Course coordinator
Associate Professor Ian Hesketh
Course overview
- Study period
- Semester 2, 2024 (22/07/2024 - 18/11/2024)
- Study level
- Undergraduate
- Location
- St Lucia
- Attendance mode
- In Person
- Units
- 2
- Administrative campus
- St Lucia
- Coordinating unit
- Historical & Philosophical Inq
This course investigates how key historians have approached and written about the past. By introducing students to schools of history-writing since about 1900, we discuss major historians in their own context, along with significant concepts that have shaped historical inquiry. We consider how those concepts arose, and why they have been influential. These insights help students develop their own sense of `the historian's craft'.
The course explores the work of major historians and their schools across the decades of the twentieth century. Taken together, these are the landmarks of historical practice in an era of change, turmoil, argument and dissent. Each week we examine a school of historical interpretation, and a set of concepts that have been influential in shaping historical inquiry. We consider how those concepts arose, and how they can be traced in the work of influential historians. What is the significance of these ideas and practices in the evolving story of history-writing?
This course aims to show that history-writing itself has a history.ﾠThrough readings, discussions and class activities, we explore some of the big ideas that have shaped the discipline of history in the past hundred and fifty years, and that continue to be important in the present. You are encouraged to work out your own approach and preferences, and so develop skills in those areas of historical inquiry that have value to you.
Engaging with a range of ways of interpretingﾠand representing the past, we ask: ‘What isﾠhistory, especially in modern times?’ ‘Whatﾠkind of thinking helps us make sense of theﾠpast?’, and ‘What ideas, circumstances and practices have shaped history as a professional and academic discipline?’
Course requirements
Assumed background
This course is a mandatory component of the History major. It is recommended only for students who have already taken at least one Gateway course (such as HIST1601, HIST1400, HIST1201).
Incompatible
You can't enrol in this course if you've already completed the following:
HIST3611
Course contact
Course staff
Lecturer
Associate Professor Ian Hesketh
Tutor
Associate Professor Ian Hesketh
Dr Maxwell Brierty
Ms Samantha Grey
Timetable
The timetable for this course is available on the UQ Public Timetable.
Aims and outcomes
- Familiarise students with the leading historical thinkers and schools of historical interpretation of the last 150 years;
- Explain the intellectual assumptions and methodologies on which the main schools of historical interpretation are based;
- Situate major historians and changes in historical thinking within their historical context;
- Enableﾠstudents to identify the influence of these schools of historical interpretation in contemporary historical works;
- Push students to develop their own approach to writing history, as the next generation of historians;
- Develop high level skills in oral and written communication.
Learning outcomes
After successfully completing this course you should be able to:
LO1.
Identify the key schools of historical interpretation that together have shaped the modern discipline of History.
LO2.
Explain your understanding of important ideas that have contributed to modern historical practice.
LO3.
Read historical texts with a critical awareness of the major schools of modern historical practice.
LO4.
Appreciate the historical, intellectual, and social contexts relevant to key schools in modern history writing.
Assessment
Assessment summary
| Category | Assessment task | Weight | Due date |
|---|---|---|---|
| Participation/ Student contribution | Tutorial Participation | 20% |
29/07/2024 - 14/10/2024 |
| Essay/ Critique | Critical Review Essay | 20% 1,000 words |
30/08/2024 2:00 pm |
| Paper/ Report/ Annotation | Essay Proposal and Annotated Bibliography | 20% 500 words |
20/09/2024 2:00 pm |
| Essay/ Critique | Research Essay | 40% 2,000 words |
25/10/2024 2:00 pm |
Assessment details
Tutorial Participation
- Mode
- Activity/ Performance, Oral
- Category
- Participation/ Student contribution
- Weight
- 20%
- Due date
29/07/2024 - 14/10/2024
- Learning outcomes
- L01, L02, L03, L04
Task description
Students are required to attend tutorials across the semester and participate in class discussion. Marks will be awarded for evidence of having completed the required readings for each tutorial and for engaging substantially in class discussions.
NOTE: Tutorials start in Week 2. There is no tutorial in Week 4 due to a public holiday.
Submission guidelines
Deferral or extension
You cannot defer or apply for an extension for this assessment.
Critical Review Essay
- Mode
- Written
- Category
- Essay/ Critique
- Weight
- 20% 1,000 words
- Due date
30/08/2024 2:00 pm
- Learning outcomes
- L01, L02, L03, L04
Task description
Task: Write a 1,000 word essay that critically examines one of the weekly excerpted tutorial readings (see list below). The essay should do the following:
- Identify the historian and excerpted reading
- Identify the school (e.g., Marxism, Annales, post-colonialism, etc) to which the reading belongs
- Examine the key features/themes of the reading that reflect the particular school
- Critically assess the strengths and weaknesses of the reading, particularly in relation to the relevant school
While this is technically a "critical review" assignment, make sure that your examination has all the elements of an essay including an introduction, conclusion, and thesis statement.
