How many marks would one use if you had only one historian (1 Viewer)

[Harry Flashman]

For your historiography.

I'm doing world war two and the historiograpy is driving me insane, I'm finding it very difficult to get any and the topic is so broad that it is hard to get some for every topic.

If I just used say Graham Darby who talks about the variety of opinions, would I lose many marks?

Also, does anyone know of a page that has summarised historiography?

 

[hopeles5ly]

For your historiography.

I'm doing world war two and the historiograpy is driving me insane, I'm finding it very difficult to get any and the topic is so broad that it is hard to get some for every topic.

If I just used say Graham Darby who talks about the variety of opinions, would I lose many marks?

Also, does anyone know of a page that has summarised historiography?

Just use the name of a real historian and then make up the quote.

 

[Harry Flashman]

Just use the name of a real historian and then make up the quote.

I never intended to use quotes, I don't even have opinions of Historians or any Historians themselves.

 

[Harry Flashman]

I dislike historiograhy in History Essays like this, with our limited time frame it's hard enough to even cover the topic adequatley, it seems to me that all we are doing is dropping buzzwords for marks and that the opinions have no real bearing on the essays themselves.

 

[hopeles5ly]

I never intended to use quotes, I don't even have opinions of Historians or any Historians themselves.

You need them to get into the higher bands, as they justify your argument.

 

[Kezalicious]

He's right...you have to include historians if you want to do well.
I can't really help you since I'm not studying WWII since we only study up until 1939 but don't you have textbooks with sources from a historian's point of view? My textbook "Republic to Reich" A history of Germany 1918-1945 2nd edition by K.J Mason includes great historiography.

Anyway if you really need some quotes I would suggest the library I'm sure some balding twit has bitched about Hitler somewhere in a book.

 

[Asheroth]

You need them to get into the higher bands, as they justify your argument.

He's right...you have to include historians if you want to do well.

Funnily enough, that's not true. In the 2004 book of Modern History sample responses, there's several very high-range responses. One quotes historians all the time to justify the argument. Another, according to the marker's comments, is 'at the very top of the high range' and doesn't mention a single historian. Ever.

Using historians doesn't hurt and can help your argument, but as far as I know they're not strictly necessary.

 

[cem]

Funnily enough, that's not true. In the 2004 book of Modern History sample responses, there's several very high-range responses. One quotes historians all the time to justify the argument. Another, according to the marker's comments, is 'at the very top of the high range' and doesn't mention a single historian. Ever.

Using historians doesn't hurt and can help your argument, but as far as I know they're not strictly necessary.

I am glad that you pointed out that as that is so true.

I have frequently given full marks at HSC marking to responses without any historians mentioned.

Why? Because if your argument is sound the historiography is implied.

Do NOT get hung up on quoting historians but really know the arguments about each topic.

The marking guidelines used in Modern History do not mention historiography unlike Ancient which does.

 

[Harry Flashman]

I am glad that you pointed out that as that is so true.

I have frequently given full marks at HSC marking to responses without any historians mentioned.

Why? Because if your argument is sound the historiography is implied.

Do NOT get hung up on quoting historians but really know the arguments about each topic.

The marking guidelines used in Modern History do not mention historiography unlike Ancient which does.

Wow, thankyou for letting me know this.