Make sure that it isn’t overly written to where it is hard to read or seems above the 12th grade level. This essay was written completely wrong and I am attaching the edits made by the teacher via photo. There is three main sections: the evaluation of sources, investigation, and reflection. The evaluation of sources is written like this:
Identify/choose two important sources that you have used in Section 2 (the investigation).The sources can be either primary or secondary or one from each.
-
Take one source at a time and complete Steps 1 and 2 for each
-
Write about 200 words for each source evaluation.
Step 1
-
Analyse the value and limitations of the source in relation to the investigation, with reference to their origin – one paragraph
Origin – who produced the source and when?
Value of the Origin
The origin of the source helps give it value because …
-
What is the author’s/producer’s background?
-
Is the author a specialist or historian?
-
Someone important?
-
When was it produced?
-
Where was it produced?
-
Someone there at the time?
-
Are they benefiting from hindsight?
Example: Source 1: Eades, Lindsay Michie. The End of Apartheid in South Africa. Westport: Greenwood, 1999
The origin of the source helps give it value because Eades is an expert in the field of history, lecturing at the University of Transkei in South Africa from 1989 to 1991 and being a history professor at Chowan College, East Carolina University and Greensboro College in North Carolina. As well as this, by being published in 1999, the author has been able to look at the subject more in depth and analyze the effects of such incident. Furthermore, the fact that Eades is not South African makes the analysis of the book more objective.”
Limitation of the origin
However, the origin of this source also limits its value…
-
Are they bias?
-
Are they from a particular country?
-
Does their political/social/sconomic background have influence?
-
Was their position influential?
-
Are they writing without the benefit of hindsight?
Example
However, the origin of this source also limits its value because, since it was not written during the apartheid era, some of the information might not be completely accurate. Likewise, the date of publication also limits its value because more information concerning the end of apartheid might have come to light since it was published.
Step 6
Analyse the value and limitations of the two sources in relation to the investigation, with reference to their purpose and content – one paragraph
Purpose – why was the source produced?
Content – what does the source say?
Value of the Purpose
The purpose of the source is to ……. [Explain why it was produced in the first]. This is of value because…
-
It is very specific to the time period/country/theme/group of the investigation?
-
The content provides a good overview/detailed account?
-
Shows the feelings a particular group/country… at the time?
Example
The purpose of Eades’ book is to go over the changes made to transform the government and the challenges that this new government faced concerning the end of apartheid as well as going through the divisions of the South African society. This is of value because a variety of primary documents, including F.W. deKlerk’s policies as well as Freedom Charters from politicians with knowledge on the topic, are of great use when exploring the causes to the end of apartheid.
Limitation of the Purpose
However, the purpose and content has limitations because ….
Some examples:
-
It is too broad/narrow an overview?
-
It is too personal/written in private/for the public?
-
It was produced to persuade the audience?
-
It only shows one groups/countries/persons views?
Example
However, by focusing [the content] mainly on the changes made to transform the government, the author does not make much reference to Botha himself; instead he focuses more on F.W. deKlerk’s policies. As well as this, her basis of her analysis is based on official documents, not taking into account the possibility that these political documents are biased since politicians looked for positive publicity.
Don’t forget to repeat Steps 1 and 2 for the second source.
Things to keep in mind while writing the section 1 of the History IA:
The first section of the IA expects you to analyze two sources (primary or secondary) that you have used elaborate (make sure to use these two sources multiple times throughout section 2 of the history IA)
-
State the question you have chosen clearly. Do not be vague. It should be stated as a question
-
You need to mention the relevance of the sources you have picked to analyze. Why were these sources important to your findings or conclusion? What do they offer? Do they give you more clarity in detail or a fresh perspective?
-
Thoroughly analyze the two sources. Analyze and discuss the value and limitation of these sources
-
Thi analysis must be done in the context of the origin (when and by whom), the purpose (why), and the content (what).
The investigation should be written like this:
Section 2 of the IA, the investigation, is a tougher nut to crack. Be mindful of specific essential points, and you’ll be ready. Your investigation should be nearly 1,300 words and aim to answer the IA’s question. Since it’s the actual investigation it needs to have proper structure
-
Introduction
-
The first paragraphs of the investigation should briefly overview the topic. This is where you interest the reader/examiner. Why is the question chosen relevant or essential?
