TJ-500N, degrees, I see what the modern problem is. You 'research' your assignment and then piece together a series of pros and cons before drawing and ideally neutral conclusion '. . . if on the other hand . . .'
On one first year tutorial a student had the temerity to say "I think . . . " and was immediately slapped down by the tutor "No one wants to know what YOU think."
Only at higher levels are you expected to think and even then modern history thesis seem to be based on material unearthed from the archives and given the light of day. They are 'research' papers only so far as that person has 'searched' the archives. Or so it seems to me
