Category: Theory (term 3)
This week I had a short conversation with Nigel to clarify a few final questions before submitting my thesis proposal. Most of my questions were about Harvard referencing, page numbers, PDF sources, secondary citations and the structure of my chapters.
One of my main questions was about using PDFs that I had found online. Some of these PDFs did not have visible page numbers, so I asked whether it was acceptable to use the PDF page numbers instead. Nigel explained that this depends on the type of source. Books usually have page numbers, but journals or online PDFs do not always include them. He said that if proper page numbers are not available, it is not a major problem.
Nigel also explained that the bibliography should include the full source information, while the in-text citation only needs the author and date, and page numbers when relevant. This helped me understand the difference between what needs to appear in the main text and what needs to appear at the end in the bibliography.
I also asked about a source that quoted Paul Wells, because I found it difficult to access the original book and page. Nigel advised me that it is always better to use the primary source when possible, because another writer may have interpreted or quoted it incorrectly. However, if the original source cannot be accessed, it is acceptable to use the secondary source, as long as I am careful and accurate. This reassured me, because I had found a PhD thesis that cited Wells and included the page numbers.
Another question I asked was whether the citations in the document needed to be clickable, so that clicking on an author’s name would take the reader directly to the bibliography. Nigel said that this was not necessary and advised me not to make the academic paper interactive in that way, because it could disturb the marker while reading.
Finally, I asked about the chapter structure. I wanted to know whether each chapter should be labelled as “Chapter One”, “Chapter Two”, etc., followed by the topic title. Nigel confirmed that this was a good way to structure it, for example: “Chapter One: [Title]”, “Chapter Two: [Title]”, and “Chapter Three: [Title]”.
Overall, this conversation helped me feel more confident about the final referencing and formatting of my thesis proposal. Nigel reassured me that small referencing issues can be corrected through feedback, but that I should make sure to submit the work through Turnitin so that any problems can be checked properly. After this conversation, I felt more prepared to reread my proposal, make the final adjustments and submit it.
This week’s theory session focused on understanding the formal requirements for the thesis proposal and how to prepare the written submission correctly. We looked at the main proposal structure, including the research title or question, draft introduction, keywords searched, research design methods, draft literature review, chapter outline, draft chapter, and indicative bibliography.
The session helped me understand that the proposal needs to clearly explain what the research will investigate and how it will be developed. For my own FMP, this means refining my idea around doomscrolling, desensitisation, media overload, political performance, and the way violence becomes part of an endless digital feed. Instead of only describing the story visually, I need to connect the project to a clear research question and explain how the practical animation will support the written investigation.
We also discussed the importance of academic writing and referencing. The guidelines explained that the thesis should use peer-reviewed books and scholarly articles where possible, rather than relying on personal blogs, reviews, or YouTube videos. This is important for my project because I need to support my ideas about media, war, animation, and desensitisation with reliable academic sources.
Another important part of the session was learning how to use Harvard referencing correctly. Any quotation, paraphrase, film, television programme, image, or online source needs to be referenced clearly in the text and included in the final bibliography. This helped me realise that I need to keep track of every source I use from the beginning, especially visual references, films, academic texts, and online assets that may influence the project.
Outside of class, I started thinking more about which sources could support my proposal. I looked at key books related to film theory and animation, including texts on animation history, animation authorship, and film theory through the senses. These sources could help me connect my practical animation choices to academic ideas about visual storytelling, spectatorship, emotion, and the relationship between media and the viewer.
At this stage, my next step is to continue refining my research question and begin organising the proposal into the required sections. I also need to expand my bibliography, collect stronger academic sources, and think carefully about how my practical work in Blender can become part of the research design. This week made the proposal feel more structured and helped me understand what needs to be prepared before submission.
This week’s theory session focused on developing a stronger research proposal by refining our research questions and understanding how to structure an academic thesis effectively. We explored the key stages of proposal development, including defining a clear research title, planning possible chapter structures, outlining research methods, drafting an introduction, and developing an example chapter before revising the bibliography and literature review.
Alongside the proposal framework, we also discussed the importance of critical thinking in academic writing. Rather than approaching research through surface learning and simply collecting information, the session encouraged a deeper engagement with sources by questioning ideas, comparing perspectives, and identifying meaningful gaps within existing research. This helped me understand that my FMP proposal needs to build a clear argument, rather than only describing the visual story I want to create.
