This action might not be possible to undo. Are you sure you want to continue?
Contact Name: William R. Caraher Employee ID: XXXXXX Department: History Stop Number: 8096 Office Phone: n/a Email Address: email@example.com Project Summary: Flipping the Textbook: A Proposal for Using the Scale-Up Classroom for Developing a ‘Signature Pedagogy’ for History Over the past 20 years there has been growing discussion of a “signature pedagogy” for the field of history. While no consensus has emerged, recent scholarship has come to see the introductory level course as a key laboratory for developing new approaches to teaching students to produce historical knowledge about the past. Approaches that favor “uncoverage” where students focus on methods rather than the endless list of names and dates have gained favor among many forward thinking historians. Practices like flipping the lecture and collaborative learning have sought to expose the intermediate learning processes and extended the faculty grasp from the lectern to the laptop to promote a more systematic approach to knowledge production and skill retention. The Scale-Up classroom fits well within the more extreme approaches to producing a managed learning environment. The panoptic character of the Scale-Up classroom provides an ideal place for careful, observable, collaborative knowledge production. The goal of History 101 in a Scale-Up environment will ask students to write a history textbook collaboratively from scratch.
Flipping the Textbook: A Proposal for Using the Scale-Up Classroom for Developing a ‘Signature Pedagogy’ for History Course number and Description: History 101: Western Civilization I Number of Sections Offered: 1 Single Instructor Enrolment Figures: 150 per class Scheduling: 7:00 pm – 9:20 pm Tuesday Night Schedule: Traditionally, the Department of History has taught History 101 at night for both pedagogical and social reasons. The former are outlined in the body of the proposal. The latter involve making the course available to the largest and most diverse community of learners possible.
Project Description: 1. Introduction. 2. Background and Experience 3. Goals and Design Principles 4. Assessment Strategy 5. Maximizing the Use of Available Resources 6. Classroom Structures to Meet Learning Goals 7. Classroom Procedures 8. Conclusion 9. Works Cited 10. Appendices
1. Introduction: Despite over 100 years of critique, the large lecture-style history class has changed very little. The traditional arrangement of the class positions the faculty member as the "sage on the stage" and the students in the audience in order to maximize the number of students exposed to the content in a controlled environment. Across campus, however, this form of classroom organization has gradually given way to more dynamic and interactive arrangements between student and teacher. While the much-maligned jargon of "active learning" has lost favor in recent times, there is no doubt that a greater degree of interaction between faculty and students has become increasingly normalized within pedagogical literature and day-to-day teaching practices of faculty. Within history, however, enrollment pressures, efficiency expectations, and old habits have continued to support the presence of large lecture style classes particularly at the introductory level or at least seen them as antithetical to carefully managed learning outcomes. Occasional efforts to flip or invert the lecture have met with the typical difficulties: large classes, lecture bowl style seating, and limited space for students to meet, work, share, or write. In recent years, the rapid expansion of digital technologies has offered new ways to overcome the physical limits of the classroom. Discussion boards, integrated social networking components, and the use of new and multi media delivery systems have expanded the educational environment beyond the physical confines of lecture hall, distended the concept of learning communities, and challenged the tension between groups and individual learners. Despite the expansion of the digital frontiers and a continuously renewed commitment to "active learning" and "flipped lectures", traditional textbooks persist as the main way in which students encounter "content". Traditional textbooks are generally linear, unappealing, and expensive obstacles that many faculty feel as compelled to work around as to justify to their students. Remarkably the history textbook of the 21st century is structurally similar to the textbook of the mid-20th century, even if the content has changed to suit new academic fashions and tastes. My proposed use of the Scale-Up classroom is to create a History 101: Western Civilization course where the students write their own textbook. This takes its inspiration from recent discussions of inverting the lecture, conceptual literature projects that compose journals or edited books in a fixed span of time, collaborative spirit behind projects like Wikipedia, and the socially disruptive "DIY" practices associated with the edu-punk movement (Groom 2008). The main goal of the Scale-Up History 101 Course will be to produce a synthetic History 101 textbook. The class will break into 15, 10-12 student groups, each responsible for a 5000 word chapter in the textbook. Using online resources, collaborative digital and classroom work spaces, and a restructured history lecture which focuses on methods, key interpretative themes, and techniques for writing history,
