A Closer Look at Point-of-View: Part 1

The biggest frustration for most students of AP European History has to be essay writing. Many students come to the course unprepared for the very organized kind of essay writing that they are expected to master by the time of the exam in May. They are so used to writing about a topic, and not necessarily methodically answering a question. When you throw the requirement that students read and interpret documents as evidence in answering a question the expectation is that some students' heads might explode under the strain. Then we ask them to actually account for the point-of-view (PoV) presented in some of the documents! This is something that our modern society does not do very well. If it's in writing, or in a picture, then it must be true, right? While the information presented in any document might not necessarily be false, it can be presented in such a way that it is intended to illustrate a particular thesis, or to fit the agenda of the speaker. Therefore, we must be careful when presenting the information contained in the document as absolute fact. This is really what we mean when we ask you to "analyze point-of-view" in a document-based essay.

There are several ways to analyze point-of-view in a DBQ. I will point a couple of these out and give you some examples of acceptable and unacceptable point-of-view analysis. Let's take a look at Document 6 from the 2003 DBQ (Burgfrieden):

Prompt: Describe and analyze changing views toward the concept of a "civil peace" (Burgfrieden) in Germany from 1914 to 1918.

Source: Oskar Schmitz, author, member of the Pan-German League, pamphlet, "The Real Germany," 1915

"Our strength today is our unity, that is, the best individuals in all our classes support the war and are determined to see it through to the end. Other 'opinions' are not allowed. That in England there still exists freedom of thought concerning the war is England's weakness."

This document offers several opportunities for analyzing the author's point-of-view. In fact, this is exactly why the folks at The College Board included it as part of this DBQ. Remember, there are NO trick documents. They are hoping that YOU will recognize the opportunites present for analyzing PoV!

The simplest way to analyze PoV in this particular document is to relate his opinion (authorial PoV) to his place in society. In this case, the author of this document is a member of the Pan-German League, an ultra-nationalist group that saw German national identity as a unifying force in the German Empire, and even advocated the expulsion of Poles from the Polish areas in the eastern half of the empire. It is clear that Schmitz is of the opinion that the "civil peace," which called for Germans to put aside their conflicts with one another during the war, only serves to strengthen Germany against her enemies, particularly against England. To what degree has this opinion been shaped by his position as a member of the Pan-German League? That is what you must account for in analyzing point-of-view.

Example of Acceptable PoV Analysis:

"The Pan-German League was an extremist and ultra-nationalist organization that saw German culture as the greatest unifying force in Germany, and it is not surprising that Schmitz, as a member of this group, would equate unity in support of the war with strength."

So, why is this an acceptable analysis of PoV? First, it identifies and explains a source of bias in the document. It identifies the Pan-German League as an ultra-nationalist group, and explains what that really means. Second, it connects the bias to the author of the document and to the opinion he expresses. Can we take Schmitz's opinion about German unity as the opinion of most Germans in 1915? No, we cannot. The fact that he is an ultra-nationalist has affected the point-of-view expressed in his pamphlet.

Example of Unacceptable PoV Analysis:

"This is the point of view of the Pan-German League who want to unify all Germans."

Many students only go part of the way when attempting to analyze PoV in this way. They may identify a source of bias in the document correctly, but they fall short of connecting it to the author or the opinion expressed. Notice the effect of this omission on the example of unacceptable PoV analysis. The goal of the Pan-German League is roughly identified but there really is no explaination of how this affects the opinion expressed, and there is no explanation of how this might represent a bias.

Another way to approach PoV is to evaluate the reliability of the source. This doesn't mean that you must always find a source to be of questionable reliability. You might find some authors to be more qualified to speak on a subject than others. These sources might be more reliable than the others. Let's take a look at this using Document 6 from the 2006 DBQ (Alsace-Lorraine).

Prompt: Analyze the ways in which national and cultural identity in Alsace-Lorraine were perceived and promoted during the period from 1870-1919.