Referencing style: Students must use Chicago style for references (footnotes) and bibliographies: http://www.chicagomanualofstyle.org/tools_citationguide/citation-guide-1.html
Word Limits: A word count that is within ±10% of the set length (1,000 words) is acceptable. Word count does not include footnotes; however, discursive footnotes are included in the word count. A word count that is outside these 10% will receive a proportionate penalty and will be graded against the grading criteria.
AI: This assessment task evaluates students' abilities, skills and knowledge without the aid of generative Artificial Intelligence (AI). Students are advised that the use of AI technologies to develop responses is strictly prohibited and may constitute student misconduct under the Student Code of Conduct.
Readings:
Empiricism: Geoffrey Elton, England Under the Tutors (1955), inHouses of History, pp. 26-46).
Marxism: Christopher Hill, "Economic Background of the English Revolution" (1940), in Houses of History, pp. 59-71.
Annales: Fernand Braudel, The Mediterranean and the Mediterranean World in the Age of Phillip II (1949) in Houses of History, pp. 118-130.
Psychohistory: Lyndal Roper, Oedipus and the Devil (1994) in Houses of History, pp. 84–105.
Cultural History: Inga Clendinnen, “Yucatec Maya Women and the Spanish Conquest” (1982), in Houses of History, 210–232.
Narrative: Hayden White, “The Fictions of Factual Representation” (1976), in Houses of History, 233–261.
Gender: Sharon Harley, “For the Good of Family and Race: Gender, Work, and Domestic Roles in the Black Community, 1880–1930” (1990), in Houses of History, 274-288.
Postcolonialism: Henrietta Whiteman, “White Buffalo Woman” (1987), in Houses of History, 333–341.
Poststructuralism: Judith Walkowitz, “Science and the Séance: Transgressions of Gender and Genre” (1992), in Houses of History, 301–319.
Submission guidelines
Submit via Turnitin on Blackboard
Deferral or extension
You may be able to apply for an extension.
The maximum extension allowed is 28 days. Extensions are given in multiples of 24 hours.
Late submission
A penalty of 10% of the maximum possible mark will be deducted per 24 hours from time submission is due for up to 7 days. After 7 days, you will receive a mark of 0.
Essay Proposal and Annotated Bibliography
- Mode
- Written
- Category
- Paper/ Report/ Annotation
- Weight
- 20% 500 words
- Due date
20/09/2024 2:00 pm
- Learning outcomes
- L01, L02, L03, L04
Task description
Task: Write an essay proposal and annotated bibliography that specifies the research essay topic you will write about (topics are listed in the Research Essay assessment item) along with the sources you will use. Your proposal should include the following:
- Clear description of the research topic
- Description of your approach to the topic
- Outline of key themes
- Statement of proposed argument
- A bibliography of at least 5 sources that you intend to use in your essay
- A short annotation accompanying each item in the bibliography
Referencing style: Students must use Chicago style for references (footnotes) and bibliographies: http://www.chicagomanualofstyle.org/tools_citationguide/citation-guide-1.html
Word Limits: A word count that is within ±10% of the set length (500 words) is acceptable. Word count does not include footnotes or bibliography; however, discursive footnotes are included in the word count. A word count that is outside these 10% will receive a proportionate penalty and will be graded against the grading criteria.
AI: This assessment task evaluates students' abilities, skills and knowledge without the aid of generative Artificial Intelligence (AI). Students are advised that the use of AI technologies to develop responses is strictly prohibited and may constitute student misconduct under the Student Code of Conduct.
Submission guidelines
Submit by Turnitin on Blackboard
Deferral or extension
You may be able to apply for an extension.
The maximum extension allowed is 28 days. Extensions are given in multiples of 24 hours.
Late submission
A penalty of 10% of the maximum possible mark will be deducted per 24 hours from time submission is due for up to 7 days. After 7 days, you will receive a mark of 0.
Research Essay
- Mode
- Written
- Category
- Essay/ Critique
- Weight
- 40% 2,000 words
- Due date
25/10/2024 2:00 pm
- Learning outcomes
- L01, L02, L03, L04
Task description
Task: Your major assessment project for this course is a 2,000-word research essay. Your essay should respond to one of the questions below. It should be based on original research in the relevant historical literature, with at least 10 items listed in your bibliography. NOTE: To ensure diversity of coverage you should not write on the same subject as your Critical Review Essay.
Topics:
- Take a major twentieth-century historian as your focus. Assess their larger significance for modern historical practice. How should their contribution to their field of study be regarded?
- Take a major contemporary historian as your focus. Identify and critically examine the assumptions and objectives underlying their approach to the past. How has their work been received by the historical profession?
- Take a major work of history (i.e. history book) as your focus. Situate it by reference to one or more of the schools of history-writing discussed in the course. What does it contribute to the field of study, and how can we best characterize the author’s approach?