students will be asked to invert the traditional educational process where students go from learning history from a faculty member, a textbook, and other economically and politically repressive arrangement to producing a textbook in a space where the tools and material of history are available in a far more democratized way than traditional introductory history lectures. 2. Background and Experience: The course itself will be based upon my experiences teaching with both flipped lecture style History 101 class and teaching a similar course online. My flipped lecture classroom met once a week at night and featured 6 break out style groups who would meet weekly to prepare responses to discussion questions based on primary sources. In an online version of the class these discussion questions became part of an online discussion board where the students responded both to prepared questions and their fellow student's posts. Both techniques created an environment where students learned from one another rather than from a set lecture. The groups were generally big enough that better students and responses drove out the worse, and better students tended to model the quality for those less clear on the expectations of the class. For collaborative writing, I have experimented extensively with wikis that allow students to produce collaborative, synthetic collections of weekly notes. The significance of a wiki style interface is that it makes transparent the editing process and allows students to comment on particular pages and to move backward and forward through redacted drafts. From the perspective of faculty, the wiki feature in Blackboard allows for relatively transparent view of student contributions to various wiki pages. There is an extensive and growing literature on best practices in collaborative writing. The keys appear to encourage students to assign tasks clearly, to break complex tasks into manageable chunks, and to rotate tasks so that students get to participate in the writing, editing, and proofreading of each chapter. I have also gained experience with using social media to facilitate student communication and interaction in real time both both within and outside the classroom. Outside of the classroom, I have used Twitter as a simple and ubiquitous way to create social networks that allowed students to forge a sense of community and to communicate in a transparent and immediate way. Recent studies have show that the use of Twitter can produce a stronger sense of student engagement with is regularly tied to successful student learning outcomes (Junco et al 2011, 2012). I have also used Twitter in the classroom as a live “backchannel” feed and to facilitate instantaneous non-disruptive communication between groups. Students could use Twitter to post questions or comments during the lecture and discussion. While engaged in group work, students could post progress reports, simple questions, or even queries to other groups. These would appear on a screen at the front of the room in real-time and create a more dynamic and responsive classroom environment.
3. Goals and Design Principles: In keeping with the experimental natural of the course and the space, the project will have two sets of goals: one for the overall project and the other for the course itself. For the project: 1. To design a class to maximize the available resources in the Scale-Up classroom. 2. To design a course to maximize the quality and quantity of assessment data collected, 3. To demonstrate the viability of a large-scale (100+ student) history laboratory type class. 4. To engage both a graduate and an undergraduate student assistant in the preparation and design of the course. For the class itself: 1. To introduce students to the basic tools, methods, and critical positions central to historical analysis. Most scholarship on the teaching of history has emphasized the ability to analyze primary and secondary sources, to select historical evidence that supports particular arguments, and to understand and apply a range of abstract models for interpreting the significance of past experiences. 2. To foster collaborative writing as a means of critical reflection on the past. Historical writing has become an increasingly collaborative project. The growth of websites like Wikipedia outside the academy and rise in STEM and social science models for knowledge production within the discipline has influenced collaborative methods for the production of past knowledge. The success or failure, then of a particular project relies less on the ability of an individual and more on the individual’s ability to leverage the learning community to foster useful collaborative processes. 3. To encourage a deeper and more extensive knowledge of Western Civilization. Following best practices, "backward" and "assessment-driven" design played a key role in the structure and organization of the course. To do history is to write history. As a result, writing it the point of departure for any course that seeks to introduce students to historical knowledge production. Students, however, are generally unfamiliar with written, academic history and, introductory level students typically lack the complex skill sets necessary to produce these kinds of texts. Students are familiar with textbooks which can serve as an ideal model for issues of historical production. Thus, the writing a textbook is a suitable goal for a course designed to introduce students to the practice of producing historical knowledge. Writing a textbook is a project that is too large for any single students in the time allotted in the course. The need to complete a large task in a relatively short amount of time encourages students to embrace the collaborative engagement with the material and to utilize the tool and the time available in the Scale-Up classroom environment. Over the past 20 years, collaborative writing has emerged as an important method for encouraging discussion, making students more self-aware learners and thinkers,
