---

VIII. APPENDICES

A.) T.A.'s Pedagogical Diary Martin Wilson, Fall, 1996 and Jennifer Coleman, Spring 1997

Martin W. Wilson Discussion Diary 

09/06/96: 

Today's discussion section was focused on the following three questions which are included in the course syllabus: 

1. Is history all about dates and facts? Why? Why not? 

2. What is the difference between history and memory? 

3. What "good" is history? What function does it perform in the present? 

On the first day of class the students were given the handout, "History and Historians," which is the introduction to Allen F. Davis' and Harold D. Woodman's book Conflict and Consensus. Students were to read the article by class on Friday and hand in a journal entry consisting of approximately 200-250 words about either the questions posed in the syllabus or the content of the article. The article addressed the same subject matter as the questions, so all of the journal entries were focused upon those questions. 

At the beginning of class I focused the students on the questions and then broke them into five discussion groups consisting of five students each. Within each group students were to pick a spokesperson whose job was to present to the reassembled class a summary of the group's discussion, and a time-keeper whose job was to keep the discussion on track while keeping an eye on the clock so as to assure that all three questions were addressed within the allotted time. After twenty minutes had passed it became clear that three of the discussion groups had "run out of steam," while two were still actively working on the questions. I gave them about two more minutes and then reassembled the class. 

In the reassembled class I asked the spokes-persons to say their name, and then to address the questions. Each of the five spokespersons were to address question one before moving on to question two, and so on. Students in addition to the spokes-persons also contributed to the discussion. Since the reading most closely corresponded with question number 1, the class responses seemed to draw on the reading. I asked for examples from the reading to illustrate the points that students made. It was clear that some of the students had done the reading and had absorbed information. Approximately 12 of the 25 students raised their hands and took part in the discussion. For the most part, students suggested that history is more than just facts and dates, but I felt that, with the exception of perhaps three students, most of them did not fully grasp why different historians offer different interpretations (this was confirmed when I read their journal entries). Several of them suggested that interpretation was something like educated guessing -- that historians kind of fill in the gaps between available facts and dates with conjecture. Most of them, I think, do not really grasp that two historians examining the same data can come away with two different interpretations, each equally valid. I tried to summarize Davis' and Woodman's points for the class before moving on to the second question. 

The discussion about memory seemed to revolve around the idea that memory is an individual and subjective phenomenon while history is a collective and more objective one. I talked about collective memory and illustrated its importance in providing an identity to various groups by telling the class how the Irish immigrants to America didn't share an Irish identity until they began to share their memories of Ireland. I think that example got that particular function of memory across to the class. Professor Cutler talked some about how memory can be seen as the first step in assembling a history. My feeling is that the class had a hard time understanding the concept of collective memory. They, for the most part, retained their first concept of the difference between memory and history. I would have liked to get into a discussion of how memory and history are similar. I think that explaining how memory changes with changing circumstances in the present, as does history, would have provided an important clue to the students about the nature of interpretation. 

The responses to the third question echoed the saying, "those not familiar with history are condemned to repeat it." One or two students did argue that history was important for diverse groups in that it provided them with an identity. 

On the whole I was pleased with the amount of discussion. I think that approaching the class with questions prepared by someone else was a little difficult because I needed to mold my questions to what I though Prof. Cutler wanted. While his questions were pretty straight-forward, I found myself trying to get the responses that I thought he wanted instead of exploring avenues that I naturally tended towards. I think that I kept the discussion focused and allotted sufficient class time to each. I was weak in my ability to tie the various student comments together and I did not provide a summary at the end of the class. Partly this was because we seemed to run out of time (admittedly my fault) and partly because I am not as comfortable as I would like to be leading discussions and I forgot to summarize until it was too late. 

09/13/1996: 

In today's discussion section we talked about the question in the syllabus concerning the sources and limits of personal freedom in the colonies. We also discussed the first two readings from Dinnerstein. We used the same groups as the first week. Each had five students except for one which had six. The groups met for longer than I would have liked. I gave them too long an assignment. I called the class back together after 30 minutes. The remaining 20 minutes were not enough to cover everything. 

I began the discussion by asking the spokespeople what the theses of the two articles were. Many students admitted that they hadn't read the material. The first essay (Morgan's) was easy for those who had read it to identify the thesis. Fewer people volunteered to tell me the thesis of the second. I suspect that fewer students read the second. 

The discussion on freedom barely got going when it was time to end the class. I did remember to summarize this week, but I could have done a more thorough job. 

09/20/1996: 

In today's discussion class I handed out a two-page collection of short quotations that came from the assigned readings. There were six quotations, each of which addressed an important concept from the readings. The class was asked to break down into five small groups and each group was given one quotation to discuss. I asked them to address the sixth question if they finished with the one they had been assigned before we were ready to reassemble. After each quotation I had provided two questions for the groups to discuss. The groups met for about 25 minutes, after which the class was reassembled. 

During the 25 minutes that the small groups were meeting Prof. Cutler sat in on one of the groups. I circulated among the other four. I may sit in on a group in the future. 

During the general discussion that followed we managed to succeed in covering only two of the questions. The discussion was fairly lively. The theme for the class was diversity and the two quotations (see #s 1 & 2) offered two different views on the plight of the Indians and Blacks. One view said that blacks were not merely victims, the other said that Indians were completely conquered. A comment by one of the students about the rise of Ku Klux Klan type groups as a result of expanding diversity caused a reaction by several other students. We explored that side-effect of diversity for several minutes. Two sides of the question concerning the victimization of the native Americans and slaves were represented in the class. 

Since we did not get to discuss all of the questions, we decided to continue the discussion on Monday. 

09/27/96: 

Today we tried to get at the development of an American identity. I split three questions up between the five groups. The questions were: 

1. (From syllabus) What were the differences between the political cultures of Britain and America in the eighteenth century? How and why were these differences important? 

2. What was the impact of international politics on the colonies? 

3. When and why did a separate American identity begin to form? What do we mean by an American identity? Do you have an American identity? How do you define American identity? 

