TEACHERS

ABOUT THE BOOK

This comprehensive teacher’s guide is structured for a college-level seminar. It balances the historical context of the Vietnam War with advanced literary analysis of trauma, narrative fragmentation, and psychological warfare.

Instructor Overview & Course Placement

Target Level: Upper-level undergraduate or graduate seminar.
Primary Disciplines: 20th-Century American Literature, War Literature, Trauma Studies, Medical Humanities.
Core Thematic Intersection: The collapsing boundary between the physical battlefields of Vietnam and the psychological battlefields of the psychiatric ward.

Key Learning Objectives

By the end of this unit, students will be able to:

Analyze how Coleman uses experimental narrative structures to mimic the cognitive disruptions of Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD).
Evaluate the novel within the canon of Vietnam War literature, contrasting it with combat-centric narratives (e.g., Tim O’Brien, Michael Herr).
Deconstruct the institutional critique of military psychiatry and its role in treating war-induced trauma.
Synthesize critical frameworks from trauma theory (e.g., Cathy Caruth, Bessel van der Kolk) to interpret the characters’ psychic fragmentation.

Required Critical Frameworks for Lectures

To prepare your students for this complex text, introduce these concepts prior to reading:

Literary Trauma Theory

The Unspeakable: Discuss how extreme trauma resists conventional chronological narrative.
Latency and Flashbacks: Explain how the past violently intrudes upon the present, destroying the protagonist’s sense of linear time.

Historical & Clinical Context

The Diagnosis Gap: The novel is set in an era before “PTSD” was officially recognized in the DSM-III (1980). Soldiers were often diagnosed with “gross stress reaction” or labeled as schizophrenic/hysterical.
The Institutional Paradox: Analyze the military psychiatric ward as a space meant to “fix” soldiers, but which often inflicts secondary institutional trauma.

4-Week Syllabus & Reading Schedule

Week 1: The Dual Battlefields

Reading: Chapters 1–5.
Focus: Establishing the parallel geography. Look at how descriptions of the psych ward mirror the claustrophobia and threat environment of the jungle.
Discussion Question: How does Coleman immediately challenge the reader’s expectation of a traditional “war story”?

Week 2: Language and Fragmentation

Reading: Chapters 6–10.
Focus: Character studies of the institutionalized soldiers. Notice the breakdown of language, military slang, and medical jargon.
Discussion Question: In what ways do the psychological coping mechanisms of the soldiers manifest in their speech patterns, acting-out scenarios, and withdrawn silences?

Week 3: Institutional Violence vs. Combat Violence

Reading: Chapters 11–15.
Focus: The medical staff, treatments, and the power dynamics of the ward.
Discussion Question: Is the army psych ward an extension of the war machine, or a refuge from it? How do the critics Beidler and Kearns view this tension?

Week 4: The Permanently Altered Sanity

Reading: Chapter 16 to the End.
Focus: The climax and lack of traditional resolution.
Discussion Question: Evaluate the ending. Does Coleman offer the possibility of healing, or does the novel argue that war permanently alters the human psyche beyond repair?

Seminar Discussion Prompts

The “Sergeant Back Again” Motif: Deconstruct the title. What does it mean to “come back” from war if the war is internalized? Is a soldier ever truly “back”? That’s half of the motif. The other half is the wounded causality in Collins care, Sergeant Back Again, How does Collins react when he comes upon him in the surgical unit for the second time (“back again”)? This is the climax to the final chapter in the litany of the dead who Collins has treated and it blows his mind. Why? Sergeant Back Again is both a complex symbol and a metaphor for the novel: expound.
Critical Dialogue: Philip Beidler notes that Vietnam literature often requires a “new language” to describe a new kind of war. How does Coleman invent or distort language to achieve this?
The Bodily Versus the Psychic: How are physical symptoms used by characters to express psychological wounds that they are forbidden or unable to speak aloud?

Essay Prompts & Research Assignments

Close-Reading Assignment (Short Essay)

Choose a single sequence where a character experiences a hallucination or flashback. Analyze how Coleman’s syntax, punctuation, and structural choices simulate a psychological break for the reader.

Historical-Critical Research Paper (Long Essay)

Read excerpts from Philip Beidler’s American Literature and the Experience of Vietnam. Write an essay arguing how Sergeant Back Again fulfills or complicates Beidler’s thesis regarding the moral and aesthetic responsibilities of the Vietnam veteran-writer.

