[Cyfer]

Just before i start:



OK:

I now have to write a 500 word essay on Renaissance Warfare. It's meant to be a 'project' ()

500 words?! thats not even a page. Never mind my 10,000+!!

How am i going to fit all that information into one little space?!

I was thinking of having my question as How did the Renaissance Revolutionize Warfare. Good title?

My points would be:
Why wars occurred
What made the main difference to them (black powder)

I don't have enough space for anything more and my teacher really wants me to stick to the 500limit because in my history presentation regarding The Printing Press during the Renaissance, i had so much to say i just blurted it out so fast that none of the class understood it. Even though i tried extremely hard to stop talking so fast. Any tips here?

So i'm basically screwed, a couple times over.....

Oh and some of the marks are awarded for 'breadth of research' .... What the?! how can you show research in 500words!!!??


This is a nightmare for me....

~Cyfer/Cipher

[MrJohnDClare]

Hmmm
I know why you are frustrated - you know SO MUCH!!

In situations like these, there is only one thing for it:
SUMMARISE

I don't mean of content/narrative.
I mean of conclusions.

Here the deal.
You know more than anybody else in the class - everybody accepts you are the expert.
Even the teacher must realise you are factually robust.
You therefore don't NEED to pull out the factual content to back up your ideas/ understanding.
You can just give them the ideas/ theories.

What I would do is this:
FIVE THEORIES ABOUT RENAISSANCE WARFARE
Then, from your studies, pull out five generalisations = five ideas = five things about Renaissance warfare you have learned = five things they DON'T know.
And then present them as 'Five theories'.

That gives you 100 words each to fill out the idea.
There is no need to provide actual back-up - just explain the theory.

Try to make your theories a bit 'wild'/ 'way out'/ 'controversial'/ 'mind-blowing' - ideas which will rock them back on their heels.
e.g. 'Did you think Henry VIII was a great warrior-monarch? WRONG; in terms of Renaissance monarchs he was a bit-player also-ran.'
'Did you think that Renaissance warfare was knights and cavalry charges and sieges? WRONG; in fact thebiggest conqueror of Renaissance armies was diarrhoea.'


Do you have to make a presentation to the class?
Do it as 5 ppt. slides, each with a picture and a title, and talk simply to each one.


You have a quick-silver mind.
If you can control your desire to go into every thread and detail at vast speed I am sure that you can thrill them.

[Cyfer]

MrJohnDClare, on Jun 19 2009, 09:25 PM, said:

Hmmm
I know why you are frustrated - you know SO MUCH!!

In situations like these, there is only one thing for it:
SUMMARISE

I don't mean of content/narrative.
I mean of conclusions.

Here the deal.
You know more than anybody else in the class - everybody accepts you are the expert.
Even the teacher must realise you are factually robust.
You therefore don't NEED to pull out the factual content to back up your ideas/ understanding.
You can just give them the ideas/ theories.

What I would do is this:
FIVE THEORIES ABOUT RENAISSANCE WARFARE
Then, from your studies, pull out five generalisations = five ideas = five things about Renaissance warfare you have learned = five things they DON'T know.
And then present them as 'Five theories'.

That gives you 100 words each to fill out the idea.
There is no need to provide actual back-up - just explain the theory.

Try to make your theories a bit 'wild'/ 'way out'/ 'controversial'/ 'mind-blowing' - ideas which will rock them back on their heels.
e.g. 'Did you think Henry VIII was a great warrior-monarch? WRONG; in terms of Renaissance monarchs he was a bit-player also-ran.'
'Did you think that Renaissance warfare was knights and cavalry charges and sieges? WRONG; in fact thebiggest conqueror of Renaissance armies was diarrhoea.'


Do you have to make a presentation to the class?
Do it as 5 ppt. slides, each with a picture and a title, and talk simply to each one.


You have a quick-silver mind.



If you can control your desire to go into every thread and detail at vast speed I am sure that you can thrill them.

Nobody knows about how much i know about Renaissance Warfare. I've only done a presentation on the Western Printing Press although i am generalized as a 'neek'

I like your idea of theories, yet i would need fact to back them up (look above), and my teacher said my essay should revolve around a question and i need to make a judgment on it and give my opinion, they made that especially clear. The question i have thought up of is 'Did the Renaissance Revolutionize Warfare?' , so i would need to answer that question.

Oh and not to be pedantic but wasn't dysentery a bigger factor of death rather than diarrhea?

Oh man i wish i could talk about the Crusades i have so many theories i can think of for that.

Can't think of much for Renaissance but one could be:
'Did Peace Treaties Solve Anything' (referring to the various Ottoman Empire treaties with the Holy League etc etc...)
'Where cannons the main weapon during the Renaissance, even with mass production?' (referring to use of trebuchets)





~Cyfer/Cipher

[MrJohnDClare]

Cyfer, on Jun 20 2009, 08:53 PM, said:

Oh and not to be pedantic but wasn't dysentery a bigger factor of death rather than diarrhea?