While the groups were meeting Dr. Cutler sat in on one of the groups and I sat in on the other. I found the students in my group seemed to be having a hard time with question number three. By asking them questions I was able to get them to come up with at least part of the answer. I noticed, however, that the spokesperson for the group had a hard time coming up with something coherent when the larger class reconvened and it was his turn to talk. 

When the class reconvened I moved them through questions number one and two rather rapidly. The students supplied most of the answers I was looking for; I didn't have to do that much explaining. The third question, however, seemed to stump most of the class. I found myself talking more than I had hoped to, but I think we got through most of the question before the time ran out (although another ten minutes would have helped). 

10/4/96: 

1. Did the Americans consider themselves to be revolutionaries? 

Why? If not, why not? 

2. As we have been discussing in class, the colonists only chose the option of independence after attempts to defend their rights as British citizens proved unsuccessful. When the colonists no longer accepted the crown as being sovereign, they chose to recognize their own sovereignty. Can you apply this reasoning to today's political climate in the U.S.? Why or why not? 

I began today's class reviewing the material from Monday's and Wednesday's classes as Professor Cutler requested. On Wednesday he had given the students a one-minute quiz to see if they were absorbing the lesson. After reading the results of the quiz, he concluded that not enough students grasped the concept that he was trying to get across which was that a changing world view of the colonists led to a shift of sovereignty from London to America. That changing world view involved individualism v. the communalism of the old world view. Part of the discussion revolved around virtual v. actual representation. 

I spent about 15-20 minutes reviewing the material. Then the class broke up into small groups to discuss the two questions above (one was from the syllabus). There was a lot of activity in the groups. I sat in on one group while Prof. Cutler sat in on another. When the class reconvened we had about ten minutes left. The discussion was quite animated. One student drew a parallel between the Sons of Liberty and today's militias. Another defended the Sons of Liberty by emphasizing that today's militias had the right to vote, something the Sons of Liberty did not have. 

All in all I thought it was a good class. Hands were still up when the clock said that time was up. 

10/11/96: 

1. What were the incentives for, and obstacles to a constitutional convention? What role did "the people" play in the ratification of the U.S. Constitution? 

2. Historically, women have enjoyed a less than equal status in American society. What role did they play in the period under discussion (1776-1800)? Today in 1996, has that role changed? If so, how? 

In today's class the small groups formed to discuss the above questions. I broke the first question into three smaller questions and assigned one to each of three groups. The other two small groups addressed the second question. While the small groups were meeting I sat in on each of them for a few minutes. Lately I've been handing one copy of the day's questions out to each group, but today I handed a copy of the questions out to each student. One women commented, with the consensus of her group, that she preferred it that way. I had handed out only one copy of the questions per group hoping that whoever had the question handed to him/her would act as the group leader. When each student has a copy of the questions in front of them, however, it allows them to study the question more thoroughly before trying to answer it. 

I noticed when I was sitting in on the groups that, for the most part, each group seemed to be working towards answering their respective question, although I had to prod one group to get it going. A student in that group told me that she was having a hard time understanding this week's chapter (this was confirmed when I read her journal entry). This particular group seems to have more than its share of students who are struggling. Most of the other students didn't seem to be having the same difficulty. 

After the class reconvened we discussed the first question. The students were able to come up with most of the answers that I was looking for. Then I lectured about the Constitutional Convention. Class time ran out before we could discuss the second question. 

The class seemed interested and involved, although there was a moment when a few students seemed to get into their own discussion in the back of the class. I'm not sure if it was about history or not. I called upon one of them to address what another student had been saying and that seemed to end it. 

10/18/96: 

Exam review. 

The three themes of this course are migration, diversity, and individual freedom. Relate each of these to the period discussed so far in class (1492-1800). 

Migration: American immigrants were both "pushed" and "pulled" to America. What were the factors that tended to "push" people out of Europe in this period? What were the factors that tended to "pull" people to America? 

Diversity: Apply the word diversity to America in this period. 

That is, what was diverse? What was the effect upon American society of this diversity? 

Individual Freedom: Did all Americans enjoy greater freedom than they would have if they had stayed in their native country? What were the sources of individual freedoms in America? 

Today I handed out these questions and then broke the class into three groups. These were different groups than those the class had been using before. I asked each group to address one of the questions. I sat in on the group that was discussing number three. The group that I sat in on had a hard time getting started. I prodded them by getting them to start talking about the different groups that came to America and what they were leaving behind in terms of personal freedom. After getting some recognition that not all groups found greater freedom in America we turned to the second part of the question. The students had a hard time relating the events that we had been discussing in class (eg. the Great Awakening) to the development of personal freedom. It seems like I did most of the talking in this group. 

When we called the class back together, we had about fifteen minutes to let each group review for the class what they had been discussing. The group that discussed migration did a very thorough job with the exception that they left out African immigrants. The group that discussed diversity also did a good job. The group that I was in disappointed me in their response. The development of individualism as a result of conditions in America and the Great Awakening is a concept that some students seem to have a hard time grasping. 

10/25/96: 

Today's topic was the Dartmouth College Case of 1819. The discussion was based upon the selection in the reader called, "Public Versus Private Education: The Neglected Meaning of the Dartmouth College Case," by Eldon L. Johnson. We focused on these three questions: 

1. What is the thesis of the article and what are Johnson's arguments in support of that thesis? 

2. What does Johnson have to say about the utility of higher education? What was Governor Plumer trying to accomplish? What do you think the utility of higher education is today? 

3. What does Johnson say about the development of public versus private higher education? What did "public" mean then, as opposed to now? How did Chief Justice Marshall's decision in this case contribute to the economic development of the country? 

At the beginning of the class I lectured for about five minutes on the general significance of Chief Justice Marshall's tenure on the Supreme Court. Then I talked about the Dartmouth case in particular addressing its significance for the sanctity of contracts. Then we broke the class into three groups; each one was assigned one of the above questions to discuss. I sat in on the group that was discussing question number two. It was clear from the beginning that only two students out of six in the group had read the article, and even those two hadn't gotten much out of it. I don't know what they would have talked about if I hadn't been sitting there spoon-feeding them the answers to the question. The only lively part of the discussion occurred when I asked them what use a college education was today. They each related their own personal reasons for attending college and the utility that they saw in education. Trying to get them to relate that to New Hampshire's Governor Plumer's educational ideology was like pulling teeth, however. I'm not sure what they got out of the reading, if anything. 