- Take a major school of historical scholarship as your focus. Critically assess the context in which this school emerged (this could be understood either narrowly or broadly). What essential concepts characterize the work of this school? What has it contributed to historical scholarship and/or practice?
Referencing style: Students must use Chicago style for references (footnotes) and bibliographies: http://www.chicagomanualofstyle.org/tools_citationguide/citation-guide-1.html
Word Limits: A word count that is within ±10% of the set length (2,000 words) is acceptable. Word count does not include footnotes; however, discursive footnotes are included in the word count. A word count that is outside these 10% will receive a proportionate penalty and will be graded against the grading criteria.
AI: This assessment task evaluates students' abilities, skills and knowledge without the aid of generative Artificial Intelligence (AI). Students are advised that the use of AI technologies to develop responses is strictly prohibited and may constitute student misconduct under the Student Code of Conduct.
Submission guidelines
Submit via Turnitin on Blackboard
Deferral or extension
You may be able to apply for an extension.
The maximum extension allowed is 28 days. Extensions are given in multiples of 24 hours.
Late submission
A penalty of 10% of the maximum possible mark will be deducted per 24 hours from time submission is due for up to 7 days. After 7 days, you will receive a mark of 0.
Course grading
Full criteria for each grade is available in the Assessment Procedure.
| Grade | Description |
|---|---|
| 1 (Low Fail) |
Absence of evidence of achievement of course learning outcomes. Course grade description: <p>Grade 1, Low Fail (0-24%), is generally awarded in cases where some assessment has been submitted, but it is of wholly unsatisfactory standard or quantity. In work submitted, however, there is no demonstrated evidence of understanding of the concepts of the field of study or basic requirements of the course.</p> |
| 2 (Fail) |
Minimal evidence of achievement of course learning outcomes. Course grade description: <p>Grade 2, Fail (25-44%), is generally awarded to work that exhibits deficiencies in understanding and applying the fundamental concepts of the course and field of study, and as such, does not satisfy the basic requirements of the course. Often, one or more major items of assessment will not have been completed.</p> |
| 3 (Marginal Fail) |
Demonstrated evidence of developing achievement of course learning outcomes Course grade description: <p>Grade 3, Marginal Fail (45-49%), is generally awarded if a student has submitted work that attempts to meet the knowledge and skill requirements of the course, but is only able to demonstrate a superficial understanding of the fundamental concepts of the course. Students will usually have attempted all major pieces of assessment and show that they have an identifiable, emerging ability to apply basic knowledge and skills.</p> |
| 4 (Pass) |
Demonstrated evidence of functional achievement of course learning outcomes. Course grade description: <p>Grade 4, Pass (50-64%), is generally awarded where all major items of assessment have been submitted. An adequate knowledge of the fundamental concepts of the course and field of study should be demonstrated and a functional skill level achieved.</p> |
| 5 (Credit) |
Demonstrated evidence of proficient achievement of course learning outcomes. Course grade description: <p>Grade 5, Credit (65-74%), is generally awarded where all items of assessment have been completed and a substantial understanding of the fundamental concepts of the course and field of study have been demonstrated.�</p> |
| 6 (Distinction) |
Demonstrated evidence of advanced achievement of course learning outcomes. Course grade description: <p>Grade 6, Distinction (75-84%), is generally awarded where all items of assessment have been completed and substantial knowledge of the deeper and more complex aspects of the course and field of study have been demonstrated.�</p> |
| 7 (High Distinction) |
Demonstrated evidence of exceptional achievement of course learning outcomes. Course grade description: <p>Grade 7, High Distinction (85-100%), is generally awarded where all items of assessment have been completed and there is evidence that the deeper and more complex aspects of the course and field of study have been mastered.</p> |
Additional course grading information
ASSESSMENT CRITERIA
Tutorial Participation
Your tutorial participation will be assessed according to the following criteria:
- Evidence of participation in discussions.
- Evidence of preparation for the tutorial, most notably through completing the set readings.
- Quality of contributions to discussions.
- Fostering of group discussions, through courteous and respectful interactions with staff and students.
- Attendance is necessary to fulfill the above criteria, as per the course requirements, but marks cannot be awarded for attendance alone.
To achieve a grade of 7 (High Distinction, 85–100%), your attendance will be flawless and your participation exceptional. This grade reflects exceptional levels of preparation, mastery of course materials, and very high quality contributions to, and fostering of, group discussions. You should be able to engage with your peers very effectively.
To achieve a grade of 6 (Distinction, 75–84%) your attendance will be excellent and your participation very substantial. This grade reflects excellent levels of preparation, knowledge of course materials, and high quality contributions to, and fostering of, group discussions. You should be able to engage with your peers effectively.
