What is culture? Critically discuss at least two perspectives.
I am studying Culture, Policy and Management MA course. Here are the instructions that the teacher gave :
We place a major emphasis on answering the question. We devise questions carefully. Importantly, we grade them in response to the marking criteria (see handbook) and critically, to what extent the answer the question.
So, if you reword the question, or make up your own you will be immediately undermining your potential to get a good mark. Our hope, and objective, is that you get the best possible marks!
As questions are an opportunity to express your understanding of the topic, the question gives you plenty of scope. However, you need to display your skill at both appreciating the scope, and your analytical skill of focusing on a particular aspect that you can explore in the necessary depth. So, telling the reader/marker how you have interpreted the question and focused it is very helpful. This should be echoed in your conclusion, where you reverse the order. Critically, you answer the question in the conclusion.
Signalling the logic of your answer is always good. Unless we are reading a detective novel, we usually appreciate a map that lets us know what to expect. You might add a few sentences at the end of your introduction that lets the reader know what to expect, if there are 3 parts, tell us! In an short essay of 3000 words or so sub headings might not be appropriate; but, if they help to structure your paper, and you have signalled such a structure; use them. We find newspaper stories (that are usually less that 1000 words) divided by subheadings easier to read. Its all about communication; use those skills.
The middle part – core – or your essay will be the evidence/argument. I find it helpful to think of this in a judicial analogy. We have all seen court room dramas. You have the opening statement by the judge who outlines the case and the jurisdiction of the court. The you have the case for; and the case against. The jury (you) is led by the judge’s summing up (your conclusion). Where they balance the evidence and ‘weigh’ it and hence offer a reasoned, and argued case, for the answer.
On ‘evidence’: this is based upon your reading you need to assemble evidence from ‘experts’ and reference them when you cite their authority. (of course one task is for you to sift and organise your evidence so that it fits into a two or three different positions that seem coherent). Each position should be as rigorous as the others. An implication is that the ‘reference’ list is actually that material which you have cited (not a general bibliography of all that you read). How long should the reference list be? As long as it needs to be to establish your points. Most people seem to average on 2/3 of a page. But, relevance is key, not length.
Use the order calculator below and get started! Contact our live support team for any assistance or inquiry.
[order_calculator]