Ancient History - How do you make your sources stand out? (1 Viewer)

[roar84eighty]

OK, I have a stupid question that baffled my ancient history teacher:

How do you distinguish your sources/historians (ancient and modern historians and other types of sources) and make them stand out?

Should we simply underline them or are we allowed to highlight them in the HSC Exam?

 

[trekkie]

There should really be no need, a trained and experienced marker should be able to recognise when you are or arent using sources lol, but if you really feel the need lead into each statement dont just say "A census was undertaken in the first years of Augustus reign" and then dump Suetonius behind it in brackets. Instead to make it stand out say "The Roman Historian Suetonius states that a census was undertaken..." Or you could go for more sledge hammer approaches like you mentioned such as using hi-lighting, underlining or putting their name capitals (be wary of the last one in case a matronish english/history teacher marks your paper).

 

[roar84eighty]

Thanks for the advice

 

[Allyria]

Hey,

I loved Ancient History ^_^
fav subject!

A method I used in my essays was mentioning the key ancient and modern historians I was going to use, in my introduction. That way all you have to do like Trekkie said is just put the historian in brackets after the quote.
It was especially useful for Agrippina (personality)

what topics are you doing?

 

[live.fast]

From what I know, I'd say it both does and doesn't matter in the HSC. It's a psychological maneuver more than anything.

BUT I did it myself, and to varying degrees, so I guess there's no real harm in trying.

Re-using a source citation can make the 'underlining' solution a bit tedious. Moreover, there are ways of formulating the response to make the source stand out. But for single source citations, I'd probably use the underlining method.

Funnily enough, the most impressively written HSC exam responses I've seen have used it - ALOT- even though it does seem like a stupid time-wasting HSC mysticism thing.

But whatever you do - don't do ANY highlighting! ever!

 

[cem]

From what I know, I'd say it both does and doesn't matter in the HSC. It's a psychological maneuver more than anything.

BUT I did it myself, and to varying degrees, so I guess there's no real harm in trying.

Re-using a source citation can make the 'underlining' solution a bit tedious. Moreover, there are ways of formulating the response to make the source stand out. But for single source citations, I'd probably use the underlining method.

Funnily enough, the most impressively written HSC exam responses I've seen have used it - ALOT- even though it does seem like a stupid time-wasting HSC mysticism thing.

But whatever you do - don't do ANY highlighting! ever!

As an HSC marker I have no problem with any student who wishes to identify their sources by highlighting, underlining etc but it isn't necessary as we are usually able to identify the sources quite easily.

With the Pompeii question where the use of a specific source is demanded in the question it is quite useful to highlight or underline your use of your source for your own peace of mind - you know you have used it and you are sure that the marker will realise it as well.

 

[roar84eighty]

Thanks to all who posted