promotes notions of collective intelligence, and reinforces in a tangible way the learning goals of the course. For the class itself, requiring students to articulate in writing their perspective supports the notion that history is a series of written arguments about the past. Requiring dissenting opinions (see below) further reinforces the notion that history is contested and that historical interpretations emerge from the social practice of writing history rather than the antiseptic vacuum of pure truth. There is a massive body of literature on collaborative writing from both conceptual and practical perspectives ( Moreover, the goal of collaborative writing resonates with larger shifts the writing process. The web has increasingly encouraged collaborative writing through blogs, wikis, and other multi-authored domains. The social and hard sciences have long traditions of co-authorship which have made important inroads into the humanities. The days of “heroic” writers producing solitary texts appear to be in abeyance (Eide and Lunsford 1992). Encouraging students to work on the textbook using Blackboard features and in the Scale-Up classroom environment allows for a panoptic view of the "intermediate processes" or "invisible" learning (Wineburg 2001; Bass and Eynon 2009). Following M. Foucault critique of the prison as panopticon, scholars have come to recognize the key role that new media practices could play in understanding and documenting the invisible learning processes (Foucault 1977). Observation of the learning process alone has the potential to shape student outcomes, but it also become a method of assessing various learning outcomes and grounding them in student practice. By crafting an environment that both encourages and requires online, digital interaction, it become possible to monitor not only quantifiable aspects of student engagement (time, number of contributions, et c.) but also to gather data from student participation in the online environment for later study. This final product of the course - a textbook developed through collaborative practices - that will preserve a large, unstructured dataset for later queries regarding student attitudes toward the past. 4. Assessment Strategy: The goals of each part of the course reflect the overall goals of the course more generally with each section emphasizing different degrees of individual and collective work in the course. Each unit has an individual active and passive assessment tool built into the course and designed to produce structured data suitable for comparison with Scale-Up projects at other institutions. The final product of the course, a textbook, will provide a substantial unstructured dataset with which to evaluate the overall success of the course. Active assessment will occur through three methods: 1. The course will model its active assessment on a survey developed by University of Minnesota to evaluate the usefulness of the Scale-Up classroom space in changing the learning experience (see Appendix 2). The value of using this particular assessment form is that we can compare our results with University of Minnesota results published in several recent publications (Walker, Brooks, and Baeple 2010; Brooks 2010; Whiteside,
Brooks and Walker 2010). The survey will be administered at the conclusion of each part of the course (see below) via Qualtrics for which UND has a recently acquired site license. 2. A simple form focused on basic skills associated with the historical method. This form will be administered at the conclusion of each section of the class. Considering the rather involved character of the University of Minnesota form and the real potential for “survey fatigue”, this assessment form will be short and focused on key historical skills. 3. Typical USAT evaluations will represent a set of data that can be compared with other History 101 courses in our department and by the same instructor. We also plant to implement a three-part passive assessment plan employing assessment: 1. Peer Observation: Over the past year, our department has encourage peer observation of teaching. The result of these observations are typically presented in a brief report to the instructor. We will also request that the peer observer maintain a brief log of activity in the room modeled on a log prepared for the evaluation of Scale-Up space at the University of Minnesota (see Appendix 3). This offers a robust, published point of comparison to contextualize our study. 2. Video Observation: In classroom observation, the presence of a conspicuous outsider has the potential to significantly alter the classroom environment and student and instructor behavior. At three times during the semester, I hope to be able to video record the classroom environment for later mining to determine whether the peer observation is consistent with classroom behavior in general. It seems likely that IRB approval will be necessary for this kind of data collection. 3. Digital Data Collection: As this course will have a robust digital component and the Blackboard LMS has a substantial analytical back-end that will produce data on student access practices (when and for how long?), student engagement to material (what pages did they visit?), and content creation practices (how evenly distributed was online content creation?). By collecting digital data, we can gain some understanding how collaborative and democratizing online digital data distribution actually is. Finally, the class will produce a textbook which represents a large, unstructured dataset for future assessment. The rather distributive arrangement of the textbook production will mitigate to some extent against the possibility that relatively few students made the majority of contributions to the final results. 5. Maximizing the Use of Available Resources: The advantage of the Scale-up classroom is that it will foster an integrated, simultaneous, realtime physical and digital environment that will allow multiple individuals to develop texts and resources collaboratively. Wiki style text interfaces (even if managed through an off-the-shelf product like Google Docs) allow multiple students to edit a single document simultaneously and allow the faculty to track total