To achieve a grade of 5 (Credit, 65–74%), your attendance and participation will be good. This grade reflects proficient levels of preparation, good knowledge of course materials, and good quality contributions to, and fostering of, group discussions.
To achieve a grade of 4 (Pass, 50–64%) your attendance and participation will be satisfactory. This grade reflects adequate levels of preparation and knowledge of course materials, and an acceptable quality of contributions to, and fostering of, group discussions.
To achieve a grade of 3 (Marginal Fail, 45–49%) your attendance and participation will be unsatisfactory. This grade reflects irregular attendance and/or participation and superficial knowledge of course materials and basic levels of preparation. However, when in attendance, there is evidence of your ability to demonstrate developing achievement in contributions to, and fostering of, group discussions.
To achieve a grade of 2 (Fail, 25–44%), your attendance and participation will be very unsatisfactory. This grade reflects irregular attendance and/or participation, minimal knowledge of course materials, little evidence of preparation, and mixed to low quality of contributions to, and fostering of, group discussions.
To achieve a grade of 1 (Low Fail, 0-24%), your attendance and participation will be unsatisfactory. This grade reflects irregular attendance and/or participation, an no evidence of preparation, and little or no evidence of quality of contributions to, and fostering of, group discussions.
Critical Review Essay
Your critical review essay will be assessed according to the following criteria:
- Evidence of comprehension of the reading or readings under review.
- Contextualization of the readings, locating them in the relevant field(s) of literature.
- Critique of the reading or readings.
- Insight and creativity.
- Clear and concise written expression, well presented.
To achieve a grade of 7 (High Distinction, 85–100%), your critical review of and reflection on readings should demonstrate exceptional comprehension of the works under review; it should locate them precisely and comprehensively in the relevant field or fields of literature; it should be highly persuasive and clear in its critique, and should demonstrate exceptional levels of insight and creativity. Your writing will be very clear and concise, pay strict attention to discipline conventions and have minimal, if any errors in referencing, expression, grammar, spelling and punctuation.
To achieve a grade of 6 (Distinction, 75–84%), your critical review of and reflection on readings should demonstrate an advanced comprehension of the works under review; it should locate them perceptively and comprehensively in the relevant field or fields of literature; it should be very persuasive and clear in its critique, and should demonstrate advanced levels of insight and creativity. Your writing will be clear and concise, pay strict attention to discipline conventions and have minimal, if any errors in referencing, expression, grammar, spelling and punctuation.
To achieve a grade of 5 (Credit, 65–74%), your critical review of and reflection on readings should demonstrate a proficient comprehension of the works under review; it should locate them broadly in the relevant field or fields of literature; it should be effective and clear in its critique, and should demonstrate proficient levels of insight and creativity. The presentation and referencing of your review will follow/largely follow discipline conventions, have few/some errors in grammar, spelling and punctuation, and demonstrate your ability to communicate effectively.
To achieve a grade of 4 (Pass, 50–64%), your critical review of and reflection on readings should demonstrate a functional comprehension of the works under review; it should at least be able to identify them broadly in the relevant field or fields of literature; it should offer a coherent critique, and should demonstrate basic levels of insight and creativity. Your organisation, writing, referencing, spelling and grammar will be adequate and use some of the discipline conventions to communicate appropriately.
To achieve a grade of 3 (Marginal Fail, 45–49%), your critical review of and reflection on readings should demonstrate developing levels of achievement and a very basic level of research, but it falls short of meeting all the requirements for a passing grade. It should attempt to demonstrate a basic comprehension of the works under review; attempt to identify them broadly in the relevant field or fields of literature and attempt to offer a coherent critique. Your organisation, writing, spelling and grammar will be adequate/poor and your referencing and use of discipline conventions poor/and or inconsistent.
To achieve a grade of 2 (Fail, 25–44%), your critical review of and reflection on readings will reflect inadequate comprehension of the works under review; a minimal if any attempt to identify them broadly in the relevant field or fields of literature; an inability to offer a coherent critique or identify insights. Your organisation and writing will be poor and/or inappropriate, and referencing and use of discipline conventions poor/and or inconsistent.
To achieve a grade of 1 (Low Fail, 0–24%), your critical review of and reflection on readings will not show evidence of understanding and comprehension of the works under review. It will fail to demonstrate a satisfactory understanding of the work’s relation to surrounding literature and will not provide a coherent critique or insight and creativity. Your organisation and writing will be poor and/or inappropriate, and referencing and use of discipline conventions poor/and or inconsistent.
Essay Proposal and Annotated Bibliography
Your essay proposal and annotated bibliography will be assessed according to the following criteria:
- Topic definition and rationale for project.
- Concise statement of your research question or problem.
- Outline of research approach, strategy and time plan.
- Identification of key issues and/or challenges.
- Evaluation of academic sources and evidence.
- Presentation and written expression.
