Synopsis! Help, opinions, suggestions!!! (1 Viewer)

[*Ya_So_CuTe*]

Hey all!
Similar to 'aliasfan', my major work is also due in a week and i jst wanted to know if my synopsis shows im on the right track! the essay is coming..slowly but surely !
Would be appreciated if ppl could jst read this and give me their first impressions

 

[Cityboy]

If anything you have done too much, I did something similar for my proposal but was slightly shorter than yours but in terms of what was in the proposal it is almost exactly the same and I got 5 out of 5 for mine. However you have left out where your project fits into the extension history major work guidelines.

 

[xeuyrawp]

Hey-

A very good start.

With the formatting, I really dislike the whole aesthetics thing that's happening. The titles' are cool, but the whole dot points are freaking me out. Furthermore, what's with the indenting, can't you put a paragraph space between paragraphs? Do you want to save paper that much?

What's with the bolding? It's very annoying. I know you want to emphasise some things, but just write boldly (pardon the pun) and with certainty.

With referencing, can you just look at one of the other threads? In short, when you type you EITHER underline or italicise. Generally the latter, because underlining is what you do when you can't italicise. No quotation marks around book names. The name comes first.

hence: “ The Petrov Affair- Politics and Espionage” , By Robert Manne, Pergamon Press Sydney,1987

becomes: R Manne, The Petrov Affair- Politics and Espionage, Pergamon Press, Sydney, 1987.

Making the first name an initial is purely choice, but I do it because lots of people don't give their whole name.

RE your question: I really like your actual question and how you're going to approach it. You seem to have the research and the focus totally done, which makes you further ahead than anybody else's work I've read. You can do a good job in a week

If you want to talk further so I can help you more, add me to msn, or feel free to email me your work so I can have a look over it.

 

[*Ya_So_CuTe*]

If anything you have done too much, I did something similar for my proposal but was slightly shorter than yours but in terms of what was in the proposal it is almost exactly the same and I got 5 out of 5 for mine. However you have left out where your project fits into the extension history major work guidelines.

Hey thanks, I knew i had to put that in somewhere but forgot! seeing as i did the proposal ages ago. Thanks for the reminder

 

[*Ya_So_CuTe*]

Thanks for the offer!

Hey-

A very good start.

With the formatting, I really dislike the whole aesthetics thing that's happening. The titles' are cool, but the whole dot points are freaking me out. Furthermore, what's with the indenting, can't you put a paragraph space between paragraphs? Do you want to save paper that much?

What's with the bolding? It's very annoying. I know you want to emphasise some things, but just write boldly (pardon the pun) and with certainty.

With referencing, can you just look at one of the other threads? In short, when you type you EITHER underline or italicise. Generally the latter, because underlining is what you do when you can't italicise. No quotation marks around book names. The name comes first.

hence: “ The Petrov Affair- Politics and Espionage” , By Robert Manne, Pergamon Press Sydney,1987

becomes: R Manne, The Petrov Affair- Politics and Espionage, Pergamon Press, Sydney, 1987.

Making the first name an initial is purely choice, but I do it because lots of people don't give their whole name.

RE your question: I really like your actual question and how you're going to approach it. You seem to have the research and the focus totally done, which makes you further ahead than anybody else's work I've read. You can do a good job in a week

If you want to talk further so I can help you more, add me to msn, or feel free to email me your work so I can have a look over it.

I shall take you up on it in a few days when I have a first draft done.
* Fingers crossed*, but yes i do have the research totally done, Just a matter of putting it all together now
P.S: Thanks for the editing advice. Mostly appreciated

 

[bonniejjj]

However you have left out where your project fits into the extension history major work guidelines.

Hi... I know this is advice for somebody else, but I read this and I'm worried that my synopsis might not address this. I completed my third (and final) draft yesterday, and I was planning to take it to the printers and get it bound today... would someone be able to read my synopsis and tell me if it's adequate??

 

[xeuyrawp]

Hi... I know this is advice for somebody else, but I read this and I'm worried that my synopsis might not address this. I completed my third (and final) draft yesterday, and I was planning to take it to the printers and get it bound today... would someone be able to read my synopsis and tell me if it's adequate??

