Comment on the statement, “what now masquerades as World History is largely fictitious.”


Notice: Trying to access array offset on value of type bool in /home/onliiuxo/public_html/wp-content/themes/betheme/functions/theme-functions.php on line 1490

Notice: Trying to access array offset on value of type bool in /home/onliiuxo/public_html/wp-content/themes/betheme/functions/theme-functions.php on line 1495

Comment on the statement, “what now masquerades as World History is largely fictitious.”


Notice: Trying to access array offset on value of type bool in /home/onliiuxo/public_html/wp-content/themes/betheme/functions/theme-functions.php on line 1490

Notice: Trying to access array offset on value of type bool in /home/onliiuxo/public_html/wp-content/themes/betheme/functions/theme-functions.php on line 1495

Written Assignment Due on WENSDAY JUNE 26th On the bottom line of page 69 and top line of page 70 of your textbook, Walker states that “what now masquerades as World History is largely fictitious.” Comment on this statement in a well-developed essay from 350 to 600 words long. The 350 word MINIMUM is about the equivalent of a page and half double-spaced typewritten; the 600 word MAXIMUM is roughly about two and a half double spaced pages. The actual appearance of your posted text does not have to be double-spaced, it can be single-spaced, or space and a half. I am just giving you a rough idea of what the word count is equivalent to. (A longer essay is preferable and usually graded higher than a shorter essay, especially if you reach the minimum of 350 words and then stop abruptly, when a few more sentences would make your point stronger. However, quality counts more than quantity) You may totally agree, partially agree or totally disagree with Walker’s statement, but cite the specific facts on which you base your opinion. Avoid as much as possible any emotional arguments (such as “I feel. . .” “I hate. . .,” “I’m pissed off. . .,” “this is a bunch of bullcrap ,” etc.). Instead present your case with logical, rational, well-reasoned facts and arguments. You should be primarily responding to the text, and specifically to Chapter Two (pages 46-72) but if you think that the textbook is biased, you may cite other sources – other books, websites or info from other courses at UT, etc. –- IN ADDITION TO THE COURSE TEXT — to defend your case. (You must cite the textbook even if it is to say that you disagree with a certain passage or passages). Please post your essays to the WRITTEN ASSIGNMENT folder as a Microsoft Word compatible ATTACHED FILE. Your essay should not contain lengthy quotes. Short quotes –one or two lines–are permitted. But as much as possible the essay should be constructed in your own words, though of course you should paraphrase whenever appropriate Important: You MUST cite references and you should utilize the SAME method of CITATION that you were taught to use for assignment # 1, i.e., using fictitious examples, “On page 30, Walker cites Thomas Jefferson as stating . . .” or “On page 46 Walker quotes Pres. Barack Obama’s 2008 election campaign slogan ‘Yes we can!’ ” Repeating again: You MUST use documentation /cite references from the online text or other texts; you cannot talk/write “from the top of your head.” On the other hand, you should not use lengthy quotes but instead you should summarize and paraphrase. Please remember that if you support the statement you should be primarily citing the textbook chapter for examples. Some students sidestep the assignment by giving me essays full of anecdotes about the history of Native Americans, Nazi Germany, and other insights learned from other classes, without documenting or even touching upon the material from this AFRICAN HISTORY class. Such essays do not fare well when I grade them. Remember that one main objective of this homework assignment is to show that you have carefully read the assigned chapter in this textbook. Another oft-submitted faulty argument is that “we never really know what happened in history, because we weren’t there.” A third faulty argument is that relaying history is like playing the “game of telephone,” where the story is constantly changing from one person to the next. Essays built primarily on such assumptions do not fare well either.