To achieve a grade of 7 (High Distinction, 85–100%), your proposal should demonstrate exceptional consideration of issues related to topic definition and rationale, and provide a nuanced and sophisticated statement of your research question and strategic approach. Project tasks should be identified very clearly, and the evaluation of relevant sources will be very insightful. Your proposal will be very well written, clear and concise, pay strict attention to discipline conventions and have minimal, if any errors in referencing, expression, grammar, spelling and punctuation.
To achieve a grade of 6 (Distinction, 75–84%), your proposal should demonstrate an advanced level of consideration of issues related to topic definition and rationale, and provide a very effective statement of your research question and strategic approach. Project tasks will be clearly identified, and the evaluation of relevant sources will be insightful. Your proposal will be well written, clear and concise, follow discipline conventions and have few errors in referencing, expression, grammar, spelling and punctuation.
To achieve a grade of 5 (Credit, 65–74%), your proposal should demonstrate proficient consideration of issues related to topic definition and rationale, and provide an effective statement of your research question and strategic approach. Project tasks will be well identified, with good evaluation of relevant sources. The presentation and referencing of your essay will follow/largely follow discipline conventions, have few/some errors in grammar, spelling and punctuation, and demonstrate your ability to communicate effectively.
To achieve a grade of 4 (Pass, 50–64%), your proposal should adequately consider some issues related to topic definition and rationale, and provide a functional or workable statement of your research question and strategic approach. There will be adequate identification of some project tasks, and a basic evaluation of some relevant sources. Your organisation, writing, referencing, spelling and grammar will be adequate and use some of the discipline conventions to communicate appropriately.
To achieve a grade of 3 (Marginal Fail, 45–49%), your proposal will consider issues related to topic definition and rationale only superficially, and will provide an attempt that demonstrates developing proficiency but ultimately does not result in a workable statement of your research question and/or strategic approach. Identification of project tasks will be superficial, and relevant sources will be evaluated inadequately. Your organisation, writing, spelling and grammar will be adequate/poor and your referencing and use of discipline conventions poor/and or inconsistent.
To achieve a grade of 2 (Fail, 25–44%), your proposal will demonstrate minimal consideration of issues related to topic definition and rationale, will fail to provide a workable statement of your research question and strategic approach. There will be poor or insufficient identification of project tasks, and inadequate evaluation of relevant sources. Your organisation and writing will be poor and/or inappropriate, and referencing and use of discipline conventions poor/and or inconsistent.
To achieve a grade of 1 (Low Fail, 0–24%), your proposal will fail to consider issues related to topic definition and rationale, and will not present a workable statement of your research question and strategic approach. There will be no or insufficient identification of project tasks, and no or insufficient evaluation of relevant sources. There will be an unsatisfactory standard of presentation and/or written expression. Use of discipline conventions will be absent, poor or inappropriate.
Research Essay
Your research essay will be assessed according to the following criteria:
- Ability to construct a well-reasoned argument.
- Depth and breadth of knowledge and understanding of central issues.
- Ability to form a well-structured essay.
- Engagement with academic sources and evidence.
- Insight and/or creativity in interpreting texts or constructing a point of view or argument.
- Capacity to produce a coherent and well-written essay using correct grammar and syntax.
- Appropriately referenced, as per discipline conventions.
To achieve a grade of 7 (High Distinction, 85–100%), your essay should reflect an exceptional level of achievement. It should demonstrate that you have undertaken extensive, high-level research, that you are able to form a very rigorous, well-organised argument, and that your discussion is original and creative. It should also demonstrate that you are able to evaluate and organise data and/or evidence in a critical manner and that you have a sophisticated and insightful understanding of problems and issues. Your essay should be very well written, clear and concise, pay strict attention to discipline conventions and have minimal, if any errors in referencing, expression, grammar, spelling and punctuation.
To achieve a grade of 6 (Distinction, 75–84%), your essay should reflect an advanced level of achievement. It should demonstrate that you have undertaken wide research, that you are able to form a rigorous, well-organised argument, and that your discussion is coherent and convincing. It should also demonstrate that you are able to evaluate data and/or evidence in a perceptive manner, and that your understanding of problems and issues is perceptive and insightful. Your essay should be be well written, clear and concise, follow discipline conventions and have few errors in referencing, expression, grammar, spelling and punctuation.
To achieve a grade of 5 (Credit, 65–74%) your essay should reflect a proficient level of achievement. It should demonstrate that you have undertaken the expected level of research, that you are able to develop or adapt convincing arguments and justify them adequately, that you are able to evaluate data and/or evidence in a proficient manner, and that you have a proficient understanding of problems and issues. The presentation and referencing of your essay will largely follow discipline conventions, perhaps have some errors in grammar, spelling and punctuation, and demonstrate your ability to communicate effectively.
