I need an explanation for this History question to help me study.
The paper should be a 2-3 page paper, double spaced. 12 font times new roman
There is no prompt for the paper. It is meant to get your reaction/response to the reading.Despite the fact that you are required to give a short summary of the paper (including the name of the author) and what the main points propounded in the article, the paper is NOT supposed to be a summary of the article.After giving the summary (meaning providing the context) you are required to give you reaction to that article. Was it interesting? completely new material to you/ or dd you find that the author did not do justice to the subject.? Does this article make you think of the subject in a different way?
The paper should have some kind of a thesis and needs to be an academic paper, so please make sure that you have topic sentences and a consclusion.
You are free to use any type of citation, hoever, please ensure that you are consistent throughtout this paper.