contributions to a document. At the same time, students will also have access in a group format to various resources on the web ranging from Google Earth to content sources like Wikipedia, digital primary source texts, digital open access textbooks, and new and multimedia resources. The Scale-Up classroom creates to space to foster collaborative learning. This class will leverage, in particular, ability to move documents from one group to the next, to project them on a common screen, to integrate new and digital media into a born digital textbook, and to edit text collaboratively in real time. I have 5 years of experience working with flipped or inverted lectures and have come to value experienced graduate assistants in that classroom setting. The undergraduate assistant would work alongside myself and my graduate student to help students with basic issues of historical interpretation and to ensure groups stay on task. In particular, collaborative writing will likely involve counseling groups on efficient workflow, familiarizing students with the technical aspects of the course, and (almost inevitably) some amount of conflict resolution among group members. There is a substantial body of practical literature on collaborative writing that I will work with both my graduate and undersgraduate teaching assistants to familiarize them with the best practices. 6. Classroom Structures to Meet Learning Goals: On the first day of class the instructor will assign a textbook chapter to each group. The chapters will cover a particular time span, a non exclusive set of key concepts, topics, and developments, and some pertinent primary and secondary source texts. The course will be structured around 5 concerns central both to preparing a Western Civilization textbook and to understanding the process of interpreting and selecting historical evidence to compose an argument. The themes coincide closely with key skills central to historical analysis and, thereby, parallel the requirements of a ‘signature pedagogy’ for the discipline of history. These themes will be introduced over the first five weeks of the semester and, during which time each group will begin to work toward framing their chapters around key concepts and themes. 1. Key Themes in History Historical thinking depends upon students recognizing the key role the particular "critical positions" and methods play in the creation of historical narratives. To encourage the students to engage models for understanding the past in an explicit way (i.e. to produce and recognize a distinct historical epistemology), the class will feature an explicitly thematic approach to composing a textbook. This will, from the start, shift the emphasis from a specific sequence of events, a particular time span, or a narrowlyconstrued understanding of required coverage area to producing an explicit position necessary for the production of knowledge about the past. A strong thematic approach will have the additional benefit of ensuring a degree of consistency and coherence among the chapters of the textbook.
Since the mandated coverage of the course spans from the beginnings of human civilization to late 15th century, I will introduce the students to some basic themes central to the study of pre-industrial societies. These themes will come from a lecture and the only specific assigned reading for the class: P. Crone's Pre-Industrial Societies (Crone 1989). This work presents a general study of the social, economic, environmental, and political forces that shape pre-industrial societies. The general nature of the text is both its strength and its weakness. It will encourage the students struggle to understand how traditional narrative coincide with the model for preindustrial presented by Crone. I have used this book and this approach in my History 101 course since 2004 and I am particularly familiar with the limitations of the text and the difficulties in student understanding of using models for producing past historical knowledge. At the conclusion of this week, individuals will produce a basic essay on the limits on pre-industrial social, economic, and political development. 2. Texts and Sources Primary sources play a key role in historical analysis. They provide the foundation for historical argument and are central to performing the historical method as the key objects of critical inquiry. Selecting sources that form a foundation for at least parts of each chapter's arguments will be as important as identifying key sources that complement the historical narratives and interpretations presented the chapters of the texts. Recent literature on teaching history teachers to prepare course material has identified the ability to select appropriate primary sources as a key skill in demonstrating a sophisticated understanding of historical reasoning (Belanger 2011). At the same time, the notion of “primary”, “secondary” and “tertiary sources” often serves to obscure issues of authority in the production of historical knowledge. As part of the textbook writing exercise each Western Civilization chapter will be a selection of primary sources. In the first weeks of the class we will consider the key role that primary sources play in the study of the past and consider the role that they play in constructing historical arguments. We will also reflect on the role that primary sources play in the teaching of historical methods and how they should fit into the material prepared for each chapter. At the same time, students will have access to a series of textbook chapters that cover the period in which their group will write. To avoid copyright entanglements, the chapter will be extracted from each textbook and made available in a binder assigned to each group. Intentionally limiting the resources available to the group in this way not only will foster cooperation, but also keep course coast (i.e. book fees) to a minimum. At the send of this week, individuals will have a brief essay on the suitability of various primary source texts to complement and engage the main themes presented in Week 1.
