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.