Thread by @ZaraAnishanslin

It’s one of my favorite days in my undergrad #ColonialAmerican #history class: after reading short pieces by each, students have to choose whether they are Team (Karin) Wulf or Team (Gordon) Wood.

Stay tuned for continued coverage as the debate over #vastearlyamerica unfolds!

Here's what they read:
Wulf, "No Boundaries?: New Terrain in Colonial American History," OAH Magazine of History (2011)
and
Wood, "History in Context," Washington Examiner/Weekly Standard (2015)

I do not give any analysis before the debate, but later in the class we discuss the concept of the Atlantic World, which speaks to both Wulf and Wood (well, Wood via Bailyn).

Update! By the numbers (so far, some students were absent so these might change via Canvas discussion):
Total enrolled: 35
Team Wood, 7
Team Wulf, 20

Update 2! Who's in these groups?
Team Wood: 4 men, 3 women
Team Wulf: 6 men, 14 women
(no self-identified non-binary students)

Update 3! How do History majors break down?
Team Wood: 4 of 7 are History majors
Team Wulf: 5 of 20 are History majors

Update 4! Students in both groups argued eloquently and with conviction and thoughtfulness

Update 5! Why did they choose Team Wood?
Like concept of history being OBJECTIVE
Like concept of history being COHESIVE
Dislike presentist POV about the past
Want to see past as ppl then did
Dislike applying contemporary MORAL LENS to the past
Like keeping the past the past

Update! Why they chose Team Wood, part 2
Agreed with his argument that, because academic historians are writing more "fragmented" and presentist history, popular history is more and more the domain of non-academic historians
Easier to teach kids history a la Team Wood

Update! Why did they choose Team Wood, part 3?
Liked the unbroken style of his piece (i.e. no headings)
which made it easier to read
(in fairness, I pointed out that such stylistic choices likely were editorial, not authorial)

Update! Why did they choose Team Wulf?
Found her more CREDIBLE (their word)
Found her more PROFESSIONAL (their word)
Thought Wood using Bailyn (his advisor) as his example was "kinda like putting your mom as a reference on your resume"
Liked her emphasis on trade & economics

Update! Why did they choose Team Wulf, part 2?
Liked the BIRDS' EYE VIEW of history
Liked her inclusion of diverse people beyond the British
Liked her inclusion of slavery (which is "too often silenced")
Found her argument more clear (some found Wood self-contradictory)

Update! Why did they choose Team Wulf, part 3?
Liked her emphasis on Atlantic World history
Think it is good to apply presentist lens to history
Disagree with Wood's contention that contemporary MORAL LENS does disservice to how ppl in past thought about issues

Update! Why did they choose Team Wulf, part 4?
Think putting presentist moral lens on the past allows us to trace how morals/standards change over time
Think colonial America was a DIVERSE place so deserves a diverse historical lens

Update! Why did they choose Team Wulf, part 5?
(I know @kawulf will love this one)
Liked her FOOTNOTES

(but to be fair: I pointed out that Wood would not have been allowed footnotes given where he published)

Did anyone change their team after we discussed this in class?

One student switched from Team Wood to Team Wulf because:

she believes that all ppl's stories should be told
BUT she still doesn't like a presentist moral lens

SO MANY SMART AND THOUGHTFUL COMMENTS from both teams!!

Oh and from a pedagogical standpoint, of course I let the smaller team (Team Wood) go first in discussion