21 Amy, Poor spelling and/or grammar continues to plague your work, even up to this last journal. Each story choice and paragraph was supposed to address the two themes of "turning point" and "end of the war", but your paper remained more narrative (simply retelling the story) than analytical (supporting your reasons for choosing it as a turning point or end. 29 Brian, Overall, good work. Critique... you took the turning point and ending a bit more literally than I had planned, focusing on Tet and 1975 exclusively. (Don't worry, you weren't alone. About a third of the class joined you. I will revise my prompt for the future. :-) In the first part, you said "not only told the ending ... but also showed a similarity of how politics..." which leaned toward overstepping the posed question. Your last paragraph is definitely too far reaching, summing up the entire U.S. approach to the war, but also focusing peculiarly on the race question. (This may be the case, but it would have been an different prompt or different assignment altogether.) 23 Chad, Your paper started okay, but fell apart. I was unsure which specific stories you referred to, mainly because your writing was vague and generally narative (rather than analytical) in nature. Examples You wrote "created less of a blanket around the war itself". What does this really mean? You wrote "my Lai was a ... disturbing end", yet wasn't that part of the "turning point" paragraph part 4? You wrote "Vietcong felt they could reach and agreement with each other". This does not make any sense. 15 Derek, Your assignment was too brief and did not include the stories from the Appy book. 23 Evan, Your paper was narrative in nature, lacking any real analysis of the stories to the posed questions. For example, your first part on the turning point focused exclusively on "race" complexity. 24 Glenn, The second part of your paper began with "The ending of the war can best be explained" which was not really the posed question. That paragraph ends with a redundant rambling about the anti-war movement. It looks as if you would rather have written a paper on that topic, rather than what I assigned. Finally, using vocabulary like "bullshit" and "pissed" is not appropriate in an academic paper. They are often used to get around a thorough written explanation in order to make your case. I certainly have no problem with students "quoting" curse words used by the historical people included in this class... the Appy book had many of them. 30 Jennifer, Creative story choices. Very nice analysis. I think this is your best paper of the term. Critique: You overstepped a bit when you wrote "America realized we needed to get out because we were wrong." I don't think bad soldier behavior, presented in this single story, makes a strong enough case for you to come to that conclusion. I'd like to be able to use parts of this paper, anonymously, for future students to see as an example. Can I have your permission? (By the way, I do not intend to put ANY pressure on you. We personally don't know each other well enough to make any assumptions. I don't know if you are "protective" of your intellectual content or feel uneasy about this request. Perhaps you are just fine with it. I'll be just fine with your decision either way. Please send me a Moodle message with your reply.) 29 Kelly, Very nice work. I think this is your best paper of the term. Part 1 was the best... nice use of outside sources Part 2 was a bit brief and didn't completely make the connection between protesting the war and the "ending" of the war in my posed question, but I think I knew where you were going. Remember to always write history in past tense. 20 Matthew, This paper was too brief, and what WAS included was a narrative "listing" of what the stories were about. It almost seems like it could have been written without reading the story. In part one, you say they were "about to began one of the biggest operations in military history", which is both wrong AND not really something they could have known at the time. You follow that by saying "We all know how big the Tet Offensive..." which is definitely not a convincing claim to make. You also end that paragraph by making a comparison to the American Revolution, which again, was not explained well. 30 Michael, Your paper was actually too long for these topics, but I'd rather that then not being thorough enough. Excellent introduction. Very nice background and development of the issues at hand. I especially like the analysis of the Ford presidency piece at the start of your "end" of the war example. As I've asked you before, can I have your permission to use parts of this as an excellent example for future students? 21 Mikco, Poor spelling and/or grammar continues to plague your work, even up to this last journal. This paper was too brief to develop the analysis of these story choices. You wrote "I think that a lot of soldiers felt this way" but show little proof of this claim. Wasn't there more information/numbers in the Herring book or videos that you could have used to "prove" it. As it stands, your paper did not include much support for your claims. 