Now that you have ‘Organised the Construction’ of your house, you need to get some experts in to give advice on the progress of the building of the house/your coursework.
What do we mean by ‘Getting More Expert Advice’?
We at The Coursework Club use ‘Getting More Expert Advice’ to refer to the need for you to include, what exam boards call, ‘historiography’ or ‘interpretation’. Historiography means the critical evaluation of historical events or issues. Essentially (for our purposes), it is what other academics have said about certain things in history: quotes, arguments, points of view, and interpretations.
Why should we include historiography and interpretation in our essays?
Apart from the fact that the exam boards will expect it, it is a crucial element of historical research and analysis. What it gives your work:
How far would you agree that the Domino Theory was the main reason JFK became involved in Vietnam?
Paragraph One:
The Domino Theory was evolved in the heightened Cold War atmosphere of the 1950's and, as US eyes turned towards Asia in the early 1960's, it was used by JFK as a justification for greater 'engagement' in Vietnam. The significance of the theory to Kennedy's involvement in Vietnam cannot be underestimated because it provided, as argued by Smith, "the strategic reasoning behind the need to protect non-communist countries in the region" from the supposedly inevitable, threat from the 'red tide'. The domino theory appeared, to many within JFK's administration, as a strategic truth and, when applied to Asia, 'revealed' the dangers of American non--intervention: sequential losses of country after country to communism.
A more complex example, using two opposing historical interpretations:
Paragraph One:
The Domino Theory was evolved in the heightened Cold War atmosphere of the 1950's and, as US eyes turned towards Asia in the early 1960's, it was used by JFK as a justification for greater 'engagement' in Vietnam. The significance of the theory to Kennedy's involvement in Vietnam cannot be underestimated because it provided, as argued by Smith, "the strategic reasoning behind the need to protect non-communist countries in the region" from the supposedly inevitable, threat from the 'red tide'. Jones, however, sees the domino theory as a simple (and untrue) piece of US propaganda, designed for nothing else but "...to convince the American people to agree to American intervention in Vietnam".
A more complex example, evaluating two opposing historical interpretations:
Paragraph One:
...The significance of the theory to Kennedy's involvement in Vietnam cannot be underestimated because it provided, as argued by Smith, "the strategic reasoning behind the need to protect non-communist countries in the region" from the supposedly inevitable, threat from the 'red tide'. Jones, however, sees the domino theory as a simple (and untrue) piece of US propaganda, designed for nothing else but "...to convince the American people to agree to American intervention in Vietnam".Clearly, Smith's argument holds more validity because it is supported by evidence such as... whereas Jones' view is critically limited due to...
A More Complex Example, Evaluating Two Opposing Historical Interpretations and Deciding Your View is More Accurate: (this is what you should be aiming for):
Paragraph One:
...The significance of the theory to Kennedy's involvement in Vietnam cannot be underestimated because it provided, as argued by Smith, "the strategic reasoning behind the need to protect non-communist countries in the region" from the supposedly inevitable, threat from the 'red tide'. Jones, however, sees the domino theory as a simple (and untrue) piece of US propaganda, designed for nothing else but "...to convince the American people to agree to American intervention in Vietnam". While both arguments hold a degree of validity, what Smith and Jones tend to neglect in their analysis of the domino theory as a cause of JFK's involvement is... Perhaps a more appropriate judgement would be that the domino theory was neither well reasoned nor a successful tool of US propaganda. In this respect, its value as a cause of involvement must be seen as limited, particularly when compared to...
Now that you have learned how to incorporate historical interpretation into your answer, the best way to remember to do it throughout your coursework, is to follow a basic rule:
Every paragraph should contain (where possible) at least:
Doing these things every paragraph will demonstrate your ‘ownership’ of the essay. (Remember that some exam boards may not require interpretation/historiography for all of their essays but it’s a valuable skill to remember for the future)
This section has shown you, using detailed and increasingly more sophisticated responses to the same coursework title, the importance of using historical interpretation in your answer. You have learned how to deploy historical interpretation, and how to successfully use it to confirm or contradict an historical debate. You have also learned how to use historians to contradict one another! Now, apply these skills to your work.
Access to all of the content here at The Coursework Club is FREE.