HST 486 – Research for Seminar Paper – Jan 23
Fill out this form thoughtfully and turn it in before leaving the library
According to the timeline published in the syllabus, you will need to have chosen a topic and compiled an initial bibliography for your paper by January 30 in order to stay on track.   All students will meet individually with me during the first two weeks of February to discuss their progress on their papers.

1)  List the topic you propose to research for this  paper, including the time and place it occurred:
 
 

2)  Describe the strategy you will use to gain a general (non-scholarly) knowledge of this topic as you begin your research.  Explicitly name specific historical encyclopedias, subject bibliographies, multivolume general history series, and so on that you will use.
 
 
 

 

3)  To determine what historians agree on about this topic and where they disagree, you will need to become acquainted with the historiography of this topic.  What strategy will you use to discover the "big questions" related to your topic? to discover the major historians who have worked in this area?  (You learned how to do this in HST 301.)
 
 
 

 

4)  Use the Ohiolink catalog to find the titles of books that will be good secondary sources for your topic.  Order at least three such books today.  List the titles of those books you have ordered here:
 
 
 

 

5)  Use Historical Abstracts or another online database to find the titles of articles that will be good secondary sources for your topic.  List the bibliographic citation of one such article chosen from one of the journals owned by Roesch Library:

 

List the bibliographic citation of one such article chosen from a journal not owned by Roesch Library.  If you do not know how to obtain an article from a journal not owned by Roesch Library, ask Ms. Good to explain the process to us during our meeting with her.  Proceed to order this article yourself.  List the bibliographic citation of this article here:

 

6)  Describe the strategy you will use for finding primary sources on this topic:
 
 




Meetings for February 6-13 (appointment times randomly generated using 3x5 cards)
February 6
5:00-5:10 -- Goodman
5:10-5:20 -- Whalen
5:20-5:30 -- Cominsky
5:30-5:40 -- Kasick
5:40-5:50 -- Barger
5:50-6:00 -- Lorenzo		 February 13
5:00-5:10 -- Hall
5:10-5:20 -- Bartlett
5:20-5:30 -- Burke
5:30-5:40 -- Melton
5:40-5:50 -- Vaughan
5:50-6:00 -- Westbrock
 HST 486 – Research for Seminar Paper – Feb 6-13 (draft 1/21)
During this period, all students in the seminar will meet with me individually to discuss their progress on their papers.  Based on the work done January 23rd and thereafter, students should now be acquainted with the historiography of their topics.  They should have compiled an initial bibliography on their topics and have begun the reading for their papers.  This will enable students to narrow the topic on which they are working by devising a working thesis for their papers.

1)  Assume that I will ask you to describe the historiography on your topic during this meeting.  What are the major arguments and most important scholars' names which you will mention during this description?
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

2)  What research did you do which allowed you to discover the information in #1?
 
 
 
 
 

 

3)  Attach the initial bibliography for your paper to this form.  Be sure that your entries are in Chicago/Turabian citation style.  Group your entries as follows:

I. Secondary sources already read
II. Secondary sources yet to be read
III. Primary sources already read (this group may be fairly small at this point)
IV. Primary sources yet to be read
You will NOT group your bibliography entries this way when you turn in your paper!

4)  Outline your timetable for completing the reading of the secondary and primary sources in Groups II and IV here:
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

 

5)  Write down the working thesis for your paper as of this time:
 
 

 


Meetings for February 27-March 6
February 27
5:00-5:10 -- Bartlett
5:10-5:20 -- Kasick
5:20-5:30 -- Westbrock
5:30-5:40 -- Whalen
5:40-5:50 -- Goodman
5:50-6:00 -- Burke		 March 6
5:00-5:10 -- Lorenzo
5:10-5:20 -- Vaughan
5:20-5:30 -- Barger
5:30-5:40 -- Hall
5:40-5:50 -- Cominsky
5:50-6:00 -- Melton

HST 486 – Research for Seminar Paper – Feb 27-Mar 6 (draft 1/21)
During this period, all students in the seminar will meet with me individually again to discuss their progress on their papers.  Based on the work done since their previous meetings, students should now have compiled their final bibliographies.  Most of the reading of secondary sources should be completed and substantial progress on reading primary sources should be underway.  Students should be able to write a rough outline of the papers they propose to write.