Medical Humanities Track

Analyze the conflict between the institutional goals of the army psychiatrists in the novel and the existential needs of the traumatized protagonists.

Classroom Activities & Micro-Lectures

Mapping the Geography: Draw a Venn diagram on the board. Label one side “The Jungle/Combat” and the other “The Ward.” Have students populate the intersections with shared imagery (e.g., surveillance, entrapment, hierarchy, threat).
The DSM Contextualization: Present the official 1980 DSM-III diagnostic criteria for PTSD. Have students find specific scenes in the novel that perfectly illustrate these symptoms avant la lettre.

Here is a comprehensive teaching module for Week 2: Language, Fragmentation, and the Trauma Narrative. This resource includes a complete, interactive seminar lecture script and an analytical essay grading rubric customized for upper-level collegiate standards.

Seminar Lecture Script: Week 2

Topic: Language, Structural Fragmentation, and Characters as Trauma Symptoms
Format: Interactive Seminar (60–90 minutes)
Materials Needed: Whiteboard, copies of Chapter 6–10 text.

Part 1: The Hook & The Framing (10 Minutes)

Instructor: “Welcome back, everyone. Last week, we mapped the parallel geographies of Sergeant Back Again-how the claustrophobia of the physical jungle in Vietnam seamlessly translates into the architectural and psychological trap of the psychiatric ward.

Today, we are shifting from where the trauma happens to how it speaks.

As critics like Philip Beidler have argued, the Vietnam War shattered traditional modes of American realistic fiction. It demanded a new language. Charles Coleman doesn’t just tell us his characters are traumatized, he forces us to experience cognitive disruption through the very syntax of the novel.

Look at your notes from Chapters 6 through 10. By this point, the narrative linearity has begun to erode. Why? Because trauma destroys the brain’s ability to sequence events. In trauma, there is no ‘past tense’-everything is happening right now. Let’s look at how this manifests in the soldiers’ language.”

Part 2: Close Reading & Technical Analysis (20 Minutes)

Instructor: “Open your texts to Chapter 7. Look at the dialogue between the soldiers. Notice the heavy reliance on acronyms, military slang, and fractured sentences.

Can someone read a passage aloud where the dialogue feels disjointed or rapid-fire?”

(Allow a student to read a passage.)

Instructor: “Excellent. Notice what is happening here. We see a collision of two distinct vocabularies: military jargon-designed to sanitize violence-and psychiatric jargon, designed to categorize sanity. The soldiers are caught in the middle. They speak in a fractured patter.

Let’s put a term on the board: Narrative Mimicry. Coleman’s prose mimics the clinical symptoms of what we now call PTSD. The text uses repetition, sudden ellipsis, and unannounced shifts in perspective.

Why do you think Coleman avoids smooth transitions between a character talking in the dayroom and that same character flashing back to a fire fight? What is the psychological effect on us as readers?”

(Facilitate a brief 5-minute student discussion. Expect answers regarding confusion, disorientation, and empathy.)

Part 3: Characterization as Symptom (20 Minutes)

Instructor: “In traditional fiction, characters have neat backstories and clear motivations. In Chapters 8 and 9, Coleman introduces us to a spectrum of broken soldiers. I want us to stop viewing these men merely as literary characters. Instead, let’s view them as personified symptoms of war-induced trauma.

Let’s look at three specific figures introduced or developed in this section:

The Hyper-Vigilant: The soldier who cannot stop monitoring the perimeter of the ward.
The Mutist/Withdrawn: The soldier who has completely abandoned language.
The Fabricator/Logorhetic: The soldier who talks constantly, spinning endless, non-linear war yarns.

In your small groups for the next ten minutes, take one of these characters. Find two instances where their dialogue or behavior shows a complete breakdown of their pre-war ‘sanity.’ Ask yourself: Is their behavior in the ward a defense mechanism to keep them alive, or is it pure destruction?”

(Break students into groups. Circulate and guide their textual analysis.)

Part 4: Synthesis & Wrap-Up (10 Minutes)

Instructor: “Let’s bring it back together. As George Kearns points out in his reviews of Vietnam literature, books like Sergeant Back Again show that the human mind under extreme stress treats reality as an enemy combatant.

When sanity is permanently altered, language is the first thing to decay. Next week, we will examine how the doctors try to force these men back into ‘normal’ language using institutional violence. For your journals tonight, I want you to write a one-page response on this question: If a war narrative is perfectly logical, linear, and easy to read, is it telling the truth about war? See you next session.”