Outside of class, building on the ideas identified last week, I continued developing my FMP concept around doomscrolling, media overload, desensitisation, and the way political speeches, war footage, advertisements, memes, violence, and entertainment are consumed together through the same digital feed. I started thinking more carefully about how the film could begin and end with the same image of a character scrolling on their phone, creating a loop that shows how difficult it is to escape this constant stream of content.
I also continued exploring how the main character could move through a normal daily routine while disturbing events happen around them. This includes background moments such as people filming violence instead of helping, emergency vehicles passing, fights in public spaces, and billboards or screens showing political messages. These ideas helped me think about how animation can represent emotional numbness, not only through facial expression, but also through body language, environment, sound, repetition, and the gradual breakdown of the city.
Rather than finalising every scene immediately, I am using this research phase to evaluate which parts of the concept are the strongest both visually and academically. I want the project to balance a clear animated narrative with a wider investigation into desensitisation, media consumption, and the contrast between political performance and real human suffering. To develop this further, I will continue researching visual references, practice-based animation projects, and academic sources before refining the final proposal and discussing the direction in tutorials.
The session focused on Harvard referencing conventions and continuing the development of the thesis proposal. This was useful because the proposal is not only about having a strong research idea, but also about presenting the research in a clear, academic and properly referenced way.
A key part of the session was understanding the expectations for thesis writing. The guidelines explain that the thesis should use an appropriate methodology, cite scholars where relevant, and consult peer-reviewed texts such as academic books and journal articles. They also warn against relying on personal blogs, film reviews or YouTube as academic sources, unless they are being used for a very specific animation reference.
The session also helped me understand how to use formal academic language. The guidelines explain that academic writing should avoid emotive language, sweeping generalisations, slang and vague words. Instead, it should be objective, precise and carefully worded. For my proposal, this means I need to describe my topic critically rather than emotionally, even though the subject itself is serious and difficult.
Another important focus was Harvard referencing. The resource explains that any quotation or paraphrase from a scholar, critic, film, TV show or other source must be clearly referenced in the text and included in the reference list or bibliography. This reminded me that even when I write an idea in my own words, I still need to cite the author if the idea comes from their work.
We also looked at how to reference different types of sources. Since my project may include film, animation, images and possibly media references, it was useful to see that films, TV programmes, images and games all have different referencing conventions. The guidelines explain that films should be listed in a filmography and that the first reference to a film should include the title, director and year.
For my thesis proposal, this means I need to be organised with my sources from the beginning. I should keep a clear record of academic texts, films, animations, images and any other references I use. This will help me avoid confusion later when creating the bibliography, filmography or image list.
The session focused on the next steps for progressing the thesis proposal. The resources helped clarify what needs to be developed after receiving feedback on the draft literature review, and how that feedback can guide the proposal towards a stronger final structure.
A key point from this week was the importance of checking the Turnitin feedback from the draft literature review. This feedback should be used to guide the development of the proposal, especially when refining the research title, research question, chapter structure and bibliography. The resource explains that the first step is to refine the research title or question so that it is viable and deliverable for the final research premise.
The session also focused on developing a general outline for each chapter. The resource explains that chapter topics should be organised in a logical order, with a reliable range of perspectives to create a balanced argument. It also suggests revising or expanding literary sources as the chapter topics develop. For my thesis, this means I could structure the chapters around media narratives, animated documentary, memory and trauma, and the visual strategies of stylised 3D animation.
Another important step was the research methods outline. The resource explains that this should include approaches, methods and sources beyond literature, such as case studies, interviews, exhibitions or other primary sources. For my project, this could include analysing animated films or visual examples, looking at media imagery, and connecting those references to my own FMP animation development.
The guidelines for thesis writing and referencing were also useful. They reminded us to use an appropriate methodology, cite scholars where relevant, and use peer-reviewed books or scholarly articles. The resource also warns against relying on personal blogs, film reviews or YouTube as academic sources, unless it is for a specific animation that is unavailable elsewhere.
This is important for my topic because I will be discussing war, media and civilian experience, so the writing needs to remain formal and carefully referenced. The same guidelines also explain that Harvard referencing should be used for quotations and paraphrases, and that clear referencing helps support arguments and avoid plagiarism.
A key focus of this week was the thesis proposal structure. The proposal submission date is 18th June 2026, and the proposal should explain the plan for the research I intend to conduct. The resource explains that a research proposal should show how and why the research is relevant to the field, and whether it fills a gap, supports existing research, or adds new knowledge to the academic discussion.