When we reconvened the class each small group reported. Group one really didn't have much to say. They only reported on the most superficial aspects of the article. Group two gave a fairly coherent and substantive report, but it was all the material that I had just given them. Group three, who had been working with Professor Cutler, gave a good report. 

My gut reaction to this class is that the students in groups two and three benefitted, while the students in group one didn't learn much. 

11/01/96: 

Today we handed out a short teaching evaluation form to give the students to comment on how they think the class is going so far. The four questions on the form were: 

1. What do you like about this class? Why? 

2. What don't you like about this class? Why? 

3. Are the lectures helpful in understanding the material? Explain. 

4. Does working in small groups help you to understand the material? Explain. 

We were especially interested to see how the students would answer question number four, and, interestingly, that question elicited the most energetic, and useful, answers. Many students stated with no reservations that they liked the small groups. Some said that the small groups offered them the opportunity to reflect on the material presented in class earlier in the week and enabled them to internalize and understand the material better. Others, however, said that the small groups that didn't have one of the instuctors sitting in on it were a waste of time and that they didn't learn anything in them. This view confirms what I suspected from last class. When I sit in with a small group we seem to really get at the material. Before class Professor Cutler and I talked about breaking the class into just two groups so that each had an instructor sitting in. Since there were only about 17 students in class today, we each had 8 or 9 students in our group. The small groups met for the remainder of the class. It seems that we were able to discuss the material on a deeper level than we would have been able to in a larger group. I made it a point to get a contribution from each student in my group. 

One student expressed some resentment with the discussion format. He ask me a question and then said that I was getting paid to give him the information. He just wanted to take notes without having to contribute to the discussion. However, I must say that he asked two interesting questions after that. 

I think that this two group format will work for the remainder of this course, but it is obviously not an option when I am teaching the course alone. 

The questions that each group discussed are: 

1. What was the political ideology of the Whig Party? What did they stand for? What segments of the population supported the Whigs? Did the Whigs want an active or passive government? 

2. What was the political ideology of the Democratic Party? 

What did they stand for? What segments of the population supported the Democrats? Did the Democrats want an active or passive government? 

Issues: 

• corporations
• tariffs
• banks
• internal improvements

11/08/96: 

1. "These labor protests in early Lowell contribute to our understanding of the response of workers to the growth of industrial capitalism in the first half of the nineteenth century. They indicate the importance of values and attitudes dating back to an earlier period and also the transformation of these values in a new setting." 

One of the values referred to here is personal freedom. How did the growth of industrial capitalism affect the personal freedoms of the women described in Dublin's essay? Relate the concept of personal freedom to the events that Dublin depicts. 

2. This week we have been talking about the various reform efforts of the 1830s and 40s. How did these efforts contribute to the evolving concept of personal freedom in the United States in this period? How are today's reform efforts affecting the concept of personal freedom? 

We spent all of today's class in two groups. I sat in on one and Professor Cutler sat in on the other. Each group discussed both questions. Reports from the groups were held over until Monday because we ran out of time again. The discussion in my group started out a little slow, but by the end of class we had generated a fair degree of enthusiasm. We started talking about the article on the women at Lowell (see questions above). That discussion generated some polite discussion. Most of the students contributed something. The second question, however, was the one that seemed to generate more enthusiasm, especially when we started talking about the concept of personal freedom. I brought up the current war on drugs in America and how it is affecting all of our personal freedom. I offered an example that was on the news last year of a family having their house broken into by police looking for drugs. The police found nothing, but broke up the house pretty thoroughly. A few students said that they were willing to give up some personal freedom in exchange for protection from drug dealers. We also talked about the purpose of reform in the nineteenth century. We differentiated between those who were the target of reform efforts, and those who initiated reform. We explored the purpose of public education. Public education was for the poor as the rich could afford private education. Did the poor uniformly accept public education. At first the students said yes, that it was the way to achieve the American dream. After a little prodding on my part they began to remember text references to the poor resenting schools because children could not help with family finances by working. I put a Bowles and Gintis spin on public education for them. One student responded by saying that he should rethink his educational experience so far. I think the students in my group left class with a more rounded concept of what reform was all about, that there were at least two sides to the reform issues. 

We also talked about the differences between the Great Awakening and the second Great Awakening. One student suggested that the difference in terms of personal freedom was that the first G.A. led to more freedom and the second to less. She used the terms "external" and "internal" to describe reformers and the objects of reformers. She saw the reforms efforts stemming from the second G.A. as instruments of cultural hegemony, although she didn't use those terms. 

While using only two groups is not what we intended to do when we started this course, I think that it has turned into an acceptable compromise. The groups allow us to cover the material, yet in a more intimate setting that encourages student participation. 

11/15/96: 

1. How well did African Americans cope with being slaves in the American south? Did free blacks suffer as well as slaves? Explain. 

2. What was the purpose of the Florida Slave Codes as described in Joseph Conan Thompson's essay, "Florida's Slave Codes, 1821-1861?" What was the effect of the codes on slaves and masters? 

Today's topic was the life of slaves and free blacks in ante bellum America. The class broke into two groups, each discussing both questions. After about 30 minutes, the group reconvened and we spent about 10-15 minutes summarizing what had been discussed in the small groups. 

I sat in on one group's discussion. In that group the discussion was steady, but not as fiery as last week's. The end of the semester is here and I think that students are skipping their reading more than they had earlier. Nevertheless, the small group covered the material fairly thoroughly with a couple of interesting insights coming from one or two students. 

The reconvened group added little to what we had discussed in the small groups, but I think that it is good to repeat the lesson as many times as possible in order to get students to remember what we talked about. Ideally each little nugget of knowledge or insight should come from the students in the small groups; have a bigger picture created within the small groups of the lesson; and then have it summarized by the students in the large group. I think that this is starting to happen in the format we have recently adopted (two small groups with teacher participation). 