24 Name withheld, You make many vague statements that are unsupported in this paper. Also, refrain from asking hypothetical statements "But can anyone blame the South ...?" You wrote "basically a joke", "we simply did not have any", and "quite sick and quite tired" but failed to provide real proof of those claims. Using cliche phrases like these is not very appropriate in an academic paper. They are often used to get around a thorough written explanation which is needed in order to make your case. 27 Nicholas, It is clear you are a bright student with a very good grasp of this period, but in formal academic papers such as these, you need to "play along" a bit more. Let me explain. (And Moodle message me if I have not been clear.) For example, you wrote "could America win the war". Did you mean attempt to win? I'm in agreement with you on the poor management of the war, but that is not the same as assuming "victory" was the only other possible outcome. Nice mention of Korea, but you could have expanded upon this. (That is not to say that I would have not come back to you with a question about the historical analogy or comparison problems ;-) Your "ending" paragraph says "best describes the final years", but that was not the question I posed to you. Finally, while I very much appreciate your last paragraph (especially because it states clear and fully supportable reasoning for your story choices... kudos) that is better left to the class evaluation feedback section. Don't you agree? (I can only imagine how some of your "less tolerant" and more "dovish" professors would have reacted. ;-) 26 Patrick, You first part was fine, but your 2nd paragraph was weak, without support for the "ending" theme I posed in the question. I'm still not sure what you were after with the luxury vs. impoverished view of the city, and who was viewing it that way. Avoid the hypothetical questions in academic writing, eg. "Could you imagine seeing people...?" 30 Paul, Once again, right on the money. Support of the homefront vs. support of the soldiers... unbelievable insight! The difficulty in defining the "end" of the war... wow! (Till now, I don't believe I've used exclamation points when giving students feedback.) I especially like your take on the Watergate scandal. You are the first student to make this connection (so well) in years! As I've asked you before, can I have your permission to use parts of this as an excellent example for future students? 24 Robert, Poor spelling and/or grammar continues to plague your work, even up to this last journal. You also make some very large, and unsupported claims. What you've done it to make the authors of your story choices the "historical truth" for the entire war. It sounds as if you are saying it (the war) was over before it even started. That's just not accurate. Ending the paper with a typical coaches phrase "if you think you're beaten, you are" is also not very convincing. 24 Scott, You make a good start in part 1, but come to a strange conclusion... "US dollars and for us to stay as long as possible." Part 2 starts okay, but also fell apart with unfounded and unsupported claims. Later, in part 2, you say "but hey, we got the most corrupt and elite out in time." Again, a quip that doesn't really belong in an academic paper and doesn't address the posed question. (Same goes for "feeding your friends to the wolves".) Didn't we help ARVN for many years? The Frank Snepp story is in 1975. Remember, the U.S. military was "out" of Vietnam in 1973. 29 Tiffany, Why are their colors and underlining in your paper? Did you write it that way? Just asking because I've never gotten a paper this way before. I did not consider it as part of your score in any way. Nicely done, because you took the time, space, and words to make your positions known. Critique You wrote "Tet Offensive... by the NVA". Sorry, it was predominantly the Vietcong. Avoid hypothetical questions in academic writing. "... what the hell was going on". Finally, your conclusion rambles on past what was asked in the original assignment question and gets off track a bit, attempting to pass judgement on the entire war. That is far to large a question. ;-) 22 Tish, Your paper was too brief. You mention the turning point, but don't address the second part of the posed question. You also write "felt worthy to fight for" and end that paragraph saying "demanding the ending to the war". The text in between does not explain your point well at all. Later, you also wrote "War is a fortunate reality." This paper reads more like I asked the question "tell me what lesson we should have learned about the Vietnam War", which was not my question at all. 25 William, The first part is okay, but not well coupled to the "turning point" question. Your paper is more narrative than analytical in nature. I like your story choice for the second part, but the paragraph is much too brief to make your point.