PSS ESSAY WORKSHOP Gurminder K Bhambra Wednesday 6th November, 2013 QUESTION: Discuss the strengths and limitations of the epistemological framework underpinning your planned research. Or a question agreed with your seminar tutor Deadline: 2pm, Tuesday 7th January, 2014 Electronic submission will be available by week 10 at the latest STRUCTURE: Title Introduction Main body Conclusion Bibliography References in Harvard style Limit use of footnotes REFERENCES: To give information, to illustrate a point, to present a particular perspective, to present an argument or counter-argument Support your argument with more than one source Select examples from a range of sources Be aware of the strengths and weaknesses of the evidence used Why reference? To show that you have researched your material To acknowledge the source of the information used To distinguish between your ideas and the ideas of others To provide support to your ideas HARVARD SYSTEM: The social scientists of the nineteenth century mostly operated with an idea of modernisation that endowed historical development with coherence (Iggers 1997). The general understanding of the modern world was thus premised on the idea of modernization as ‘a process of the global diffusion of Western civilisation and its key institutions’ (Wittrock 1998: 19). According to Bendix (1967), modernization theory rested on three related assumptions. BIBLIOGRAPHY: Should be presented in alphabetical order All books which are cited should be referenced Electronic articles available in print form, don’t need the url Follow standard conventions for the bibliography BIBLIOGRAPHY: Book McLennan, Gregor 2006. Sociological Cultural Studies. Basingstoke: Palgrave MacMillan Article Wittrock, Bjorn 1998. ‘Early Modernities: Varieties and Transitions’, Daedalus: Early Modernities summer 127 (3): 19-40 Chapter in an Edited Book Spivak, Gayatri Chakravorty 1990. ‘Post-structuralism, Marginality, Postcoloniality and Value’, in Peter Collier and Helga Geyer-Ryan (eds) Literary Theory Today. Cambridge: Polity Press Website Dimitrijevic, Nenad 2006. ‘Moral responsibility for collective crime’, Eurozine http://eurozine.com/pdf/2006-07-05-dimitrijevic-en.pdf accessed 23 June 2007 ACADEMIC INTEGRITY: Plagiarism is when you intentionally pass off someone else’s work as your own, be it from a published source or from the web or from another essay (your own or somebody else’s!) If you’re using words, phrases, ideas from someone else – reference them Turnitin – source matching software PRESENTATION: Word-processed Use clear English; no slang or jargon Good referencing; don’t italicise whole quotes Accurate bibliography Clear layout Check spelling and grammar and punctuation ADDITIONAL POINTS: Avoid using a ‘patchwork’ of quotations Clear sign-posting Balance of narrative and analysis Limit use of lecture and seminar notes in the essay Review and revise Dealing with complicated arguments requires a simplification in your presentation of those arguments Proof-read ADDITIONAL POINTS: Marks are for the quality of the essay, not for the individual writing the essay You have to be confused in order to grapple with essays – that’s why you NEED TIME to write them so that you can be confused, and then distil that confusion into clarity You’re only writing 3000 words – you’re reading many more words than that – you need to distil and edit – this takes time.