Hey. That's very good. I'm affraid I can't give any feedback to you, other than saying it's good, because I have no understanding about the topic area.

 

[bonniejjj]

Sorry about that PwarYuex, I can see how its hard to evaluate when it was rather out of context. But thank you for the feedback. My focus questions is "How did the imperial coronation of Charlemagne affect the old power structure that existed between the Roman papacy, the Frankish King in the West, and the Byzantine Emperor in the East?" Today I took my assignment to be bound and I'm now back... I think I've done a good job so I'm just going to stop stressing and leave it alone. It's due on tuesday; actually I'm glad I've bound it because it means I can't work on it any more and will devote some time to the other work I need to get done before the end of the holidays!

 

[xeuyrawp]

Sorry about that PwarYuex, I can see how its hard to evaluate when it was rather out of context. But thank you for the feedback. My focus questions is "How did the imperial coronation of Charlemagne affect the old power structure that existed between the Roman papacy, the Frankish King in the West, and the Byzantine Emperor in the East?" Today I took my assignment to be bound and I'm now back... I think I've done a good job so I'm just going to stop stressing and leave it alone. It's due on tuesday; actually I'm glad I've bound it because it means I can't work on it any more and will devote some time to the other work I need to get done before the end of the holidays!

Well I'm glad I could be of reassurance

It is a good work, and I know you'll do well!

 

[Cityboy]

Can someone take a look at my intro see if im on the right track


On August 6th 1945 the world was changed forever as America dropped the first ever atomic bomb on the city of Hiroshima on Japan’s in order to defeat the Japanese in the War in the Pacific. After the dropping of this first bomb the Japanese did not immediately surrender and as such the Americans dropped a second bomb on the city of Nagasaki on August 9th 1945 causing an immediate surrender by Japan. Since the times of the dropping of these bombs there have been many differing views over the necessity of the dropping of the bombs to end the War in the Pacific and these differing views have formed one of the most intensely heated historical arguments of recent times. In this essay there will be a focus on the two main points of view the first being that the bombing was necessary to win the war and the second being it wasn’t. Also the reasons for these differing views will be discussed.

In the debate over the necessity of dropping the atomic bomb the first thing that must be established is the reasons for dropping the atomic bomb and how important these reasons were in 1945 for the dropping of the atomic bomb. The reasons given for the dropping of the atomic bomb differ depending on the view that the author has on the necessity of the bombing. Those that believe that the dropping was necessary put forward the arguments that the bomb was dropped to save both the lives of the American servicemen and the lives of the Japanese civilians and that the Japanese were starting their own atomic program to attack America with. Those that believe that the bombing was unjustified cite the reasons for the dropping of the atomic bomb as retribution for Pearl Harbour, racism, and for Truman to show himself as his own man and a worthy man to be President and not just FDR’s deputy.[/I]

 

[bonniejjj]

Hey Cityboy... I'm not sure if this is the introduction to the essay or the synopsis, but I think you're very much on the right track. I rewrote a few bits because in places it was unnecessarily repetitive (not a criticism because I'm sure this isn't the final draft, I'm just trying to be helpful.) Just a comment on this bit;
"In this essay there will be a focus on the two main points of view the first being that the bombing was necessary to win the war and the second being it wasn’t. Also the reasons for these differing views will be discussed."
If this is a synopsis, this is acceptable... if it is part of the actual essay I wouldn't write "in this essay..."
Also I wouldn't refer to President Roosevelt as FDR, at least in the first instance anyway.
"...show himself as his own man" Is this a bit informal? Correct me if I'm wrong...
Also I would suggest assume the marker is
"intelligent and critical enough to pick up shoddy arguments, to look for evidence for claims and to expect an essay that is logically presented and carefully checked for errors, but not so well-informed that students don't have to explain ideas in clear and simple terms to [them.]"
(Advice given by Marnie Hughes-Warrington in 'Marking Historiography' article in Teaching History March 2002)
So basically don't rely on assumed knowledge...
Anyway that's all from me, and hopefully that advice was of some use...