-
One paragraph only – approximately 200 words
-
A brief context to introduce the question.
-
Set the scene / generate reader interest by establishing why this question was important at the time, and remains relevant today.
-
Highlight the scope of your question – what will it focus on and what dates you will be covering.
-
Method – Outline how the essay will be approached, and the main conclusions that will be reached.
-
State the different historical perspectives that exist in relation to the question.
-
Do NOT carry out any analysis here.
Example Introduction
To what extent did World War II lead to women in the United States becoming permanent participants of the labor force?
Few historians would disagree that World War II brought about a dramatic increase in female participation in the American labor force during the early 1940s. Between 1940 and 1944, women’s participation in the workforce rose by 23.5% (Clark, Summers 8), a change affecting women of all ages (See Table 1 of the Appendix). As a whole, women workers grew by 5 million in the 1941-1944 period (Anderson 239), with one-sixth of the working women being employed by a war related industry (Goldin 753). The war was therefore responsible for the unquestionable incorporation of women into the American labor force. However, historians disagree on the extent to which these changes had long-term effects. While some refer to this war as a “watershed” event leading to the permanent incorporation of women into the labor force, others refute this statement by arguing that the war’s influence on women’s employment “appears to have been more modest” (Goldin 741).
-
Critical analysis
-
The evidence used should be analyzed in different contexts. Try giving an informative counterargument if needed. All the sources should be discussed. You can also bring in diverse perspectives and address them in separate paragraphs.
-
Approximately 3 to 4 main paragraphs
-
Each paragraph should have a specific focus, point of view or theme.
-
Within each paragraph, start with a clear topic sentence which is clearly focused on the question.
-
Carefully select and properly reference evidence.
-
Use quotes as necessary, try NOT to use quotes longer than 10 words, or paraphrase, but ensure you footnote or reference all evidence.
-
Stress the value of the evidence you use, but also acknowledge its limitations, with reference to Origin, Purpose and Content as appropriate.
-
Try to show more than one perspective.
An example paragraph
To what extent did World War II lead to women in the United States becoming permanent participants of the labor force?
However, the late postwar period gave way to a reversal of this initially unfavorable effect, for women’s employment soared in the 1947-1950 years. In this period the percentage of working women between 25-64 years of age increased from by 2% (Clark, Summers 1982), and that of working married women rose from 20% to 23.8% (Goldin 742). Additionally, the number of employed female operatives in metals and machinery manufacturing increased 4 History teacher support material 7 Example 2 (Name) (Candidate Number) from 175,246 to 331,140 between 1940 and 1950. (Blackwelder 145). Also, twice as many women were employed in California in 1949 as had been employed in 1940 (Chafe 161). These examples of growth have led some to point out that the war did, indeed, have, a “long-term rather than temporary impact on women’s place in the labor force” (Blackwelder 147). The 5.25 million female increase in the labor force between 1940 and 1949 (Chafe 161) further strengthens the point that the war was, despite the initial postwar setback, a “milestone for women in America.” (Chafe 172). Conversely, it seems relevant that only 22% of the eventual 1950 women workers joined during the war years (Goldin 744) and that more than half of the women employed in 1950 had been employed before the United State’s entry in the war (Goldin 744). “Rosies” of 1944 were only 20 % of the eventual 1951 employment among married women (Goldin 750). These figures indicate that a majority of the jobs offered during the war period disappeared at its conclusion, and, consequently, that the women that participated in the labor force during the war years only constituted a small percentage of the late postwar employment. This suggests that the changes brought about by the war were more moderate than suggested by enthusiastic modern historians such as Blackwelder, who, perhaps in an effort to analyze an extensive time period, might have failed to examine short-term trends, consequently venturing to claim that “World War II had clearly accelerated the feminization of the U.S. labor force and increased employment among married women.” (Blackwelder 146).
346 words
-
The first sentence clearly relates to the question.
-
Evidence is well-selected – good use of statistics to support the argument.
-
Perspectives have been included and evaluated.
-
Critical thinking is present.
-
Each piece of evidence has been cited appropriately.
-
Conclusion
-
The last paragraph should be a concluding statement summarising the investigation and analysis. Keep it short and precise
-
One paragraph only – approximately 150 words.