Upper-Level Collegiate Analytical Essay Rubric

Use this criteria-focused rubric to grade the analytical essays assigned for this unit. It evaluates advanced critical thinking, theoretical synthesis, and textual mastery.

Criteria	Advanced (A-Grade)	Proficient (B-Grade)	Developing (C/D Grade)	Unsatisfactory (F Grade)
Thesis & Argumentation (25%)	Thesis is highly original, analytical, and arguable. Boldly tackles the sustained intersection of narrative structure and psychological trauma.	Thesis is clear and analytical, but stays within safe interpretive boundaries. Argument is sustained well throughout.	Thesis is purely descriptive or factual rather than analytical and author. Argument centers on plot summary.	Thesis is missing, incomprehensible, or merely states the book's title and no central argument.
Theoretical Integration (25%)	Seamlessly integrates trauma theory (e.g., Beidler's criticism or clinical concepts) to illuminate Coleman's literary techniques.	Accurately references trauma concepts or critics, but connections to the text feel slightly mechanical or forced.	Mentions trauma or literary criticism superficially. Fails to use theory as an analytical tool, uses it as decoration.	Completely ignores the theoretical framework of the course. Fails to engage with critical concepts.
Evidence & Close Reading (25%)	Provides exquisite close-readings of specific passages. Explicitly connects sentence structure, syntax, and vocabulary to character psychology.	Uses strong textual evidence to support claims, but occasionally lapses into explaining what happened instead of how it was written.	Relies heavily on broad plot summaries or oversized block quotes without unpacking the specific language.	Minimal or absent textual evidence. Relies on vague generalizations about the Vietnam War or trauma.
Structure & Academic Tone (25%)	Flawless organization. Transitions mirror the complexity of the argument. Advanced, precise academic prose free of mechanics errors.	Clear organization with logical transitions. Tone is appropriately academic. Minor grammatical or citation hiccups.	Organization is chaotic or repetitive. Vocabulary is overly casual or relies on clichés. Noticeable editing errors.	Lacks coherent structure. Fragmented paragraphs. Pervasive grammatical errors that impede comprehension.

Historical Documents: “The Domino Theary,” the strategy of “Winning Hearts and Minds,” the fallacy of inflated “body counts,” the Pinkville Massacre, My Lai Massacre,

Here is a concise historical primer designed to provide your students with the essential context of the Vietnam War. These concepts directly parallel the psychological fragmentation in Charles Coleman’s Sergeant Back Again, demonstrating how institutional rhetoric, systemic deception, and battlefield atrocities shattered the sanity of the soldiers who carried them out.

The Domino Theory

The Document/Concept: Popularized by President Dwight D. Eisenhower in a 1954 press conference, this geopolitical theory posited that if one country in a region fell to communism, surrounding countries would inevitably collapse in a chain reaction, like a row of dominoes.
The Lecture Application: Frame this as the grand ideological abstraction that justified American intervention. In the context of Sergeant Back Again, contrast this massive, abstract geopolitical theory with the claustrophobic, brutal reality of the individual soldier. The grand narrative of “stopping the dominoes” completely breaks down when soldiers face an invisible enemy in the jungle, leading to a profound sense of ideological betrayal and existential meaninglessness.

“Winning Hearts and Minds” (WHAM)

The Document/Concept: Originally a British counter-insurgency strategy, this phrase was heavily used by President Lyndon B. Johnson and the military command. The goal was to win the emotional and intellectual allegiance of the South Vietnamese peasantry through humanitarian aid, infrastructure, and security, rather than relying solely on firepower.
The Lecture Application: Use this to highlight the paradox of the compassionate occupier. In reality, the U.S. military simultaneously used heavy artillery, napalm, and forced relocation (Strategic Hamlets), which systematically alienated the population. In the novel, this paradox drives soldiers to psychological ruin: they were ordered to be “humanitarians” by day while burning villages by night, shattering their moral compass and creating a profound cognitive dissonance.

