2.Sınıfta her sınavda karşınıza çıkacak olan ESSAY konusu hakkında faydalı bilgiler...
öncelikle işinize yarayacağını düşündüğümüz bir link:
http://lorien.ncl.ac.uk/ming/dept/tips/writing/writeindex.htm
Lütfen
bize mail yoluyla ulaşarak fikrinizi belirtin...
Essay...
|
|||||||||||
An essay is a piece of writing with 
a particular structure and layout. Therefore, the
language you use will be different from the way you speak. You
will be expected to write in a formal academic style, and use
quotes and extra pieces of information when necessary. You will
be expected to keep to the task in hand at all times. All essay
questions will be structured in different ways, therefore it is
important you understand what is meant by the differing terms
that you will come across in each of the questions. The following
pages will help you understand some of these terms and will
hopefully provide an easy to use system that will act as a
learning tool to support your existing knowledge of essay writing
techniques.
|
||||||
Tip 1:
Analyse the title - Note down key words - What are they asking you to do?
Tip 2:
Divide your work - Who says what? - Note
this down on a large sheet of paper - What
differences can you see?
Tip 3:
Write a brief outline - Could you provide an alternative conclusion / introduction?
Tip 4:
Organise this
information - Do you need all of it? How relevant to the essay
question is
it?
Tip 5:
Always note the sources you are using / quoting - The bibliography will be a breeze.
Tip 6:
Write a rouge plan
and then show someone i.e.: a lecturer then make changes
accordingly
They are there to help, so use them.
Tip 7:
Write your work onto a P.C. where possible
- saves time to changes and allows you tto move
your work around.
Tip 8:
Stay objective - Unless asked try and keep your personal opinions to yourself.
Tip 9:
Go back and read
the essay question then re read your essay - Have you answered it
as
well
as you could have.
Tip 10:
Make sure you leave
enough time for changes - Last minute work will always give you
problems
|
|||||||
When reaching your exams you will probably feel that you have mastered the technique of writing essays. Although technically you have, in that you have now found your writing niche, you will now be required to adapt these techniques in an exam situation. This means that you will have to change the way you prepare your work, the speed at which you write and the resources you use to help you through the exam.
REMEMBER...
PREPARATION
SPEED
RESOURCES
Sound daunting? Well it can be, but you do now have an excellent tool to pull upon. The knowledge you have gained and the skills you have found are basically all you need to prepare you for your forthcoming exams. All you need to remember is how to use those techniques in a situation that requires you to think and work at a faster pace.
So what you need to do now is think about how you are going to prepare for the exam......
Some exam situations give students the essay questions they are required to write about before the exam is due to be taken. This can sound very unfair to students who have to enter an exam not knowing what questions they will be asked. However this isn't the case. In situations like this students will actually be required to demonstrate a little more knowledge and expertise about the topic they are writing about, because they have had more time to prepare for it. Whatever your situation you will need to have reached a competent level in your essay writing skills that will enable you to feel confident about writing under harsher conditions. So you will need to be able to make a distinction between writing term essay and essays for exams.
The Chartist movement was prolonged, widespread and impressive. It organised mass petitions and popular demonstrations, and was clearly taken seriously by the governments of the day. Considering the previous success of the 1832 Reform Act, and the widespread outbreak of revolution on the continent in 1848, it seems entirely reasonable to ask why Chartism failed. Yet on closer inspection there is no mystery. The list of reasons for its failure in almost endless. Lack of unity, organisation, communication and purpose among the Chartists themselves, and sensible though firm action by the government, all combined to defeat the movement. A better question, perhaps, would be 'Why did the Chartists think they could succeed?'
This is a good introduction. 'Fail' is the question's key word (i.e. the issue that has to be discussed). The author clearly identifies this key word and shows he is aware why it is important. Equally, he provides a brief answer to the question - this has the important effect of showing that he knows exactly what the question is getting at, has thought about it and above all has planned his answer in advance. Just as importantly, this is obviously an introduction, a scene setter for the main body of the essay - detailed information in support of his argument is left till later.