11/22/96: 

1. Why did the sectional crisis in America come to a head in the 1850s? What role did the Republican Party play? What makes the 1850s so pivotal in the history of American freedom and society? 

2. Paul Finkelman in his essay, "Slavery, the `More Perfect Union,' and the Prairie State," shows that, like the nation at large, the state of Illinois was "a house divided against itself" (to use Lincoln's words) in the decades before the Civil War. What were the issues, according to Finkelman, that proved divisive in Illinois? How did Illinois compare with the rest of the country? 

Today's discussion class repeated the pattern that we have set lately of breaking into two smaller groups to discuss the questions listed above. We didn't reconvene into the larger group though. It is clear that in a group of about ten or eleven students, only three or four, at best, do the required reading. 

At the beginning of the session we spent some time putting events of the 1850s into perspective, that is, what did the Missouri Compromise and the war with Texas have to do with subsequent events of the 1850s. We cleared up Lincoln's views on slavery and put the abolition movement in the North into perspective (some students thought that all Northerners were abolitionists). 

11/27/96: 

Today I showed two, ten minute segments from Ken Burns' Civil War documentary. The first was the introduction to the whole series; the second focused on Sherman's march to the sea. In the discussion that followed we focused on the "total war" aspect of the Civil War. Since the film took up about twenty minutes of the class we didn't break the class down into the two small groups. The class was not overly responsive today. Perhaps they were counting the minutes to the start of the Thanksgiving break. As is usually the case, a couple of students were prepared for class and contributed. Many, however, sat as if impatient for the end of class. 

12/06/96: 

Inclement weather kept me from class this last day of discussion. 

TA Diary Jennifer Coleman 

January 21, 1997 

Distributed syllabus and first assigned reading (Introduction to Allen F. Davis and Harold D. Woodman, eds. Conflict and Consensus in Early American History. Lexington, Massachusetts and Toronto: D.C. Heath and Company, 1992) to the students. Introductions were made to the class. Dr. Cutler spent a good deal of the hour going over the syllabus, explaining in detail the requirement of the class, and showing students the textbooks for the class (Robert A. Divine, et. al. America: Past and Present. vol. 1. Fourth Edition and Leonard Dinnerstein and Kenneth T. Jackson, American Vistas: 1607-1877. Seventh Edition). 

January 23, 1997 

Broke students into two discussion groups which will meet every Thursday. Dr. Cutler will lead one group and I will lead the other group for 45 minutes and then we will bring the class back together to share the major topics of our discussions. Today we met to talk about history, memory, relics, historiography, and fiction. My group was extremely small with only 13 students. We began the discussion by recalling vivid memories from high school or junior high. It was an attempt to make the students feel comfortable in the classroom and with me. I also shared personal memories. We attempted to define the term memory. Then we talked about how historians select the past to write history and the elusive nature of seeking the "truth" about history and how relics are tangible pieces of the past. Almost all students participated, although the pace of discussion was slower than I expected. We did not have time to discuss fiction and popular history. In our combined class one student from each group shared the topics discussed in each discussion group. Dr. Cutler lead most of the combined discussion, however, I also stood in the front of the class feeling rather awkward. I need to improve my skills in leading a discussion, asking follow up questions, summarizing main points, providing transitions, and concluding the discussion. 

In addition to preparing for small discussion groups, students are required to hand in every Thursday a one page journal entry responding to the main themes covered in class and in their reading assignments. As the teaching assistant, I was required to grade the journals and hand them back to students with comments every Tuesday. In the first journal entry, students were asked to respond to the question "Is history just about dates and facts?" In general, students were not able to construct a well supported argument in their journals, did not include evidence from the article they were asked to read, and showed uncertainty as to what was required of the journal entry. 

January 28, 1997 

Dr. Cutler lectured on the discovery and exploration of the New World. He asked students to consider several historical interpretations of Christopher Columbus. He also emphasized the theme of migration by comparing and contrasting Spanish, British, and French arrival in the New World. I handed back the journal entries, however, a discrepancy arose between my understanding of what the assignment should entail and Dr. Cutler's. I do not remember his instructions to have students write on either the article from Conflict and Consensus or the questions on the syllabus. Hence, my comments and criticisms on their papers related to major themes from their reading assignment. 

January 30, 1997 

Today we broke into discussion groups to talk about the Puritans and Anne Hutchinson. I wrote three questions from the essay on Anne Hutchinson, xeroxed them, and handed them out to students as a way to stimulate discussion. I gave copies to Dr. Cutler before class, however, while I had envisioned the class period devoted to analyzing the assigned essay, he wanted to take a broader approach asking students to place Anne Hutchinson within the context of early migration. In addition, he wanted to discuss the differences that sprang up between the New England colonies, Middle colonies, and the Southern colonies. We reconvened to share our discussion. My reporter was the only student from my group to contribute. The rest were from Dr. Cutler's group. Students handed in their journals. However, some did not come to class with their journals and had many reasons why they were not prepared. Another discrepancy arose between Dr. Cutler and myself as to whether we would accept late papers and the policy associated with late work. I told several students that I would not accept late papers, but Dr. Cutler told the students we would accept late papers and that they could email their journal entries. As we are accepting hand written journal entries, I do not believe we should accept late journals. 

February 4, 1997 

Dr. Cutler lectured on the differences in family life and women's roles in New England and Virginia. He used overhead transparencies with demographic information from a New England village (Sudbury) and challenged students to come up with ideas and conclusions about the importance of family and community in New England. However, students had a very difficult time grasping these concepts. Only a few students participated and their answers were very unfocused and confused. Dr. Cutler spent much of the time trying to pull out more focused arguments. Time did not permit for a discussion of Salem, Massachusetts and the breakdown of community which resulted there. 

