Writing about Ostracized Historical Figure Assignment | Online Assignment
Paper historical gure: Making modern science (MMS) (LPS 60/Hist 60)
Students will submit one research paper on a historical gure who was not discussed in our
Making modern science book. This gure should be an individual who fullls one of the following:
(1) they were ostracized by their research community, or (2) they worked in areas of science that
are (or have been) ignored by \Western” culture, or (3) they were part of an underrepresented
group (e.g. woman, Latinx, etc.)
These papers should discuss two main topics with respect to the chosen historical gure:
{First, the paper should discuss the gure’s (i) scientic work, including the main ideas and
claims that the individual argued for. What subeld of science was their work in and what
time period? Did this individual’s childhood or upbringing in
uence their work? What
particular theories, experiments, or tools did they use?
{Second, (ii) how was this individual’s work assessed during their own time period? Were
their ideas similar to or dierent from other ideas in close research communities at the time?
Are there any relevant aspects of this historical time period that help answer this question
or that explain other aspects of their work? Why do you think that this individual was
ostracized from the research community of their time period? Why do you think that they
were omitted from a book like Making modern science?
Papers should be around 1,000-1,500 words and contain at least three references that come
from articles and/or books (and not wikipedia). References should be cited throughout the paper
and listed in a reference section at the paper’s end. Papers should be single-spaced, in 12 point
font, and submitted to Canvas by 5pm PST on on Saturday May 30th.
Guidelines and grade: This assignment is worth 30% of your total class grade. You will be
graded on the basis of (1) addressing points (i) and (ii) and (2) doing so in a way that is clear and
grammatical, while providing relevant content.
| Answers (i) and (ii) in paper guidelines (50% of paper grade) | Paper sufficiently addresses (i) and (ii) in a way that is clear, concise, and understandable. | Paper addresses most of the points in (i) and (ii), but not all of them. Or paper addresses points in (i) and (ii) in a way that is mostly clear, but sometimes difficult to understand. | Paper only addresses some points in (i) and (ii) or does so in a way that is highly unclear. |
| Syntax and punctuation (25% of paper grade) | Virtually no spelling, punctuation or grammatical errors. | Few spelling, punctuation or grammatical errors. | So many spelling, punctuation or grammatical errors that it interferes with the meaning. |
| Organization, coherence, and reference of relevant texts (25% of paper grade) | The organization—chronological or thematic—is appropriate for the purpose and subject of the essay. The introduction establishes a context, purpose, and contains a focused thesis statement. | The organization is fairly clear. The reader could outline the presentation, despite the occasional lack of topic sentences. Paragraphs have adequate development and are divided appropriately. | Organization is deficient. Introductions or conclusions are not clearly marked or functional. Paragraphs are neither coherently developed or arranged. Topic sentences are consistently missing, murky or inappropriate. Transitions are missing or flawed. |