The Fallacy of Inflated “Body Counts”

The Document/Concept: Because the Vietnam War was a war of attrition without traditional frontlines or territory to conquer, Defense Secretary Robert McNamara instituted the “body count” as the primary metric of military success. Units were judged, promoted, and rewarded based on the number of enemy dead they reported, creating systemic pressure to inflate numbers.
The Lecture Application: This is a crucial concept for understanding the linguistic corruption of the war. Because “if it’s dead and Vietnamese, it’s VC (Viet Cong),” soldiers were forced to participate in a bureaucratic numbers game where human lives became raw data. In Coleman’s novel, this corporate, statistical approach to mass death directly contributes to the soldiers’ PTSD. It highlights the trauma of realizing they were cogs in a metric-driven meat grinder where truth was entirely manufactured by the chain of command.

The My Lai Massacre / “Pinkville”

The Document/Concept: On March 16, 1968, the soldiers of Charlie Company (11th Brigade, Americal Division) entered the village cluster of My Lai 4-notated on military maps as part of an area nicknamed “Pinkville” due to the pink shading used to denote high population density. Under the command of Lt. William Calley, frustrated by weeks of sustaining casualties from unseen traps, the soldiers systematically raped, tortured, and murdered over 500 unarmed Vietnamese civilians, primarily women, children, and old men. The atrocity was actively covered up by the military bureaucracy for over a year until whistleblowers forced an investigation.
The Lecture Application: This is the ultimate case study in systemic moral injury. The My Lai Massacre represents the absolute evaporation of rules of engagement and the total collapse of military discipline under acute psychological stress. When teaching Sergeant Back Again, use My Lai/Pinkville to explain why the soldiers in the psych ward are so haunted. The trauma in the novel is rarely just about fear of dying; it is frequently about the moral horror of what they witnessed or participated in. The psychological “war within” is often a battle against the guilt of actions committed in environments like Pinkville, where the boundary between combatant and civilian was forcefully erased.

🎙️ Seminar Lecture Script: Week 3

Topic: Institutional Gaslighting, Cold War Rhetoric, and the Anatomy of Moral Injury
Format: Interactive Seminar (60–90 minutes)
Materials Needed: Whiteboard, the 5 historical terms from last week written on the board (Domino Theory, Hearts & Minds, Body Counts, Pinkville/My Lai).

Part 1: The Lecture Frame – The Two Bureaucracies (15 Minutes)

Instructor: “Welcome back, everyone. Last week we looked at narrative fragmentation-how Charles Coleman uses broken syntax to mirror a broken mind. Today, we are diving into the heart of the novel’s institutional critique.

Look at the board. We have our five historical pillars: the ideological abstraction of the Domino Theory, the tragic paradox of ‘Winning Hearts and Minds,’ the corporate deceit of inflated body counts, and the ultimate manifestation of systemic breakdown at Pinkville/My Lai.

Up until now, you might have thought these were just battlefield problems. But in Chapters 11 through 15, Coleman reveals a terrifying truth: The military psychiatric ward is not an escape from the war; it is a continuation of the war by other means.

In this lecture, we are going to explore how the army psychiatrists use the exact same rhetorical manipulations on the patients that the Pentagon used on the American public. We call this Institutional Gaslighting. The medical staff’s job is not necessarily to heal these men’s souls; it is to patch up the machinery of the state and re-legitimize a war that has driven these men mad.”

Part 2: The Parallel Deceptions (25 Minutes)

Instructor: “Let’s draw some direct parallels between Pentagon history and Coleman’s psych ward. Open your books to Chapter 12, where the doctors are evaluating the patients.

Parallel 1: The Domino Theory vs. The Sanity Threshold

In Washington, the Domino Theory argued that if one country falls, they all fall. It was an all-or-nothing, black-and-white view of geopolitics. How do the psychiatrists in the novel view sanity? They view it the same way. If a soldier displays a single symptom of ‘deviation’ or ‘combat exhaustion,’ they are treated as an operational failure. Yet, the doctors try to enforce a false narrative of ‘total recovery.’ They want a black-and-white line, you are either fit for duty or you are crazy. There is no room for the gray zone of trauma.

Parallel 2: ‘Hearts and Minds’ vs. Institutional Compliance

The military claimed they wanted to win the ‘hearts and minds’ of the Vietnamese while simultaneously dropping napalm on their villages. Now look at the dayroom in Chapter 13. The psychiatrists claim they want to heal the soldiers’ minds. But what are they actually doing? They are administering heavy sedatives, enforcing rigid military protocol, and threatening court-martial if patients don’t comply.

Can anyone point to a scene in these chapters where a doctor’s ‘compassion’ feels identical to military occupation?”

