Monmouth College History 112 Fall 2008

First Book Exam:  Four Hats in the Ring

Instructions
bulletHand in a thoughtful and thorough essay with perfect grammar and beautiful prose in answer to one of the following questions. Your essay should be no shorter than five pages--and that is five pages to the bottom of page five. This essay is due at the beginning of class on the date specified on the syllabus, 26 September 2008.
bulletI encourage you to work with each other on this exam. Discuss the book among yourselves, and talk through your essays.
bulletDo not plagiarize each other’s exams, however. If you do, both of you will be asked to rewrite your papers, and a penalty may be assessed. If you plagiarize from the book, you will also have to rewrite your paper, and a penalty may be assessed.
bulletDirect quotes from the book must be inside quotation marks. The page number from whence the quote came must be noted in parenthesis after the period (that is, outside of the sentence). The Scots Guide contains the College’s plagiarism policy, which I follow strictly.
bulletYour job, in large part, is to convince me that you have read this book and understood its major concepts. To that end, your essay should include brief quotes from throughout the book which help to support the points you are making. On the other hand, don't use quotes when you can convey it in your own words just as well.
bulletTHE BIGGEST MISTAKE YOU CAN MAKE IN WRITING THIS EXAM IS TO HAVE THE BOOK OPEN ON THE DESK NEXT TO YOU AS YOU WRITE. Doing this will almost always cause you to plagiarize--and it will usually cause you to order your thoughts the way the book is ordered. Don't do that. Write with the book under the mattress. Put the points you are making in YOUR OWN ORDER. Use YOUR OWN WORDS, except for direct quotes. I want to see evidence of your analysis, your synthesis, your thought, your words. I've read the book! I don't want to re-read a slight variant of it.
bulletIf you have any questions at all, call me, e-mail me, or stop by my office. I will be happy to look at a draft of your essay. I’ll be happy to look at your thesis statement, or your outline, or your opening paragraph--whatever will help you to write a really excellent essay.
bulletDon't forget that the writing center on campus is staffed with people who can help you with your prose. Get a draft done early and take it to them, or bring it to me. If you go to the Mellinger Center, remind them that this class follows the Chicago Manual of Style, not the MLA.
bulletThis is a 40 point exam.

Options:

#1:  Imagine that you are a reporter for the Monmouth College Courier.  It’s 1912, and you have been given the task of explaining the presidential election that has just ended.  Basing your article only on the Gould book, write an overview that explains the election.  Conclude with assessing whose mistake(s) caused the outcome that occurred.  Your article must include examples and brief quotes from the book.

#2:  Imagine that you are a journalist for the New York Times.  It’s 1913, and you are writing a one-year retrospective piece on the election that you followed at the time. Your angle is that of the candidates themselves.  You’ve decided to look back and consider how and why the worst criticism of the election hurt the candidates.  Using only your Gould book, locate what you think is the worst criticism leveled at two of the four candidates.  Analyze that criticism in depth, and explain how the candidate responded.  Use the Gould book as you would an interview.

#3:  One of the most interesting things about the 1912 election was that each of the men running was in his own way, progressive. Write an essay, based only on Gould’s book, that explains the progressivism of each of the four candidates.  

#4.  Think of the characteristics necessary to be a great president.  Did any of the four men running then have those characteristics?  Write an analytical essay, based only on the Gould book, that considers whether the choices each man made to run in 1912 seemed like they would herald a great presidency, or whether those choices likely made the candidate unsuited to the presidency.