Yes. I was over-dumbing-down.

Quote

Can't think of much for Renaissance but one could be:
'Did Peace Treaties Solve Anything' (referring to the various Ottoman Empire treaties with the Holy League etc etc...)
'Were cannons the main weapon during the Renaissance, even with mass production?' (referring to use of trebuchets)

Sounds good to me.

[Cyfer]

MrJohnDClare, on Jun 20 2009, 08:58 PM, said:

Cyfer, on Jun 20 2009, 08:53 PM, said:

Oh and not to be pedantic but wasn't dysentery a bigger factor of death rather than diarrhea?

Yes. I was over-dumbing-down.

Quote

Can't think of much for Renaissance but one could be:
'Did Peace Treaties Solve Anything' (referring to the various Ottoman Empire treaties with the Holy League etc etc...)
'Were cannons the main weapon during the Renaissance, even with mass production?' (referring to use of trebuchets)

Sounds good to me.

So whats your reply to me having to answer that question? i won't have enough space for the theories.

[Marx]

Mr Clare has completely covered what I wanted to say (as usual).

It's clear you're extremely enthusiastic and intelligent, so don't take a request from your teacher to shall we say "dumb down" your essay / project as an insult.

By being able to summarise I think that you are showing an ability to point out the key points and cover them in an easy to understand way, rather than going in depth in to every possible thing and (quoting my history teacher) "waffling on". I think at the level your teacher wants you to write at , writing about the most important factors and going into depth is better than writing every single thing you know about every single possible factor, even if you go into depth.

Considering you are 13 and under, I somehow doubt your teacher expects or wants to read a 10,000 word essay. Stick to your parameters, being able to give the facts to the reader / marker in a clear and consise way is more important than endlessly expanding and elaborating.

If you're presenting this to a class of your peers, you need to keep them entertained ! If you have a class of people who like gory stuff, talk to them about what they like listening to, that way you will keep their attention.

For developing a point, I have always been taught to write a paragraph following a simple structure :

Point - What you are trying to explain, for example if the essay Q was "Why was there a revolution in Russia in 1905 ?" one of the points could be "Nicholas II was a weak ruler"

Content - Give more detail to the reader as to the reasoning of your point. Always imagine that your reader knows absolutely nothing about the essay subject. "Nicholas II wasn't ready to come to the throne in 1894, because of X, Y, and Z which caused him to be a weak ruler"

Evaluation / Content - How does this relate to the essay question ? If it doesn't relate to the question, it shouldn't be in your essay. "Due to Nicholas II's weak but brutal autocratic leadership, the Russian revolution of 1905 was able to happen and this is why *bla bla bla*" - briefly summarise the points made in the content, never add anything to the conclusion / evaluation that hasn't been previously stated in the content.

I've waffled on enough Good luck .

[MrJohnDClare]

Cyfer, on Jun 20 2009, 09:26 PM, said:

So whats your reply to me having to answer that question? i won't have enough space for the theories.

I think that it's an issue you have to decide for yourself.
Either of the two questions you suggested is a perfectly valid question.

When you have large amounts of information to get into a small space you can EITHER 'go shallow' OR 'go limited'.
Above, I suggested that you go shallow.
I took your answer, giving the question(s) above, to mean that you would prefer to go limited.

Either solution is absolutely valid, but now you need to go away and craft your presentation.
At your stage of writing career, it doesn't even matter if it works or not - it is just a practice as you hone your skills.

Let us know how you're getting along as you go along.
We're all rooting for you!

[Cyfer]

Marx, on Jun 20 2009, 10:25 PM, said:

Mr Clare has completely covered what I wanted to say (as usual).

It's clear you're extremely enthusiastic and intelligent, so don't take a request from your teacher to shall we say "dumb down" your essay / project as an insult.

By being able to summarise I think that you are showing an ability to point out the key points and cover them in an easy to understand way, rather than going in depth in to every possible thing and (quoting my history teacher) "waffling on". I think at the level your teacher wants you to write at , writing about the most important factors and going into depth is better than writing every single thing you know about every single possible factor, even if you go into depth.

Considering you are 13 and under, I somehow doubt your teacher expects or wants to read a 10,000 word essay. Stick to your parameters, being able to give the facts to the reader / marker in a clear and consise way is more important than endlessly expanding and elaborating.

If you're presenting this to a class of your peers, you need to keep them entertained ! If you have a class of people who like gory stuff, talk to them about what they like listening to, that way you will keep their attention.

