INSTRUCTIONS:
You will complete three 300 word reflections (900 words total) which will expand upon the lecture topics and tutorial activities for this module. These will allow you to demonstrate your knowledge of the key debates, topics and themes covered in this module. You will be able to use the forms and tutorial activities completed during the module as a basis for your reflections.
Each response must clearly justify your arguments and points, using material from the lectures, tutorials, and reading list.
*Sources: For each 300 word reflection please cite at least two secondary sources.
USE THESE SOURCES, IF CAN’T FIND THEM, STILL CITATE THEM AT THE END IN THE BIBLIOGRAPHY, THEY ARE VERY COMMON BOOKS CAN BE FIND ANYWHERE THOUGH:
That Noble Science of Politics: A Study in Nineteenth-Century Intellectual History (by Stefan Collini; Donald Winch; John Burrow, 1983)
Political Theory : Methods and Approaches (by David Leopold, and Marc Stears – 2008)
Going to the sources: a guide to historical research and writing (by Anthony Brundage – 2018)
*Referencing: You can use either the Chicago style or Harvard style of referencing, and you must provide a bibliography at the end of the assignment listing the sources you have used for all three reflections.
—-
Reflection topics:
Please respond to one question from section 1, 2 and 3, and write the question you are responding to at the top of your reflection.
Section 1:
Sources, methods and fundamental debates
‘History’ and ‘the past’ are not the same thing: what factors shape the accounts that historians produce of the past?
Should we trust historians’ accounts of the past? Why or why not?
Does digital technology require historians to radically transform their approach to the study of history? Why or why not?
Is political science truly a ‘science’? Why or why not?
Section 2:
History and Politics: differences and intersections
What are some key differences between the study of history and political science? (identify at least three)
How can political science methods help us understand the study of the past?
How can history methods help political scientists and/or scholars of international relations understand politics?
What are some of the problems we might face in reconciling the approaches of political science and history?
Section 3:
The impact of history on the present
Is it always a good thing for history and historical information to be more accessible to the public? Why or why not?
Who should produce history? Why?
How does history shape the actions of contemporary policy makers, governments or institutions?
Should institutions or governments seek to make reparations or amends for injustices in the past? Why or why not?
