means rather than pick at words or specific arguments. In pressing for clarity, your first responsibility is to make the best case for the presenter. Your contribution is to show how that case could be made more persuasively. A key question in reading or in attending a lecture or presentation is: How could this be improved?
2. Focus attention on the assumptions of the presentation; this is the most difficult and important element in any communication. Second, consider how the basic thrust is presented, namely, what is the structure of the argument; how is evidence presented (or neglected); why have these particular examples been selected. Have specific textual evidence at hand.
3. If warranted, propose alternative assumptions, suggest more effective arguments, alternative evidence, possible counter examples, etc.
4. Avoid gamesmanship. This is rule-bound activity but it is not a game –‘making points,’ ‘louder voice,’ and ‘fastest gun,’ are not productive. Seminar discussion is not about competition, it is about mutual benefit – communication and cooperation are siblings. To be effective, present your views succinctly. Be prepared to learn from others. Thinking critically often means learning to listen and learning to acknowledge the effectiveness others. Finally, if you happen to be brilliant and articulate, don’t dominate discussion on this conviction alone.

RESEARCH ESSAY OUTLINES: FORMAT

Students are required to approve all research topics with the instructor. To assist students in selecting an interesting and manageable topic, a list of suggested topics has been included with the syllabus. The list is by no means exhaustive and is intended to pose suitably focused titles. I include the following guidelines for submitting the Outline, Bibliography, and Computer Search, which is due no later than week IX. The topic for the completed research essay {page designations will be discussed} must be approved by the instructor.

Begin Early: The most difficult task in writing a research essay is selecting a manageable topic; central to your success is restricting the topic and focusing on clearly identified issues and supporting your position with evidence. Begin early; I suggest the following procedure:

1. Find a topic that interests you.

   Clarify for yourself what topic holds interest then isolate the issues that make the topic meaningful, controversial, troubling. Find the best general sources available to help clarify your concerns. Set a time limit for yourself; you must identify a topic, clarify the issues, and if the topic is manageable. Are there sources available? How can the topic be more narrowly focused?

2. Get organized.

   Once you are satisfied with your topic and that sources are available, you must then begin to research your topic with good organizational skills and discipline. Don’t get side tracked; as Lewis Carroll suggested to the Alice: begin at the beginning; go to the end; then stop.

3. Computer Search:

   The library has a lot of books. Learning how to make a library work for you is a critical and joyful experience.

   First, learn how to use LUIS; if you need help, arrange for assistance from the reference librarian. Check the major authors most frequently cited in the works that you have already consulted. Good research is sleuthing: read footnotes with care; dig through the evermore detailed layers of scholarly publication–which often means specialized journal articles. Then, learn to search the web. See the search button at this website.

   Second, discuss you research project with the reference librarian; inquire what search options (on-line; CD-ROM) are available and most promising. Pursue every avenue for titles that seem promising. Obtain ‘hard copy’ printouts for future use.

   Third, sift and winnow. Think about how existing publications have identified, organized, and interpreted the issues that initially drew you to the topic. Having obtained copies of the books, monographs, articles, and other materials, read them with care–several times.

4. Make an Outline:

   An outline is required for the course and by most successful writers. It should include the following components: a) Thesis: The thesis statement is critical; it reduces to one clear sentence your considered conclusion–your position and interpretation–of the problem, question, or issue that you initially identified. Most writers labor distill their entire research essay into a simple declarative sentence. It will be difficult; it requires careful thought. b) Objectives: Your objectives state clearly what you hope to achieve in the essay, that is, what you will identify, describe, illustrate, and demonstrate, in your essay.

   Having stated your thesis and objectives, you must developed a detailed outline of your essay. Aristotle provides a plan: a beginning; middle; end: introduction; body; conclusion. Developing a detailed outline will save time and possible embarrassment when writing your essay. It is time well spent. Pay particular attention to organization and the relationship of the parts; is your argument coherent? Do you have evidence for your interpretation? Are there graceful transitions?

5. Bibliography:

   Having had your topic approved and supported by a general literature search, an outline with carefully considered thesis and objective statements, you must also develop and submit a Bibliography on your topic. No paper will be evaluated without a bibliography; include all relevant materials as ‘Works Consulted.’ The format should follow The Chicago Manual of Style, now an industry standard in academe. Follow this manual for footnotes and other apparatus.