To achieve a grade of 4 (Pass, 50–64%) your essay should reflect a functional level of achievement. It should demonstrate that you are able to apply fundamental concepts and skills, that you have undertaken a basic level of research and have the basic ability to evaluate data and/or evidence, to identify problems and issues, to offer insights and to develop routine arguments. Your organisation, writing, referencing, spelling and grammar will be adequate and use some of the discipline conventions to communicate appropriately.
To achieve a grade of 3 (Marginal Fail, 45–49%) your essay should reflect developing levels of achievement. It should demonstrate that you have a superficial level of knowledge of fundamental concepts and skills, that you have undertaken a basic level of research, made some attempt to evaluate data and/or evidence, to identify problems and issues, and to offer some insights. Your arguments, while underdeveloped, show your emerging ability to apply knowledge and skills. Your organisation, writing, spelling and grammar will be adequate, perhaps poor, and your referencing and use of discipline conventions poor/and or inconsistent.
To achieve a grade of 2 (Fail, 25–44%) your essay will reflect deficiencies in skill acquisition and in your understanding of the fundamental concepts of the course. It will demonstrate that you have not undertaken adequate research, that you are unable to evaluate data and/or evidence, to identify problems and issues, or to offer insights adequately. Your arguments will be unsupported and/or inappropriate, your organisation and writing will be poor and/or inappropriate, and referencing and use of discipline conventions poor/and or inconsistent.
To achieve a grade of 1 (Low Fail, 0–24%), your essay will reflect that you have failed to meet the minimum learning requirements and skill acquisition for this course. Your essay will demonstrate an absence of research, evaluation of data and/or evidence, and lack argumentation. Use of discipline conventions will be absent, poor or inappropriate, and written expression poor or inappropriate.
Supplementary assessment
Supplementary assessment is available for this course.
Additional assessment information
- Failure to submit all major assessment items (those worth 15% and above) will result in a maximum grade of 2 (Fail).
- By submitting work through Turnitin you are deemed to have accepted the following declaration: ﾠ‘I certify that this assignment is my own work and has not been submitted, either previously or concurrently, in whole or in part, to this University or any other educational institution, for marking or assessment’.
- All studentsﾠ mustﾠ ensure they receive their Turnitin receipt on every submission of assessment items. YOU MUST CHECK THAT THE RECEIPT CONFIRMS THAT SUBMISSION HAS BEEN SUCCESSFUL.
- A valid Turnitin receipt will be the only evidence accepted if assessments are missing. Without evidence, the assessment will receive the standard late penalty, or after ten business days, will receive zero. In the case of a Blackboard outage, please contact the Course Co-ordinator as soon as possible to confirm the outage with ITS.
- It is the responsibility of the student to ensure that they are submitting assessment items on a device that is capable of the task, and that appropriate bandwidth and speed is available. If you cannot be sure if your device or internet will enable you to complete or submit an assessment task, you must come onto campus and use one of the University computers in the Library or Computer Labs.
- Plagiarism is cheating and constitutesﾠacademic misconduct.ﾠSee ECP Section 6.1.
- Feedback against the assessment criteria in the form of comments on your script will be provided through Turnitin or on your script directly.
- For information on assessment remarks see: https://my.uq.edu.au/information-and-services/manage-my-program/exams-and-assessment/querying-result
Learning resources
You'll need the following resources to successfully complete the course. We've indicated below if you need a personal copy of the reading materials or your own item.
Library resources
Find the required and recommended resources for this course on the UQ Library website.
Own copy required
You'll need to have your own copy of the following reading resources. We've indicated below if you need a personal copy of the reading materials or your own item.
| Item | Description |
|---|---|
| Book |
The houses of history: a critical reader in history and theory
by Green; Anna; Troup; Kathleen - 2016 Edition: Second edition Publisher: Manchester University Press ISBN: 9780719096204; 9780719096211; 9781526115119; 9781526153708 |
Additional learning resources information
ﾠ
ﾠ
ﾠ
Learning activities
The learning activities for this course are outlined below. Learn more about the learning outcomes that apply to this course.
Filter activity type by
Please select
| Learning period | Activity type | Topic |
|---|---|---|
Week 1 (22 Jul - 28 Jul) |
Lecture |
Week One: Course Introduction This introductory lecture introduces the course, and explains the various activities and assessment tasks that lie ahead. We will begin to form the topic groups and ‘fan clubs’ for presentations in the course. Learning outcomes: L01, L04 |
Week 2 (29 Jul - 04 Aug) |
Lecture |
Week Two: History's Golden Age? Empiricism and Its Descendants This lecture addresses the role of evidence-based analysis or ‘empiricism’ in history-writing. It concentrates on the late-nineteenth century generation of historians and their search for objective truth, the collection of facts, and the aim to make history a science. Learning outcomes: L01, L04 |
Tutorial |
Week Two: Empiricism and Geoffrey Elton Tutorial reading: Green and Troup, The Houses of History, Ch. 2 Tutorian Discussion Questions: Geoffrey Elton, England Under the Tutors (1955), in The Houses of History, pp. 26–46.