3. Chronological Framework Chronology has long been a bane and a benefit for students of the past. On the one hand, the chronological ordering of events appears to offer clear lines of causality and even a simple guides for narrative structures that provide continuity in survey level courses. On the other hand, specific periodization schemes and chronological limits have often served as a justification for required coverage in survey level courses (e.g. Calder 2006, Sipress and Voelker 2011). Time like causality and historical knowledge is socially constructed (Fabian 1983) and should not replace critical understanding in the organization and arrangement of historical knowledge. In an effort to promote a deeper understanding of the past and to problematize basic critical positions that have characterized simple views on historical knowledge, this course will explicit challenge the linear, progress- and coverage-driven, narrative often associated with survey history courses, I will emphasize the problems associated with the chronological arrangement of past events (often closely associated with analytical models that privilege narrative) and potential ways to recognize the cultural significance of chronology while critiquing its limitations. The introduction to chronology will also make clear how the course itself will function as each student will be asked to critique a chronologically adjacent chapter as well as non-adjacent ones. This will make explicit that history is not the story of the past arranged uncritically in a linear way, but rather a set of skills, methods, and understandings that produces knowledge of the past. At the end of this week, individuals will produce a basic list of key dates for their chapter. 4. People and Powers The process of interrogating historical causality is the a key aspect of the historical method. At its core, the historical method requires a critical engagement with the whole the range of possible reasons for understanding the events, actors, and powers that shaped past events. In short, explicit statements on people and power stand as key concerns of history and focusing on the challenges associated with identifying The model for how pre-industrial societies functioned proposed by Patricia Crone and explored in the "Key Themes" section intentionally, explicitly, and critically limits the number and kinds of institutions and powers that influenced the course of events in pre-industrial times. At the intersection of a critical engagement with the major themes of the course and the range of potential institutions and individuals comes the process of selection. Students will also have to understand the chronological limits of their chapter, as well as understand what other chapters plan to do in order to create a cohesive study of the pre-industrial past. Public communication between groups using social media will ensure that each group of chapter authors will know (and to some extent justify) the key individuals, groups, and powers that shape the events in each chapter. At the end of this week, individual students will have a list of the key people and institutions for their chapters.
5. Places and Spaces Digital media has made it increasingly easy to display spatial and geographic relationships on the web. Each team will be asked to prepare maps and, if necessary, illustrations for their chapters based material from the web. Optimally, each chapter will produce a Google Earth data set of significant places and these will complement the final draft of the textbook. At the end of this week, individual students will have a list of the key spaces and places of the chapter. 7. Classroom Procedures: The course will be divided into three main parts. The first part of the course will focus on the core concepts, methods, and structures central to historical research and writing. The second part of the class will emphasize the selection, interpretation, and composition process for the textbook chapter. The third part will emphasize peer review and critical reflection on the writing and analysis process. At present the course is designed to meet 1 time a week, at night, for 140 minutes per week. The longer class periods provided by a one-day-a-week night course provide structured ample time for groups to meet and to produce texts within the classroom setting. This will allow the faculty to observe the collaborative, production processes. Complementing in class work, however, will be a robust – almost hybrid – online component of the class which will allow groups to continue to work outside of the classroom boundaries. Finally, the longer class will make it easier to combine lecture and discussions in the same class period. For a more detailed treatment see Appendix 1. Part 1. The goals of part 1: 1. Develop an understanding for expectations and technical aspects of the course. 2. Introduce students to key concepts in the study of history. 3. Develop key writing skills. 4. Expose students to the collaborative aspects of the course. The first part of the course will feature 5 short lectures dedicated to the main structural components of the class as outlined above and focused on the first goal of the course. Designed to complement the readings from Crone's book or other sources, the lecture will be punctuated by group activities that ask the student to will familiarize the students with the expectations of the course, the various technological interfaces, their co-authors, and to begin to develop the critical writing process. Graded Work: Each class will require an individual writing assignments to be submitted
