Overview
Theory
Discussion 3: Thomas Jefferson and the Development of Racist Theory
Overview:
This week’s discussion focuses on the role that Enlightenment thinkers—especially Thomas Jefferson—played in shaping early American ideas about race. Using your assigned readings and sources, you’ll examine how Jefferson expressed these ideas and how others, like Benjamin Banneker, directly challenged them.
What You Need to Do:
You will complete two posts for this discussion:
• Original Post (Due by the second day of the Unit):
Answer the prompt below using evidence from the Unit 6 readings and sources.
• Follow-Up Post (Due by the Last Day of the Unit):
Reply to a classmate’s original post. You can expand on their ideas, bring in additional evidence from the unit, respectfully challenge their points, or ask questions that deepen the conversation.
Discussion Prompt:
In Notes on the State of Virginia, Thomas Jefferson offered views about race that reflected (and helped shape) broader racial attitudes among white Americans during the early national period.
• How would you describe Jefferson’s ideas about race in this text?
• How did figures like Benjamin Banneker respond to Jefferson’s racial assumptions?
• What do these sources reveal about how racial theories were formed, justified, and contested in the 1790s?
Be specific, and be sure to base your response on the OpenStax textbook, Unit 6 primary and secondary sources, and not outside materials.
Requirements:
• Use Only Assigned Sources:
You must base your discussion on the OpenStax textbook and the primary and secondary sources in Unit 6. No outside sources are allowed.
• Chicago Style Citations:
Use Chicago Style endnotes for all references. If you need help, visit the “About Discussions” section in the Help With Assignments module.
• Demonstrate Engagement:
Your posts should clearly show that you’ve read and understood the materials. Posts that fail to reference the readings will receive a lower grade and may raise concerns about academic integrity.
Grading and Support:
• A grading rubric is available in the “Help With Assignments” module under “About Discussions.”
• If you need support with citations, ideas, or understanding the sources, please reach out—I’m here to help.
A Note on Artificial Intelligence (AI):
This class is a space to grow as a thinker, reader, and writer—skills that AI cannot develop for you. Using tools like ChatGPT to write or assist with your post is a violation of academic integrity and undermines your learning.
When you complete the readings and engage in your own analysis, you're building skills that matter far beyond this class. Let’s keep this work real, personal, and your own.
Discussion Rubric:
Total: 50 points
1. Addresses the Discussion Prompt (10 points)
• 9–10 pts – Fully and thoughtfully responds to all parts of the question; demonstrates strong understanding of historical context and complexity
• 7–8 pts – Addresses the question clearly, but may miss some nuance or depth
• 0–6 pts – Incomplete or vague response; major elements of the prompt are not addressed
2. Use of Primary and Secondary Sources (10 points)
• 9–10 pts – Effectively integrates and interprets primary sources as historical evidence and
• Thoughtfully engages a secondary source (e.g., textbook or assigned article) to support analysis
• 7–8 pts – Uses at least one primary source with some analysis
• Mentions a secondary source with limited integration
• 0–6 pts – Limited or no use of primary sources; lacks interpretation
• No use of secondary sources or unclear reference
3. Chicago Style Citations (5 points)
• 5 pts – All sources cited correctly using Chicago Style endnotes
• 3–4 pts – Some citation errors or inconsistent formatting
• 0–2 pts – Citations missing or incorrect
5. Writing Quality & Organization (5 points)
• 5 pts – Writing is clear, organized, and free of major grammar/spelling errors
• 3–4 pts – Generally understandable with some grammar or clarity issues
• 0–2 pts – Disorganized or difficult to follow; grammar issues affect readability
6. Follow-Up Post (20 points)
• 9–10 pts – Responds meaningfully to a classmate’s post by building on ideas, offering new insights, or citing additional evidence
• 7–8 pts – Responds to a classmate’s post with a clear connection, but limited depth
• 0–6 pts – Minimal response, off-topic, or no follow-up post submitted
Grading Scale
Points Earned
Letter Grade
Description
45–50 points
A
Excellent work that exceeds expectations
40–44 points
B
Good work with minor areas for improvement
35–39 points
C
Adequate, but needs more development or depth
Below 35 points
Not Passing
Incomplete or significa
https://openstax.org/books/us-history/pages/1-introduction
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/aia/part2/2h71t.html
https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/aia/part2/2h72t.html
http://historymatters.gmu.edu/d/6596