Learning outcomes: L01, L02, L03, L04 |
|
Week 3 (05 Aug - 11 Aug) |
Lecture |
Week Three: Marx and the Revolutionaries This lecture considers the contribution of Marxist approaches to history. By concentrating on the British school of Marxist historians, we examine how figures like Eric Hobsbawm, Christopher Hill and E.P. Thompson have approached topics like revolution, social conflict and class experience. We assess the legacies of Thompson’s epic work The Making of the English Working Class. Learning outcomes: L01, L04 |
Tutorial |
Week Three: Marxism and Christopher Hill Tutorial Reading: Green and Troup, The Houses of History, Ch. 3. Tutorian Discussion Questions: Christopher Hill, "Economic Background of the English Revolution," in The Houses of History, pp. 59–71.
Learning outcomes: L01, L02, L03, L04 |
|
Week 5 (19 Aug - 25 Aug) |
Lecture |
Week Five: The Quest for Total History: The Annales School This lecture considers the ‘three waves’ of the influential French school known as the Annales historians. Their innovative use of timeframes and deep structural frameworks to human history suggest the value (but also the pitfalls) of a ‘big picture’ approach to the past. Braudel’s epic The Mediterranean pioneered a new conception of geography and social structure as a factor in human affairs, but highlighted problems when generalizing on such a grand scale. Learning outcomes: L01, L04 |
Tutorial |
Week Five: The Annales and Fernand Braudel Tutorial Reading: Green and Troup, The Houses of History, Ch. 5. Tutorian Discussion Questions: Fernand Braudel, The Mediterranean and the Mediterranean World in the Age of Phillip II (1949) in The Houses of History, pp. 118–130.
Learning outcomes: L01, L02, L03, L04 |
|
Week 6 (26 Aug - 01 Sep) |
Lecture |
Week Six: Psychohistory: Freud and the Historians This week we explore how historians have used versions of Freudian theory to explain subjective and un-stated human motives. Erikson’s work on the psychology of Adolf Hitler is used to explore the value of ‘psycho-history’. We also examine Norbert Elias’s theory of the “civilizing process” in history, referring to the change in human conduct and sentiment in a specific direction as a result of the process by which humans impose ever-increasing restraints upon themselves. And we look at the recent development of the ‘History of the Emotions’. Learning outcomes: L01, L04 |
Tutorial |
Week Six: Psychohistory and Lyndal Roper Tutorial Reading: Green and Troup, The Houses of History, Ch. 4. Tutorian Discussion Questions: Lyndal Roper, Oedipus and the Devil (1994) in The Houses of History, pp. 84–105.
Learning outcomes: L01, L02, L03, L04 |
|
Week 7 (02 Sep - 08 Sep) |
Lecture |
Week Seven: Cultural History: History Meets Anthropology This class investigates the fruitful intersection of history with anthropology in the 1970s and 1980s. The influence of American anthropologist Clifford Geertz and his concept of ‘thick description’ provides a key focus, along with the ‘New Cultural History’ and 'Microhistory'. We will also consider the rise of the related field of 'Ethnohistory' and the attempt to study ‘culture from below.’ Learning outcomes: L01, L04 |
Tutorial |
Week Seven: Cultural History and Inga Clendinnen Tutorial Reading: Green and Troup, The Houses of History, Ch. 8. Tutorian Discussion Questions: Inga Clendinnen, “Yucatec Maya Women and the Spanish Conquest” (1982), in Houses of History, 210–232.
Learning outcomes: L01, L02, L03, L04 |
|
Week 8 (09 Sep - 15 Sep) |
Lecture |
Week Eight: The Use and Abuse of Narrative in History Writing Story-telling is an essential feature of much history-writing, and narratives are often at the heart of historical analysis and explanation. This lecture explores the basic paradox of historical narrative: a story that cannot be invention. How is this even possible? Hayden White’s expose of the ‘meta-narratives’ of epic history-writing in the nineteenth century provides a useful antidote to inflated claims for empirical objectivity, but does that imply that history is inevitably fiction? Watchers of TV documentaries might think so. Learning outcomes: L01, L04 |
Tutorial |
Weel Eight: Narrative and Hayden White Tutorial Reading: Green and Troup, The Houses of History, Ch. 9. Tutorial Discussion Questions: Hayden White, “The Fictions of Factual Representation” (1976), in Houses of History, 233–261.