1) Attach the final bibliography for your paper to this form.  Be sure that your entries are in Chicago/Turabian citation style.  Group your entries as follows:
I. Secondary sources already read
II. Secondary sources yet to be read
III. Primary sources already read
IV. Primary sources yet to be read
You will NOT group your bibliography entries this way when you turn in your paper!

2) Outline your timetable for completing the reading of the secondary and primary sources in Groups II and IV here:
 
 
 

 

3) Write down the working thesis for your paper at this time:
 
 

 

Has this thesis changed since our last meeting?   Why or why not?
 
 
 

 

4) Make an outline of the rough draft you will write here.  Be sure that each of the major points you will make explicitly develops your working thesis.  Be sure that you have arranged these points in logical order.
 
 

 


Meetings for March 13-20
March 13
5:00-5:10 -- Cominsky
5:10-5:20 -- Melton
5:20-5:30 -- Barger
5:30-5:40 -- Lorenzo
5:40-5:50 -- Hall
5:50-6:00 -- Kasick		 March 20
5:00-5:10 -- Goodman
5:10-5:20 -- Burke
5:20-5:30 -- Vaughan
5:30-5:40 -- Westbrock
5:40-5:50 -- Bartlett
5:50-6:00 -- Whalen

 HST 486 – Research for Seminar Paper – Mar 13-20 (draft 1/21)
During this period, all students in the seminar will meet with me individually again to discuss their progress on their papers.  Based on the work done since their previous meetings, students should now have completed the research for their papers and written a first draft of their papers.  This should be examined by two of their colleagues in the seminar ("referees") for logic and for clarity in writing style.  If this process uncovers any holes in the argument, some final research may be necessary, but this should be minimal.

1)  How has the reading and discussion that we have been doing during seminar meetings shed light on your topic?
 
 

2)  Arrange to have two people in the seminar comment on your first draft.  List their names here:

 

Some guidelines for the referee process: Students should take their responsibilities as referee very seriously.  Be sure that the thesis of the papers you read makes a statement that can be proven. If the thesis is vague or unclear, how could it be made more precise?

Draw up a rough outline of the paper.  The author needs to know if the argument as it exists in his or her mind is the same one that is coming across to the reader.  Do the points which the author makes support the thesis?  Does the author explicitly state the relationship between each point and the thesis?  Are the points arranged in a logical order?

The paper must be more than a summary of each of the readings completed by the author.  If it reads like a series of summaries, warn the author!

If the paper includes one or more sections which are basically descriptive narrative, how well do they fit into the whole?  Do they provide all of the context necessary to understand the situation under study?  If a referee believes he or she needs more of this background, try to specify what is necessary: more information on certain people, events, structures, etc.?  On the other hand, if there is too much narrative, point that out.  Is all of the narrative in the paper relevant to understanding the analysis?

Does the paper demonstrate an understanding of enough sources to support the thesis?  Do the sources seem appropriate to the thesis?  Would you suggest some additional research to make the paper even more convincing?

Every writer occasionally uses wording which seems clear to the writer but does not communicate an idea to the reader. These research papers must use standard written English in a formal mode.  Warn your authors where they lapse into informal or carelessly phrased language.

Are there any terms in the paper which need to be defined, either because the author is using them in an unconventional way or because a particular term is restricted to specialists in this field of study?

For most students, this will be the final required individual meeting with me.  Part of the time during seminar meetings on April  3, April 10, and April 17 will be devoted to student presentations on their research topics.  Students who would like to meet with me for additional brainstorming may, of course, meet with me during office hours or by appointment.

During the coming weeks, all students should take seriously the comments made by their referees.  Write a second and third draft of your papers.  Remember the distinction between "draft" and "revision" in the writing process.  A draft involves reconstruction – inserting new sections of analysis where a point wasn't clear or moving sections around in a paper.  Most college students need to write more than one draft of their seminar papers.  Also be sure that you have adequately documented your paper.  Every paragraph should have a citation at its end, except for those paragraphs made up entirely of your own ideas.

Once the final draft is complete, the revision process can begin.  Above all, this involves making sure that your writing is clear and precise.  You have to communicate your argument to someone who does not necessarily understand what "you meant to say" when reading your work.  When you have polished your writing, go over it again to be sure that you have eliminated all "sentence-level errors" – typos, grammatical errors, and so on.  Take a look at the "confused about grammar?" section of http://academic.udayton.edu/MarybethCarlson/paper-guide.htm.  Be sure that you understand why all of the indicated problems are grammatically incorrect and take care to eliminate all of them from your paper.