Modern History Exam Thoughts (merged) (1 Viewer)

[RyddeckerSMP]

lol RyddeckerSMP just realised I do exactly the same subjects as you

I dropped ext2 maths though..... apart from that, yes.

 

[c_james]

Slde - If you don't use sources, expect the bottom band for that question. That's what our teacher did to a few students in an assessment during the year.

Not really. I've seen exemplars which made absolutely no use of historiography whatsoever. They made up for it, however, with very forceful arguments and well-developed theses.

Placing someone in the bottom band for a lack of quotations is utterly stupid, and I very much doubt this occurs in the marking centre (thank god for double marking). Having said that, I made extensive use of historiography, as it is better to be safe than sorry.

 

[c_james]

hey why would u talk about diem?
i wrote about bombs such as napalm and agent orange, and halmets am i correct? im not very good with modern history. but i did try my best...

You would talk about Diem because the US installed Diem, and the South Vietnamese immediately associated him with American interests in the region. He directly caused suffering by persecuting Buddhists, and the US thus indirectly caused such suffering through its support of Diem up until 1963. Heck, I rattled on about Diem for roughly half my essay. If you didn't mention him, however, it doesn't matter - there were many approaches to the question, each of which was valid, and the stuff you mentioned was relevant.

The tricky part of the question was bringing Cambodia into it - I wrote much more on the South Vietnamese than the Cambodians (roughly 75% on Vietnam, 25% on Cambodia).

 

[rusty_rouge]

wellz...I did Indochina, Germany, Leni Riefenstahl and obviously WW1.. all the questions were essays id done and rememeberd so i was stoked with the questions... i hope i do well coz ma teacher told me she expected band 6, along with like the top 5 people in the grade (who will get band 6 for everything lol) so the pressure was on...i HOPE i get the marks i need....good job everyone for completing one of the hardest topics mwa xo

Well christine, hmmm, I liked it, but the Pacific questions couldve been better. And we'll go get those band sixes girl! Mwa. Haha your evil enemy Kate.

 

[rusty_rouge]

I thought modern history was a fair test - no outrageously difficult questions, yet they all, especially the National Studies and International Studies, made us apply what we know rather than just regurgitate it. Probably a good way of distinguishing us all, but it made the exam a little more time-consumng.

 

[tabularasa]

I thought WWI was pretty alright nothign really curly in that one.
GErmany i did the totalitarian state although i completely forgot to mention the six things ab0out it so i was like damn it. i think i did alright in that one.
Vietnam is did anti war movements cause i did not even try and study cambodia. It was alright gotr about 5 pages on anti war then said other stuff was important too.

 

[neafoo]

it was okay
i dont think ill do greatly ;(

 

[rusty_rouge]

I actually quite liked the paper - wasn't outrageously difficult question-wise, and it required us more to apply the knowledge rather than regurgitate it.

But overall, I thought it was sound enough - nothing like maths!! - and I think we knew it all deep down.

Germany, Speer and Conflict in the Pacific were all fine for me - what did you guys answer?

 

[rusty_rouge]

Haha ,me and my stupid computer. I'll just shuttup with the repeating myself now...

 

[johnny_87]

c_james - I referred to sources approximately 3 times per page (and sometimes referred to two at once - only if they had the exact same idea/opinion) so I'm set in terms of sourcing and referencing.

 

[Haks]

wat raw mark would u need to get 85-86 in modern?

 

[x_meow_x]

the way i linked it wif the q was the aim of the ussrs policies was to spread communism and thats wat caused the crisis? is that correct or was there anyfin else to add??

i think you'll do fine as long as you back up your argument =)

it said assess the extent so i babbled about how it was due to both USSR and USA policies

 

[the_pun]

I actually quite liked the paper - wasn't outrageously difficult question-wise, and it required us more to apply the knowledge rather than regurgitate it.

But overall, I thought it was sound enough - nothing like maths!! - and I think we knew it all deep down.