On August 6th 1945 the world was changed forever as America dropped the first ever atomic bomb on the Japanese city of Hiroshima in order to defeat the Japanese in the War in the Pacific. After the dropping of this first bomb the Japanese did not immediately surrender and as such the Americans dropped a second bomb on the city of Nagasaki on August 9th 1945. This had the desired effect of an immediate surrender by Japan. Since these events there have been many differing views over the necessity of the dropping of the bombs to end the War in the Pacific and these differing views have formed one of the most intensely heated historical arguments of recent times. In this essay there will be a focus on the two main opposing points of view; the first being that the bombing was necessary to win the war and the second being it wasn’t, and a discussion of the reasons for these differing views.

In the debate over the necessity of dropping the atomic bomb the first thing that must be established is the reasons for dropping the atomic bomb and how important these reasons were in 1945. The reasons given differ depending on the view that the historian has on the necessity of the bombing. Those that believe that the dropping was necessary put forward the arguments that the bomb was dropped to save both the lives of the American servicemen and the lives of the Japanese civilians as the Japanese were starting their own atomic program in order to launch an attack on America. Those that believe the bombing was unjustified cite the reasons for the dropping of the atomic bomb as retribution for Pearl Harbour, racism, and an opportunity for American vice-president Truman to show himself as his own man, worthy to be President and not just Franklin D. Roosevelt's deputy.

 

[xeuyrawp]

Hey Cityboy... I'm not sure if this is the introduction to the essay or the synopsis, but I think you're very much on the right track. I rewrote a few bits because in places it was unnecessarily repetitive (not a criticism because I'm sure this isn't the final draft, I'm just trying to be helpful.) Just a comment on this bit;
"In this essay there will be a focus on the two main points of view the first being that the bombing was necessary to win the war and the second being it wasn’t. Also the reasons for these differing views will be discussed."
If this is a synopsis, this is acceptable... if it is part of the actual essay I wouldn't write "in this essay..."
Also I wouldn't refer to President Roosevelt as FDR, at least in the first instance anyway.
"...show himself as his own man" Is this a bit informal? Correct me if I'm wrong...
Also I would suggest assume the marker is
"intelligent and critical enough to pick up shoddy arguments, to look for evidence for claims and to expect an essay that is logically presented and carefully checked for errors, but not so well-informed that students don't have to explain ideas in clear and simple terms to [them.]"
(Advice given by Marnie Hughes-Warrington in 'Marking Historiography' article in Teaching History March 2002)
So basically don't rely on assumed knowledge...
Anyway that's all from me, and hopefully that advice was of some use...

That's good advice

Marnie Hughes-Warrintong is my historiography lecturer at uni!

 

[bonniejjj]

That's good advice

Marnie Hughes-Warrintong is my historiography lecturer at uni!

Thank you... and wOw! Thats so cool. I know people who aren't interested in history wouldn't care, but I get so excited about the prospect of meeting a real historian. When the HTA study days were on in Sydney, my class and I flew down to attend- and I got to meet Gae Callender! She was so amazing and I talked to her for ages after the lecture and Wow. I guess I just get a little starstruck... Ok thats was totally unrelated to this forum but ah well =)

 

[xeuyrawp]

Thank you... and wOw! Thats so cool. I know people who aren't interested in history wouldn't care, but I get so excited about the prospect of meeting a real historian. When the HTA study days were on in Sydney, my class and I flew down to attend- and I got to meet Gae Callender! She was so amazing and I talked to her for ages after the lecture and Wow. I guess I just get a little starstruck... Ok thats was totally unrelated to this forum but ah well =)

Gae Callender is really cool, she knows my name after talking with me 3 times

I feel so special, yet so nerdy at the same time. She does a lot of HSC marking, and setting of the questions, and apparently she yells out "I didn't say this!" a lot at the marking centre when she sees a fake quote

Marnie's really great, and was probably my most interesting and bright lecturers that I've had thus far. She's really on the ball, but also knows how to teach, which is probably due to her being an ex-teacher.