Writing Sample: How Groundbreaking Must It Be?

[thedig13]

I'm trying to get into the Honors Program here at my university, and am currently putting the finishing touches on my application for the Honors Program. As per the recommendation of some here, I'm planning to use my Honors Thesis as my Writing Sample.

Part of the application is a thesis proposal. I'm considering an Honors Thesis on the Intercommunal Youth Institute (later renamed the Oakland community school), which was a very, very successful primary and secondary school founded, run, and operated by the original Black Panthers. Unfortunately, after doing some research on current scholarship on the IYI/OCS, I've found out that a number of publications covering this topic have already been produced. It's not a super-worn-out topic, but it's certainly been dealt with before, usually tangentially, but occasionally directly.

Essentially, I'd like to know: How much will it hurt my application if my writing sample covers a topic that has already been examined and covered a bit? Do graduate schools care? Do they really expect you to have contributed to existing literature before you start graduate school?

Also, if my thesis turns out decent, should I try and get it published? My school has a few journals dedicated exclusively to undergraduate research. Will these journals be taken seriously, or is getting published in an undergraduate research journal entirely pointless? If it's pointless and I decide to submit anyway, will that hurt my application?

Edited April 12, 2012 by thedig13

[Sigaba]

@thedig13--

Do what you can to frame your thesis within the historiographical debates over the Black Panthers. Present your thesis as a modest contribution/exploration that supports one or more positions within that debate. If, in the course of your research, you come to agree with scholars A, B, C, D but disagree ever so slightly with scholars E, then you've got a sustainable piece. (Because not everyone is going to agree with everyone else--there are going to be different hierarchies of causality.)

Admissions committees will want to see a writing sample that demonstrates your ability to do historical research using primary sources and secondary works, to think critically, and to articulate a thoughtful argument in a well-written essay. The expectation of creating new knowledge will come later. That is, when you're a graduate student and you're preparing a master's thesis (or report) and, later, a dissertation.

Insofar as you getting your thesis published, keep in mind that during the 2011-2012 application season, there was at least one applicant who had a publication and that fact alone did not get that person into his/her preferred programs. This is not to say that you getting your thesis published would be "pointless," but rather that you should manage your expectations.

HTH.

[Riotbeard]

No need for it to be groundbreaking. Just make sure it is well-written, has good use of primary sources, and you situate your argument in the historiography. These are the things you need to demonstrate. Also it sounds very interesting. Good luck on it.

[natsteel]

No need for it to be groundbreaking. Just make sure it is well-written, has good use of primary sources, and you situate your argument in the historiography. These are the things you need to demonstrate. Also it sounds very interesting. Good luck on it.

THIS. I'm closing out my first year and my advisor has never mentioned my writing sample topic. I'm sure that goes for most of us already in programs. Riotbeard's requirements are spot on. They want to see that you can analyze and incorporate primary sources. They also want to see that you can do the same for secondary literature.

[thedig13]

All right. Thanks, you three. I really appreciate it. This has taken a great burden off my shoulders.

Just a follow-up question -- if you guys have any tips on how to start my research, I'd love to hear some of your input/advice. I've already looked up contact information for a few people who helped run the program (without calling yet), and I've read up on some of founder Huey Newton's philosophies on education. Not really sure where to go from here.

Edited April 15, 2012 by thedig13

[Simple Twist of Fate]

I agree with what's been said, but I would also encourage you to attempt to find as original an approach as possible. If you want to situate your argument in historiography (which is necessary), it's hard to show that you can be (for lack of a better word) critical and analytic without attempting some kind of departure from what's been written before. Emphasize the original aspects of your work, even if as a whole, it doesn't "break ground." This will come more readily as you dive into the research, but keep in mind that originality doesn't always mean finding a new, undiscovered topic, but often means finding a new way of approaching a topic. I hope this makes sense.

Also, if my thesis turns out decent, should I try and get it published? My school has a few journals dedicated exclusively to undergraduate research. Will these journals be taken seriously, or is getting published in an undergraduate research journal entirely pointless? If it's pointless and I decide to submit anyway, will that hurt my application?

I don't see why it would hurt your application. I suspect that it wouldn't help very much. I have several articles in similar publications (one of which I am involved in editing) and I didn't think of them as much more than afterthoughts for my CV. However, it can be a good experience to go through this process - especially if it means having your paper edited.

[hbeels]

Emphasize the original aspects of your work, even if as a whole, it doesn't "break ground." This will come more readily as you dive into the research, but keep in mind that originality doesn't always mean finding a new, undiscovered topic, but often means finding a new way of approaching a topic.

Good point, STOF... but honestly, even then, you're applying to attend graduate school. They're looking for good writing skills, analytical and critical thinking, articulation, correct grammar/vocabulary/citation, and a familiarity with historical writing (and even the last one can be up for grabs).

I also agree with Sigaba's recommendations for your piece. Personally, I think that showing an awareness of the historiography of your topic and explicitly applying it in your work is a more sophisticated level of writing than just going through a bunch of primary sources and churning out relevant information.