-
Provides a direct answer to the question by synthesising (combining) the main points of the essay.
-
DO NOT argue against your thesis in your introduction.
An example conclusion
To what extent did World War II lead to women in the United States becoming permanent participants of the labor force?
It, therefore, seems that World War II was indeed, responsible for an incorporation of females in the American labor force during the war years, an increase that is likely to have lead to a change in the perspective of male employers and public officials towards women employees, and might have played important role in the rise in women’s employment during the late postwar period. However, evidence regarding the percentage of “Rosies” that were to form part of the postwar labor force suggests that the conflict did not secure a permanent incorporation of war female workers into the American labor force. World War II can therefore be seen as responsible for a number of significant ideological changes regarding women’s employment but its direct influence in terms of persistence of women’s participation in the labor force appears to have been modest.
150 words
-
Relates clearly to the question.
-
It is consistent with the thesis stated in the introduction.
-
It is consistent the evidence and arguments provided in the main body.
-
No new evidence is provided.
Here is an outline of the structure of the investigation:
Paragraph 1: First argument from your scope. Use 4-5 pieces of evidence. After each piece of evidence, you put your interpretation linking the evidence to the argument.
-
evidence: this is information that is cited. It’s not just random facts.
-
analysis
-
evidence
-
analysis
-
evidence
-
analysis
-
evidence
-
analysis
-
link all of the above to your argument (show how this relates to what you are trying to prove, i.e. your thesis). Think “So what?” Why is it important?
Paragraph 2: Counterclaim against your THESIS, not the arguments supporting the thesis. Clearly state. 3-4 pieces of evidence that will prove the counterclaim.
-
evidence
-
analysis
-
evidence
-
analysis
-
evidence
-
analysis
-
Now reject the counterclaim. The analysis in this portion needs to question the counterclaim in terms of the thesis.
Paragraph 3: Stongest argument from your scope. Use 5-6 pieces of evidence. After each piece of evidence you put your interpretation linking the evidence to the argument.
-
evidence
-
analysis
-
evidence
-
analysis
-
evidence
-
analysis
-
evidence
-
analysis
-
link all of the above to your argument (show how this relates to what you are trying to prove, i.e. your thesis). Think “So what?” Why is it important?
Need a Convulsion
Restate your assumption in an arguemenative form\
Perhap restate your major arguements
State in the tense that it has be proven
Do not bring in any new evidence.
In Section 3 you are required to write 400 words and to reflect on two main themes:
-
what you have learnt while researching and writing your investigation.
-
the challenges and limitations faced by the historian.
You must provide specific examples from your own experience and sources and it is advisable to break this section down into three paragraphs.
1. Discuss the methods/steps you used similar to that of a historian…
-
Research?
-
Analysis?
-
Evaluation?
-
Comparison?
-
Interpretation?
-
Differing perspectives?
-
Reaching a conclusion?
Example “This investigation has allowed me to gain an insight into some of the methods used by historians, as well as to the challenges that historians face when carrying out historical investigations. I feel I have developed a skill that is fundamental in the study of history: that of carefully analysing sources, often presenting different points of view on a same subject, to reach a justified conclusion.”[1]
2. How has this investigation helped you appreciate the challenges faced by the historian…
-
Difficulty of research, too little or too much information?
-
Dealing with differing perspectives?
-
Working with unreliable/biased sources?
-
Is there a difference working with primary sources compared to secondary?
-
Determining the importance of one source above another?
-
What conditions might affect the historian?
-
The difficulty of reaching a conclusion?
Example “…calling into question how accurate historical knowledge can be. This challenge was made explicit to me through the examination of Dietrich’s extract, as it contained within in it biases, such as the desire to shift blame away from Nazi officials, which may have distorted the true picture of events, thus distorting the accuracy of our knowledge of them.”[2]
3. Limitations of the role of a historian
-
Can a historian distort history?
-
The problem with history being subjective?
-
The difficulty of providing a meaningful interpretation?
-
The problem of history always being uncertain, always changing?
-
How does the process of a historian differ to that of a mathematician or scientist?
Example “A limitation of this method is the difficulty in being unbiased when providing interpretations, in selecting different historical events and in determining their importance. Past events are interpreted and converted into History by historians whose values and thinking were greatly influenced by the context in which they were set in.”[3]