Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  

History IA - Difference between Sections B and D

Recommended Posts

I am currently in the process of writing my historical investigation, but got confused with the Sections B and D. What exactly is the difference between the summary of evidence and the analysis? I've read through the criteria, but I still don't exactly grasp the discrepancy.

Does B include the facts, figures, pre-happenings and consequences of the historical event? Is D for the causes and different interpretations thereof?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

B:

  • All the factual information presented in a straightforward manner
  • Include statistics/illustrations/diagrams/whatever here
  • Don't write narratively!
  • Do NOT analyze at all!
  • Make sure all the info you present is pertinent. Don't give general information that's not needed.
  • Provide good supporting details. That's pretty key.
D:
  • Show historical opinions/debate--different interpretations
  • The actual analysis of your information
  • Significance of the topic in historical context
  • Criticize the historians you quote, but back up what you say.

And if you ignore how I go back and forth from informing you what each section contains and telling you how to write it, the advice is pretty sound, in my humble opinion.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

B:

  • All the factual information presented in a straightforward manner
  • Include statistics/illustrations/diagrams/whatever here
  • Don't write narratively!
  • Do NOT analyze at all!
  • Make sure all the info you present is pertinent. Don't give general information that's not needed.
  • Provide good supporting details. That's pretty key.
D:
  • Show historical opinions/debate--different interpretations
  • The actual analysis of your information
  • Significance of the topic in historical context
  • Criticize the historians you quote, but back up what you say.

And if you ignore how I go back and forth from informing you what each section contains and telling you how to write it, the advice is pretty sound, in my humble opinion.

what do you mean by not writing narratively??

do u mean things like: then this happened. followed by this....

whats the difference between that and telling facts. isn't it essentially the same. even if you put your facts in chronological order, isnt that saying...this happened...then this...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry I didn't clarify. I meant to put "don't write narratively" with "don't give general information that's not needed." You don't want to talk about background information too much. If you think you must explain something obscure-ish, then I guess it's okay, but don't talk about WW1 for a paragraph to intro to a specific thing about a battle. If you start doing a narrative here, it's considered a tangent. Plus you're wasting words big time.

One more thing. This isn't related to parts B and D explicitly, but use a variety of sources. And use many souces. Quality over quantity, but make sure you have more than two sources.

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.