Helpful Advice/Suggestions for Section 1 of the IA…
Advice on choosing sources:
One of the challenges of this section is to choose two sources from your investigation which target the criterion. The keywords are 'the student has identified and selected appropriate and relevant sources'.
- One way to think about this is to consider which two sources you have used most in your investigation. However, you may have relied on these two sources just because they helped you understand the topic best. These two sources may be quite similar in what they offered and thus you may be wise to consider just one of these and search for a more appropriate contrasting source.
- Another way is to consider which two sources are central to the contention of your question, or that contribute most to the debate. This begins to target the appropriate part of the criterion.
- Some sample responses indicated that a primary and secondary source are chosen in order to highlight differences in perspective on the topic. This can be helpful when you go to discuss the value and limitations of the sources for the investigation.
- It might be wise to evaluate a few of your sources before you settle on the two that will appear in this section.
- Much of your choice will hinge on the question you have chosen...remember to aim for a relatively narrow scope to your question.
PARAGRAPH #1
Research Question, Time Frame, Brief Justification
Step 1:Start the section with your question:
This investigation will answer the question, [insert question here].
Step 2:[Then state why you believe the question/investigation is important]
This question is important because...
Step 3:Next, specifically state thetime framespecific area of research]
Tip:Be sure to use the wordscope.
The scope of the investigation is...
Example:The scope of this investigation focuses on Nixon's years as U.S. president and his relationship toward Native Americans.
FIRST SOURCE-PARAGRAPH #2
Step 1:Include a sub-heading for the author and title of the first source. (See guidelines below for instructions on how to properly do this.)
Step 2: Write Paragraphs 2, 3 and 4.
First Source - Origins
Discuss the ORIGINS of the source and what the Values and/or Limitations of the ORIGINS are as related to your Research Question.
PARAGRAPH #3
First Source - Purpose
Discuss the PURPOSE of the source and what the Values and/or Limitations of the PURPOSE areas relatedto your Research Question.
PARAGRAPH #4
First Source - Content
Discuss the CONTENT of the source and what the Values and/or Limitations of the CONTENT areas relatedto your Research Question.
SECOND SOURCE-PARAGRAPH #5
Step 1:Include a sub-heading for the author and title of the second source.(See guidelines below for instructions on how to properly do this.)
Step 2:Write Paragraphs 5, 6 and 7.
Second Source -Origins
Discuss the ORIGINS of the source and what the Values and/or Limitations of the ORIGINS areas relatedto your Research Question.
PARAGRAPH #6
Second Source -Purpose
Discuss the PURPOSE of the source and what the Values and/or Limitations of the PURPOSE areas relatedto your Research Question.
PARAGRAPH #7
Second Source -Content
Discuss the CONTENT of the source and what the Values and Limitations of the CONTENT areas relatedto your Research Question.
Sample A:
To what extent did World War II lead to women in United States becoming permanent participants of the labor force?
Section 1: Identification and Evaluation of sources
This investigation will explore the question: To what extent did World War II lead to women in the United States becoming permanent participants of the labor force? The years 1940 to 1950 will be the focus of this investigation, to allow for an analysis of women’s employment during the war, as well as its evolution in the post-war period.
The first source which will be evaluated in depth is Julia Kirk Blackwelder’s book “The Feminization of Work in the United States, 1900-1995”, written in 1997. The origin of this source is valuable because Blackwelder is a professor of history at Texas University, specializing in Modern US and American women’s history, and has written extensively on women’s employment in scholarly journals and books, indicating that she is knowledgeable on this topic. Furthermore, the date of the publication of this source, 1997, strengthens its value, as it indicates that Blackwelder, benefitting from hindsight, has been able to analyze a comprehensive range of sources, including government documents, interviews and statistics. However, the origin of the source is limited in that Blackwelder is not a professional expert in economics, with which this topic is closely related and, consequently, might have misinterpreted some of the economic data presented.
The purpose of Blackwelder’s book is to analyze the trends of American women’s employment in the 1900-1955 period, and “to let evidence speak for itself” (Blackwelder xiii). This is valuable, for it indicates that an extended period of time has been examined, permitting for connections to be made between the trends discovered. However, the fact that the author has covered nearly a century of economic developments limits its valueto a historian studying economic developments within a short time period.
The second source evaluated in depth is Mary Anderson’s 1944 address American Economic Association “The Postwar role of American women”, which was delivered in March, 1944. The origin of this source is valuable because the address was delivered by the head of the Women’s Bureau of the Department of Labor, and therefore provides an insight into the views of a well-known figure regarding women’s employment and post-war plans. Additionally, the date of delivery of the address, 1944, indicates that the source allows for a valuable understanding of contemporary views on women’s employment. However, this date is also a limitation, for it suggests that the source, having been written before the completion of the war, is likely to fail to analyze extensive research on women’s employment. In terms of origin, the source is also limited in that Anderson was herself a former factory worker and was “ particularly well attuned to the thinking of female employees” (Weatherford 256), indicating that she might have tended to shape the address according to her views, and, consequently, may have provided a slightly subjective insight into government plans.
The purpose of this source is to underscore the importance of the adoption of measures to secure the position of women in the American post-war workforce. The address therefore provides a valuable insight into government plans at the time. The source is, however, limited in its purpose in that the address, having been written to convince others of Anderson’s point of view, perhaps omits some ‘inconvenient truths’ about the government’s views, merely describing encouraging plans for female workers.
Sample B:
To what extent was martial law imposed in Poland on 13 December 1981 in order to pre-empt the military intervention of the USSR?”
Section 1: Identification and evaluation of sources
The investigation, examining the situation in Poland in 1980 and 1981, that is the economic conditions, dependence upon the USSR and the interactions between the Polish United Workers’ Party and Solidarity movement, will try to answer the question: To what extent was imposition of martial law in Poland on 13 December 1981 in order to pre-empt the military intervention of the USSR?
The two contemporary sources which will be evaluated are a script from the session of Politburo, they are relevant because they reflect the attitude of the USSR towards the situation in Poland, and the proclamation of martial law by General Jaruzelski, in which he argued why martial law had to be imposed in Poland.
Working notes from the Session of the CPSU CC Politburo:2
The origin of source 1 is the working notes from the session of the Politburo, presided by Leonid Brezhnev, on the question of the situation in Poland from December 10, 1981. It was kept by the secretary Chernenko, and published 26 years later in a collection of secret documentation. Its purpose was to record the secret meeting and it was intended only for use within the Politburo.
It is valuable because it shows the intentions of the USSR towards Poland in a period of a particular unrest. It reveals many details about the economic situation in Poland and a predicted Soviet financial aid, which were not, and would not have been, publicized by Polish authorities. A further value is it states the opinion of the USSR about invading Poland in 1981, expressed by Andropov: “We do not intend to introduce troops into Poland. […] even if Poland falls under control of
Solidarity, that’s the way it will be.”3 This strong statement renders Politburo’s treatment and attitude towards Poland. However, the formal nature of the document limits an insight into a process of reaching the agreement between the comrades. Only Andropov’s recollection of "a very thorough exchange of opinions", suggests limitations as the consensus did not emerge truly spontaneously and that the view regarding military intervention differed among the Politburo.4
Footnotes
2. Brezhnev, Leonid. "On the Question of the Situation in Poland", 10 December 1981. Cold War International History Project, Virtual Archive, CWIHP, May 14, 2008. Making the History of 1989. Web. Accessed: 28 November 2013.
3 Brezhnev, Leonid. "On the Question of the Situation in Poland", 10 December 1981. Cold War International History Project, Virtual Archive, CWIHP, May 14, 2008. Making the History of 1989. Web. Accessed: 28 November
2013, p.9
4 Brezhnev, Leonid. "On the Question of the Situation in Poland", 10 December 1981. Cold War International History Project, Virtual Archive, CWIHP, May 14, 2008. Making the History of 1989. Web. Accessed: 28 November 2013. Translator’s Note n.21
A proclamation of martial law by WojciechJaruzelski 5
The origin of source 2 is a speech was given by General WojciechJaruzelski on December 13, 1981 on the TV and radio. Its purpose was to explain the causes of the imposition of martial law. It described the current situation, the steps which had to be taken by the Party to counteract it, and the nature of the newly established Military Council for National Salvation.
The value of the speech is that it expresses the opinion of the communist Party about the culprit of the martial law. The General blamed solidarity for refusal of cooperation with the Party, and lack of any agreement on the reforms. A further value is that the speech is an example of the Party’s propaganda which manipulated with facts and language in order to obtain popular support and present the Party as the only seeker for cooperation.
Moreover, the speech is limited by lack of information on the numerous debts incurred by the government, and brutal repressions by the militia on Solidarity activists. Furthermore, the General called martial law ‘legal’, while in reality its introduction was against the Constitution.6 Another limitation is the mentioned list of ‘interned’, which, according to Jaruzelski’s memoirs, was unknown to him.7
Footnotes
5 Jaruzelski, Wojciech. „Przemówienieradioweitelewizyjnewygłoszone 13 grudnia 1981 r.” [„The speech addressed on December 13, 1981 on radio and television”]. Przemówienia 1981-1982. [Speeches 1981-1982]. KsiążkaiWiedza: Warszawa, 1983.
6 Gmyz, Cezary. “Nielegalnystanwojenny” [“The illegal martial law”]. Rzeczpospolita, 16 March 2011. Web. 17 December 2013
7 Jaruzelski, Wojciech. Stan wojenny. Dlaczego… [The state of war. Why…] PolskaOficynaWydawnicza „BGW”: Warszawa, 1992