PSS ESSAY WORKSHOPGurminder 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:

BookMcLennan, Gregor 2006. Sociological Cultural Studies. Basingstoke:

Palgrave MacMillan ArticleWittrock, Bjorn 1998. ‘Early Modernities: Varieties and Transitions’,

Daedalus: Early Modernities summer 127 (3): 19-40 Chapter in an Edited BookSpivak, Gayatri Chakravorty 1990. ‘Post-structuralism, Marginality,

Postcoloniality and Value’, in Peter Collier and Helga Geyer-Ryan (eds) Literary Theory Today. Cambridge: Polity Press

 WebsiteDimitrijevic, 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.