February 6, 1997 

In Discussion groups today I prepared a handout asking students to discuss 1. relations between Indians and Europeans in the New World 2. the emergence of slavery in Colonial America and 3. the Salem witchtrials. I am afraid that my approach to discussion centered more on having students display factual information rather than allowing them to explore issues on their own. Yet, it is difficult to have an informed discussion when students have no mastery of the material and I see one goal of the survey classes, which contains mostly freshman and sophomores, to lay the historical foundation for future analysis. I also talked about the early colonial militia system and the fact that military force eventually won Indian lands for the Europeans. I need to remember, however, that this is not a military history class even though as a military historian I feel the need to stress the importance of war on society. I must also encourage students to express their own opinions and not talk so much in our discussion section. Time ran out before we could discuss the Witchtrials. Dr. Cutler had focused his discussion around race and gender relations in Colonial America. In some ways, I feel torn between taking my discussion section in a different direction than Dr. Cutler's section. While we do reconvene to share ideas, some students might feel that they are not receiving the same information as students in the other section. I believe that assigning students two chapters in the American Vistas is too much information for students to digest in one week. 

February 11, 1997 

Dr. Cutler led the class today after first placing students in a seating arrangement similar to a Quaker meeting, i.e. men and women segregated and facing each other from their seats. I believe the physical seating arrangement lent itself well to the class forcing students to view the class (literally) from a different perspective. Dr. Cutler lectured on the Great Awakening (1730-1760) in provincial America and the contrasting themes of unity and disunity, sacred and secular. He also spent time on the thesis that the Great Awakening began to create a national American identity through the exchange of ideas about religion and increased religious diversity. 

February 13, 1997 

Today I led both my discussion group and the combined class. I tried to focus on the themes surrounding the definition of freedom, its evolution, and various meanings from colonial times to the present and the emergence of a national American identity. I felt my discussion group went much better as we had a genuine discussion about freedom, suffrage, and political and religious apathy in our society instead of me merely fishing and prodding for factual data from the text. Combined discussion was more difficult, especially since Dr. Cutler was seated in the classroom. (We had decided that after the first combined discussion that both of us standing in the front confused the students and that for the rest of the semester only one of us should lead the combined discussion.) However, I asked each assigned spokesmen from the difference sections to summarize the topics discussed and tried to tie those themes together in the treatment of children in Colonial America and raising adolescents as a crisis faced by parents in an increasingly secular society. We briefly discussed the Navigation Acts and Seven Year's War as both uniting and dividing the colonies in her relations with England. A student wrote a harsh comment on her journal entry, clearly dissatisfied with her grade and the class. I wrote a note back that Dr. Cutler would be more than happy to talk with her about any concerns she might have. To my knowledge, she never went to see him at his office hours. 

February 18, 1997 

Dr. Cutler lectured today on the origins of the American Revolution. We spent considerable time defining the concept of sovereignty and the impact of the Seven Years' War in pushing the colonists toward independence. Dr. Cutler also spent time talking about Massachusetts Royal Governor Thomas Hutchinson and how his loyalists views differed from those of the Patriots. I was dismayed that we didn't touch on any of the numerous acts passed by Britain, however, the students were very intent in the class discussion and perhaps a lists of legislation would not have stimulated the same level of participation. 

February 20, 1997 

In discussion groups today we talked about the American Revolution. We felt that Americans considered themselves "reluctant revolutionaries." However, I do not believe that I did a very good job conveying to students the more subtle arguments of whether or not the American Revolution was a "radical" or "conservative" step. The discussion of why the Americans won and why the British lost was perhaps the best so far. I made use of the blackboard as a teaching tool and we listed the advantages and disadvantages both countries possessed entering the war, the realities of the war itself, and why initial appearances can be deceiving. All students participated and seemed to feel comfortable. As usual, however, we ran out of time before we discussed the third question on my review sheet. 

February 25, 1997 

Dr. Cutler began his lecture on the Early Republic today by addressing the fears Americans had about chaos and order in the new Republic. He also stressed the fact that the most important shift from a British model of government to an American model of government was to place sovereignty in the hands of the people. He developed this theme to talk about the Constitutional Convention of 1787. At the end of the class he asked students to fill out a 4 x 6 card to tell us 1. What they learned and 2. What was still confusing to them. Many of the students were still unclear about the basic definitions of such terms as popular sovereignty, utopian republicanism, balance of power, etc. Unfortunately, one student replied that s/he was not sure what was going on in the class in general. As a large percentage of Temple University students do not speak English as their first language, we believe that comment came from a ESL student. However, our task is not to teach the students English. At the collegiate level, it is necessary to set high standards. It does not help students in the long run to lower those standards. 

February 28, 1997 

Responding to the comments students gave us on the 4 x 6 cards, I spend the first half of my discussion group today going over the definitions of the above terms and writing them on the board for my students. They told me that they wished we wrote more the information down on the board so they could copy it easier. While they seemed more comfortable with the terms, I felt I was not fully encouraging them to come up with their own answers but giving them answers. The second half of the class we discussed the Jan Lewis article on "Republican Wives" which had been assigned. Few had read the article and the few who did, did  not understand it. So, I spent the remainder of the time summarizing the thesis for them. The updated class list revealed two students in the class who had not turned in a single journal entry. Students are falling behind in their work and late entries, which I am accepting but lowering the grade depending on how late they are, are creating confusion and additional work for me. 

March 4, 1997 

Today very few students, 20 out of a total of 35, came to class. It is the week before Spring Break. Dr. Cutler lectured on the political situation in the Early Republic by defining the concept of political parties. The students were able to grasp this concept by building on their knowledge of current politics. Dr. Cutler then explained how the first two political parties began to form around the ideologies of federalism and anti-federalism using Alexander Hamilton and Thomas Jefferson as examples of each of the political ideologies. Students seemed to respond to questions and were able to bridge the gap from current issues (i.e. taxation, power struggle, campaigns) to historical issues. 

March 6, 1997 

We had students fill out mid-semester evaluations of the course. Overall, students seemed to enjoy the small discussion sections and felt they were encouraged to participate in class. They expresses anxiety about the upcoming mid-term and how they should prepare for the test. A few students complained that the journal entries were too much work and were unhappy with their grades. At least two of these students, however, have attendance problems which would explain their low grades. I made appointments with two other students to discuss work they had missed, but they failed to show up. 

The small group discussion we held today was the worst of the entire semester. It was the Thursday before Spring Break and the few students who came had not read the two chapters assigned to them on the Early Republic. Basically, I had to feed them information about the Elections of 1796 and 1800 (who won, who lost, etc. ) although we did discuss freedom of speech concerning political dissent and the enactment of the Alien and Sedition Acts. 

