Jump to content

History May 2017 Discussions/Debate


Richard Stifler

Recommended Posts

Hey guys,

I have been kinda exasperated and anxious with my History HL exam now in may: more than being a very demanding subject, it has a less padronised program and so can be considered to be harder to get top marks. Don't wanna seem kinda sponger but if you could give a few tips, talk about your situation with the subject, discuss the subject itself and, if you may, attach some notes or practicing answers to past papers (this was actually something not only I but also more people could benefit from, because for every subject you must have an effective writing, which enables you to get top marks). To get ambitious grades in this rigorous subject, we must intertwine knowledge with practice (until the exams, we can get both, so I would like to ask you, who has had good answers/methodology that would like to share with us).

I have studied the following modules: WW1, Tsarist Russia, Weimar Republic, single party states such as Hitler's Germany and Stalin's Russia, WW2, League of Nations, Cold War with Vietnam, Korea, Cuba all of that (also including the impact of the UN in Cold War, the relation between China and the USA and Russia and China), the Spanish Civil War, Algerian War and Falkland War.

Cheers,

Richard  

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

Hi!

This sounds like a wicked idea. I am studying for my mocks at the moments, and have been trying to find the best way in which to structure my work. At the moment I am going paper-wise, which has seemed useful so far, starting with the Paper 3 which lets me go somewhat chronologically. This helps me remember dates and the order of events, something which I can struggle with at times. How is everyone else studying? I am planning on doing a lot of Paper 1s, as it seems to be here I have the most trouble with the very specific way of structuring and the importance of time management.

 

We have done Tsarist Russia, single party states and the rise, rule and foreign policy of dictators (Hitler, Mussolini, Mao, Stalin), Japanese expansionism, Cold War and its effects on international diplomacy, causes of the First World War, causes of the Second World War, the unification of Italy, the unification of Germany, the League of Nations, Lenin

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

3 hours ago, lollieluvers said:

Hi!

This sounds like a wicked idea. I am studying for my mocks at the moments, and have been trying to find the best way in which to structure my work. At the moment I am going paper-wise, which has seemed useful so far, starting with the Paper 3 which lets me go somewhat chronologically. This helps me remember dates and the order of events, something which I can struggle with at times. How is everyone else studying? I am planning on doing a lot of Paper 1s, as it seems to be here I have the most trouble with the very specific way of structuring and the importance of time management.

 

We have done Tsarist Russia, single party states and the rise, rule and foreign policy of dictators (Hitler, Mussolini, Mao, Stalin), Japanese expansionism, Cold War and its effects on international diplomacy, causes of the First World War, causes of the Second World War, the unification of Italy, the unification of Germany, the League of Nations, Lenin

Yeah I am also struggling with my mocks, which start right away in march! I am very ambitious about History, really hope to get at least a 6, but I am also looking for the 7 ahah. Paper 1 Idk why is the hardest for me, and its supposed to lift the grades and help you with the rest of the long essay papers... I am still studying the modules, the cold war seems so dense that I dont even know if I can study all for the mock papers...  

Link to post
Share on other sites

Whilst it's always good to have a historical quote or two around, it's also a good idea to make tables on historical schools of thought for each of your topics. These are often easier to memorise. If worst comes to worst, quote the authors of your textbook.

And in your essay, always evaluate these views! You don't necessarily have to dedicate a full paragraph to a counterargument; a limitation can just be mentioned right before you summarise each paragraph up.

e.g. for the Cuban missile crisis:

Orthodox

Revisionist

Post-Revisionist

  • Statesmanlike; Kennedy chose not to invade Cuba despite pressures from his ExComm

  • The Missile Crisis was “Kennedy’s finest hour” (Rogers + Thomas [textbook])

  • Sorensen, Neustadt

  • The missiles actually represented a threat to American security

  • Kennedy raised the world to an unnecessary level of alarm with the crisis

  • Horowitz, Stone

  • Many things could have gone wrong; it was a “bluff”. The Russians could have just as easily reacted badly to the quarantine

  • The missiles didn’t affect the nuclear balance

  • With the November election coming up for Kennedy + the failure of the Bay of Pigs, he may have felt pressured into combatting Russia by any means necessary

  • Kennedy did act in a statesman-like way

  • Despite ExComm's wishes, Kennedy did remove Turkey’s missiles in secret

 

Edited by LeFeuilly
  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...