This discussion is now closed.

Check out other Related discussions

Historian Help

Scroll to see replies

Reply 40

Jerby

xx_ambellina_xx

It's not, but to be honest if you apply to Cambridge then you have to expect to work.

Good lord, you have to work to get a respected degree! :p:

Reply 41

xx_ambellina_xx

Jerby

Good lord, you have to work to get a respected degree! :p:

Well, I just thought I'd lay the cards on the table. I wish someone had told me exactly what to expect before coming up.

Reply 42

JohnStuartMill

*Di*

Actually it quite annoys me that the Pol&Const and the Econom&Soc papers have to be from the same period.

Do they?

Reply 43

*Di*

It's not a course requirement, but when I talked to my DoS, she said that everybody does them in the same period.

Reply 44

Wnn

5-12 books :eek:

I usually find that if I read more than 2 books in a week, I forget everything I've read. Especially history books!

For an example, with the Russian Revolution they recommend you read Figes' ''A People's Tragedy''. They can't possibly mean all 900 pages?! Can they? :redface:

Reply 45

musicbloke

Wnn

5-12 books :eek:

Well in terms of pages, you're probably looking at reading 1000-1500 pages a week in term time.

MB

Reply 46

FadeToBlackout

OK, I'll let you into a secret.

The way Historians read is different to other reading you may have done.

For starters, we'll rarely read the whole of the book. Looking at Figes, for example, chances arethat not all of it is relevant. If we were looking at, for example, Stalin in power 1937-1945 or something, we'd probably check the table of contents for the most relevant chapter/s, skim through them, and then re-read in detail and take notes if there's anything worth taking. That plus introduction and conclusion, skimmed and then detailedif needed, means you can get through the book quickly. I would also check out book reviews on Jstor.

Everyone works differently, and after a term or so you will have settleddoen to it and found the methodof "gutting" to be quick and easy.

Below is the bibliography from an essay that I chose randomly:

Bibliography

· “Hope And Glory”, Clarke.
· “The People’s Peace”, Morgan.
· “Postwar Welfare”, Lowe, in “20th Century Britain”, Johnson.
· “Employment, Education and Human Capital”, Mahony, in EHB, Floud and Johnson.
· “The Welfare State, Welfare and Income Standards”, Johnson, in EHB, Floud and Johnson.
· “The Five Giants”, Timmins.
· “The welfare State in Britain since 1945, Lowe.
· “Housing the People”, Ravetz, in “Labour’s promised land”, Fryth.
· “The feckless Mother”, Starkey, in Women’s History review 9.
· “The Equalising of Wealth in Britain since the Second World War”, Feinstein.
· “Enterprise and Welfare States”, Harris, in TRHS.
· “Labour Party General Election Manifestos, 1900-1997”, Dale (ed.)

Its not as detailed as perhaps it should have been- seeing as it was written some 30 seconds before the deadline- but this would be the minimum standard expected.

Of which the whole books are:

•

“Hope And Glory”, Clarke.
“The People’s Peace”, Morgan.
“The Five Giants”, Timmins.
“The welfare State in Britain since 1945, Lowe.
“The Equalising of Wealth in Britain since the Second World War”, Feinstein.
“Labour Party General Election Manifestos, 1900-1997”, Dale (ed.)

Which were skimmed and gutted. The first two had useful chapters, but were not too useful and detailed on the whole, whereas the Timmins book was and I looked at that in detail, likewise with Lowe. With the collection of manifestos, obviously only the relevant two or three (And they were shorter, about 3 pages long, back in the 50s, as opposed to the 2-300 page modern behemoths)

Chapters from books: (EHB = "Cambridge Economic History of Modern Britain Vol.3")

•

“Postwar Welfare”, Lowe, in “20th Century Britain”, Johnson.
“Employment, Education and Human Capital”, Mahony, in EHB, Floud and Johnson.
“The Welfare State, Welfare and Income Standards”, Johnson, in EHB, Floud and Johnson.
“Housing the People”, Ravetz, in “Labour’s promised land”, Fryth.

As you can see, the one book (EHB) provided three detailed chapters, all of which were useful.

Moving on finally to journal articles:

•

“The feckless Mother”, Starkey, in Women’s History review 9.
“Enterprise and Welfare States”, Harris, in TRHS.

