Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  

Historical Investigation Questions

Recommended Posts

Hey everyone!

I just joined this forum today, and i was wondering if anyone can answer some of my questions on the HI

Footnotes: Is it a good idea to explain things, or people in footnotes? It saves words, but will it be frowned apon by the examinar?

Evaluation of Sources: Does it matter which ones we use, or should we use our strongest?

I have most of my paper already written up, does anyone think they could look over what i have? It would be greatly appreacited!

Thanks so much guys!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

yeah, i guess you're right.

thanks for taking it down.

you know how crazy we get when it comes to IB things, and i was really freaking out about the HI due date. i'm sorry i posted it.

Edited by Meshi

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Meshi, as regards your question, what I did was choosing from all my sources a primary source and a secondary source that are easy to compare/contrast. For instance, if you are investigating on Stalin's Five Year Plans, you could use a speech by Stalin (as a primary source) and a book by an author that discusses up to which extent were these plans successful (or not). You should certainly use foot notes as the word limit is 2000 words and, for a history assignment, it is quite little. Remember, however, that for the sake of fluidity you shouldn't be utilising an excessive amount of footnotes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hedron got it right.

Also remember that those marking your essay aren't obligated to read your footnotes or any appendices you might add. If it's the end of a long day and you have many footnotes, they might just skip over them, which is a problem if the content is essential to your paper. Basically, use footnotes, but not in excess, and make sure nothing essential is in them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hey, I'm my opinion you should only use footnotes to explain a word that might not be understood by many. Don not try to write another essay in the footnote because that will just give you an immediate F. It depends on what kind of essay you're writing, if its concentrated on biology, define medical terms and body organisms in your footer. Its the same with chemistry, physics and other mathematical/scientific subjects. If literature define long hard words that examiners like to read on papers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wouldn't use footnotes to explain anything. Footnotes should be used for citations.

E.g. Joseph Duffy. "Criticism, 1814-1870", The Jane Austen Companion, 98-99; MacDonagh, 146; Watt, "Introduction", 3-4.

You shouldn't explain things in them, examiners take off marks if you do that too many times because they know you're trying to stretch the word limit.

I wouldn't explain any "difficult" words, there aren't any really in history (unlike in Biology or Physics). You can use them to refer to an appendix. If you REALLY have to, you can write in a short sentence but make it as short as possible. And only do this a couple of times in your essay, examiners AREN'T required to read footnotes so you should aim to have everything in your main essay.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For your evaluation of sources, its best to compare and contrast two opposing points of view on the issue youre investigating. This will strengthen your analysis and conclusion, and demonstrate that you have an understanding of the diverging historiography.

My teacher said 3-4 explanatory footnotes (i.e. non-citation ones) are appropriate, but should be use judiciously. For example, to mention an important point that otherwise interrupts the flow of your argument.

I hope that helps.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hey everyone!

I just joined this forum today, and i was wondering if anyone can answer some of my questions on the HI

Footnotes: Is it a good idea to explain things, or people in footnotes? It saves words, but will it be frowned apon by the examinar?

Evaluation of Sources: Does it matter which ones we use, or should we use our strongest?

I have most of my paper already written up, does anyone think they could look over what i have? It would be greatly appreacited!

Thanks so much guys!

It is not a good idea to explain things in footnotes, except very briefly (it has to be the sort of thing you would put in parentheses). The examiner is not required to look at footnotes, so make sure it isnt vital information.

You can use any of your sources, as long as the lend themselves well for evaluation!

Last thing, DONT send your paper to anyone. Never put the paper online until after the exams. You might be accused of plagiarism even though its your own paper - someone might steal it, or if it ends up on a website, then it'll seem that you copied.

Let some classmates peer-edit, or ask a history teacher that isn't your own teacher to read over it.

Hope I helped!

Good luck and let me know how it goes!

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.