Berkeley City College End Of Cold War Discussion

Question Description

Assignment: Write a thoughtful and well-written 1-2 pages (about 250-500 words) historical analysis and please try to submit the assignment by the end of Week 14 (Sunday, November 29th) if possible (you can still submit it after that).

_______________________

Expectations: 1-2 pages (about 250-500 words) of clear and strong quality writing, definitely proofread!, using any appropriately cited evidence to support your interpretation.

_______________________

Topic: “Where in the world is…?” (Links to an external site.) (aka “Party like it’s 1999…”)

Last week’s assignment asked you to consider the end of the Cold War and the beginning of a “New World Order” and to provide an interpretation of the state of the world by the end of the 1980s.

This week I’m asking you to consider the 1990s from the perspective of the year 2000 and to provide a historical interpretation of the 1990s in comparison to your analysis of the state of the world by 1989. (So please do the Week 13 Assignment first if you haven’t already!)

Was the world “better” in 1999 than it was in 1989 or “worse?” Or, was it neither? Be sure to provide an analysis that includes a consideration of the impacts of modern globalization in the 1990s!

_______________________

Tips: You can (but don’t have to!) consider any of the following:

The historical context of the end of the Cold War: what had changed in the 1990s? What hadn’t?
The impact of the end of the Cold War and globalization on the world by the end of the 1990s?
What was genuinely new and different that was happening in the 1990s and/or in the end of the 20th century and what kind of impacts resulted? (Examples: think expansion of computers, internet, and other technologies)
How would you analyze and evaluate “modern globalization” in comparison to “early globalization?” What had changed? What hadn’t?

*NOTE: There are no right or wrong arguments; I just want you to practice making connections to produce a historical argument.

_______________________

Feedback: Your feedback, which will become part of your overall evaluation in this course, will be based on 5 criteria of emphasis–

1. POINT: This will be your specific response to the question (“Looking back from 1999, we can see a decade marked by ____, _____, and _____). Usually 1 sentence; this is the thesis or topical sentence.

2. EVIDENCE: Cite strong evidence to support your POINT. Remember, evidence should directly relate to your point and support it and you need to identify and cite it as necessary.

3. EVALUATION: Having explained your EVIDENCE you then need to tie your argument together by explaining how and why the EVIDENCE supports your POINT. This evaluation, or analysis, connects your argument together to form a strong circle: POINT-EVIDENCE-EVALUATION-POINT.

ARGUMENT: How well you are combining your point, evidence, and evaluation together to form an overall ARGUMENT. The clearer and more specific your connections between your POINT, EVIDENCE, and EVALUATION are the stronger your overall ARGUMENT will be to your audience.

WRITING: The quality of your WRITING doesn’t have to be perfect, but any argument is stronger when it is well-written so be sure to proofread for spelling, grammar, and word-choice.

POINTS: CANVAS LOVES USING POINTS EVEN IF I DON’T WANT TO. PLEASE NOTE:

THE ASSIGNMENT POINT (1 POINT) IS BASED ON WHETHER YOU HAVE SUBMITTED THE ASSIGNMENT AND I PROVIDED YOU FEEDBACK–IT IS OTHERWISE MEANINGLESS!

Rubric

Weekly Assignment Rubric

Criteria

Ratings

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomePointIs the thesis statement/point clear, specific, strong, and is it related to the proposed topic?

1. Proficient

Describes a position and perspective related to the topic accurately and clearly.

2. Developing

Identifies an over-simplified position or perspective with minor inaccuracies or a lack of clarity.

3. Needs Improvement

Incomplete or missing a position or perspective or presents a position or perspective in very unclear or inaccurate terms.

4. Missing

Missing.

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeEvidenceIs the cited evidence clear, specific, accurate, and related to the point/topic? And, if necessary, is the evidence cited correctly?

1. Proficient

Presents/cites information (data, ideas, or concepts) accurately and appropriately in a context that relates to the point/topic.

2. Developing

Reports/cites information (data, ideas, or concepts) with minor inaccuracies, irrelevancies, or omissions.

3. Needs Improvement

Missing necessary evidence or using/citing information (data, ideas, or concepts) inaccurately, incompletely, or omitting relevant information as evidence.

4. Missing

Missing.

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeEvaluationIs there a historical interpretation communicated that employs connections, perspectives, ideas, and/or themes to provide effective analysis and evaluation of historical information?

1. Proficient

Provides an interpretation of information, ideas, or themes that is detailed and well-explained in a logical and clear manner.

2. Developing

Provides an interpretation of information, ideas, or themes that is generally logical and clear but needs more explanation and specific detail to provide a stronger interpretation.

3. Needs Improvement

Provides an unclear interpretation of information, ideas, or themes that contains inaccuracies, excessive generalities, and/or a lack of explanation.

4. Missing

Missing.

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeArgument (PEEP)Is the overall assignment synthesizing, or connecting, ideas/arguments, evidence, and analytical/evaluative information into a coherent whole–effectively connecting POINT, EVIDENCE, and EVALUATION together?

1. Proficient

Integrates ideas and evidence and/or develops connections (PEEP) that are clear, coherent, cohesive, and sophisticated–creating a unique and strong argument.

2. Developing

Arranges ideas and/or develops explanations that are generally clear and coherent save, perhaps, an inconsistency or two caused by a lack of detail, connection, or explanation leading to an argument that doesn’t fully come together (incomplete PEEP).

3. Needs Improvement

Forms ideas and/or develops explanations in a fragmentary manner without clear or coherent order or connection which creates an unclear overall argument that is difficult to follow.

4. Missing

Missing.

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeWritingDoes the writing use correct spelling, proper grammar and formatting, and clearly and effectively communicate the writer’s argument to their audience?

1. Proficient

Writing is of clear and consistent quality (consistently correct spelling and grammar); the writing effectively and clearly communicates the position or perspective of the work.

2. Developing

The writing can be unclear at points as the writing quality (spelling and grammar) varies. At points the writing is not effectively and clearly communicating the position or perspective of the work.

3. Needs Improvement

The writing quality (spelling and grammar, for example) is inconsistent and is frequently unclear and/or ineffective in communicating the position or perspective of the work.

4. Missing

Missing.



^{Have a similar assignment? "Place an order for your assignment and have exceptional work written by our team of experts, guaranteeing you A results."}