Steffany’s Reviews > A Pocket Guide to Writing in History, Eighth Edition > Status Update

The chapter discusses plagiarism. This reminds me a lot of Dr. Clark's lecture that she gives for every single one of her classes. It is extremely helpful and kind of scary. But most definitely necessary.

This whole part of the book discusses research papers, and how to form a good research question. I am writing a research paper for a conference and I am still deciding which angle to take. Rampolla provides some sorts of direction with the deciding factor on how to choose.

Do not use passive voice when writing a paper, the reasoning behind this--"makes the writer sound hesitant". I find this helpful, writing in passive voice is a common occurence for me unfortunately having this reasoning layed out for me definitely makes it easier to understand the purpose of not using it.

Rampolla brings in the idea of not using gender biased words, this makes me extremely happy. In speech and debate we try to always avoid using these kinds of words to make sure no one feels left out.

It discusses how to write a movie review. This would have been extremely helpful my freshmen year, I really sucked at those, this book clearly outlines what works in this kind of paper, and what is necessary to make the paper successful.

On this page it is discussed that a historians affiliation can affect their research. How interesting. It is to my understanding that as a historian the job is to be as unbiased as possible, but because of this affiliation historians seek out certain documents that confirm their thoughts that much up with what they want. This making their interpretation almost skewed in a way... thougths??

On this page it discusses critiques and book reviews. I for one have always struggled with these because of what Rampolla talks about; assessing weaknesses and strengths. I have always found this hard because I didn't think I could talk about it since I wasn't qualified it the purpose behind these is to be able to analyze.

Towards the end of this page the author mentions with the use of primary and secondary sources it allows for the historian to provide a unique point of view from multiple sources. In my opinion I think this skill is so important to have especially when dealing with research because one must gain an understanding of it as a whole and the only way to do that is by multiple perspectives.

Rampolla uses a word I was not familiar with entirely for history uses: synthesis. The idea is to do all other steps that the book discusses and then create your own perspective. I will have to do this on my research, it is an extemely daunting task. Hopefully I can gain this skill soon.

"On this page the book discusses the idea of examing where the evidence came from. Who had it, where was it.. etc.. this is an extemely important role when trying to understand something from history, one must understand its context.