For developing a point, I have always been taught to write a paragraph following a simple structure :

Point - What you are trying to explain, for example if the essay Q was "Why was there a revolution in Russia in 1905 ?" one of the points could be "Nicholas II was a weak ruler"

Content - Give more detail to the reader as to the reasoning of your point. Always imagine that your reader knows absolutely nothing about the essay subject. "Nicholas II wasn't ready to come to the throne in 1894, because of X, Y, and Z which caused him to be a weak ruler"

Evaluation / Content - How does this relate to the essay question ? If it doesn't relate to the question, it shouldn't be in your essay. "Due to Nicholas II's weak but brutal autocratic leadership, the Russian revolution of 1905 was able to happen and this is why *bla bla bla*" - briefly summarise the points made in the content, never add anything to the conclusion / evaluation that hasn't been previously stated in the content.

I've waffled on enough Good luck

Thanks for the help, i'll try to keep my peers enthusiastic during my next presentation but i couldn't really do anything that exciting involved with the printing press apart from the kids in the old chinese printing press which worked the same or worse than Industrial factory working children :S

I'll use your method since i think if i did do Mr Clare's method than my teacher would mark me down hugely because it didn't answer their question and i didn't do what they wanted me to do....

MrJohnDClare, on Jun 21 2009, 09:58 AM, said:

Cyfer, on Jun 20 2009, 09:26 PM, said:

So whats your reply to me having to answer that question? i won't have enough space for the theories.

I think that it's an issue you have to decide for yourself.
Either of the two questions you suggested is a perfectly valid question.

When you have large amounts of information to get into a small space you can EITHER 'go shallow' OR 'go limited'.
Above, I suggested that you go shallow.
I took your answer, giving the question(s) above, to mean that you would prefer to go limited.

Either solution is absolutely valid, but now you need to go away and craft your presentation.
At your stage of writing career, it doesn't even matter if it works or not - it is just a practice as you hone your skills.

Let us know how you're getting along as you go along.
We're all rooting for you!

Thanks again, i'll actually do two essays, one where i do the theory method and one where i will do what my teacher wants me to do which is to pose a single general question (stated earlier) and answer it with a judgment and opinion. I'll post both here later, maybe in a few days as i will need to proof read my work a couple of times so i can edit it to teh max

I'm doing the above since i heard that professional writers (even if they write part-time) check their work many many times, phrasing it better and better.... i'm going to try to do that.... hopefully not falling asleep during the process.....

~Cyfer/Cipher

[Cyfer]

Eh, Sorry for wasting your time guys, i just realized that unconsciously i am prolonging the inevitable because i dread it so much.

~Cyfer/Cipher

[MrJohnDClare]

Cyfer, on Jun 21 2009, 11:40 AM, said:

I'm doing the above since i heard that professional writers (even if they write part-time) check their work many many times, phrasing it better and better.... i'm going to try to do that.... hopefully not falling asleep during the process.....

Correct.
When I am writing I first spend a lot of time reading/thinking/preparing.
Then I bash out the actual text at high speed, without much looking back-over.
But then I go back over it reviewing/editing it again and again, each time improving it ... until I am satisfied with it.

Three tips:
1. When you are editing/improving your draft text, read it out loud, as though reading it to an audience. This will majorly improve your logic, development, grammar and punctuation.
2. At some point in the editing process put it on one side, forget about it, and then go back to it after a few days.
3. At some point in the editing process, give it to someone (you trust to be able to do so) and then change your text to meet their comments. (At this point, it is very easy to get precious about your text, and instead of listening, trying to argue them down. My advice is DON'T! If they think it, then a percentage of your readers will also think it - so adapt your text to accommodate.)

[MrJohnDClare]

Cyfer, on Jun 21 2009, 11:41 AM, said:

Eh, Sorry for wasting your time guys, i just realized that unconsciously i am prolonging the inevitable because i dread it so much.

Ditto - I;ve got some lesson prep I ought to be doing.

[Cyfer]

Hello should i add in my main question

How did the Renaissance Affect Warfare and Vice Versa

I've just come a very interesting point which states that art was transformed by the Italian/French Wars and started to depict battles instead of philosophy and beauty.

[Cyfer]

One more question.

Should i imply something without giving a statement to back it up? I don't have the words to waste on it really

Here it is:

Some (such as the Ottoman Empire) desired a certain place or famous landmark, or just land that they had lost, even if it were in treaties.

[MrJohnDClare]

Cyfer, on Jun 21 2009, 04:06 PM, said:

Hello should i add in my main question

How did the Renaissance Affect Warfare and Vice Versa

I've just come a very interesting point which states that art was transformed by the Italian/French Wars and started to depict battles instead of philosophy and beauty.

Interesting point - I'd put it in.
But is this the only point of the 'versa' that you have to make? Is there a danger that that side of your presentation might be a bit weak?

[MrJohnDClare]

Cyfer, on Jun 21 2009, 04:17 PM, said:

One more question.

Should i imply something without giving a statement to back it up? I don't have the words to waste on it really

Here it is:

Some (such as the Ottoman Empire) desired a certain place or famous landmark, or just land that they had lost, even if it were in treaties.

I think this is absolutely valid; it's just a fact.