Transcript Week 4 Lecture slides File - Roehampton Moodle

HHSA020C123A: Research, Reasoning
and Rhetoric – Thinking with History
Lecture 4. Conducting Independent Research
– Using Academic Scholarship
Dr Ted Vallance
Session aims and structure
• Aims
– To enable you to find and use academic
scholarship effectively/appropriately
• Structure
• Lecture
– Pt 1. Types of historical literature
– Pt 2. Identifying relevant scholarship
– Pt 3. Understanding and evaluating historical
arguments
• Seminar task – Interpreting a historical controversy
Q. Why do historical
interpretations differ?
Task: The Chartist Rally,
Kennington Common 1848
• Estimates of
numbers at meeting
– Police: 15000
– Northern Star:
250,000
– Express, 10 April:
100,000
– Express, 11 April:
15000
Source: D. Goodway, London
Chartism, (Camb, 2002 edn.)
Daguerrotype of the Kennington Common
Meeting, 10 April 1848
Why do these estimates
differ?
• Bias – high figure Chartist Northern star, low figure
police
• Timing – when was the estimate of the crowd
numbers made?
• Scope of the meeting – did it only include those
inside the railings or those outside as well?
• So – analysing a source not just a case of separating
‘fact’ and ‘opinion’
• Not bias alone which determines these figures but
also the approach adopted – how and when to
calculate the size of the crowd
Historians offer arguments,
not opinions
• An opinion – ‘The music of One Direction is terrible.’
• An argument – ‘The music of 1D is highly derivative,
as we can see from the similarities between 1D’s
Best Song Ever and The Who’s Baba O’Riley.’
• An argument – a proposition supported/advanced
by/with evidence.
• The manner of reasoning and the type of evidence
can be examined and debated
Historiography and sources
• As we learnt in last week’s session, it is not enough
simply to read original sources
• Without an understanding of the broader historical
context, we will not be able interpret original sources
effectively
• Historiography can give us a better grasp of the
sources, make us aware of issues with them and help
us identify major areas of debate (questions of
significance)
Common resources at school
level
• Textbooks simplify,
summarise and
synthesise wider
historical
scholarship
• But at degree-level it
is not enough to
read the textbook
The textbook – staple of school
history teaching
The web
• Key resources
employed at school
level – BBC History;
Spartacus
Educational;
National Archives
Learning Curve
• and, of course
…wikipedia
• Pros – free &
extensive
• Cons – pitched at
too low a level for
degree study
• Cons – in some
cases
inaccurate/lack
attribution
Importance of
debate/controversy
• Problem with these
resources not only
reliability/accuracy/
scope
• Give the impression
that the end of
historical
scholarship is to
achieve a
consensus
Cromwell remains a historiographically
divisive figure
The Variety of Historical
Scholarship
• Academic scholarship
comes in a variety of
forms
– Monographs
– Research articles
– Review articles
– Websites/blogs/ ejournals
• Offer different forms of
analysis/different
viewpoints
Monographs are specialised, book-length
studies often developed from a PhD
Finding appropriate/relevant
scholarship
• Bibliographic
databases
– Academic Search
Premier
– JSTOR
– BBIH
• Library catalogues
• Google books and
Google scholar
Assessing quality/relevance
• Databases can sort
according to
relevance
• Note Google’s
algorithms linked to
page popularity
rather than
relevance
• Check– Is this a peerreviewed article?
– Does it come from a
reputable academic
press?
– If a web resource,
what are the
credentials of the
authors/host
institution?
Reminder: e-portfolio
• Your source
commentary should be
accompanied by a 10
item (minimum)
bibliography
• This should include a
range of materials
(books, articles,
websites)
• It must be properly
formatted
Evaluating scholarship
‘Know Your Historians?’
• "Study the historian before you begin to study the
facts. This is, after all, not very abstruse. It is what is
already done by the intelligent undergraduate who,
when recommended to read a work by that great
scholar Jones of St. Jude's, goes round to a friend at
St. Jude's to ask what sort of chap Jones is, and what
bees he has in his bonnet. When you read a work of
history, always listen out for the buzzing. If you can
detect none, either you are tone deaf or your
historian is a dull dog.” E. H. Carr, What is History?
(1961)
How do historians
evaluate/critique scholarship?
B.E.R.T.
• Bias
- Skewing argument?
• Evidence
– Sufficient/appropriate
?
• Reasoning
– Faulty?
• Theory/Methodology
– Applied sensitively?
The value of references
• Footnotes/endnotes and
bibliographies very important
to historical scholarship
• They support statements
with evidence and allow
readers to check that
evidence
• They acknowledge the work
of other scholars and
demonstrate the contribution
of that book/article to its field
How to read/use secondary
works
• Approach secondary
texts critically
• So avoid ‘proof via
quotation’
• Survey a variety of
historical arguments
• Evaluate them –
don’t sit on the
fence!
Conclusion – arguments, not
opinions
• Do not confuse
objectivity with
neutrality/impartiality
• We are weighing
arguments and
evidence, not
views/opinions
• We can and should
identify those
arguments we find more
convincing
•
“Impartiality lies at the heart of
public service and is the core of
the BBC's commitment to its
audiences. It applies to all our
output and services - television,
radio, online, and in our
international services and
commercial magazines. We
must be inclusive, considering
the broad perspective and
ensuring the existence of a
range of views is appropriately
reflected.” BBC statement on
impartiality
Tasks for next week
• Undertake bibliography exercise on moodle
• Take the ‘internet detective’ quiz
• Identify 3 online resources that will be relevant to
your project.
Seminar exercise: The
Ranters