Seminars
Definition Purpose Formats Seminar etiquette Marking rubric
Seminars are oral presentations of your knowledge. Essentially, there are 2 formats:
1. Presenter(s) and audience. These can range from a formal, scripted presentation given to a passive audience to an interactive, unscripted presentation (such as a Civil War re-enactor interacting with tourists). Basically, there is an expert(s) and an audience. For this course, we will use the term “presentations” - but be aware that other instructors may call this format a seminar.
2. Format #2 has no audience. Each seminar member is to be an expert on the topic or a sub-topic. The object is to have a free-wheeling discussion and analysis of the topic/sources. For this course, we will use the term “seminar” for this format.
It is vital that you learn the purpose for the seminars in a course as soon as possible. The purpose will influence how you prepare, interact, and receive (or not) your marks. I’ve included several possibilities.
Instructor: Positive - To develop and evaluate the students’ abilities to understand and interpret the sources plus improving debating and analysis skills. Also, it permits students to demonstrate their oral abilities and allows for interaction between students and instructor.
Negative - Some instructors follow this format for an easy marking opportunity. The worst use it as a forum to show off or even belittle students to feed their own egos.
Students: Positive - To have a chance to express your viewpoints, knowledge, skills and passion about the topics. For me, seminars were the best part of university. To achieve high marks.
Negative - Some students wish to show off, belittle others, etc. Most of the time these students will be shut down by the instructor or another student. Some students also view a seminar as easy marks and an opportunity to con their way through by using vague points.
Throughout the course we will discuss how to deal with negative seminar situations.
There are a multitude of seminar formats, the main ones we will use in this course are:
1. Small group interactive - This form is a round table discussion based on a set of readings/sources. The object is to demonstrate your knowledge, your powers to analyze, and your ability to interact in a discussion format. The best marks come from being able to react to what other participants say in a way that demonstrates you have analyzed and interpreted the readings and supported your opinions with historical fact (i.e. listen and then argue based on good thinking backed by knowledge). Best preparation comes from analyzing the sources (see later notes) and then meeting with classmates from other seminar groups and comparing your analysis. You must not meet with your own seminar group and you must be prepared. Otherwise, you will not learn and you will regret your seminar experience and mark! (See me for an explanation).
2. Role seminars - Each person is assigned a historical role and acts/reacts within that role (e.g. an escaped slave from a Mississippi cotton plantation). The best marks come from your ability to be that person while still being able to interact. Best preparation comes from doing the required reading plus additional research. Plus, you should write a background of the person you are portraying (you are not looking for a specific person, you should be making up a typical person for that role). Remember, your attitudes and knowledge need to be for that person, not a modern person. Briefly, you’re writing a role and being an actor.
3. Line debates - This seminar centres around 1 question/issue that has a range of opinions from vehemently agree to fanatically disagree with all points in between. All participants sit in row and their positions indicate how strongly they feel about the topic (e.g. strongly agree in the front desk with strongly disagree in the back desk). As you listen to points from participants in other desk positions you must either argue and prove them wrong (so they shift positions) or you must shift your position to a different desk. Best marks come from an ability to move and be moved by other people. Best preparation comes from preparing a chart that will have the historical material placed appropriately for how strongly it agrees/disagrees with the question and then analyzing not only how it applies and can be used to support the question but also devising an appropriate counterpoint.
4. Formal debate - You are assigned a side and must defend or attack a position. An opening, prepared speech is followed by rebuttals and a closing. Best marks for the ability to listen to the other side and then counter their arguments and support your own position. Best preparation involves not only gathering support and analysis for both sides but the counter arguments as well.
1. You may attack a person’s ideas, but not the person.
2. While there are no turns, make sure you speak your fair share. If you are too ‘quiet’, then look for an opportunity to turn the conversation to the points you’ve prepared. If you are dominating the conversation, limit yourself to your best interpretations (the ones that required the most thinking).
3. I will assign people to groups based on their conversation style and/or where their skills will develop the most.
4. If you know you will be absent on your seminar date, transfer to another group for that week. If you miss both dates, you will only have the subsequent Wednesday to make it up - otherwise, it’s a 0%. Seminar groups will switch positions each week (1,2,3,4 and then 4,3,2,1).
5. Remember to value your seminar group members. It’s difficult to look very competent if your opponents look incompetent.
6. You must prepare for your seminar by doing all the reading and making notes. I’ll mark the notes. If you need to practice your ideas with a classmate then do so with someone outside your seminar group.
7. Transitions. If the topic being discussed isn't working for you, make a transition. A transition is a link between the topic being discussed and the topic you want to switch to. For example, the group is fixated on Robespierre and you want Napoleon – try “Napoleon used a similiar method when ....” You could also draw comparisions between situations, contrasts, show a relationship (e.g. The actions of Robespierre set the stage for Napoleon), etc. The object is to get the conversation to the topic that you want while appearing to draw a conclusion, etc (so you don't look like you know nothing about the present topic or are cutting a conversation off, etc).
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Small group |
-belittles others -tries to con the way through |
-just strict content from the book, no analysis or reaction to other speakers |
-reacts to other speakers with just adding facts with limited interpretation |
-reacts to other speakers with a simple opposing interpretation but well backed by facts -some interpretation of material |
-obviously has thought about the text and put own interpretation on it and is able to defend it well -chooses carefully when to participate in order not to dominate but to encourage discussion |
| Role | -a few facts, need to tell us who your are | -simple facts from the book with no interpretation or role is completely off | -just the text with some thought, you report on the person but are not the person | -a thorough report on the person with extra research or limited research but you are the person | -include a prop or costumes with substantial extra research, you are the person |
| Line Debate | -not sure if you’re awake | -a few facts said with little or no movement, interaction | -limited reaction to others with movement, limited interpretation | -substantial interpretation with good reaction to others and movement or may be excellent but doesn’t move when justified | -extensive interpretation and solid reasons for placement, not only responds extremely well to others’ arguments but acknowledges their impact by moving |
| Debate - opening speech | -limited facts | -facts with one interpretation | -good interpretation , well supported by facts | -excellent interpretations that is solidly supported by facts and anticipates other sides strong points | -excellent interpretations that is solidly supported by facts and not only anticipates other side’s strong points but their criticisms as well |
| Debate - rebuttals | -lamely states a few facts | -raises good points but not tied to other side’s words | -raises good points that are supported by facts that is tied to 1 argument | -raises excellent points that are well supported and deals with the previous speaker’s points well | -raises excellent points that are well supported and deals with the previous speaker’s points well, plus uses that rebuttal to rebuild earlier damage from other side or to advance a new strong point |
Note: Closing speech is a combination between the opening speech and the rebuttals.