Euroculture Thesis Assessment Grid 

Name of Student: Małgorzata Obler

Thesis Title: Scapegoating – postwar wave of Jewish persecution in Poland

Home University: University of Cracow - Jagiellonian University  

Host University: Palacký University Olomouc

Name of Supervisor: Martin Elbel (second supervisor)

In this report, please consider the following:

1) Problem statement, method and theory:
	a) The aims and objectives of the thesis – are these clearly identified and explained? Is there a well formulated problem statement?

Małgorzata Obler has chosen an interesting and important topic. She clearly identifies her aims and objectives. However, the problem statement is less precisely formulated. 

	b) Has a suitable methodology and theoretical frame been taken to solve the stated problems?

The author worked mainly with René Girard’s concept of scapegoating and attempted to apply it on post-war anti-Semitism in Poland. However, she did not always work with the concept carefully. Also, she did not take in account other approaches or criticism of Girard’s theory.
 
Another thing I miss is a methodological framework for the analysis of primary sources. As a consequence, the sources are often used as a mere illustration of the author’s arguments. In-depth analysis based on clear methodology (oral history, narrative strategies) would open new perspectives in the thesis.

	c) Does the conclusion provide convincing answers/proof to the initial questions/hypothesis?

As a consequence of 1-b), some of the conclusions are rather obvious or tautological (e.g.: “Therefore scapegoating (in symbolical way) is up to date phenomenon I think that it might results in different effect. “, “…what the speakers experienced depended on where they lived and what kind of people they were surrounded by. “ or “…the destiny of the minorities depends on the actions of majorities.”)

2) Structure:
	a) Is the thesis coherently structured?

Yes, the thesis is coherently structured. It starts with a brief explanation of the basic concepts, and then it proceeds from the description of the historical background to the analysis of the primary sources. 

	b) Are concepts clearly introduced and explained, and critically and consistently applied?

Unfortunately I cannot provide a positive answer to this question. I found the explanation and the application of both main concepts (scapegoating and anti-Semitism) confusing and inconsistent.

3) Sources (primary and secondary):
	a) Has (enough) relevant (primary and secondary) literature been adequately interpreted and integrated into the thesis?

		See 1-b)

	b) Is the bibliography/list of references complete and accurate?

Yes, as far as I could judge (see 6-c).

4) Stylistics:
	a) Is the use of language (English) acceptable and of the required standard (i.e. no spelling mistakes and typos, range of vocabulary, grammar)?

Although not being a native speaker I could tell there were occasional spelling mistakes and clumsy expressions in the thesis (however, see section 6-c)

	b) Are references in the text given in a coherent and consistent manner (either in-text or as footnotes)?

The references are presented in a coherent and consistent manner.

5) Format:
	a) How is the thesis presented? (i.e. consistency in lay-out, choice of fonts, headings, tables and graphs)

See section 6-c)

6) General:
	a) Have recommended revisions been executed to a satisfying degree?

The author sought to react to most of the suggestions. Due to the lack of time some of the recommended revisions could not been executed.

	b) To what degree has the student been able to work independently?

The work on the thesis was to a great degree carried out independently.

	c) Any other relevant comments.

I am not sure whether the version I had the opportunity to evaluate was the final one. Some of my comments may be therefore less relevant.

Grade:

Czech national grade:	B-C

Date: 28 February 2010

Signature: