The Major Work! Tips from a 2016 survivor :)

[bellerina]

Oh my gosh! Awesome 
Well hey, if we go back to the 'What is History' part of history extension...what is the best way to study for it?

[sudodds]

Oh my gosh! Awesome 
Well hey, if we go back to the 'What is History' part of history extension...what is the best way to study for it?

No worries! In terms of Section I it is very difficult to study. There isn't really "core content" in the same way that you get for modern or ancient - the topic is interpretive and while one school might place a particular focus on postmodernism, others might look more closely at the British Marxist Historians! Thus annotated readings are imo the best method of writing notes. Practice papers as well are a MUST. A history extension essay is so different from any other HSC essay you can receive, so the more practice you get the better!

Finally and probably most importantly you need to DEVELOP A VOICE! I'm your responses your own voice and opinion must be shining through, otherwise it is just a list of Historians and opinions. Debate and discussion with others is soooo helpful and important Highly recommend checking out the History Extension Debate Thread if you want help developing your voice. If there was one thread I'd recommend to history extension students above all else it would be that. (on my phone so unfortunately can't link )

Hope this helps!

Susie

[jadzia26]

This is literally an amazing guide
I feel like I'm getting confused with historiography in the context of my topic, even though we did a whole unit of it I worry I dont properly focus on historiography in the right way consistently throughout.
How can i ensure my essay doesnt kind of stray away from the main ideas?
Also how can I avoid rambling and repeating myself when re-addressing points and linking to the question? (I'm not very good with word sophistication so I always end up rewording or saying something similar that sounds repetitive)

[sudodds]

This is literally an amazing guide
I feel like I'm getting confused with historiography in the context of my topic, even though we did a whole unit of it I worry I dont properly focus on historiography in the right way consistently throughout.
How can i ensure my essay doesnt kind of stray away from the main ideas?
Also how can I avoid rambling and repeating myself when re-addressing points and linking to the question? (I'm not very good with word sophistication so I always end up rewording or saying something similar that sounds repetitive)

Yay! I'm so glad that you found it useful!!
The best way in my opinion is to literally structure it around the historiographical ideas, rather than around the content of your topic. It's impossible to not write historiography, if the basis of one of your paragraphs is literally the implication of popular culture of the interpretations of your topic, or the nature of truth in relation to your topic, etc. etc. In terms of rambling - not gonna lie, I don't think I ever perfected that when it came to history extension, however my best advice would be to make sure that no matter what you are writing, it is answering the question. If you stray to far off the question, that is when you're entering dangerous, rambling territory!

Hope this helps!

Susie

[olr1999]

The syllabus says for the synopsis we must 'describe the development of the precise question that provides the focus of the essay.' Does this mean we must talk about how our question has changed and what it started with or am I on totally the wrong track? Thanks!

[sudodds]

The syllabus says for the synopsis we must 'describe the development of the precise question that provides the focus of the essay.' Does this mean we must talk about how our question has changed and what it started with or am I on totally the wrong track? Thanks!

Hmmmm, for me, my synopsis was my introduction! So I just expanded upon what a traditional introduction would look like. I provided an outline for the basis of my question (explaining the concept of the interpenetration of opposites), and then explaining how I would go about answering my question. I personally didn't talk about how my question changed - that was more so reflected throughout my logbook. I have read many synopsis' that detail how you came to your final question however, such as being like "I was intensely interested in ___________, which led me to ___________________", that kinda thing

[katie,rinos]

The syllabus says for the synopsis we must 'describe the development of the precise question that provides the focus of the essay.' Does this mean we must talk about how our question has changed and what it started with or am I on totally the wrong track? Thanks!

For mine, I just added a sentence about it in my synopsis which was  'I came to this question after first researching how much the German population knew about the Holocaust, and then realising that thousands of Germans were actively involved in the murder of the Jewish people.' I think that if your going to address it in the synopsis it doesn't really have to be huge.

[jadzia26]

For mine, I just added a sentence about it in my synopsis which was  'I came to this question after first researching how much the German population knew about the Holocaust, and then realising that thousands of Germans were actively involved in the murder of the Jewish people.' I think that if your going to address it in the synopsis it doesn't really have to be huge.

My teacher has described the synopsis to us as an overview of your logbook kind of. So showing how you got to your topic and what influenced you I guess, showing your progression towards your final product

[olr1999]

Hmmmm, for me, my synopsis was my introduction! So I just expanded upon what a traditional introduction would look like. I provided an outline for the basis of my question (explaining the concept of the interpenetration of opposites), and then explaining how I would go about answering my question. I personally didn't talk about how my question changed - that was more so reflected throughout my logbook. I have read many synopsis' that detail how you came to your final question however, such as being like "I was intensely interested in ___________, which led me to ___________________", that kinda thing

For mine, I just added a sentence about it in my synopsis which was  'I came to this question after first researching how much the German population knew about the Holocaust, and then realising that thousands of Germans were actively involved in the murder of the Jewish people.' I think that if your going to address it in the synopsis it doesn't really have to be huge.

My teacher has described the synopsis to us as an overview of your logbook kind of. So showing how you got to your topic and what influenced you I guess, showing your progression towards your final product

Awesome, thank you so much!

[sudodds]

For future reference, this was my synopsis

Spoiler

This essay asks the reader to reflect upon the current state of the Historical Discipline through the lens of Hegelian Maoism, particularly in regards to the dialectical theory of the Interpenetration of Opposites. Within On Contradiction, Mao Tse-Tung explores the law of contradiction as the fundamental basis of dialectical materialist thought, and establishes the basic principle – as influenced by the works of Marx, Engels and Lenin – that all processes will inevitably transform into their opposites, due to the internal contradictions that interplay.

Throughout the essay, it will be argued that the Historical Discipline, from the age of Historical Empiricism to present day, has been experiencing this inevitable transition into its “opposite” – transforming from a discipline where the primary goal was the search for an objective truth (whether that was possible, even then was up for debate by pioneers of historical objectivity) to one that often places historical truth secondary to other aims, or even, according to postmodernists, as an impossibility. This will be argued through analysing the role of the linguistic turn and the introduction of the “bottom-up” approach within the discipline, and how despite expanding History in regards to introducing new ideas, subject areas and audience, they are contributing to History’s inevitable transition through distorting the role and purpose of history, and validating imagination as a legitimate tool of historical enquiry. This essay will examine the consequences of this transition through analysing how these distortions have been exploited by popular historian Bill O’Reilly, whereby despite his “vast carelessness pollut[ing] history and debas[ing] the historian’s craft,” he must still be considered a legitimate historian as the basis of a legitimate historian has been perverted so much that it is now impossible to discern.

[olr1999]

For future reference, this was my synopsis

Spoiler

This essay asks the reader to reflect upon the current state of the Historical Discipline through the lens of Hegelian Maoism, particularly in regards to the dialectical theory of the Interpenetration of Opposites. Within On Contradiction, Mao Tse-Tung explores the law of contradiction as the fundamental basis of dialectical materialist thought, and establishes the basic principle – as influenced by the works of Marx, Engels and Lenin – that all processes will inevitably transform into their opposites, due to the internal contradictions that interplay.

Throughout the essay, it will be argued that the Historical Discipline, from the age of Historical Empiricism to present day, has been experiencing this inevitable transition into its “opposite” – transforming from a discipline where the primary goal was the search for an objective truth (whether that was possible, even then was up for debate by pioneers of historical objectivity) to one that often places historical truth secondary to other aims, or even, according to postmodernists, as an impossibility. This will be argued through analysing the role of the linguistic turn and the introduction of the “bottom-up” approach within the discipline, and how despite expanding History in regards to introducing new ideas, subject areas and audience, they are contributing to History’s inevitable transition through distorting the role and purpose of history, and validating imagination as a legitimate tool of historical enquiry. This essay will examine the consequences of this transition through analysing how these distortions have been exploited by popular historian Bill O’Reilly, whereby despite his “vast carelessness pollut[ing] history and debas[ing] the historian’s craft,” he must still be considered a legitimate historian as the basis of a legitimate historian has been perverted so much that it is now impossible to discern.

Thank you, that helps a lot.
It sounds like your major work would have helped you so so much with the What Is History unit!

[sudodds]

Thank you, that helps a lot.
It sounds like your major work would have helped you so so much with the What Is History unit!

No worries! Yes it definitely did! My final What is History essay in the exam featured a lot of the same historians and arguments. If you can find a link, I highly recommend incorporating your major work throughout your What is History essays, as you'll be experts on that aspect of the course, and is where you can really demonstrate your voice, rather than the preprepared structure that most people use where they just write a chronology of the different approaches to history (eg. the ancient historians did it like this. then the enlightenment historians did it like this. and then the postmodernists did it like this etc. etc.). Speaking of major works - I'll get back to looking at yours now

[jadzia26]

I wrote a draft and I've been trying to add to it all week but I'm stuck and i don't know how to get it moving again!
sooo frustrating i told myself i would have this finished so i could be editing and getting teacher feedback but at this rate don't think that'll be happening.
Also frustrating because really there isn't THAT much to add i just cannot figure out how it's totally escaped my mind and not working 

[sudodds]

I wrote a draft and I've been trying to add to it all week but I'm stuck and i don't know how to get it moving again!
sooo frustrating i told myself i would have this finished so i could be editing and getting teacher feedback but at this rate don't think that'll be happening.
Also frustrating because really there isn't THAT much to add i just cannot figure out how it's totally escaped my mind and not working 

Hey! If there is anything we can help you with, please let us know Post your problems, and we'll all be able to band our heads together, and try and come up with a solution Also, just because it isn't finished, doesn't mean you can't still send a copy to your teacher and ask for some feedback Last year I'd sometimes just send a paragraph or two to mine, and that worked really well because rather than focusing on the whole essay, we were able to both go really in depth of one particular aspect of my idea, making sure that it was as strong as it could be! They'll always be something to add - history extension is a never ending process, there's always some other rabbit hole we can fall down don't fret

[bella1001]

Awesome! this had so many tips, thanks so much! im looking at the way women are represented in the male dominated field of historiography! It's very interesting