historiography & band 6 responses (1 Viewer)

[Born Dancer]

i know this has come up many a time before, but when i went to a hsc day, a senior examiner told us that you can still get a band six without historiography. this confused me.. isnt it part of the syllabus??

 

[rama_v]

Yes, it is possibel to get a band six provided that it is an excellent response. However keep in mind that an essay which has histroiography is much more likely to get into teh band six range than an essay without it. The lesson? Include historiography ine very essay to maximise your chances of a band six.

Keep in midn however that there are very few historians (sometimes almost none) for some of the international studies, so I don't think you will be penalised for not including them in your essay in that section (of course it depends on the topic, because I know for the UN there's pretty much no historians at all, so I ended up making up quotes and tagging a real historians name onto them ).

 

[suger_plum]

use historiography,
i do extension and it really helps my marks in modern and ancient!
although i have a personal vendetta against historiography (stupid stuff)
it raises ur marks considerably
it is possible to get a band 6 without it.
however itd wanna be a bloody good answer

 

[sunjet]

yea i got like 1000 quotes for germany and our teacher says use a quote for everyday paragraph, but for indochina he says maybe if any put 1-2 for the whole essay and hes a senior marker

 

[marwanjamiel]

I'm new to this system.

What is a historiography?

 

[sunjet]

Giving a historians view on an issue, usually supported by a quote.

 

[Harry Flashman]

Is it really necessary to use specific quotes? For example if I said something like "Terry Buggy argues that the GMD's failure to deal with the Japanese, contrasted with CCP willingness to fight was one of the key reasons that they fell in 1945" would that be acceptable?

 

[The Brucemaster]

Is it really necessary to use specific quotes? For example if I said something like "Terry Buggy argues that the GMD's failure to deal with the Japanese, contrasted with CCP willingness to fight was one of the key reasons that they fell in 1945" would that be acceptable?

Yeah I think that would be fine. I actually got marked down in my half yearly for quoting too much so you've got to find a balance I guess. As long as you make the markers aware that you are aware of various historical opinions then you're sweet.

 

[cem]

The Ancient History syllabus specifies the different interpretations of ancient and modern sources in most topics of that syllabus.

In Modern History there is no mention of this.

It is perfectly possible to get full marks for an essay without any overt historiography.

I have given full marks at HSC marking on more occasions than I care to count to responses with no mention of historians by name.

If you know your stuff AND you are able to argue your points solidly the historiography will be implied and therefore you will get the credit.


Too often I have read essays that are simply 'so and so says....' but 'so and so disagrees...' with no real argument developed by the student.


A balance yes but don't get paranoid about it.


I tell me students two or three quotes at most to support their major argument and not to go overboard but to plan their response including their arguments on each point and then, if time in the planning stage add a note about an historian but if they don't get one for each point not to worry but to write the best response they can covering all the arguments.


Markers are told to remember that you are writing a first draft essay in 45 minutes and to give credit for what is there and not to deduct marks if something is missing. In other words if the arguments are all covered and it is worth a Band 6 mark then give it even if their is no specific historiography particularly as the marking guideline does not specifically refer to the need for naming historians.

 

[patchy20]

my history teacher says its better to paraphrase eg "historians such as joe brown argue that..........." and dont actually quote, because in my opinion remembering quotes takes up too much of my brain! but theres so many possible questions ....darn the new syllabus, so paraphrasing means you can remember like a whole bunch of historians, such as the structualists for germany.

 

[Bobness]

actually i've been told you can paraphrase AND quote i.e.

if you know ajp taylor's words were something similar to "american involvement in ww1 existed from the beginning and lead to the eventual downfall of the great Germany" then you can use "" because your essay IS a first draft and remembering a historian viewpoint is sufficient enough to be quoted

 

[nwatts]

it's all about the referencing my boy, quote or not

 

[Bobness]

why thank you my lad, helpful or not

tis true i believe i shall footnote mine in the future lolz