the next week and it will count for 25% of the course grade. Assessment: A short, mandatory survey at the end of this part of the course which is largely based on a abbreviated version of a similar survey form produced by the University of Minnesota to evaluate the effectiveness of the Scale-Up Classroom. Part 2 The goals of part 2: 1. To employ the historical method – a crucial position, selection of historical evidence, analysis of primary sources, and composition of historical argument – in the service of a particular historical problem. 2. To articulate and recognize dissention historical arguments. 3. To organize and write in a collaborative environment. Part 2 will emphasize a step-by-step process that leads the group through the organization, writing, and editing of the chapter. From the first part of the course, students will have a theoretic model (Crone), primary and secondary source texts, and a set of critical perspectives on time, space, and power. Each week will require the production of a main group and a dissenting group essay. The value of Week 6 and 7 will require the groups to produce primary and dissenting opinions on key thematic, textual, chronological points for their chapter which draw explicitly on the models introduced in the first part of the class to their specific periods. Week 8 will require the production of a single outline for the chapter with an explanatory essay. A dissenting outline is possible as well. Week 9 and 10 will involve drafting the chapter. Where significant dissent exists a dissenting draft is allowed. Graded Work: The five projects in this section will amount to 25% of the final grade. Assessment: Peer observation, video data collection, and a survey comparable to that circulated at the conclusion of Part 1 will be the major assessment tools for this part of the course. Part 3. Peer Review and Reflexive Feedback The goals of part 3. 1. To learn to a respond to peer criticism. 2. To learn to offer historical critique to arguments. 3. To continue to refine writing skills and the application of the historical method. The final section of the course will involve peer reviewing other drafts and the
production of a final draft. Each student will be required to produce 1 short peer review on 4 separate chapters. The group will be asked to produce a response to a collection of peer reviews on their chapter and a revised chapter draft. This follows the standard practice in the field of history where authors receive peer review and are required to respond to the reviews in both a short statement and in the revision of the chapter. Graded Work: Peer reviews and response paper 25% and the final draft: 25% Assessment: The final draft of the textbook will provided an unstructured dataset for the evaluation of course goals. Schedule The design of the class is to Week 1 Themes Week 2 Texts and Sources Week 3 Chronology Week 4 People and Power Week 5 Places and Spaces Week 6 Themes for Chapter Week 7 Chronology for Chapter Week 8 Outline for Chapter Week 9 Draft of Chapter Week 10 Revised Draft 1 Week 11 Short Reports on 2 Chapters Week 12 Long Report on Chapter Week 13 Revised Draft 2 Week 14 Short Report of 2 Chapters Week 15 Reflexive Report on Chapter Final: Final Chapter Draft 8. Conclusion The Scale-Up classroom represents the culmination of a long process of modernization of the educational process. The transition from the centralized authority embodied in the lecturer to decentralized models of learning driven by observed encounters of the learning process. As history is a discipline committed to the production of modern perspectives on the past, it is unsurprising that they have adapted to the discourse of the late modern moment. By exposing the learning process to panoptic scrutiny, students experience the kind of control our increasingly invasive and managed form of capitalism has promoted.
Asking students to produce a textbook provides a socially informed pedagogy the leverages the tools of late capitalism to sow the seeds of its eventual demise. The packaged and homogenized nature of textbooks are an affront to anyone invested in the teaching and learning experience. Our students can learn, think, and write their own pasts that are finer and more personally rewarding than a commercial textbook. As I write these words, I’m listening to Bob Marley’s Small Axe, thinking of his social protest which used the power of media conglomerates to spread a message that was fundamentally inconsistent with the economics of music production. A similar spirit of protest powers parts of the digital revolution (and the profoundly challenging epistemologies and social economy of work like the Wikipedia project), the DIY movement, punk rock, and the long battles (fueled by a skeptical commitment of anarchic principles), that will hopefully lead to better ways of thinking, doing, and being.