The latter is the Transactions of the Royal Historical Society journal.

Incidentally, that bit should be far more detailed than it is.

So of the daunting-looking bibliography, only two books were read in any great detail cover-to-cover. The others were skimmed to find useful bits, and gutted. Other than this, they're all short articles or chapters, all of which are very manageable.

As I say, everyone works differently. I've got a new method of doing things at the moment involving photocopying, which as I say means the details are still to hand. Highlighting bits, too, is quicker, easier and more efficient than writing out longhand notes.

Reply 47

Jerby

Wow, thanks for the explanation. That sounds more manageable, although definitely an acquired skill! Unsurprisingly, it seems you have to be very discerning and motivated to make the deadlines.

Reply 48

Camford

musicbloke

Well in terms of pages, you're probably looking at reading 1000-1500 pages a week in term time.

MB

That's more than the total number of pages of book I've read so far in two year....

Reply 49

FadeToBlackout

I would say that motivation is perhaps the biggest thing you need for History, as there is so little that is compulsory and all the rest depends on you. For example, you may only have 5 or 6 lectures a week, and even they are optional. As they clashed with essay deadlines, I generally opted out. Anyway, the weekly essay is your major piece of work and should take up the majority of your time. If you're not motivated, its all too easy to put it off and procrastinate and do nothing for 4 days of the 6 you have, and end up having to do it in two marathon sessions. Trust me, this isn't good...

I wouldn't say I was motivated as such, more conscientious. For example, although I can never start an essay and hate doing the actual work; I could get a blue in procrastination. Nevertheless, my conscience used to continually nag and I'd get the work done at the end of the day.

Basically, yeah. It is all down to you, and that is one of the hardest thigns to learn and get used to.

Reply 50

White_redrose

FadeToBlackout

I wouldn't say I was motivated as such, more conscientious. For example, although I can never start an essay and hate doing the actual work; I could get a blue in procrastination. Nevertheless, my conscience used to continually nag and I'd get the work done at the end of the day.

Basically, yeah. It is all down to you, and that is one of the hardest thigns to learn and get used to.

Definitely...the realisation grows as the deadline approaches and you realise it really does have to be done now...so when I've pulled an all-nighter I can still be sitting there at 2am, having written, say, the intro, with the essay in for 8am, and still messing around on the internet or whatever. (by 5am I get serious). So, soon -to-be freshers, motivation isn't always easy, for me and most of the people I know at Cam anyway. Even if I love a topic/period in history I still have to push myself. It takes time to get a grip on things, study skills, essays and so on, but you will all get used to it (I know it's easy for us to say that now but we were in your position this time last year after all) and it'll all become second nature to you eventually. :smile:

Reply 51

FadeToBlackout

And something else I think I should mention;

If you want to talk to any of us about how essays should be, show examples maybe or things then I'm sure that would be OK. I mean, the worst thing for me as a fresher was I had no idea what History was like- and, trust me, it is VERY different to AS and A2. I may write a guide one day... anyway, no-one ever said to me "this is what your essay should be like", or "this is too much workload", or "the main focus should be your own argument WITH EXAMPLES, NOT Historiography" (Which is the biggest change and the one that took me the longest to get).

Basically, I, and I'm sure the others will too, am here to offer support, as well as your DoS, subject reps and supervisors and so on.

Reply 52

Wnn

I'd be appreciative if you could post a sample/example of the type of essay I'd be expected to write.

Reply 53

Jerby

I'd be grateful if you could do that as well.

Reply 54

Jerby

What happened to all the posts after this - were they deleted for some reason?

Reply 55

Wnn

Yeah I noticed that as well. Like they were never there at all.

Reply 56

FadeToBlackout

Don't worry, its because its a bad idea to leave essays on the net and in the open, like on this subforum, as that leads to the possibility of plagiarism which neither I nor TSR want.

Reply 57

Jerby

Of course, I understand. Thanks for putting it up though - I found it helpful at the time. (Though I'm not sure TSR agress with you - look at the adverts for coursework.info! :eek:

)

Reply 58

JohnStuartMill

BUMP: Does Paper 17 (European History 1715-1890) satisfy the post 1750 condition seeing as it is partially before and partially afterwards?

I have to get my choices in by Friday and for first year am looking to do 4, 9 and 16 and want to know which options I have open for post 1750 in my second year.