[StrangeLight]

All right. Thanks, you three. I really appreciate it. This has taken a great burden off my shoulders.

Just a follow-up question -- if you guys have any tips on how to start my research, I'd love to hear some of your input/advice. I've already looked up contact information for a few people who helped run the program (without calling yet), and I've read up on some of founder Huey Newton's philosophies on education. Not really sure where to go from here.

look at the historiography already written on the school. check their footnotes for primary sources. then track those down and start reading through them. if they're located in archives that are far from you, see if your school has any sort of research funds for undergrads. you may be able to get a grant to visit those archives during a summer. but, not a lot of schools have those sorts of funding opportunities for undergrads, so what you really want to try and find are primary sources that have been published or microfilmed. check your school's library to see if they have any useful microfilm for you.

doing oral interviews with people that ran the program would be absolutely great, but you also want to find some written documents as well. the footnotes in the existing scholarship should point you in the direction of that material.

[kotov]

No need for it to be groundbreaking. Just make sure it is well-written, has good use of primary sources, and you situate your argument in the historiography. These are the things you need to demonstrate. Also it sounds very interesting. Good luck on it.

Pretty much this. You're demonstrating your ability as a researcher and a writer, not trying to convince them to publish you. Just make sure you've done a good deal of research with primary documents and that you've revised it (preferably several times) so that it sounds polished. It's not as onerous of a requirement as it sounds.

[Sigaba]

@thedig

Were I in your shoes, I'd be very careful about using present-day interviews UNLESS I'd done some course work in oral history. Memories can get very fuzzy over time. You might not have the time nor the training to verify the information in your discussions with former BPP members.

So, I recommend you follow the path that StrangeLight recommends in post #8 and that you use the interviews as "icing" on the cake. I also suggest that if you do use interviews, you protect yourself by indicating clearly within the body of your paper that the interviews were conducted long after the events in question.

Also, if I recall correctly, the Ron Dellums papers have recently become available at the Oakland public library. You might profit from contacting a librarian to see what there is to see.

Finally, consider the utility of placing your essay not just within the historiography of the Black Panther Party, but also within the context of other debates. For example, Cornel West and Tavis Smiley are leading an initiative to tackle poverty in America. How might the history of the BPP's efforts in Oakland inform our understanding of the historical context of West's and Smiley's effort?

To be clear, I'm not suggesting that you need to make a policy recommendation or to express a political point of view. And I would caution you about taking a teleological approach to the past. And I'm dubious about the concept of "the lessons of history." I am merely suggesting that you use your paper as an opportunity to demonstrate the continued relevance of professional academic history. (As an example, Mr. Smiley insists that poverty in America is not a skill problem but a problem of will. Maybe your study can serve as an example of or counter point to Mr. Smiley's interpretation of America's past.)

[Riotbeard]

I like Tavis Smiley and Cornell West, but use public intellectuals sparingly. Cornel West has not written a real academic text since the 1980s. Keep it within the professional historiography as much as possible.

[Sigaba]

I like Tavis Smiley and Cornell West, but use public intellectuals sparingly. Cornel West has not written a real academic text since the 1980s. Keep it within the professional historiography as much as possible.

RB--

I think you might have missed my point.

Because professional academic historiography is not highly regarded by Americans in general, public intellectuals like West and Smiley feel comfortable offering generalizations about America's past. IMO, thedig13's piece offers an opportunity to make the point that the serious study of history is much more complicated and that Americans might be better served by looking carefully before they leap.

Moreover, I don't know if the practice of academic history is well served by drawing strict lines of demarcation between "professional" historiography and everything else when it comes to contemporary events. As Donald Cameron Watt pointed out in his seminal essay on the historiography of the Yalta Conference, historians need to protect their domain of knowledge.* If academic historians are to address successfully the widening gap between professional historiography and everything else, we might be better off if we widen the scope of debate sooner rather than later.

My $0.02.

____________________________________________________________________

* D.C Watt, "Britain and the Historiography of the Yalta Conference and the Cold War, Diplomatic History 13:1 (1989): 67-98. Watt argues "The true historian, like the settler, has to contend with brigandage, conmen, get-rich-quick operators, vigilantes, utopians, bushwhackers, religious fanatics and even indigenous inhabitants trying to preserve their traditional hunting or burial grounds (68)."

Edited April 19, 2012 by Sigaba

[Riotbeard]

I agree with you in premise Sigaba (there are a lot of problems with how academic history presents itself and it's audience), but I am not sure a writing sample is the place to deal with it, and if you are going to spend your time reading, read the professional historiography of black power.

To the TheDig13: Check out Adolph Reed's book Stirrings in the Jug: Black Politics in the Post-Segregation Era. One of the best books about black politics from the 70s on. He is a great scholar, and one of the smartest commentators on politics today. He is also a very nice person, and has great stories of 60s and 70s youth radicalism, if you ever get a chance to meet him.

Edited April 20, 2012 by Riotbeard