March 18, 1997 

Dr. Cutler lectured on the expansion of the market economy in the United States. He used overhead transparencies to illustrate the changes taking place in America. Students were asked to examine information about canal building and railroad building as a way to link the country commercially, industrially, socially, and regionally. The term entrepreneurial capitalism was used and students were asked to define the term and connect it to the economic growth of America in the first half of the 19th century. 

March 20, 1997 

As a review/practice for the midterm exam, I asked students in my discussion section to write a practice essay question about economic expansion in the United States. I reminded them to use a clear thesis statement and then to support the argument with specific examples from their class notes and reading. After 15 minutes of writing, I asked students to share with the class how they had answered the question and placed those answers on the board in an outline of a response to an essay question. They would see the same type of questions on the midterm exam. We then did the same exercise covering the advent of the textile industry in Lowell, Massachusetts and the impact of industry on the lives of ordinary workers considering such factors as the positive and negatives effects of industrialization. 

March 25, 1997 

The Midterm examination required students to answer two essay questions giving them the opportunity to select from several questions the one they felt most comfortable answering. Questions in the first section were taken directly from the review/discussion sheets I handed out to students each week. The second was a broader question asking students to discuss the themes of the class: freedom, diversity, and migration. Although there were no failing grades, several "at risk" students earned C-s. 

March 27, 1997 

Dr. Cutler lectured on Jacksonian Democracy. He stressed the symbolic importance of Jackson as a man of the people, the emergence of the "American Dream" ideology, and the shift from a communal value system to one emphasizing individualism and self-interest. We also discussed the architectural symbolism of Greek revival such as Girard College on the spirit of Democracy. Finally, he addressed the Jackson administration and its stand on governmental involvement in the economy. One very perceptive student recognized the connections between the historic Democratic party of Jackson and the current Republican party platforms. 

April 1, 1997 

Dr. Cutler lectured today on the Reform Movement in ante-bellum America from the 1820s to the 1860s. He stressed the growing public concern with abolition, feminism, utopianism, temperance, asylums, and education. At the center of the reform ideology was the belief in the capability of individuals to attain self-control and perfection. Students commented on the shift today to place the blame for an individual's actions and problems on society. One student who had been in a drug rehabilitation program added that too much blame was laid on society and that he believed from his experiences that individuals need to take responsibility for their own actions. The diversity of Temple University students continues to amaze me. 

April 3, 1997 

We broke into small discussion groups today and my section discussed themes in domesticity during the ante-bellum period. Specifically, we looked at changes which occurred in white, middle class families. The concept of "childhood" received particular interest and I tried to stress that not just biological factors were important to being a child, but also social construction. Students were interested in the fact that birthday parties began to take place during this time to celebrate the child's uniqueness and express his or her individuality. 

April 8, 1997 

Dr. Cutler lectured on Westward Expansion and Manifest Destiny as examples of larger course themes of freedom, migration, and diversity in American History. He mentioned specifically the Mormon Trek of 1846-1848 to Utah and their efforts to create Salt Lake City. He also discussed their religious persecution and hopes of finding religious freedom as well as defining the term Manifest Destiny and how the ideology played into westward expansion. 

April 10, 1997 

We broke into small discussion groups today. My section dealt mainly with the changing nature of immigration to the United States during the 1820s - 1860s. It was also an attempt to reteach the earlier concepts of "push" and "pull" in attracting immigrants to the United States. Specifically we talked about the Germans and the Irish immigrants by comparing and contrasting how the two groups came to America, where they settled, and what jobs they found. It was an excellent discussion which led to reasons for assimilation and acculturation of immigrants and to comments on current immigration policy and the plight of Mexicans and Asians. 

April 15, 1997 

Dr. Cutler lectured on the rise of sectionalism and slavery in the 1850s. He focused on the ideology of compromise concerning the institution of slavery specifically looking at the Constitution, the Fugitive Slave Law, and the Compromise of 1820 and 1850. He stressed how new territory gained from the Mexican War threatened the fragile foundation of compromise and led to the Civil War. 

April 17, 1997 

In small discussion groups we divided regionally into replicas of 1850s Northern and Southern factions to prepare for a combined debate on the institution and expansion of slavery. Specifically, we asked students to take sides and use historical facts to defend their positions. My section, the South, used political, constitutional, religious, legislative, judicial, and moral arguments to support the idea of popular sovereignty, the expansion of slavery in the West, and the paternalistic generalization that slaves were better provided for than northern industrial workers. In particular, the Dred Scott Supreme Court case gave Southerns the backing of the highest court in the land. Students responded well to historical role playing. 

In addition to our debate, students were required to hand in a 4 - 6 page book review today. They could choose their book from a prearranged list of about twenty books. Two weeks before the assignment was due we gave a pop quiz asking for the title and author of the book they had selected. Only half could respond. We failed to say enough prior to the paper due date about the definition of plagiarism. One student copied passages from the book. Two others clearly did not write large portions of their papers and copied from each other. Dr. Cutler gave those students failing grades. Other papers, however, were very good and reflected the practice they had in writing journals. 

April 22, 1997 

I lectured on the American Civil War, 1861-1865. Having taken an entire semester course on the Civil War, I found the task to talk about such a large and complex topic to undergraduates in an hour and twenty minutes daunting. Also, I wanted to include student participation, but was unsure how much material I should prepare to fit my allotted time. I selected two major themes: the concept of a total war versus a limited war and the concept that Union victory was by no means inevitable. I did not want to use too much military terminology which might confuse students. I did, however, talk about the battle of Antietam and draw a map on the board to illustrate the transformation of the American Civil War from a limited war to a total war. Students responded with genuine interest and good questions. 

April 24, 1997 

We broke into discussion groups today. My section responded to the question of social composition of the Union and Confederate armies. In addition was discussed the common experiences of men fighting in the war and their motivation as well as the darker side of Civil War medicine and hospitals. Once we reconvened we showed the students a clip from the Ken Burns PBS Special on Sherman's March to the Sea which visually showed the destruction the Union armies brought to the South. I was surprised that most of the students were unfamiliar with the Ken Burns PBS Special. Students were asked to read the Williamson Murray article on the Civil War in American Vistas, however, the article was inaccessible to the majority of the students. 

