Five Important Rules to Follow for a College History Research Paper

Writing history research papers can be tough. The difficulty is that each professor and each type of history (American, European, World, Asian, etc...) requires different focus, so just because you did well in one history class does not mean that you will do well on another one. I took two history courses, and I have seen many history major students around me when they were working on their term papers. I feel that with these rules, you will be able to write much better history papers than before.

Rule 1: Avoid using general expressions.

History papers require the writer to be able to accurately communicate with his or her audience. You really want to avoid sentences like, "The Cold War continues to be affecting people around the world." First of all, what type of people are we talking about? It is hard to see who in particular the author is trying to say. Second, the term "affecting" is way too general and broad. It can mean good or bad, and it really is important for you to point that out.

Another critical problem is with adjectives. For instance, "Aztec and Mayan civilizations seem to be very good with astronomy." The term "good" is too vague. What does the author trying to say? You need to choose adjectives that are clear to the readers. Same goes for word "bad." There are many words to express the word "bad" from "slightly bad" to "absolutely evil."

Here is an example that is correctly done: "Nikita Khrushchev's Secret Speech was a politic disaster in the sense that it surprised and shocked many Russians, who used to admire Stalin as their hero." If I stopped after just saying "a political disaster," then I would be unclear what I meant. But, now the readers will be able to see that the term "political disaster" means that everyone who used to believe Stalin as their hero was surprised and shocked. How can you tell if the sentence is clear and not so general? The best way is to ask, "What am I trying to say?" If you can successfully speak what you are saying in other words without introducing any new information or terms, then you are in good shape. But, let's say that you start to add things that are not mentioned in that particular sentence. For example, with that example about Aztec and Mayan civilization, what if you started to say phrases like "constellation" and "traces of unearthly materials." Then, you know that the sentence you had was too general. Sometimes, we find it hard to see if our sentence clearly meets what we are thinking. If you are not sure, say it aloud, and see if it matches.

Rule 2: Be sparse in the quotes.

This is another major problem with many students' quotes. The professors often ask the students to not overuse the quotes from the primary documents. In every institution, there are good students, who just cite way too much and end up receiving a lower grade than what they deserve. The issue is that the students are not really asking themselves whether the quoting is really needed.

In many cases, the descriptions about the events should be paraphrased, not quoted. Paraphrase is a great way to make sure that you have understood the materials, and in many cases, no professor will criticize you for paraphrasing too much (as long as you are not plagiarizing). On the other hand, if you quote too much, the professors will castigate your writing for lack of your own argument.

The question is then, how can the student distinguish between what needs to be quoted and what needs to be paraphrased?

I want to focus on the materials that should be quoted, and that leave an open area for the students to decide for themselves.

First of all, if you encounter an idea or an opinion in the book, this has to be quoted if you use word-by-word, or paraphrased with the introduction like "According to the author." If you see the sentence that says, "It seems to me [the author] and several authors that the event was no ordinary." With these sentences, you really need to mention the author, or quote the sentence directly. Personally, I think paraphrasing while mentioning the name of the author is better because this is not really hard to do so.

Second, key terms. For instance, on the Ribbentrop-Molotov Pact, there is a phrase called "sphere of influence." "Sphere of influence" is a very important term that often receives emphasis by many historians. So, whenever you encounter words like this where the phrase on its own seem to have a great importance, you want to just quote it. You can just quote the word/phrase or entire sentence. Either way, I highly recommend you to put this type of words in your paper with quotes to show that you have researched thoroughly. It's like doing search engine optimization (SEO). You want to introduce some great information, but at the same time, you want to mention some key words that are important. The logic is same here. If you believe that the term that you see is repeatedly mentioned and has its own unique meaning, I highly recommend you to quote it.

Third, dialogue is another part. With dialogues, try to pick the certain parts that make the most sense with your paper. That's right - the sentences you choose might be important in the document, but they also have to be in harmony with your arguments. The problem with quoting materials is that it easily destroys the meaning and the argument of your paper. So, when you do introduce dialogues, which can often lead to side track, you really need to pick the parts that will allow your writing to flow smoothly. If you do not do this, you may not notice right away (since you know exactly what comes before and after), but the professor will be perplexed and definitely wonder why the student put the quote there when certain parts were not necessary.

