HIST 450 Reading Response One (based on Schulman, xi-xvii, 1-117, 253-57)

Note: Reading responses for this class may be typed or hand-written and should answer all of the questions provided the week before.  If you miss class, you can find the questions on my website.  Unlike most assignments in this class, these are not formal assignments and they will not be evaluated on spelling or grammar.  Focus instead on articulating creative ideas and showing evidence of your engagement with the reading.

1. In one ordinary-length sentence (or at most two sentences), write down the main thesis for the whole book.  Read both Schulman’s introduction and conclusion to do this.  Be sure to use entirely your own words rather than simply quoting Schulman.

2. In one ordinary-length sentence, write down in your own words the main thesis of chapter 1.  Then identify one idea or passage in this chapter that you find particularly surprising or interesting.  In four or five sentences, explain what that idea or passage involves and why you find it so important or intriguing.

3. Do the same for chapter 2.
4. Do the same for chapter 3.
5. Do the same for chapter 4.



HIST 450 Reading Response Two (based on Schulman, 121-257, xii-xvii)

1. In one ordinary-length sentence per chapter, write down in your own words the main thesis of each chapter.  Do this for chapters 5, 6, 7, 8, and 9.

For the next three questions, write about five to seven sentences per answer:

2. Select one of the above five chapters and explain what you found particularly interesting or provocative in it. 

3. Do the same for another chapter.

4. What are Schulman’s own politics or values?  Offer some specific examples from the book that reveal his own positions.  Feel free to refer to the first half of the book too.



HIST 450 Reading Response Three (on Zaretsky, Schmitz/Walker, Buckaloo, & Gaddis)

Recommended reading order: Gaddis first, then Zaretsky, Buckaloo, and lastly Schmitz/Walker.  For a good response, write about five to seven sentences per answer.

1. What was Gaddis’ overall view of foreign policy in the Nixon/Ford era?  What did he find valuable in the foreign policies of Nixon and Ford?

2. According to Zaretsky, why was the 1973-1974 oil embargo so important to American consumer history and family history?

3. Buckaloo and Schmitz/Walker offer different assessments of Carter’s foreign policies, especially with regard to the issue of human rights and Nicaragua.  How do the two articles differ, and which article do you think offers the smarter assessment of Carter?

4. Select a passage in one of these four articles that strikes you as particularly relevant or useful for thinking about a domestic or international challenge that the United States faces today.  Explain what you see as the relevance for today.  Is this a case of history offering an example of something that Americans today should emulate?  Or is your chosen case an example of what not to do?


HIST 450 Reading Response Four (on Chávez and one of your primary sources)

Note: The syllabus mentions that this response will draw on the Chávez article, plus two or three additional articles.  I would like to revise this assignment in a way that will reduce your workload and help your final paper.  There will be no additional articles to read beyond Chávez, and you will instead do the activity spelled out in number 4 below.

1. In one sentence (or at most two sentences), write down Chávez’s main thesis.

2. If you had written this article, what about it would make you feel especially proud?  Try to focus on one or two specific features in the article.  Of course, we would all feel proud about having published a scholarly article, so offer a more focused comment on specific strengths.

3. Suppose Chávez was a good friend of yours, and he showed you this article in draft form.  Come up with two suggestions relating to the article’s argument, coverage, or organization that he could follow to make meaningful improvements.

**Now, instead of reading and writing on two or three other articles, please do the following.

4. Locate an interesting primary source relating to the topic of your research paper.  This primary source should be no more than one-page long.  This is very important, for reasons explained below.  Bring in two copies of your source to class on 7 May.  On a separate sheet of paper, write one or two sentences explaining how your source relates to the Bruce Schulman book (or to the foreign policy articles if you are doing a foreign policy paper that does not link to Schulman).  We will then work together in class on 7 May to discuss how all of our primary sources relate to each other and to our common readings. 

Note: I have reserved the glass-encased bulletin board on the 4th floor of King Hall at the intersection of the different wings, near the History Department office.  In class, we will conceptualize a display for all our primary sources that will go into that bulletin board case.  That is the reason why your source needs to be just one page long.  If it’s too long, we won’t have enough space for everyone in the display case.  If you have a long source, identify the best or most engaging part so that it fits on one page.  Feel free to select visual primary sources such as cartoons or photographs.  Those can be particularly useful for a display.