April 29, 1997 

Dr. Cutler lectured today on Reconstruction, 1865-1876. He briefly touched on the differences in the way historians have viewed Reconstruction and then highlighted the aims of Johnson's Reconstruction and Congressional Reconstruction. He passed out copies of the 13th, 14th, and 15th Amendments for students to read and discuss in terms of political, civil, and economic rights for freedmen. A student asked him to define what the Constitution was and he stressed that it was a statement of first principles of justice, the basic rules of the nation which were flexible enough to change to meet the current needs of the country. 

May 1, 1997 

Students were asked to bring in an exam question which they had written as a way to review for the final exam. The questions were graded to ensure that the students spent some time on the assignment and that they could serve as a journal entry if they were missing a grade. We broke into discussion sections first and we talked about the large themes we had covered in that last half of the class (Freedom, Diversity, Migration, Family, Constitution, Slavery, Civil War, Reconstruction, Immigration, Manifest Destiny) as well as the most effective techniques for answering an essay question. 

May 8, 1997 

I held an optional review session in my office several days before the midterm exam. However, the only students who came to my office hours were students who needed to hand in late journal entries. I believe that the high quality of book reviews resulted from intensive writing practice which the journals required. However, students had difficulty in keeping up with journal assignments. I took off points for journals handed in late. However, I became very frustrated when students brought me journals four to six weeks late. I gave them failing grades, but accepted them. Nine students did not meet the required number of journals. Frankly, these were an enormous amount of work to grade and keep track of, since late journals usually outweighed regular assignments. 

Students were allowed to use their textbooks, the journal entries, and lecture notes at the final exam. I was surprised that this aid did not significantly raise the overall grades. It was obvious that students who had not kept up with the reading assignments did not know where to find the information to answer the questions. Two students failed to answer the required number of short essays which substantially lowered their grade. Those who had done well throughout the semester did well on the final. 

B.) Discussion Prompts: Fall and Spring

Fall, 1996: Discussion Prompts by Martin Wilson (Go to Spring, 1997: Discussion Prompts by Jennifer Coleman)

Salem Witch Trials 

1. By the end of the 1670s it was clear in both the North and South that the English dominated all of the areas where they had settled. Their laws, economy, social organization, military actions, and religion had triumphed. For the Indians this meant that they faced the future as a defeated people, living in a country controlled by their enemies, the conquering English. (Dinnerstein p. 53) How did the author come to this conclusion? Do you agree? Why or why not? 

2. The force of custom, then, sustained the practice of magic as an alternative form of spiritual power and a body of powerful, arcane lore that coexisted (albeit not very peacefully) alongside Christian beliefs and ecclesiastical rites. Such an uneasy tenure on the popular mind was not acceptable to the Church, and gradually Christian apologists were able to subsume much of the traditional magical practice under the rubric of the diabolical by employing the term "witchcraft," which had theretofore constituted but one branch of the magical tree, to signify the dire spiritual threat of a far from moribund occultism. (Dinnerstein, p. 56) 

The Church built upon and co-opted the popular traditions and images of sorcery and magic in defining the rites and practices of witches, and effectively forged links between the vulgar persistence of ancient pre-Christian beliefs, which continued to enjoy wide popularity, and the explicit inversion of Christian doctrine through the self-consciously heretical worship of Satan. (Dinnerstein, pp. 56-57) 

What is the difference between magic and religion? Why did the church want to stamp out magic? 

WEEK FOUR

1. What were the differences between the political cultures of Britain and America in the eighteenth century? How and why were these differences important? 

2. What was the impact of international politics on the colonies? 

3. When and why did a separate American identity begin to form? 

WEEK FIVE

1. Did the Americans consider themselves to be revolutionaries? Why? If not, why not? 

2. As we have been discussing in class, the colonists only chose the option of independence after attempts to defend their rights as British citizens proved unsuccessful. When the colonists no longer accepted the crown as being sovereign, they chose to recognize their own sovereignty. Can you apply this reasoning to today's political climate in the U.S.? Why or why not? 

WEEK SIX

1. What were incentives for, and obstacles to a constitutional convention? What role did "the people" play in the ratification of the U.S. Constitution? 

2. Historically, women have enjoyed less than equal status in American society. What role did they play in the period under discussion (1776-1800)? Today in 1996, has this role changed? If so, how? 

WEEK SEVEN

The three themes of this course are migration, diversity, and freedom. Relate each of these to the period discussed so far in class (1492-1800). 

Migration: American immigrants were both "pushed" and "pulled" to America. What were the factors that tended to "push" people out of Europe in this period? What were the factors that tended to "pull" people to America? 

Diversity: Apply the word diversity to America in this period. That is, what was diverse? What was effect of this diversity on American society? 

Individual Freedom: Did all Americans enjoy greater freedom that they would have if they had stayed in their native country? What were the sources of individual freedom in America? 

WEEK EIGHT

1. What is the thesis of the article about the Dartmouth College case and what are the author's arguments in support of that thesis? 

2. What does the author have to say about the utility of higher education? What was Governor Plumer trying to accomplish? What do you think the utility of higher education is today? 

3. What does the author say about the development of public versus private higher education? What did "public" mean then, as opposed to now? How did Chief Justice Marshall's decision in this case contribute to the economic development of the nation? 

WEEK NINE

How can we differentiate between the Whigs and Democrats of the Jacksonian America? 

1. What was the political ideology of the Whig Party? What did they stand for? What segments of the population supported the Whigs? Did the Whigs want an active or passive government? 

2. What was the political ideology of the Democratic Party? What did they stand for. What segments of the population supported the Whigs? Did the Democrats want an active or passive government? 

3. What was the thesis of Ronald N. Satz's article, "Indian Policy in the Jacksonian Era?" How did he construct his argument? Do you agree or disagree with Satz? 

