I find it absolutely incredible that you take the time to answer students and write your posts. Just today I was talking with another friend of mine who, I just found out, also happens to be following your blog. A big thank you from Dallas, TX.
Alexander McKee is a widely published British military historian who was also a soldier with the 1st Canadian Army. He witnessed the final destruction of many towns in the name of warfare and took a special interest in the validity of the bombings of Dresden. McKee examines stories as told by Dresden residents who survived the bombings.
McKee also delves into official records recently declassified, to examine the political aspects of the raid. In doing this McKee is able to establish the reasons put forward for allowing the raids and the psychological effects of the raids.
This document is very valuable to my research. The author investigates a topic similar to the topic of my research. He presents valid data including government documents that are essential to my research and analysis. Though the document is packed with valuable information, this is also a limitation.
With my time constraints it has been difficult to read through the whole book and absorb all of its information.
One other limitation that I have come across is that the author is clearly against the decision to carry out the bombings. It is very difficult to find information supporting the bombings. Dresden Plus 93 Days.
Great Britain This document is a firsthand account of the bombings of Dresden as told by Dick Sheehy who was a British prisoner of war in Dresden at the time of the bombings. The account was written in and published in a copy of History Today. The purpose of this document is to give a firsthand account of the bombings of Dresden.
It not only tells of the night of the bombings, but also goes into detail about the events that followed.
The author accounts the physical and mental struggles that he went through as a result of the bombing. This article has value in that it is a firsthand account. The author goes into great detail about his experience, leaving the reader to come to his or her own conclusions about whether the bombings were justifiable.
The document gives evidence that supports research into the emotional impact of the air raids. This value, however, can also act as a limitation. Because the article is a first-hand account, there is a strong possibility that the author has forgotten important details.
Also, the author has written his account many years after the event, allowing for his memory to have been altered. He may, as a result of the mental impacts of the war, think that some things may have happened when in fact they did not.What is the History Internal Assessment?
A historical investigation consisting of a written account of between 1, and 2, words, divided into six sections: a plan of the investigation, a summary of evidence, an evaluation of sources, an analysis, a conclusion, and a list of sources (works cited).
How to Write the Economics Internal Assessment (Getting Started) This isn't 12 months from the start (or the end) of the course, but from the time you write that specific commentary. - Finally, Not affiliated with or endorsed by the International Baccalaureate Organization.
History Internal Assessment Rajesh Swaminathan Candidate Code: – cbh Word Count: 3 Evaluation of sources 4 4 Analysis 5 from the absence of an event in History is as important as the occurrence of the event itself.
4 Analysis. How can the reliability of sources be evaluated? Should terms such as “atrocity” be used when writing about history, or should value judgments be avoided?
If it is difficult to establish proof in history, does that mean that all versions are equally acceptable?
Assessment Criteria for Section 3. Internal Assessment Sample - History; Extra Reading/Notes/Review. Definition of Capitalism, Socialism, Communism, Marxism, Fascism, Maoism, National Socialism How to write the IA.
IB Learner Outcomes and Evaluation Form. There is a detailed analysis and evaluation of two sources with explicit discussion of the value and limitations of two of the sources for the investigation, with reference to the origins, purpose and content of the two sources.