(Allow a student to respond. Guide them toward passages involving medication distribution or forced therapy sessions.)

Instructor: “Exactly. ‘Healing’ in this ward doesn’t mean finding peace. It means compliance. It is the pacification of the soldier’s mind, just like the pacification of a Vietnamese village.”

Part 3: Close Reading – The Body Count of the Soul (20 Minutes)

Instructor: “Now let’s look at the most insidious parallel: The Body Count.

Robert McNamara’s Pentagon was obsessed with metrics. Success was a number. If the enemy dead outweighed American dead, we were ‘winning,’ regardless of the moral rot occurring on the ground.

How does this statistical obsession manifest in the hospital bureaucracy in Chapter 14? Look at how the doctors discuss recovery rates. They need to show high turnover. They need ‘clear beds.’ A soldier who is heavily sedated but quiet is marked down as a ‘success story’-a positive statistic on a chart sent to the higher-ups.

Let’s read this passage on page [insert page number/chapter quote] where the chart notes contradict the physical reality of the soldier weeping in his bed.

What Coleman is exposing here is the fallacy of clinical metrics. Just as a high body count in Pinkville masked a strategic and moral disaster, a high ‘discharge rate’ in the psych ward masks a catastrophic epidemic of psychological ruin. The institution values the data of sanity over the human being.”

Part 4: The Specter of Pinkville & Moral Injury (15 Minutes)

Instructor: “This brings us to our final, most heavy concept: Pinkville and the My Lai Massacre.

As we discussed, My Lai wasn’t just a failure of individuals, it was the predictable explosion of a broken system. The soldiers in Coleman’s psych ward are haunted by the ghosts of villages just like Pinkville.

In Chapter 15, we see a soldier trying to explain a battlefield atrocity to a psychiatrist. Watch the doctor’s reaction. The doctor tries to reframe the atrocity. He calls it ‘acute stress reaction.’ He tries to tell the soldier that ‘in war, things happen,’ or shifts the blame onto individual pathology.

Why? Because if the psychiatrist acknowledges that the soldier’s horror is a rational response to an irrational and immoral war, then the doctor has to admit that the entire military system is guilty. By diagnosing the soldier as ‘sick,’ the doctor completely absolves the military state of its crimes. The soldier’s guilt is internalized as a personal disease rather than a collective, political atrocity.

This is what modern psychologists call Moral Injury-the profound psychological distress caused by witnessing or participating in actions that violate your core moral beliefs. The army psych ward is designed to treat moral injury as a simple chemical imbalance. It is the ultimate form of institutional betrayal.”

Part 5: Seminar Discussion Starter & Wrap-Up (5 Minutes)

Instructor: “To close today, I want to leave you with a question to debate for the remainder of our time:

If the military psychiatrist’s job is to cure a soldier just enough so that he can either re-enter society without causing a scene, or worse, be sent back to the front lines-is the psychiatrist a healer, or are they just another weapon in the military arsenal? In this sense, is Dr. Nieland’s very compassionate care of Collins an “exception” to the above “rule.” If so, what is so different about his approach? Let’s open the floor.”

🎙️ Seminar Lecture Script: Week 4

Topic: The Permanently Altered Sanity, Narrative Irresolution, and the Critical Legacy of Sergeant Back Again
Format: Interactive Capstone Seminar (60–90 minutes)
Materials Needed: Whiteboard, pull-quotes from critics Philip Beidler and George Kearns projected or distributed.

Part 1: The Trap of the Happy Ending (15 Minutes)

Instructor: “Welcome to our final seminar on Charles Coleman’s Sergeant Back Again. Over the last three weeks, we have traced the parallel battlefields of the jungle and the ward, analyzed how trauma fractures the very syntax of language, and deconstructed the institutional gaslighting of military psychiatry.

Today, we confront the most challenging aspect of the novel: its ending-or, more accurately, its resistance to a traditional ending.

In conventional Western literature, we expect a narrative arc of crisis, climax, and resolution. In war literature, the standard trope is the return home, healing, and reintegration. But Coleman denies us this comfort. Why? Because to give this novel a neat, redemptive ending would be a lie. It would validate the very bureaucratic metrics we critiqued last week-the idea that you can ‘cure’ a soldier of a moral injury and stamp them as ‘fixed.’

Let’s look at how the novel closes. We don’t see a triumphant return. We see a permanent alteration of sanity. The ‘wars’ don’t end when the deployment clock runs out.”