Now, if the parts you want to use in the paper do not fall into any of these categories, you are better off just paraphrasing them. There is nothing wrong with paraphrasing if done correctly, so do not consider paraphrasing as your secondary option. Instead, direct quotes should be your secondary option.

Rule 3: Be detailed on the events and chronology.

There is a difference between simply mentioning an event and delineating the event with date and place along with any other person at the scene. Historians and history professors like to see more than just what happened. They often want to see when it happened and what incidents took place before and after this incident. In order to do that, you have to make sure that when you state an incident or event, you have to be as detailed as possible.

Also, with these events, it is really important to keep the chronology straight. In English essays, we are told to go from one reason to another. In History essays, chronology sometimes matters more than the reasons. In other words, it is much better to go from beginning to the end than from most important reason to least important reason. The problem with the latter method is that if you try this, you will likely be jumping around the time, confusing your professor. History papers need to be put in simple order that anyone, who has no background in the filed, can understand it without having a difficulty.

When you mention date, you need to mention year, month, and day. Some sources even provide exact time, especially with telegrams. Time is up to you. In some cases, the time during which the wars began can be important. In others, it is just couple of extra words to lengthen your paper. I suggest that you consider which type of situation it falls and pick what you need to do.

With location, try to be as specific as possible, and reiterate any past incident happened in the location. History is all about connection, so if you mention a place called A, and there was a protest in A five months ago, definitely mention that along, provided that you mentioned this somewhere in the paper before. It is important to note that connections will make your paper a lot easier to read and understand.

Rule 4: Talk with your professor.

This might seem like an obvious thing to do, but really do this. About 2-3 days before the paper is due (please do not do this a day before the paper is due), you should go to your professor's office and discuss what your opinions are about the paper. With some professors, history papers can be graded differently because of the perspective. What you argue may make sense to you, but from history professor's point of view, it may be false. So, it is important that you stop in and ask him questions about your arguments to see that you and the professor are in the same direction.

I highly hope that you avoid using emails to do this. Using emails means that you are not dedicated enough. You need to go to the professor's office in your own time (if his schedule does not meet yours, email him and then schedule one) and talk to him about it. Really, this will save you so much work. In some cases, the professor might tell you to use this source instead of the one you were using (he or she would never say that in class, but if you ask which one seems to agree with the professor's opinion, they will tell you). Or, the professor may just throw in ideas that you might have not thought of. In some cases, the professor might introduce ideas that were not covered in your lecture, but something that he or she just knows. Keep in mind that the older the professors, the longer they have been teaching. I know that some professors easily become confused whether they taught the current students certain materials or not. So, you may end up able to pick up some answers and opinions that the professor forgot or ran out of time to address in the class.

Rule 5: Proofread and revise.

Many students are aware of this, but I am going to provide methods that are very helpful.

Action 1: Go through one sentence at a time.

Read each one sentence and pause after the period. Ask yourself if what you thought to say was what you wrote. Think carefully, and do not progress to the next sentences unless you can positively say yes to this question. This is important and inconspicuous to many students because they will read sentences following this one, and go, "Oh, yeah, I know what I'm talking about." But, you really do not want to have your reader wait till couple sentences down to figure out what you have been talking about. Keep it simple and easy to comprehend.

Action 2: Read from backward.

If you read your paper from backward (i.e. from the end sentence in the last page to the first sentence in the first page), you will be able to know whether your transitions work well or not. If you do this and find that two sentences are just so unrelated and different, you will need to adjust. But, when you just read from beginning to the end, you will end up skipping these sentences because you feel like you know what you are saying. Reading from backward will allow you to put in the position of the reader who has no background in the material.

Action 3: Read aloud.

Reading aloud will allow you to catch any grammatical error that you may have missed. It will also allow you to find awkward sentences because awkward sentences are much more easily spotted when they are read aloud. If you do not want to do this, you can just try to read the first and last sentence of each paragraph just to see if your transitions work well.

If you have done all these actions, you should modify the paper as best as you can. Also, before you print the final copy, make sure that your citing formats are correct. There is nothing I can do to help about the correct citing, but as far as in-text citations go, if you are not sure about citing, and then cite anyway. Citing will never hurt you, but not citing in the areas that you should will.

History is a different branch of academics than English. So, you may be a great English student, but without adjusting to the rules, you will not be a great History student. Good luck!