DP1 - Semester 2 Outline Submission

Common Issues and Obstacles

Criterion A: Focus and Method

Research Question troubles

RQs are often too broad, too narrow, or the answer is obvious.

Presenting the RQ

This is an analytical essay, and the RQ should be treated in that fashion. Do not introduce your RQ as if you are merely finding information ("doing research.") Your goal is to inquire into a topic within a subject and present something that goes beyond rote description.

Questionable Relevance

Justify your choice of subject! Why is your RQ something that requires you to draw upon the knowledge, methodology, language, and general practices of your chosen DP subject?

Methodology

Many (most) subjects expect you to explain your methodology, either explicitly or implicitly. Some require you to justify or evaluate the choices you made.

Treat your discussion of methodology not as a simple description but as an explanation: why this method? Why this set-up? Why this order of doing things?

For subjects like World Studies, you need to justify the multidisciplinary approach to your chosen subject, as well as justify your link to a global issue of contemporary importance.

Range of Sources (part of research methodology)

Make sure you are not using a body of sources that is too narrowly focused -- not everything should be laser-focused on your particular topic.

Make sure you are not using a body of sources that are too broad -- you need sources that have a more narrow focus.

The best answer here is what suits your needs, what helps you put your work into context, and what connects your work to other academic work that has been done in this subject and topic.

Criterion B: Knowledge and Understanding

Context

Too much is bad.

Too little is bad.

Consider how your background information can help set up your research question and your analysis. You do not just include a background section to show that you've done your reading, or to show what you know; this provides the necessary context for YOUR analysis. Use it to set up your argument. Be critical.

Breadth vs Depth

In this case, Depth > Breadth.

There is a danger in having an essay that has too broad of a focus (it's a sign that the RQ needs to be revisited.) You want to reach the core of the onion.

We have 4000 words to allow us to go into appropriate depth, not to briefly touch on a number of different things.

Use Your Sources

There is an expectation that you will regularly refer to your sources (this means quoting, paraphrasing, and citing.)

Use your sources together -- synthesize information. Incorporate them into YOUR work; how does your analysis align? What do you see that is similar or different?

Show some evidence that you are critically evaluating your sources (e.g. appraise a historian's argument, discuss the significance of an author's work, critique an outdated scientific conclusion or experiment set-up.)

Criterion C: Critical Thinking (MOST IMPORTANT CRITERION)

Critique your sources

You are expecting to show some critical analysis of the sources you use. This requires you to do more than just read and regurgitate -- you want to assess and appraise the authors, their arguments, and how they fit into the larger body of work on your topic (or at least, the works that you have encountered.)

This is VERY important in Group 3 subjects (History, GloPo, Psychology, Economics)

Respond to the RQ

A critical response to your RQ should be at the heart of the EE.

Every so often... come back to that RQ. Don't just leave it in the introduction.

Evaluate significance

If you find yourself making a list of important things, you're likely missing analysis and evaluation. For example... what are the causes of Taiwan's recent drought?

Climate change?
A year of well-below average rainfall?
Irresponsible use of water?
TSMC?

Probably all of these things, to a certain extent. But this list doesn't tell you how they're important -- the analysis is missing.

Don't tell a story

Narrative =/= Analysis

The more description you include, the less analysis you are likely to have.

Think about every paragraph that you write and ask yourself...

What does this add to my essay? Does it make a point? Does it help me set up an argument? Does it critique an opposing view? If you find yourself telling a story or being descriptive for a long stretch of time, you want to change things up.

Ask a friend to read what you've wrote (note that your supervisor may only comment on ONE complete draft, so you cannot bring these issues to them until your first draft.) Likewise, be willing to check out a friend's writing in the same way -- extra pairs of eyes are usually very helpful.

Be real about your conclusions

Did your experiment raise more questions than it answered? Cool, say that.

Was there a hole in your research that you were unable to fill? Address that, don't cover it up. There are often explanations (e.g. Good luck getting U.S. Census info from 1890, as the building that held all the census records burned down.) For an experiment-based essay, critiquing your set-up and explaining what you might do differently fits with the scientific method. There is always another study that can be done.

Does your evidence and argument really give a concrete, 100% answer? Likely no. In many subjects, there are always other points or view or valid perspectives. In others, we may be limited by technology or resources or time. Be honest about limitations in what you've found. This is also a part of analysis and evaluation: assessing what you have and the work you've done.

If your conclusion is a tentative conclusion, then it should sound like a tentative conclusions. Don't turn it into something definitive unless it IS definitive. I have a friend who earned a PhD in Chemistry after spending seven years researching a protein that appears in some people's stomach while digesting certain foods (or something like that.) His years of study ended up with a dissertation that said, basically, "We still don't know what the heck is going on." But he still got the degree.

Finally, when you really get stuck... walk away for a while.

Coming back to something refreshed, after not seeing it for a while, often helps you see things you didn't see before, and takes away a lot of the frustration that comes with writer's block or being "stuck" on something. A 24-28 hour break is usually enough, particularly if you do something completely different (and hopefully get some sleep) during that time.

Talk to the EE coordinator, talk to your supervisor, vent to a friend, do homework for another subject - there is nothing making you do your EE at that specific moment (though I recognize this advice may feel different if you're reading it right before a deadline.)

Page updated

Report abuse