Modern History Predictions/Thoughts (1 Viewer)

[Masaken]

There were a few floating isolated posts around but I thought putting one under the HSC Exam Thoughts was appropriate.

Probably reiterating what I've said in those past posts thinking that for USSR, Soviet Foreign Policy will definitely be in the exam this year (but since they did aims in 2019, definitely about role of ideology / extent of ideological influence in foreign policy this year). The other will probably be economic transformation.

For Peace and Conflict (Cold War), I was thinking something from the first part of the syllabus (containment/peaceful coexistence) since they haven't done that yet, not sure about the other one though maybe geopolitical developments?

I do China for Section IV and I feel they're probably going to ask the pretty niche parts of the syllabus, like the rise of power for Jiang Zemin.

Core Study is Core Study and you can't really predict that but I'm hoping for nothing too outrageous. I got 97 for my trials and lost all my marks because of Section I so I'm hoping it's not too bad this time round...

 

[carrotsss]

I reckon there will be an essay

 

[Masaken]

I reckon there will be an essay

brooooooo if ur right i'm so screwed (

 

[roryahoy]

There were a few floating isolated posts around but I thought putting one under the HSC Exam Thoughts was appropriate.

Probably reiterating what I've said in those past posts thinking that for USSR, Soviet Foreign Policy will definitely be in the exam this year (but since they did aims in 2019, definitely about role of ideology / extent of ideological influence in foreign policy this year). The other will probably be economic transformation.

For Peace and Conflict (Cold War), I was thinking something from the first part of the syllabus (containment/peaceful coexistence) since they haven't done that yet, not sure about the other one though maybe geopolitical developments?

I do China for Section IV and I feel they're probably going to ask the pretty niche parts of the syllabus, like the rise of power for Jiang Zemin.

Core Study is Core Study and you can't really predict that but I'm hoping for nothing too outrageous. I got 97 for my trials and lost all my marks because of Section I so I'm hoping it's not too bad this time round...

iF there Is Soviet Foreign POlicy i am Screwed because I've Been ignoring It (i Should probaBly start Now), and fOr cold War it mAkes sense for containment, Though i'Ve been struggling with Containment. i Do apartheid not CHina but i Have nOt studied that topic yet because i'Ve been grinding English

 

[breadcrumbs]

does anyone here do usa 1919-1941 or conflict in pacific

 

[Anaya R]

does anyone here do usa 1919-1941 or conflict in pacific

I did both when I was in Yr 12.

In terms of predictions for US, looking at the past 4 years there have been 1 internal question and 1 external question. I think it'd be interesting if they pulled a question in regards to the survey area. Saying that, they haven't asked a question on the New Deal iirc so they could also pull something in that regards.

For Pacific War, they haven't asked a question about the turning points or collaboration and resistance yet. But I feel like they're going to circle back to A-Bomb (it hasn't been asked for a few years).

 

[Cathode_RT]

I think it will be about the past, since it is called modern history, and not modern future

 

[band6yesplease]

What do you guys think the 10-15 marker will be on for the core??
they haven't done a UN one ... but then again the 10-15s have all been kinda trash since 2019 except for 2021

 

[Masaken]

What do you guys think the 10-15 marker will be on for the core??
they haven't done a UN one ... but then again the 10-15s have all been kinda trash since 2019 except for 2021

comparing authority and intentions of UN and/or league or both would be a dream

though I will actually scream in agony if the 10-15 marker is smth about the impact of the nazi regime on German society or accounting for the rise of dictatorships in the interwar period because those are the only two questions 90% of modern history trial papers do for their 10-15 marker and I'm so tired of answering it over and over

 

[cosmicfire321312]

does anyone have predictions on indochina section?

 

[band6yesplease]

does anyone have predictions on indochina section?

I honestly reckon it'll be either something to do with the khmer rouge or civilians in cambodia and laos (or all of indochina) idk why just a feeling
Hopefully they do something good and easier like reasons why US lost idk tho
I feel like they're not gonna do any communist/nationalist things this time cause they always do it

 

[cosmicfire321312]

I honestly reckon it'll be either something to do with the khmer rouge or civilians in cambodia and laos (or all of indochina) idk why just a feeling
Hopefully they do something good and easier like reasons why US lost idk tho
I feel like they're not gonna do any communist/nationalist things this time cause they always do it

what do you think the chances are that they pull out a strategies and tactics / foreign policy question this year?

