20 th century democratic movement
Order Description
WHII-Paper 3
Mini-Research Paper
Topic: 20th Century Democratic Movements
Following the definition provided by Kaplan, you will be examining a movement in a particular country (not the United States) where a group or groups of people sought greater participation in governance. The movement could have been successful or not, and could have been seeking a democratic government or simply broader participation in any type of political system.
1. The Goal:
a. To use the lessons from the first two papers to make your own argument about history.
i. First lesson: there are lots of ways to write about history and arguments to make about the past.
ii. Second lesson: careful reading of primary sources allows you to look beyond other scholars’ views to develop interpretations and arguments of your own.
2. The Method:
a. Using JSTOR, find an academic article (usually between 15 and 25 pages). Your paper will likely begin with a summary of the article’s argument (not necessarily the content as a whole). (You don’t have to use JSTOR, but it’s a good way to ensure the quality of your article.)
b. Next, use primary sources (and additional secondary sources if necessary) to create an argument of your own.
i. You can challenge the article’s argument, or you can use primary sources to agree or even bolster the author’s stance.
ii. I fully expect that most, if not all, of the primary sources will be newspaper articles. The NYT Database is an excellent source for this sort of material. You can, of course, use other sources as well, but I don’t expect deep research at this point.
c. You MUST create an argument, even if the argument is ‘the historian who wrote the article has done a good job’.
3. You MUST use proper citation method. Please refer to the Purdue OWL website if you are unclear about how to cite something. You can use APA or MLA style.
a. Failure to use internal citations will lead to a loss of ALL citation points.

Grade A B C
Quality journal article and summary:
10 A good academic article from a quality source. Clear explanation and assessment of the article’s argument, including advanced interpretation such as questioning the author’s interpretation of primary sources.
A good article from a good source. A clear explanation, but with less ‘advanced interpretation’
A good article, with less clear explanation.

Historical Argument: 30 You present an argument about the past, and in particular in response to the article you chose. You found interesting and relevant primary sources that provide new information with which to create a new argument. -argument presented, though not as well articulated or well-conceived.
-Primary sources are there, but not as relevant.
Weak argument, poorly argued and weakly supported by documents.
Structure: 10 -Clear organization that clarifies the subject.
-Strong introduction and conclusion. -Intro and conclusion, but perhaps less persuasive.
-Organization is less effective.
-perhaps formulaic -Weak intro and conclusion.
-Organization hurts the ability to understand the content.
Style: 20 -Few editing errors.
-Some editing errors, but not enough to detract from the content.
-More editing errors, obscuring content.

Length: 10 -1500-2000 words of actual text, not including name, title, and works cited.
-1400+ words -1200+ words
Focus: 10 -Stays on target to answer the question posed above. -Answers the basic question, but perhaps slightly off target. -Right basic premise, but hard to see connection to question.
Citations: 10 -Accurate, both in placement and style. Notes (internal or footnotes) as well as Works Cited. -Accurate in placement, weaker on style. -Poorly executed, poor style.

20 th century democratic movement
Order Description
WHII-Paper 3
Mini-Research Paper
Topic: 20th Century Democratic Movements
Following the definition provided by Kaplan, you will be examining a movement in a particular country (not the United States) where a group or groups of people sought greater participation in governance. The movement could have been successful or not, and could have been seeking a democratic government or simply broader participation in any type of political system.
1. The Goal:
a. To use the lessons from the first two papers to make your own argument about history.
i. First lesson: there are lots of ways to write about history and arguments to make about the past.
ii. Second lesson: careful reading of primary sources allows you to look beyond other scholars’ views to develop interpretations and arguments of your own.
2. The Method:
a. Using JSTOR, find an academic article (usually between 15 and 25 pages). Your paper will likely begin with a summary of the article’s argument (not necessarily the content as a whole). (You don’t have to use JSTOR, but it’s a good way to ensure the quality of your article.)
b. Next, use primary sources (and additional secondary sources if necessary) to create an argument of your own.
i. You can challenge the article’s argument, or you can use primary sources to agree or even bolster the author’s stance.
ii. I fully expect that most, if not all, of the primary sources will be newspaper articles. The NYT Database is an excellent source for this sort of material. You can, of course, use other sources as well, but I don’t expect deep research at this point.
c. You MUST create an argument, even if the argument is ‘the historian who wrote the article has done a good job’.
3. You MUST use proper citation method. Please refer to the Purdue OWL website if you are unclear about how to cite something. You can use APA or MLA style.
a. Failure to use internal citations will lead to a loss of ALL citation points.

Grade A B C
Quality journal article and summary:
10 A good academic article from a quality source. Clear explanation and assessment of the article’s argument, including advanced interpretation such as questioning the author’s interpretation of primary sources.
A good article from a good source. A clear explanation, but with less ‘advanced interpretation’
A good article, with less clear explanation.

Historical Argument: 30 You present an argument about the past, and in particular in response to the article you chose. You found interesting and relevant primary sources that provide new information with which to create a new argument. -argument presented, though not as well articulated or well-conceived.
-Primary sources are there, but not as relevant.
Weak argument, poorly argued and weakly supported by documents.
Structure: 10 -Clear organization that clarifies the subject.
-Strong introduction and conclusion. -Intro and conclusion, but perhaps less persuasive.
-Organization is less effective.
-perhaps formulaic -Weak intro and conclusion.
-Organization hurts the ability to understand the content.
Style: 20 -Few editing errors.
-Some editing errors, but not enough to detract from the content.
-More editing errors, obscuring content.

Length: 10 -1500-2000 words of actual text, not including name, title, and works cited.
-1400+ words -1200+ words
Focus: 10 -Stays on target to answer the question posed above. -Answers the basic question, but perhaps slightly off target. -Right basic premise, but hard to see connection to question.
Citations: 10 -Accurate, both in placement and style. Notes (internal or footnotes) as well as Works Cited. -Accurate in placement, weaker on style. -Poorly executed, poor style.