At first glance, this table of statistics seems to support the claim that an overwhelming majority of communities in Alsace and Lorraine speak German. This would definitely justify the annexation of these territories to the German Empire in 1871. That is, in fact, exactly the purpose for which they were intended. A closer look at the source tell us that these statistics were compled for a report by the German government. These statistics were most likely tailored to suit their purposes. It is hoped by the authors of this DBQ that you will recognize and acknowledge this possible source of bias.

Example of Acceptable PoV Analysis:

"But the fact that these statistics were publish in a German government report in which they were likely used to justify German claims to Alsace and Lorraine cast some degree of doubt over their validity."

Notice that this analysis of PoV does a very good job of explaining the possible bias of this document and its source. It directly ties this bias to the statistics presented in the document (the point-of-view of the document).

Example of Unacceptable PoV Analysis:

"These statistics, presented in a German government report, show that there were more German-speaking commuities than French-speaking communities in Alsace-Lorraine."

So, what makes this analysis unacceptable? It's not really analysis. It simply states that the statistics came from a German government report, and then states the point-of-view of the document. There is no attempt to state why it is important to the interpretation of the document that the documents came from the German government.

That's all for now. We will continue this discussion of PoV analysis in my next post.

 

Posted with Blogsy

This Blog is History

As a teacher of history I am also a teacher of writing. There is just no way around it. History is a written discipline. It is based on written record and presented in written arguements. I got to thinking that as a teacher of writing I should also be an active writer. I also wanted to stimulate an open discussion of ideas on a level that might not be possible in a class of 45 students. So, please feel free to respond to my posts! I figured that a blog would take perfectly address both of these goals. This isn't my first blog, so I'm also comfortable with the medium. Feel free to check out my travel blog sometime (http://majesticeurope.blogspot.com).

This blog and the rapidly-approaching AP Exam provided the topic for my first post. So far, our course of study has taken us from the middle of the fifteenth century all the way to the middle of the twentieth. By the middle of April our journey through history will take us all of the way to the present century. We have a tremendous amount of reviewing and studying to do before the AP Exam (May 15)! So, how in the world do we handle all of that information? The best way to approach all of this information is to examine the major themes and concepts that weave themselves throughout the fabric of modern European history. Let's take a look at one of these basic themes, the changing access to information and education between 1450 and 1800 and the impact of this change on European civilization.

The changing attitude toward education and the increased access to information were two of the defining characteristics of the Renaissance, where this course picks up the thread of European history. Since the fall of the Roman Empire a thousand years before, access to knowledge and education was literally locked up by the Church. The largest libraries of Europe were to be found in monasteries, and the abbots held the keys closely. The books were chained to the desks (hand copied scripts were very expensive), and lending required the deposit of collateral worth the price of the book to be borrowed. The great universities, such as the University of Paris, were mostly concerned with reconciling classical knowledge to the revealed and accepted truth presented by the Church. The persuit of knowledge was to be done in an introspective, almost monastic way. Learning was to be applied mostly toward theological matters. Renaissance humanism changed all of this.

Renaissance humanists changed the focus and purpose of education, making it more secular and human-centered. Early fifteenth-century humanists, inspired by the works of Petrarch and classical works making their way west from the crumbling Byzantine Empire, began raiding the monastic libraries of Europe searching for classical literary treasures. Cosimo de' Medici found himself caught up in this frenzy with other young humanists. Throughout his life, he patronized the work of these founders of humanism. He supported Marcilio Ficino, who translated and renewed interest in the works of the Ancient Greek philosopher Plato. He was a close friend and patron of artists like Donatello and Fra Angelico. He also supported the writing of Leonardo Bruni, who wrote the first work of modern history, "History of the Florentine People." These early humanists concerned themselves with secular concerns. Their works were not about the glory of god, but the glory of mankind. As civic humanists, they did not believe that the acquisition of knowledge should be an introspective and private persuit. They beleived that education should lead to an active life dedicated to the betterment of one's city or community. Education became a tool of statecraft. The humanist education that they advocated was secular in nature, and not limited to the monasteries. Cosimo would ensure that his grandson, Lorenzo, recieved a humanist education. Lorenzo, in his turn, continued to patronize great humanist philosophers and artists, thus ensuring the continuation and spread of humanist ideals. However, this Italian Renaissance humanist was still limited to the sons of the wealthy merchants and rulers of Europe. It would take another revolution, partially inspired by the individualistic spirit of humanism, to further democratize access to knowledge and education.