9. Works Cited Bass and Enyon 2009. R. Bass and B. Enyon,“Capturing the Visible Evidence of Invisible Learning” from The Difference That Inquiry Makes: A Collaborative Case Study of Learning and Technology, from the Visible Knowledge Project. 2009. Accessed on April 1, 2012: http://www.academiccommons.org/commons/essay/capturing-visible-evidenceinvisible-learning Belanger 2011. E. Belander, “How Now? Historical Thinking, Reflective Teaching, and the Next Generation of History Teachers,” Journal of American History 97, 10791088. Brooks 2010. D. C. Brooks, “Space Matters: The Impact of Formal Learning Environments on Student Learning,” British Journal of Educational Technology (2010). doi:10.1111/j.1467-8535.2010.01098.x Calder 2006. L. Calder, “Uncoverage: Toward a Signature Pedagogy for the History Survey,” Journal of American History 92, 1358-1370. Crone 1989. P. Crone, Pre-Industrial Societies. Oxford: Blackwell. Eide and Lunsford 1992. L. Edie and A. Lunsford, Single Texts/Plural Authors: Perspectives on Collaborative Writing. Carbondale : Southern Illinois University Press. Fabian 1983. L. Fabian, Time and the other : how anthropology makes its object. New York: Columbia University Press. Foucault 1977. M. Foucault, Discipline and punish : the birth of the prison. New York : Pantheon Books. Groom 2008. J. Groom, “The Glass Bees,” Batavatuesday. May 25, 2008. Accessed April 1, 2012: http://bavatuesdays.com/the-glass-bees/ Junco et al. 2011. R. Junco, G. Heiberger, E. Loken, “The effect of Twitter on college student engagement and grades,” Journal of Computer Assisted Learning 27, 119–132. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2729.2010.00387.x. Junco et al. 2012. R. Junco, C.M. Elavsky, G. Heiberger, “Putting twitter to the test: Assessing outcomes for student collaboration, engagement and success,” British Journal of Educational Technology (2012), 1-15. doi:10.1111/j.1467-8535.2012.01284.x Sipress and Voelker 2009. J.M. Sipress and J. Voekler“From Learning History to Doing History: Beyond the Coverage Model” in Exploring Signature Pedagogy: Approaches to Teaching Disciplinary Habits of Mind. R. A. R. Gurung, N. L. Chick; A. Haynie eds. Sterling, Va. : Stylus Publishing. 19-35. Walker, Brooks, and Baepler 2010. J.D. Walker, D.C. Brooks, P. Baepler, “Pedagogy and Space: Empirical Research on New Learning Environments,” Educause Quarterly 34 (2011). Accessed April 1, 2012:
http://www.educause.edu/EDUCAUSE+Quarterly/EDUCAUSEQuarterlyMagazine Volum/PedagogyandSpaceEmpiricalResea/242683 Whiteside, Brooks and Walker 2010. A. L. Whiteside, D. C. Brooks, J.D. Walker “Making the Case for Space: Three Years of Empirical Research on Learning Environments,” Educause Quarterly 33 (2010). Accessed April 1, 2012: http://www.educause.edu/EDUCAUSE+Quarterly/EDUCAUSEQuarterlyMagazine Volum/MakingtheCaseforSpaceThreeYear/213681 Wineburg 2001. S. Wineburg, Historical thinking and other unnatural acts : charting the future of teaching the past. Philadelphia: Temple University Press 2001.
Appendix 1 Syllabus for History 101: Western Civilization An Experimental Collaboratory on Pre-Industrial Civilizations Part 1: Themes, Time, People, and Places The first part of the class will provide a basic frame work for understanding and producing historical knowledge. The key texts in this part of the class will be P. Crone’s Pre-Industrial Societies, a packet of standard textbook chapters, and a list of freely available primary sources. Week 1: Themes According to Patricia Crone, what are the most significant limitations on the development of pre-industrial societies, economies, and political institutions? What are the two most significant limitations and how do they apply to pre-industrial social, economic, and political realms. Provide one specific example from either the social, economic, or political history of the period that your group is responsible for studying. Week 2: Texts and Sources Most historians rely on both primary and secondary sources to construct historical arguments. What is the difference between a primary and a secondary source? Identify three key primary sources from your period. Identify one key secondary source. Week 3: Chronology All historians have to address the difficult issue of time in the past. Individual events in the past can sometimes be identified as occurring on one day (the Ides of March (March 15), sometimes over a clearly delimited stretch of dates (rule of Charlemagne as Roman Emperor 800-842), or over a period (Classical Age in Athens 480-323 BC). Identify 10 dates that are important for the study of your period. Why are they important? Week 4: People and Power Historians typically see individuals and institutions as key to understanding the development of historical events. While Crone has argued that there are real limits to the extent to which historical actors and institutions are free to act, there are nevertheless important figures within out sources. Identify 10 important institutions or individuals for your period. Why are they important? Week 5: Places and Spaces Cities, regions, and natural features have exerted a formative role on the kinds of political, economic, and social institutions that developed in pre-industrial times. Identify 10 places that are central for understanding the history of your period. Mark these areas in Google Earth and provide a kml file. Why are these areas significant? Part 2: Writing the Chapter.