Lack of unity was one of the greatest reasons for its failure. Chartism presented an impressively national appearance, yet this disguised the extent to which it was more accurately a collection of regional movements - Lovett among the artisans in London, Cooper in Leicester and Nottingham, Vincent in Bath and Moin in Glasgow. The nearest thing to a national leader was O'Connor, whose fiery oratory drew great crowds, but whose bungled attempts at organisation and finance ultimately contributed to the failure of the movement. The various leaders failed effectively to communicate or co-operate, disagreeing not only on how to achieve their objective - one reason for the failure of the 1839 Convention - but even on what they were trying to achieve. Believers in working class education, temperance, Christianity and trade unions all rallied to the flag of Chartism, but their support was neither unconditional nor wholehearted - following setbacks in 1839 the different leaders returned to these non-Chartist activities. Only O'Connor's tireless work and the deteriorating economic situation kept Chartism going. The basic lack of unity therefore was a major reason for the failure of Chartism, severely undermining its chances of presenting a united front and forcing concessions from a reluctant government.
The opening sentence of the paragraph explicitly presents the material as a point relevant to the question set (contrast with the bad essay). It refers to the key word, makes a judgement which will form part of the overall argument and establishes the theme of the paragraph.
In the main part of the paragraph the author gives evidence for the judgement made in the opening sentence using factual material from his notes. However, he does not merely copy out large chunks but selects only those parts which are relevant to the point he is trying to make. He provides sufficient facts (names, dates, places) to back up his point but does not write everything he knows, because there are many other points to make and only limited space to make them.
The concluding sentence of the paragraph again explicitly refers to the key word and restates the judgement made at the beginning of the paragraph, thus ensuring relevance and making it obvious that this is an argument and not a narrative. Targeting of the question remains up front.
The Chartist movement began in 1836 when the London Men's Working Association drew up the Charter, containing its famous six points - the vote for every man over twenty-one, a secret ballot, no property qualifications for MPs, payment of MPs, equal constituencies and annual parliaments. Many members of the working class were disappointed by the 'betrayal' of the 1832 Reform Act and believed that if the Charter was granted the government would have to listen to their problems, and would make their lives better. The Charter was a failure at the time, but eventually five of its six points were gained.
The examiner's heart will sink when he reads the first sentence of this essay - it is not an introduction but a beginning. It clearly shows early signs of that dreadful disease - the narrative essay. There is no indication of the line the answer is going to take. This will not be a relevant answer clearly addressing the key word but simply the story of Chartism. It contains unnecessary factual information and reveals a failure both to understand the point of the question and to plan the answer in advance. The last sentence does mention the key word but is obviously just lifted from the author's notes as it includes the word 'failure' - not because he is about to ponder the concept.
In 1836 Feargus O'Connor founded the Northern Star as a Chartist newspaper, and in 1838 the Charter was launched in a series of mass meetings organised by the London Men's Working Association and the Birmingham Political Union. The Chartists quickly gathered support among the working classes since it was a 'knife and fork question'. In 1839 a national Convention was held in London, but it could only agree to gather a petition. Thomas Attwood, the founder of the Birmingham Political Union presented this petition, which contained 1,280,000 signatures, to Parliament. After it was rejected there were demonstrations and outbreaks of violence throughout the country. In Newport John Frost led an uprising to free an imprisoned leader, Henry Vincent, but it was easily put down by troops who killed some of the demonstrators. Frost was arrested, and so were Chartist leaders, Lovett and O'Connor included, in other parts of the country. So the first stage of Chartism was a failure.
The second paragraph takes up where the introduction left off. The opening sentence presents the material as a chapter in a story rather than a point in an argument (contrast with the good essay). There is no attempt to answer the question set, but rather a wholesale reproduction of a section of the author's notes. There is a wealth of irrelevant factual detail and the disastrous use of a quote which is unattributed, unsupported and unexplained. The final sentence again mentions the key word, but again in an unreflective manner. This essay is obviously hell-bent on telling the story of Chartism without making any systematic attempt to explain the reasons for its failure. Targeting of the question is relegated to a postscript.
