chapter 14
chapter 15 in The American Yawp
This is one large question with multiple parts, so make sure that you carefully address each part. This question covers the entire span of the semester, so make sure you go back to the beginning of the course and trace these issues over the entire time span that this class has covered. This report needs to be two pages long, not counting the works cited page.
During this assignment, please consult the How To Write In History Module. In the Module, you will find a Brief Guide To Writing a History Paper and video links for Advice and Tips, Forming an Introduction, Structuring the Main Body of your term paper, and Forming a Conclusion for your paper.
Here are the questions you need to answer:
What kinds of arguments did Southerners use to defend slavery?
How did slaves commonly offer resistance to masters?
What happened to slaves during the Civil War, and would you see them as an asset or liability to the Southern war effort?
Once slaves were free, what problems did they face?
What did Congress do to try to guarantee freed slaves would enjoy the rights of American citizens, and did Congressional action work?
This report needs to be typed, double-spaced, with 12-point Times News Roman font, normal (default margins). You essay must be 2 pages in length.
Assessment:
You will be assessed on the following:
Written Communication Skills: This component includes your ability to write clearly and cogently in order to make a compelling, readable case. 50%
Critical Thinking: This component includes your ability to present and weigh arguments, to consider historical evidence, and to engage critically with your sources. 30%
Social and Personal Responsibility: This component involves your ability to incorporate the context of the development of and conflicts over concepts of freedom, liberty, and justice in American history. Your also must do your own work and where applicable cite the work and ideas of others. 20%
Note: The Critical Thinking and Personal Responsibility rubric attached to this assignment applies to the mandatory state assessment and the point scale associated with it will not apply toward the earned assignment grade.
Note: Understanding the difference between content knowledge and research
Content Knowledge is information gained from materials assigned as part of the class (Lecture Notes, specifically-assigned readings from The American Yawp, etc.)
Research is information gained from conducting individual research/readings not assigned as part of the class (such as other readings from The American Yawp not assigned, information from scholarly web sites, etc.)
If you need additional information on the difference between content knowledge and research, please feel free to ask for assistance .
Rubric Critical Thinking & Personal Responsibility Critical Thinking & Personal Responsibility Criteria Ratings Pts This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome Crit Think – Clarify threshold: 3.0 pts 4.0 pts Identifies and evaluates relevant, significant points of view. Is empathetic, fair in examining all relevant points of view 3.0 pts Identifies and evaluates relevant points of view. Is fair in examining those views 2.0 pts May identify other points of view but struggles with maintaining fair mindedness; may focus on irrelevant or insignificant points of view 1.0 pts Ignores or superficially evaluates alternate points of view, cannot separate own vested interests and feelings when evaluating other points of view — This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome Crit Think – Collect threshold: 3.0 pts 4.0 pts Gathers sufficient, credible, relevant information; observations, statements, logic, data, facts, questions, graphs, themes, assertions, descriptions, etc. Includes information that opposes as well as supports the argued position. Distinguishes between information and inferences drawn from that information 3.0 pts Gathers sufficient, credible, and relevant information. Includes information from opposing views. Distinguishes between information and inferences drawn from it 2.0 pts Gathers some credible information, but not enough; some information may be irrelevant. Omits significant information, including some strong counter arguments. Sometimes confuses information and the inferences drawn from it. 1.0 pts Relies on insufficient, irrelevant, or unreliable information. Fails to identify or hastily dismisses strong, relevant counter-arguments. Confuses information and inferences drawn from that information. — This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome Crit Think – Conclude threshold: 3.0 pts 4.0 pts Makes deep rather than superficial inferences. Makes inferences that are consistent with one another 3.0 pts Makes valid inferences, but not with the same depth as “Excellent” 2.0 pts Inferences are more often than not unclear, illogical, inconsistent, and/or superficial 1.0 pts Makes illogical, inconsistent inferences. Exhibits closed-mindedness or hostility to reason; regardless of the evidence, maintains or defines views based on self-interestMakes illogical, inconsistent inferences. Exhibits closed-mindedness or hostility to reason; regardless of the evidence, maintains or defines views based on self-interest — This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome Crit Think – Consider threshold: 3.0 pts 4.0 pts Clearly defines the issue or problem; accurately identifies the core issues. Appreciates depth and breadth of the problem. Demonstrates fair mindedness toward a problem 3.0 pts Defines the issue; identifies the core issues, but may not fully explore their depth and breadth. Demonstrates fair-mindedness 2.0 pts Defines the issue, but poorly (superficially, narrowly); may overlook some core issues. Has trouble maintaining a fair minded approach toward the problem 1.0 pts Fails to define clearly the issue or problem; does not recognize the core issues. Fails to maintain a fair-minded approach toward the problem — This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome Personal Resp – Identification Identification … the extent to which they understand the nature of inquiry. Identification clearly pinpoints what information is being sought and what kind of analysis is necessary. threshold: 3.0 pts 4.0 pts Student demonstrates a sophisticated understanding of complex ethical issues and recognition of diverse ethnic and cultural values 3.0 pts Student demonstrates an adequate understanding of complex ethical issues and recognition of diverse ethnic and cultural values 2.0 pts Student demonstrates partial understanding of complex ethical issues and recognition of diverse ethnic and cultural values 1.0 pts Student fails to demonstrate understanding of complex ethical issues and recognition of diverse ethnic and cultural values — This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome Personal Resp – Response Response … the extent to which a meaningful, personal connection is made to the ethical issues. threshold: 3.0 pts 4.0 pts Student identifies connections to personal values, can thoroughly articulate an argument showing understanding of the ethical quandaries, AND shows respect for the rights of others 3.0 pts Student identifies connections to personal values, can effectively articulate an argument showing understanding of the ethical quandaries, AND shows respect for the rights of others 2.0 pts Student identifies some vague connections to personal values, can adequately articulate an argument showing understanding of the ethical quandaries, AND shows some respect for the rights of others 1.0 pts Student fails to identify connections to personal values, is unable to articulate an argument showing understanding of the ethical quandaries, AND shows little respect for the rights of others — This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome Personal Resp – Connections Connections … the use of research or content knowledge to enhance and clarify the argument/discussion. threshold: 3.0 pts 4.0 pts Student uses sophisticated research AND incorporates content knowledge from the areas under study to enhance and clarify ethical quandaries 3.0 pts Student uses acceptable research AND incorporates content knowledge from the areas under study to enhance and clarify ethical quandaries 2.0 pts Student uses acceptable research OR incorporates content knowledge from the areas under study to enhance and clarify ethical quandaries 1.0 pts Student fails to use research or content knowledge to enhance or clarify ethical quandaries —
