Is my History EE topic narrow enough?

[JPG328]

Is it smart to start a research question with " To what extend..." I was thinking of doing Hitler and whether he was successful or not with the policies of Nazi Germany at the time. Would this be too broad? Any help is welcome.

[The Filipino Limner]

Well, generally, to what extent is sorta a TOK question, but no one is going to stop you from using it to be your EE question.

Actually, personally, to what extent, can be okay for quesitons about Hitler, just make sure that there isn't just one accepted answer, and that there are a number, so that you can investigate and talk about them.

It would be better, though, if you try to draft EE questions, and post it here, and we'll be very glad to help you edit it.

[Arrowhead]

What the OP said ^

If you draft your questions and post them here, we can help you by narrowing or (if necessary) broadening it.

Also, an EE on Hitler's policies in Nazi Germany? Really? Could you be more unoriginal? By all means, do it if you want to, it is your paper after all, but that sounds like such a boring, overdone to death topic. My ernest suggestion to you would be to find some other aspect of history that interests you because as far as Hitler is concerned, I will be truly surprised if you find something that someone somewhere has not already written about.

Arrowhead.

[JPG328]

What the OP said ^

If you draft your questions and post them here, we can help you by narrowing or (if necessary) broadening it.

Also, an EE on Hitler's policies in Nazi Germany? Really? Could you be more unoriginal? By all means, do it if you want to, it is your paper after all, but that sounds like such a boring, overdone to death topic. My ernest suggestion to you would be to find some other aspect of history that interests you because as far as Hitler is concerned, I will be truly surprised if you find something that someone somewhere has not already written about.

Arrowhead.

Here was one that I had before. "To what extent did Adolph Hitler affect the establishment of the Jewish Final Solution?" I was going to use the structuralist and intentionalist perspectives.

[JPG328]

To what extent was Adolf Hitler successful in his dictatorship?

[Arrowhead]

Here was one that I had before. "To what extent did Adolph Hitler affect the establishment of the Jewish Final Solution?" I was going to use the structuralist and intentionalist perspectives.

The Final Solution (German: Die Endlösung) was Nazi Germany's plan and execution of the systematic genocide of European Jews duringWorld War II, resulting in the most deadly phase of the Holocaust. Heinrich Himmler was the chief architect of the plan, and the German Nazi leader Adolf Hitler termed it "the final solution of the Jewish question"

I think that makes your question rather self-explanatory and pointless (this was the opening paragraph of wikipedia).

To what extent was Adolf Hitler successful in his dictatorship?

Too broad! Far too many perspectives to look into and just not narrow (nor a strand of originality) enough to adequately cover in 4,000 words. A very badly worded dissertation paper is what this one is.

[JPG328]

Here was one that I had before. "To what extent did Adolph Hitler affect the establishment of the Jewish Final Solution?" I was going to use the structuralist and intentionalist perspectives.

The Final Solution (German: Die Endlösung) was Nazi Germany's plan and execution of the systematic genocide of European Jews duringWorld War II, resulting in the most deadly phase of the Holocaust. Heinrich Himmler was the chief architect of the plan, and the German Nazi leader Adolf Hitler termed it "the final solution of the Jewish question"

I think that makes your question rather self-explanatory and pointless (this was the opening paragraph of wikipedia).

To what extent was Adolf Hitler successful in his dictatorship?

Too broad! Far too many perspectives to look into and just not narrow (nor a strand of originality) enough to adequately cover in 4,000 words. A very badly worded dissertation paper is what this one is.

I was going to use the 2 differing perspectives.

[Arrowhead]

I was going to use the 2 differing perspectives.

While I agree that the historiographical argument between the functionalist and intentionalist academics is viable, I just think you could do so much better than limiting yourself to a literally futile discourse on unknown semantics. The debate revolves around whether or not Hitler knew the extent of what was going on and whether or not it was he, directly, who authorised the terrible atrocities that occurred. It's such a silly thing to squabble over. When we covered this in class, I distinctly remember just deciding to blank out for the rest of the period because it was such an unnecessary academic struggle. Personally, I thought it was just one step up from random conspiracy theories.

But hey, not everyone agrees on these things, which is why we debate and discourse. What I found monumentally uninteresting, you probably find massively engaging, in which case, go ahead and do it on that. This is your paper and whether or not some random person on the internet thinks your topic is unoriginal and unavailing, if you think you can research it and give it an original spin and write it marvellously, then who am I to say that you won't get an A on the paper?

Best of luck!

Arrowhead.