This past year, I created an annotated syllabus for teaching a two part United States history survey course at Arizona State University. The first portion of the annotated syllabus covered teaching American history prior to European arrival up to Reconstruction. The latter portion of the annotated syllabus covered teaching from Reconstruction up to and including the present. Both sections of this project were designed to cover a fifteen week time frame each. When combined, the syllabus detailed thirty weeks of instruction. Each week was designed to cover a particular time and theme of American history. In addition, each week’s topic was supported by assigned reading and background texts which provided a means for synthesizing varied historians
…show more content…
However, certain topics are far more difficult to compartmentalize and confine to a week. For example, this annotated syllabus sets adequate parameters for covering the Korean War in a week, but to attempt to cover the Cold War in a week is detrimental to the course’s objectives. My second conclusion from this activity deals with synthesizing historical sources. During each week of both units, I drew influence from the writings of many different historians. For some weeks, the writings provided a fantastic way to synthesize the perspectives of different historians into the syllabus. For instance, in week one of part one, I drew upon Charles Mann’s 1493: Uncovering the New World Columbus Created. This book provided an ecological history methodology that I was able to easily synthesize with the syllabus. However, I also concluded that some of the writings of other historians were either too long or in depth to be able to completely integrate the writings into a one week unit survey course. For example, in week ten of part one, I used Jon Meacham’s American Lion: Andrew Jackson in the White House. This book is 512 pages long, and to attempt to fully synthesize Meacham’s writings into the course syllabus in a week was foolhardy at best. Thus, one of the most crucial conclusions from this project was to draw upon resources that provide historical insight but do so in a timely manner conforming to the constraints of the week unit
However, certain topics are far more difficult to compartmentalize and confine to a week. For example, this annotated syllabus sets adequate parameters for covering the Korean War in a week, but to attempt to cover the Cold War in a week is detrimental to the course’s objectives. My second conclusion from this activity deals with synthesizing historical sources. During each week of both units, I drew influence from the writings of many different historians. For some weeks, the writings provided a fantastic way to synthesize the perspectives of different historians into the syllabus. For instance, in week one of part one, I drew upon Charles Mann’s 1493: Uncovering the New World Columbus Created. This book provided an ecological history methodology that I was able to easily synthesize with the syllabus. However, I also concluded that some of the writings of other historians were either too long or in depth to be able to completely integrate the writings into a one week unit survey course. For example, in week ten of part one, I used Jon Meacham’s American Lion: Andrew Jackson in the White House. This book is 512 pages long, and to attempt to fully synthesize Meacham’s writings into the course syllabus in a week was foolhardy at best. Thus, one of the most crucial conclusions from this project was to draw upon resources that provide historical insight but do so in a timely manner conforming to the constraints of the week unit