WEEK TEN

1. "These labor protests in early Lowell contribute to our understanding of the response of workers to the growth of industrial capitalism in the first half of the nineteenth century. They indicate the importance of values and attitudes dating back to an earlier period and also the transformation of these values in a new setting." (Dinnerstein, p. ) 

One of the values referred to here is personal freedom. How did the growth of industrial capitalism affect the personal freedoms of the women described in Thomas Dublin's essay? Relate the concept of personal freedom to the events that Dublin depicts. 

2. This week we have been talking about the various reform efforts of the 1830s and 1840s. How did these efforts contribute to the evolving concept of personal freedom in the United States in this period? How are today's reform efforts affecting the concept of personal freedom? 

WEEK ELEVEN

1. How well did African Americans cope with being slaves in the American south? Did free blacks suffer as well as slaves? Explain. 

2. What was the purpose of the Florida Slave Codes as described in Joseph Conan Thompsons's essay, "Florida Slave Codes, 1821-1861?" What was the effect of the codes on slaves and masters? 

WEEK TWELVE

1. Why did the sectional crisis in America come to a head in the 1850s? What role did the Republican Party play? What makes the 1850s so pivotal in the history of American freedom and society? 

2. Paul Finkelman in his essay, "Slavery, the 'More Perfect Union,' and the Prairie State," shows that, like the nation at large, the state of Ilinois was "a house divided against itself" (to use Lincoln's words) in the decades before the Civil War. What were the issues, acording to Finkelman, that proved divisive in Illinois? How did Illinois compare with the rest of the country? 

Spring, 1997: Discussion Prompts by Jennifer Coleman

WEEK TWO -- Colonial America, I

2. How did the Puritans handle religious diversity within New England? How did Anne Hutchinson's religious convictions differ from John Winthrop's? What were the consequences of her diversity? 

3. Discuss the major schools of historical thought surrounding Anne Hutchinson. How has historical interpretation of the Antinomian crisis of 1635-37 changed? 

WEEK THREE -- Colonial America, II

2. Discuss the advent of slavery in colonial America and the emergence of a distinct African-American culture. How did the lives of female slaves differ from the lives of their white mistresses? How were they similar? 

3. Salem, Massachusetts experienced an outbreak of witch hysteria in 1692. How did the legal system handle the charges of witchcraft? What sorts of evidence were used to convict witches. How have historians explained the causes of the witch hunt? 

WEEK FIVE -- The American Revolution

2. Why did the Americans win the war for independence? Why did the British lose the war? Discuss such factors as military strategy, ideological commitment, civilian support, and foreign alliances. 

3. Why did a republican government create concern about social order? How did the "democratic-republican" ideology affect the lives of Americans after the Revolutionary War? 

WEEK SIX -- The Early Republic, I

Include the concepts of mixed government, balance of powers, utopian republicanism, popular sovereignty, and public virtue. 

2. Discuss the Constitutional Convention of 1787. How did the Virginia Plan and the New Jersey Plan for the federal government differ? What compromise was eventually reached? 

3. Discuss the concept of the Republican Wife and its relationship to larger social and political issues in the Early Republic. How does this metaphor reflect changing attitudes about marriage, virtue, education, women and family? 

WEEK SEVEN -- The Early Republic, II

2. How did Americans view political dissent in the Early Republic? What tools were employed to suppress alternative political beliefs? In this context, why is the election of 1800 called a "peaceful revolution"? 

3. George Washington's farewell address warns the young republic to avoid foreign entanglements. Was this a realistic course of action for the Americans? Why? Consider Jay's Treaty, the XYZ Affair, the Barbary pirates, the Quasi-War with France, and the War of 1812. 

WEEK EIGHT -- Economic Expansion

2. Discuss the emergence of American nationalism in post-war domestic politics, Supreme Court decisions, and foreign diplomacy. 

3. How does the emergence of industry impact the lives of ordinary workers? In particular, discuss the challenges facing women workers in the Lowell textile mills. 

WEEK NINE -- Jacksonian Democracy

2. Discuss the major issues that confront the Jackson administration. Include the National Bank war, Indian removal, and the nullification crisis. 

3. The Jacksonian period has been called the era of the "common man." Do you agree with this statement? Why or why not? How would a foreign aristocrat visiting America respond to the same question? 

WEEK TEN -- Domesticity and Reform

2. Discuss the transition of the American family from the colonial to the ante-bellum period. Specifically, how do the roles of men, women, and children change in white, middle-class families? 

3. Discuss the tension in the United States between Protestants and Catholics, especially concerning education, religious freedom, and the separation of church and state. What does this struggle reveal about religious diversity? 

WEEK ELEVEN -- Westward Expansion

2. Foreign relations between Mexico and her neighbors to the north erupt into violence twice during the early nineteenth century. Discuss the causes and consequences of both the War for Texas Independence and the Mexican-American War. 

3. Immigrants were both "pushed" and "pulled" to the United States between 1820 and 1850. What were the factors that tended to push people out of Europe during the nineteenth century? What were the factors that tended to pull them toward America? Consider specifically the Irish and Germans. 

WEEK TWELVE -- Slavery and Sectionalism

1. You are a Southerner in 1850s America defending the institution and expansion of slavery. What arguments and strategies would you use to support the Dred Scott decision, the supremacy of states' rights, slavery in the western territories, and the beneficial aspects of slavery for Africans? 

2. You are a Northerner in 1850s America attacking the institution and expansion of slavery. What arguments and strategies would you use to challenge the Dred Scott decision, the supremacy of states' rights, slavery in the western territories, and the beneficial aspects of slavery for Africans? 

WEEK THIRTEEN -- The American Civil War

2. The Union army has been called "an army of disunion fighting for union" while the Confederate army has been called "an army of union fighting for disunion." Do you agree or disagree with this statement based on the social composition of the two armies? Who was "Billy Yank?" Who was "Johnny Reb?" How are their military experiences similar? How are they different? 

3. The end of the Civil War fundamentally altered American society. Discuss the social, political, and economic consequences of the war. Include in your answer changes in race relations, gender roles, philanthropy, medicine, industry, and the federal government. 

Go on to Exams 

Back to top