Each team is responsible for one chapter of the textbook. The chapter should be no more than 5000 words total, should clearly identify and address key themes for the course (i.e. from Crone’s book and our discussions in the first part of class), and provide a clear chronological guideline. Finally, the final chapter should be free of grammatical errors. Week 6: Identifying Chapter Themes While pre-industrial society had significant limitations, the nature and response of these limitation in each period and location varied. In a general way, a focus on Crone’s limitation on all pre-industrial societies will ensure that each chapter has a similar character and emphasis. The first step in composing your chapter is deciding how you will incorporate Crone’s model of pre-industrial society into you treatment of a place and period. The best approach to your chapter will be to identify a theme or argument that will provide unity to the chapter. Provide a single statement that will demonstrate how you plan to incorporate Crone’s model to the material present in your chapter. Then, provide short examples of how Crone will help your audience to understand the material from your chapter. Week 7: Organizing a Chapter Chronology Each chapter must have a timeline that both reflects important historical events, but also reflects your arguments and themes. Developing a timeline will not only add useful component to your chapter, but also help you begin to organize the material relevant for writing your chapter. Justify your timeline by discussing the events that you have included and those that you have not included. Exchange your timeline with another group and prepare some critical commentary. Week 8: Preparing a Chapter Outline An outline is the crucial first step to any long writing project. It will provide the first opportunity to determine how to integrate the thematic issues in your chapter with its chronological structure. It will also break the work into manageable sections of writing. Prepare a detailed outline for your chapter showing how each section of the chapter will advance your thematic and chronological goals. Assign each section to an author or team of authors. The outline should provide a way to distribute the work evenly across the group. Each section should be roughly the same length and difficulty. Week 9: Producing a Chapter Draft Your outline should provide a basic model for distributing the work of writing to member of your group. Following these guidelines, compile the work of each team into a completed draft and make this draft available to all members of the team. Week 10: Revising the Chapter Draft Now that the entire team has read the entire draft, each member of the team should
prepare a list of 3 priorities for revising the entire draft. The more detailed and specific the list of revision priorities are, the easier it will be to improve the draft. Compile these short lists of priorities into a master list and distribute to the team. Each author or group of authors is responsible for making changes to their sections in response to the overall list of revision priorities. Part 3. Peer Review and Reflexive Feedback A key part of the writing process is revising drafts. Typically in the field of history, drafts of chapters are circulated to other scholars for suggestions and improvements. This process is called peer review and is a key aspect of the production of historical knowledge. Week 11: Short Peer Review Reports This week, each team will swap drafts with two other groups and receive two drafts in return. Over the next week, each team member should read these drafts and prepare short (1 page) critique of the drafts. The goal of the critique is to provide clear suggestions on how the draft can be improved. Be as specific as possible. Week 12: Long Peer Review Reports This week, each team should circulate their chapters to one other team and receive a chapter in exchange. Each team should prepare a long (3-5 page) peer review report on this chapter. This report should highlight the strengths and weaknesses of the chapter and emphasize clear ways to improve the chapter. As this long report will be produced by the team, rather than an individual, it might be easiest to encourage individual team members to focus on particular issues in the chapter (e.g. clarity of themes, historical evidence, names and dates, grammar and style, et c.). Week 13: Revised Draft 2 Over the past three weeks, each team has received both internal and external reviews on their draft. On the basis of these reviews, please produced a revised version of your chapter draft. Week 14: Short Peer Review Reports 2 The work this week will follow the same procedures as in Week 11, but on a different pair of chapters. Each team member should read two chapter and provide short reviews. Week 15: Reflexive Report of Chapter As part of the peer review and revision process each team has received extensive comments on their chapter drafts. The reflexive report sets out the most meaningful recommendations received in the peer review process and details how the chapter was changed to adapt to these recommendations. Each team should provide one, 3-5 page, reflexive report that details the most significant revisions undertaken during the peer review process. Final Exam: Final Chapter Draft.
This action might not be possible to undo. Are you sure you want to continue?
We've moved you to where you read on your other device.
Get the full title to continue reading from where you left off, or restart the preview.