Part 2: Engaging the Critics – Beidler & Kearns (25 Minutes)

Instructor: “To understand this lack of resolution, we must turn to the critical frameworks established by Philip Beidler and George Kearns. Let’s look at the quotes distributed in your handout.

Philip Beidler on ‘Rewriting the Language of War’

In his seminal work American Literature and the Experience of Vietnam, Beidler argues that Vietnam veteran-writers faced an unprecedented aesthetic crisis. The old myths of American martial glory were useless. Beidler writes that a true Vietnam narrative must create a ‘new language’ that can accommodate the simultaneous presence of the surreal, the horrific, and the banal.

How does Coleman do this at the end of the book? Look at the final chapters. The prose style doesn’t stabilize. If anything, it accelerates into a deeper state of fragmentation. Coleman is fulfilling Beidler’s thesis: he refuses to translate the madness of the war into a comforting, readable idiom. The language remains as broken as the minds it describes.

George Kearns on the Internalized Frontline

Now let’s look at George Kearns’ commentary. Kearns pointed out that in Sergeant Back Again, the battlefield has been completely internalized. The physical coordinates of Vietnam are gone, but the psychic coordinates remain.

If the frontline is now inside the soldier’s own consciousness, can a ceasefire ever actually be declared? If the enemy is your own memory, how do you surrender? Let’s open this up to the room. Look at the title character’s final psychological state. Does he ever actually leave Vietnam?”

(Facilitate a 10-minute student discussion. Guide them to look at specific passages where the imagery of the jungle completely overtakes the physical space of civilian life or the ward.)

Part 3: Close Reading – The Myth of “Sergeant Back Again” (20 Minutes)

Instructor: “Let’s do a deep-dive close reading of the novel’s title and its ultimate irony in the final pages. The phrase ‘Sergeant Back Again’ sounds like a celebratory homecoming. It sounds like a soldier returning to status quo.

But what does it actually mean to be ‘back again’ in Coleman’s universe?

Turn to the final sequence. Notice the repetition of military terminology even as civilian life looms. The protagonist is ‘back’ physically, but his sense of reality has been permanently altered. Sanity isn’t restored; it is replaced by a hyper-awareness of the fragility of human constructs.

Look at the syntax in these closing paragraphs. Coleman uses compressed sentences, heavy ellipses, and an absence of definitive closure.

What is the political and moral impact of leaving the reader stranded in this psychological gray zone? Why is an unresolved ending a more radical anti-war statement than a tragic death or a peaceful recovery?”

(Allow students to analyze the text. Focus on the idea that an unresolved ending forces the civilian reader to carry a small piece of the text’s discomfort, preventing easy emotional closure.)

Part 4: Capstone Synthesis – The Legacy of the Novel (15 Minutes)

Instructor: “To wrap up our unit on Coleman, let’s look at where this book sits in the wider canon of American literature.

Most Vietnam literature that achieved mainstream commercial success-like Tim O’Brien’s The Things They Carried or Michael Herr’s Dispatches-focuses heavily on the visceral thrill and horror of combat. They are ‘grunt’ narratives.

Coleman did something far more dangerous. He pulled the curtain back on the aftermath. He proved that the true catastrophe of the Vietnam War wasn’t just what happened in the muddy trenches of the Mekong Delta; it was what happened to the American soul when those soldiers were locked away in psych wards, treated like defective military hardware.

As you prepare your final analytical essays, remember Beidler’s core insight: Sergeant Back Again is a masterpiece because it refuses to let the war end. It demands that we acknowledge trauma not as a temporary sickness to be cured, but as a permanent, historic restructuring of human consciousness.

Thank you for your rigorous work over these last four weeks. I look forward to reading your final papers.”

Final Steps for Syllabus Readiness

To ensure you have absolutely every piece of material needed for this collegiate seminar, let me know if you would like me to generate:

A 20-point rubric for grading seminar participation and oral presentations during these discussion sections.
A set of 3 comprehensive final essay prompts that explicitly force students to synthesize Week 3’s historical documents with Week 4’s literary criticism.
A suggested supplementary syllabus bibliography of 5 peer-reviewed articles on Sergeant Back Again and Vietnam War trauma theory to put on reserve for your students.

SERGEANT BACK AGAIN

TEACHERS

ABOUT THE BOOK

SERGEANT BACK AGAIN