Germany, Speer and Conflict in the Pacific were all fine for me - what did you guys answer?

ha yeah i did Germany, Speer and Conflict in Pacific - what questions did u do? i did totalitarian for Germany and Allied force strategies for Japan (decolonisation is the most boring feature i think, but thats just my opinion)

 

[_dhj_]

ha yeah i did Germany, Speer and Conflict in Pacific - what questions did u do? i did totalitarian for Germany and Allied force strategies for Japan (decolonisation is the most boring feature i think, but thats just my opinion)

I did exactly the same electives and questions.

 

[stv_87]

ww1-didnt study somme at all but could almost learn from sources then right stuff about inauguration of technology in breaking stalemate, the morale of soldiers and reduction of army capacities from somme , thus making it easier to brreak stalemate futher on in 1918, the somme was futile and lacked any gains thus not directly breaking lines hoping for 23
germany-totalitarian- all these people posting about totalitarian have done practice essays happy cayuse im one of them-spent 55 mins- 10 pages hoping for 17
leni-first part through me off with public life , i had a set response then for smome reason changed it considerably hoping for 8 maybe 9
-second knew that that q would be there but for some reason i did 03 in stead of 01 but it worked except culture was that based upon german thoughts and expressions-used volksgemeinschaft and how that was a belief reinforced by t of w, aryan ideals of olympia though came out with not playing a role for olympia hoping for 8
indochina-antiwar-had half an hour left and got six pages- i reckon 3 page was the onlyu useful thing intro and how vietnamization acceleartion was basded upon movement used cambodia incursion where arvn labelled mediocre but accelearted due to protest hopin for 18

grand total 75-80 hopfully if markers mark harder than my nuts ultimate fighting teacher. yes thats true he does ultimate fighting best raw mark ever in modern thus happy. found myself virtually not taking the exam seriously as it was my last and i was feeling really sick and got appeal and misadventure

 

[jennylim]

i swear our class was the funniest. because we hadn't been taught totalitarianism or conservative elites, the "check your page numbers" turned into a raucous hullabaloo. we literally started laughing going "OH MY GOD". so funny!!!! we were uncontrollably laughing for about 10 mins before we calmed down.

but it was fantastic for me - each section could not have been better if i had set the paper for myself, quite literally. well...maybe if germany had had a really direct one on collapse of weimar. and perhaps if leni was a straight out "was she a propagandist, or wasn't she?". but realistically speaking, i think that the paper was wonderful. really enjoyed it. wrote 33 pages all up.

 

[Skillo]

Without sounding high-handed and arrogant, that was an extremely straightforward exam and I can't imagine getting <90. I say that with all the humility I can conjur up.

The exam might of been easy to you, but you don't know how your answers weigh up against the rest of the state. And you don't know who's marking it.

Anyone want to share the USA questions with me? I want to see if I was given a rough deal with last year's paper. Hehehe. I remember after my modern exam, i sealed up my 80pg summary and gave it to a young one named my little sister...just thought I might prepare her for all the shit u have to remember! well done guys.

 

[kouklitsa]

For Germany totalitarian question specifically what did people write about? To argue Germany was a totalitairan society I wrote about such things as the Enabling Law and fuhrer had abosolute power, Hitler Youth, prison camps, control of the Wehrmacht, etc etc. Did you guys write the same things.

i was working on the basis of Friedrich's 6-point definition of a totalitarian state from the 1950s.. but then had other historical perspectives saying the term 'totalitarian' was a little bit too narrow and that popular support played an important role in keeping the nazi party in power. ummm but yeh i outlined pretty much the same factors as you

 

[kouklitsa]

oh yeh.. and i pretty much guessed germany, speer and cold war (well the conflict bit and something about policies) so when i saw that paper i was cheering!
my friend looked over at me and knew wat was going through my head because id told her thats what id thought

on the the other hand i didnt focus on the somme in my study! argh... but i pulled out alot of crap that i remember from a while ago... felt that was the best section 1 ive ever done!

hopefully the markers think its gud

 

[hannah03]

i find it really funny that everyone keeps talking about how easy short answer was... not sure if any of you realise, but it's supposed to be easy. If you come out of the exam and say "oh wow, the first section was tough" i doubt you'd be raving about the rest of it...