 

[Ethan1k17]

Guys, do we need specific historian quotes?

 

[band6yesplease]

Guys, do we need specific historian quotes?

Yes but u can also definitely make them up in modern ahahha just not too often. just know some key historians- eg Kotkin for Russia
having some actual quotes is a good idea tho, like eg tet "Exploded around the country side like a string of firecrackers" (karnow) Just remember things you think are interesting and can be used in more than one type of essay

 

[band6yesplease]

what do you think the chances are that they pull out a strategies and tactics / foreign policy question this year?

they've never really done a broad foreign policy one eg from 1964 so they could definitely do that but cause it's not a key feature idk maybe not as likely...
I honestly have no idea there's no clear trend or anything and they often repeat questions so yeah i really dk and thats so scary haha

 

[Ethan1k17]

Yes but u can also definitely make them up in modern ahahha just not too often. just know some key historians- eg Kotkin for Russia
having some actual quotes is a good idea tho, like eg tet "Exploded around the country side like a string of firecrackers" (karnow) Just remember things you think are interesting and can be used in more than one type of essay

Damn fair enough will defo make some up, I reckon 2-3 quotes from historians would be enough surely?

 

[Masaken]

Damn fair enough will defo make some up, I reckon 2-3 quotes from historians would be enough surely?

They're fine with just one historian per essay seeing as it's not required in the syllabus/assessment band indicators.

If you do use historians they're not looking to see you just integrate a quote into your paragraph, they want to know what you're arguing. I use historians but I never quote them directly because that just shows the markers you don't really understand the quote and you're just putting it in hoping you get marks. To show that you do and you're genuinely using the historian to support your argument, talk about their argument rather than the quote.

So something like: '... as argued by historian John Lewis Gaddis, the Yom Kippur War highlighted the fragile nature of detente where both superpowers sought to take unilateral advantage over the expense of the other.'

Another way to elevate your essay is with the use of counterarguments. My teacher used to mark the HSC and as soon as they see a well-integrated and used counterargument they look towards a mark in the top band. So something like 'While historian says this, there is sufficient evidence to suggest otherwise, where...' etc etc

 

[roryahoy]

What do you guys think the 10-15 marker will be on for the core??
they haven't done a UN one ... but then again the 10-15s have all been kinda trash since 2019 except for 2021

iT might Be UN but I also Think it could be Impact of the regime oN Germany

 

[roryahoy]

They're fine with just one historian per essay seeing as it's not required in the syllabus/assessment band indicators.

If you do use historians they're not looking to see you just integrate a quote into your paragraph, they want to know what you're arguing. I use historians but I never quote them directly because that just shows the markers you don't really understand the quote and you're just putting it in hoping you get marks. To show that you do and you're genuinely using the historian to support your argument, talk about their argument rather than the quote.

So something like: '... as argued by historian John Lewis Gaddis, the Yom Kippur War highlighted the fragile nature of detente where both superpowers sought to take unilateral advantage over the expense of the other.'

Another way to elevate your essay is with the use of counterarguments. My teacher used to mark the HSC and as soon as they see a well-integrated and used counterargument they look towards a mark in the top band. So something like 'While historian says this, there is sufficient evidence to suggest otherwise, where...' etc etc

Wow ReallY? i Actually didN't know yOu could Do that bEcause my TEachers said Quotes are FiNe... i'Ve nEver HEard of counterarguments tHough i'm a Bit WORried...

 

[Ethan1k17]

They're fine with just one historian per essay seeing as it's not required in the syllabus/assessment band indicators.

If you do use historians they're not looking to see you just integrate a quote into your paragraph, they want to know what you're arguing. I use historians but I never quote them directly because that just shows the markers you don't really understand the quote and you're just putting it in hoping you get marks. To show that you do and you're genuinely using the historian to support your argument, talk about their argument rather than the quote.

So something like: '... as argued by historian John Lewis Gaddis, the Yom Kippur War highlighted the fragile nature of detente where both superpowers sought to take unilateral advantage over the expense of the other.'

Another way to elevate your essay is with the use of counterarguments. My teacher used to mark the HSC and as soon as they see a well-integrated and used counterargument they look towards a mark in the top band. So something like 'While historian says this, there is sufficient evidence to suggest otherwise, where...' etc etc

Thank you very much, this is class. I’ll make sure to find out a few historians views on issues then. Also the counter argument thing is class, usually I try to argue against the question as my teacher says to do, but going against historians is class. Thanks!