Learning outcomes: L01, L02, L03, L04 |
|
Week 9 (16 Sep - 22 Sep) |
Lecture |
Week Nine: The Rise of Women's History and Gender as a Category of Analysis Women and women’s experiences were routinely marginalized in older modes of history-writing, something that has been challenged fundamentally by women’s emancipation and feminism. Key feminist historians have taken various steps to rectify the historical imbalance, and have pioneered a range of approaches that challenge the patriarchal framework of the historical profession. In the past decade or so ‘gender’ itself has been analyzed critically as a historical phenomenon, along with masculinity and sexuality. This lecture examines this bold and radical streak of historical practice since the 1960s. Learning outcomes: L01, L04 |
Tutorial |
Week Nine: Gender History and Sharon Harley Tutorial Reading: Green and Troup, The Houses of History, Ch. 10. Tutorial Discussion Questions: Sharon Harley, “For the Good of Family and Race: Gender, Work, and Domestic Roles in the Black Community, 1880–1930” (1990), in Houses of History, 274-288.
Learning outcomes: L01, L02, L03, L04 |
|
Week 10 (30 Sep - 06 Oct) |
Lecture |
Week Ten: Empire and Its Legacies: Postcolonialism As overt European imperialism collapsed in the mid-20th century, a strident critique of its legacies has appeared in scholarly work by figures such as Edward Said. ‘Post-colonial’ history has been concerned with the important residues of empire in language, culture, politics and identity. This lecture outlines the emergence of this school, its importance to national and liberation movements in Africa, the Middle East, Asia and South America, and the way it encapsulates a new appreciation of power and its implications for the contemporary post-colonial globe. Learning outcomes: L01, L04 |
Tutorial |
Week Ten: Postcolonial History and Henrietta Whiteman Tutorial Reading: Green and Troup, The Houses of History, Ch. 12. Tutorial Discussion Questions: Henrietta Whiteman, “White Buffalo Woman” (1987), in Houses of History, 333–341.
Learning outcomes: L01, L02, L03, L04 |
|
Week 11 (07 Oct - 13 Oct) |
Lecture |
Week Eleven: Postmodernism: The Challenge of Modernity Arising from fashionable trends in European (especially French) philosophy and linguistics in the 1970s and 1980s, postmodernism was an intellectual challenge to the complex of ideas that had constituted “modernism”: e.g. the belief in human progress, the ability to ascertain “truth” through the use of reason, and moral absolutes. Postmodernism thus represented an assault on the old forms of authority in historical knowledge. At the same time Foucault and others opened up new areas for historical inquiry: madness, discipline and surveillance, power, morality, and perhaps most famously, sexuality. Did the postmodernists undermine history as a credible discipline? Or were they simply a neo-idealist conspiracy, the latest in a long line of empirical skeptics? What has postmodernism actually contributed to historical understanding? Learning outcomes: L01, L04 |
Tutorial |
Week Eleven: Poststructuralism and Judith Walkowitz Tutorial Reading: Green and Troup, The Houses of History, Ch. 11. Tutorial Discussion Questions: Judith Walkowitz, “Science and the Séance: Transgressions of Gender and Genre” (1992), in Houses of History, 301–319.
Learning outcomes: L01, L02, L03, L04 |
|
Week 12 (14 Oct - 20 Oct) |
Lecture |
Week Twelve: Big History: Writing History in the Age of the Anthropocene Climate change, mass extinctions, planetary crisis, and the real possibility that human life may have a finite period of existence on the earth, all force us to rethink how we understand the history of humanity. In recent years "Big History" - meaning the history of the universe from the Big Bang to the present - has become popular in schools and universities, even winning over fans such as Microsoft founder, Bill Gates. And as the human imprint on the earth grows many scientists now believe we have entered a new epoch, the "Anthropocene", in which the major cause of geological and environmental change in the world is humanity itself. If humanity's future is in doubt, how do we write its history? Learning outcomes: L01, L04 |
Tutorial |
Week Twelve: Big History and David Christian Tutorial Reading: Ian Hesketh, "What Big History Misses,” Aeon, 16 December 2021 Tutorial Discussion Questions: David Christian, “This History of Our World in 18 Minutes”, TED Talk: https://www.ted.com/talks/david_christian_the_history_of_our_world_in_18_minutes?language=en
Learning outcomes: L01, L02, L03, L04 |
|
Week 13 (21 Oct - 27 Oct) |
Lecture |
Week Thirteen: Public History: Taking History Outside the University Recent decades have seen a growing awareness of the application of historical inquiry and communication to areas of broad public concern. There is also a greater recognition of the value of historical insight to public issues such as heritage conservation, museum exhibitions, and the interpretation of historical sites. This lecture examines the emergence and practice of public history as a transnational development, with particular emphasis on recent Australian applications. Learning outcomes: L01, L04 |
Additional learning activity information
There are no learning activities in Week 4 due to a public holiday.
Policies and procedures
University policies and procedures apply to all aspects of student life. As a UQ student, you must comply with University-wide and program-specific requirements, including the:
- Student Code of Conduct Policy
- Student Integrity and Misconduct Policy and Procedure
- Assessment Procedure
- Examinations Procedure
- Reasonable Adjustments - Students Policy and Procedure
Learn more about UQ policies on my.UQ and the Policy and Procedure Library.