• ***If you haven't yet customized / cleaned up your blog, please do so. This includes adding a title, removing the word press sample blog posts, adding something to the about section, and removing any sample blurbs from the blog.***
  • Word Count: 450-700 words (can include inline references but not the bibliography)
  • References: Use inline references (Author date, page number) (e.g. Johnson 2000, 208). Include a bibliography of sources at the end using the Chicago Manual of Style.
  • Topic: Gold Rush (can include migration to California, mining, life in the camps, or the bust that followed); This week's secondary source readings, especially, Susan Johnson's Roaring Camp
  • Skill Requirement: Primary Source Integration and Analysis Include at least TWO primary sources (not including those we used in class) in your discussion and analysis. Be sure to cite these sources and link to them in the post. Use your primary source analysis checklist as a guide.
  • Remember, in these blog posts, you have the freedom to choose how you want to talk about this topic, as long as you integrate the skill component. Try to find an innovative way to approach this topic so you're not just rehashing what we discussed in class this week. Think about this as an opportunity to synthesize and analyze class topics and materials. You might also pose questions that these sources or topics may raise for you.
  • Due by 11:59PM on Friday 9/2.
  • Audience

    Write for a public audience that includes your peers


  • To increase your proficiency and comfort at analyzing primary sources and practicing using the digital tools we learn about in class

  • To engage with the public, including your peers, in offering thoughtful responses to historical materials

  • To gain experience and comfort in blogging and digital communication

  • To provide regular opportunities for synthesis, writing, and historical analysis in the classroom.

  • Grading

    Blog posts will be graded on a 15-point scale.
    Exceeds Expectations Meets Expectations Needs improvement
    Writing / Content / Ideas (5 Points) Your post has a “critical edge,” meaning that you pay attention to complexity, contradictions, and nuance. You challenge taken-for-granted assumptions, shed new light on old topics, and/or explore alternative viewpoints. You include specific, detailed examples, and approach the topic from an interesting or exciting viewpoint. Your post notes some complexity, contradictions, and nuance, but could move to the next level by challenging taken-for-granted assumptions, shedding new light on old topics, or exploring alternative viewpoints. You include examples but they may be lacking in appropriate detail. Your post lacks attention to complexity, contradictions, and nuance, and instead focuses on a single perspective and/or generalizations. To improve in this area, seek a more innovative viewpoint. Your post may also be lacking in detailed examples.
    Professionalism (5 points) Your post follows the basic rules for clear writing. Your post is thoroughly proofread, and is well-written in an appropriately professional tone. You include proper citations as needed. Your post meets all requirements (length, number of sources, etc.). Your post generally follows the basic rules for clear writing and is generally well-written, but it has a few proofreading errors and/or is missing citations. The tone is appropriately professional. Your post meets all or most requirements (length, number of sources, etc.). Your post would be stronger if you invested more time in proofreading and revisions. You may also be missing citations or be writing in too informal of a tone. Your post may not have met all of the requirements (length, number of sources, etc.).
    Skill Practice (5 Pts) Masterfully references at least two primary sources and integrates them into the post seamlessly. Chooses interesting sources that fit within the chosen topic. Clear analysis of sources supports the rest of the post. References two sources and integrates them into the post. To improve, student may need to work to better connect the sources into their writing or strengthen their analysis. Student references less than two sources or may not have tied them in well (listing them or talking about them separately). Analysis may be or insufficient or incomplete.