The religious reformations of the sixteenth century (both Protestant and Catholic) took some of the chains off of learning and ensured that most Europeans would recieve a basic education. The reformation started with the question "What must I do to be saved?". The very nature of this question shows the influence of the spirit of individualism present in the new humanism upon Martin Luther and other northern humanists such as the artist Albrecht Dürer. Luther reflected the desire of many Christians to have a more personal connection to the Church and their faith in his doctrine of the priesthood of all believers. By this, Martin Luther meant that Christians did not need the services of a priest to understand and interpret the Bible. They could do this for themselves. This meant that followers of Lutheran doctrine needed to learn how to read. They needed a basic education. Even women needed an education so that they could provide a religious education to their children. Protestant communities all over Europe began to provide a basic schooling to their followers during the sixteenth century. After half a century fighting against this humanist coup, the Catholic Church finally recognized the value of this kind of education and a personal experience within the Church in the Council of Trent. The council offical sanctioned the Society of Jesus (Jesuits), a militant order within the Church that took as its mission providing a humanist education to Catholics all over Europe and the world. By the end of the sixteenth century the rising middle-class merchants and monarchs great and small began to see a humanist education as means of increasing the wealth and power of their states. By the middle of the seventeenth century, a new breed of monarchs, in an attempt to further enhance the power and prestige of their states, began to openly support the work of scientists, supporting scientific societies that fostered the development of a secular, educated, and very literate international community.

Absolute monarchs of the seventeenth century and the scientific societies they created contributed greatly to creating an international culture of literacy. This culutre of literacy, in turn, lead to increased popularization of scientific and philosophical literature in the Age of Enlightenment that followed. While they may have not contributed directly to increasing political democratization, Louis XIV of France and Charles II of England contributed to the creation of an international spirit of scientific speculation and collaboration through the creation of the Royal Academy of Science and the Royal Society, respectively. Through these scientific societies great minds like Sir Issac Newton were able to share and argue their findings with other scientists all over Europe. The new, mechanical view of the Universe that these scientist described in their very technical works (Seriously! Just try to get through the first ten pages of Newton's "Principia"!) were translated and popularized by a new group of intellectuals, the Philosophes of the eighteenth century. To these works they added their own rational arguements on everything from political reform, to prison reform, to educational reform. The works of these Philosophes - Voltaire, Montesquieu, Rousseau, Diderot, Smith, and many others - were not limited to high intellectual circles. These works were written for an increasingly literate society, in a market that saw books become so afordable that almost every household owned at least one. In Paris, their ideas were debated in the salons of wealthy aristocratic women. In London, their works became the subject of coffeehouse discussion. Indeed, the eighteenth century finally let the genie out of the bottle. "Dare to know!", exclaimed Immanuel Kant, "Have the courage to use your own understanding."

As political democracy took hold in the nineteenth and twentieth centuries, the democratization of knowledge and learning were not far behind. Political democracy works best when the electorate is well informed and well educated. In this first decade of the twenty-first century we have seen access to knowledge and education expand at a rate never before experienced. This blog is the perfect example of this. Anybody with an internet connection has the ability to be published and read around the world. Services like iTunes U provide anybody with course lectures and materials from universities all over the world absolutely free of charge. It is up to us to ensure that we take advantage of these opportunities and use them responsibly.

Okay, so that was a particularly long post. You probably won't be required to cover quite the chronological distance that I covered here on any essay on the AP exam. However, you can see that the ability to follow a theme over the course of a couple of centuries will help you to construct a cohesive arguement in an essay. This is what I mean when I say to study according to the "big ideas." This is the best way to review and study for the AP exam. We'll work on this in class in the month before the exam. In the next blog I'll try to tackle some of the confusion about analyzing point-of-view in a DBQ.