The proposal also needs to explain the methodology that will be used, including the tools and procedures for collecting, analysing and interpreting information. It should also consider any limitations or constraints connected to the project. This is important for my own thesis because I need to be clear about how I will use academic sources, case studies and visual analysis to support my argument.
The resource also outlined the main structure of the research proposal. It should include a research title or question, draft introduction, keywords searched, draft literature review, research methods outline, chapter outline, draft chapter and indicative bibliography. This helped me understand that the proposal is not just one written text, but a set of connected sections that show the direction of the full thesis.
The session also made me think more carefully about the introduction. The proposal introduction should introduce the topic, state the problem or question, provide context, explain why the research is necessary and show how it connects to established research. For my topic, this means I need to explain why the gap between media narratives of war and lived civilian experience is important, and why animation could be a useful way to explore that contrast.
Another important part of the proposal is the chapter outline. The resource explains that each chapter outline should identify the purpose of the chapter, the research questions driving it, the key thinkers or ideas included, and how the chapter helps answer the main research question. This is useful because it helps me see how the final thesis could be organised into clear sections rather than one broad discussion.
The feedback on my literature review was overall positive. The topic was seen as relevant and worthwhile, and the review itself was communicated clearly. It was also clear that I already have a good starting base of sources to build from. One of the strengths of the project is the way it brings together ideas around war, memory, animation, and metaphor. The example of Waltz with Bashir was also seen as particularly relevant to the direction of the research.
At the same time, there are some areas that need further development. One important point is that the title and wording of the project need to be sharper, as the current phrasing could be more precise. From this, it was suggested that the title should be turned into a clearer research question, so that the study has a stronger central focus. I also need to improve some academic conventions in the writing, such as simplifying in-text references by using the author and year rather than full publication titles, being more consistent with page numbers for books, and giving the correct details when films are mentioned.
Another key part of the feedback was that the bibliography should continue to expand. I need to read further around animated documentary, memory, war, and the idea of animation as a form of representation or document. This will help strengthen both the theoretical background and the connection to my practice.
More broadly, the feedback confirmed that this is a good topic because animation can communicate things that live action often cannot. This includes memory, associations, metaphor, individual pain, and wider social issues. Rather than only showing conflict in a direct or literal way, animation can offer a more indirect and sensitive form of representation.
Overall, the main message from the feedback was that the project is moving in a strong direction, but now needs to become more focused and structured. My next steps are to rethink the title, turn it into a clear research question, begin considering a possible chapter structure, and continue developing the bibliography with further reading.
The session continued to focus on developing research design strategies and methods. The main aim was to keep building a clear structure for the thesis proposal, so that the research question can be answered in a focused and achievable way.
The session continued with the development of research design strategies and methods. The focus was on how to create a structure that can either develop a hypothesis or answer the research question. This was useful because it showed that the thesis proposal needs to be more than an idea; it needs a clear plan for how the research will be organised, supported and developed.
A key part of the session was understanding research design. Research design is the way a researcher organises a project, including how information will be collected, analysed and used to answer the research problem. The resource explains that research design acts as an outline and guide for the whole research project, helping to organise the different components and make sure the research addresses the main problem.
We also looked again at the structure of the thesis and proposal. The thesis needs a clear research question or hypothesis, introduction, literature review, methodology, themed chapters, conclusion, reference list and bibliography. The proposal also needs to include a research title or question, keywords searched, draft introduction, draft literature review, research methods outline, chapter outline, draft chapter and references. This helped me understand how each section connects to the others.
Another important concept from this session was the “golden thread”. This means that the research question, objectives, literature review, methodology and final argument should all connect clearly. The resources explained that when reading and writing, it is important to keep asking why a source is relevant to the question and what it contributes to the argument. For my own thesis, this means I need to make sure every source I use supports my main question about animation, media narratives and civilian experience.
We also looked at research objectives. Research objectives are the outcomes the research aims to achieve, and they help guide the research process, including data collection, analysis and conclusions. The resource explains that objectives should narrow the focus of the research and break the main aim into smaller achievable steps.
The session also reminded me to be critical when reading sources. Instead of collecting too many articles, I need to focus on sources that directly help answer my research question. I should also make notes in my own words to avoid unintentional plagiarism and evaluate how each source supports or challenges my argument.