Login

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

March 29, 2024, 08:08:45 am

Author Topic: VCE History Revolutions Question Thread  (Read 54395 times)  Share 

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

mmikh99

  • Fresh Poster
  • *
  • Posts: 2
  • Respect: 0
Re: History Revolutions Question Thread
« Reply #15 on: August 10, 2017, 07:05:29 pm »
0
is it helpful to look at past exams and try to guess the topic or at least eliminate what won't be on the coming exam? For example, last year there was a question on the Cheka for Russia, so it mostly likely won't be on the exam this year.

patriciarose

  • Trendsetter
  • **
  • Posts: 159
  • Respect: +63
Re: History Revolutions Question Thread
« Reply #16 on: August 10, 2017, 07:36:52 pm »
+3
there's only one past exam for the current study design, so there's no guarantee the questions won't be similar to the ones they asked prior to 2016, when the old study design was still in use. so i don't think you physically can guess the topic haha, and in terms of eliminating, i don't think that really works because even if the specific question doesn't mention the cheka, you can still discuss them in your answer if it's relevant (and it probably will be). since a lot of the questions kind of leave it up to you to figure out what you want to talk about, there's no point not learning about the cheka because the exam asked about it last year so it won't explicitly ask for them this year; you'd be shooting yourself in the foot by excluding them because they tied into so many events in russia AOS2.

the only thing you might be able to work out is if the questions will be narrow or wide – for example, the essay prompt might have been focused on a particular event or person last year, which suggests it'll probably be more general this year. but idk whether that's worth bothering about unless it makes you feel better to have a general idea of something which may or may not come true haha.
SUBJECTS |  English [47], Literature [46], Extension History @LTU [4.5]

ATAR (2017) | 95.95

K888

  • VIC MVP - 2017
  • National Moderator
  • ATAR Notes Legend
  • *****
  • Posts: 3705
  • Respect: +2877
Re: History Revolutions Question Thread
« Reply #17 on: August 11, 2017, 11:11:32 pm »
+5
is it helpful to look at past exams and try to guess the topic or at least eliminate what won't be on the coming exam? For example, last year there was a question on the Cheka for Russia, so it mostly likely won't be on the exam this year.
My two cents:

This worked for me, with the past study design, because I had years of past exams to go off. I correctly guessed the timeframes for the 3 or 4 pointer questions and doc study for China, which was super helpful. But it's really hard to do with new study designs, and as patriciarose said, even if the question doesn't specifically mention the Cheka, you could likely still end up writing about them. You're better off making sure you know everything well, but perhaps if time gets tight with revision, it'll give you something you might not have to revise as closely.
The key with predicting questions for Revs (if you're gonna do it) to me, is to pick the timeframe, not the specific question. I don't know how you study it in your class, but we studied things in timeframes/groups of years that fit together (one example being say, 1949-1953, 1953-1957, and so on for China).

One key point though - VCAA like to stick things in that have historically been done poorly. So make sure you read over the examiner's report, as you might find that they'll incorporate some stuff that was done poorly last year in this year's exam (will likely not be overt, though). :)

TheCommando

  • Forum Obsessive
  • ***
  • Posts: 316
  • Respect: +6
Re: History Revolutions Question Thread
« Reply #18 on: August 12, 2017, 10:20:55 am »
+1
it would have been counterproductive for the bolsheviks to allow the provisional government to be toppled (by anyone other than themselves, that is) because they were made much stronger by the government and military being at odds with each other. they had a better chance of overthrowing the provisional government than the whole army, basically.

Thanks! sorry for the late reply but also,
If they were made much stronger by the government and millitary being at odds with one another it doesnt make sense that they will effectively attempt to kill of the army either way to act in a major counter revolutionary manner

how i think about it now was that Kornilov as well was a threat to the Soviets as he was a version of the old who he absolutely despised the bolshevicks and soviets and was a counter revolutionary threat due to his radical ideas and his position and ability
« Last Edit: August 12, 2017, 10:24:04 am by TheCommando »

TheCommando

  • Forum Obsessive
  • ***
  • Posts: 316
  • Respect: +6
Re: History Revolutions Question Thread
« Reply #19 on: September 08, 2017, 04:40:11 pm »
0
'The Bolshevik alternative was to vest both managerial and control powers in the state'
So this was the bolsheviks response to factory commitee leaders attempting to impose their syndical model (where workers union control the means of production). My question is does this mean lenin instead wanted to the industries and factories to be controlled by the government instead of the workers which angered left wing people in his party

K888

  • VIC MVP - 2017
  • National Moderator
  • ATAR Notes Legend
  • *****
  • Posts: 3705
  • Respect: +2877
Re: History Revolutions Question Thread
« Reply #20 on: September 11, 2017, 04:18:11 pm »
+3
'The Bolshevik alternative was to vest both managerial and control powers in the state'
So this was the bolsheviks response to factory commitee leaders attempting to impose their syndical model (where workers union control the means of production). My question is does this mean lenin instead wanted to the industries and factories to be controlled by the government instead of the workers which angered left wing people in his party
Yep, so during this time, the Bolsheviks were establishing and running State Capitalism. They'd inherited a country that was essentially in financial ruin - it was crippled. They were fighting a very costly war (like, there were still a million or so soldiers on the Eastern Front at the end of 1917), the industrial sector was basically non-functioning because of strikes, the train/transport network sucked big time, and they were struggling to feed people in the cities.
So, State Capitalism was a bit of a bridging thing between the Bolshevik takeover and implementation of socialist policies. It was designed to turn the economy around and give the Bolsheviks something to work with. As a part of State Capitalism, the Bolsheviks would have control over the major sectors of the economy - heavy industry, mining, finance, factories, that sort of thing.
As an aside, this was a return to Marxist policy by Lenin - as Marx had argued that capitalism had to be developed before socialism can occur.

So, this angered the syndicalists - whose movement had sprung up under the time of the Provisional Government. But the key thing is, Lenin said that syndicalism needed to wait for a later time - what he needed to immediately establish was a strong and stable economy, in order to allow Russia to survive. Unfortunately though, this alienated both the syndicalists and the left-wing of his party - the latter particularly because they saw this as a move away from proper socialism, and believed that Lenin and the Bolsheviks were compromising their vision, etc.

So, in a nutshell/tl;dr:
- The Bolsheviks inherited a Russia that was unstable, and basically in complete financial ruin. They needed to stabilise the economy if they had any hope of saving the country and their power
- Bolshevik control of the factories/industry was a key part of State Capitalism (which Lenin saw as a transitional phase between them taking power and them moving onto proper socialism, as well as allowing him to stabilise the economy)
- This angered the left wing of his party, because they believed Lenin was compromising socialist values

Want to emphasise how important it is to understand State Capitalism here :)
Hope this helped! Please let me know if you need any clarification.

Mapleflame

  • Adventurer
  • *
  • Posts: 17
  • Greetings earthlings.
  • Respect: 0
Re: History Revolutions Question Thread
« Reply #21 on: September 14, 2017, 06:55:07 pm »
0

Does anyone have/know where to find a list of practice essay questions?
2016~Biology [31]

2017~Chemistry, EL, Specialist, Methods, Revolutions.

I also code BBCode, some VBA, and HTML

Learning English, Irish Gaelic, and French.

~A.H

K888

  • VIC MVP - 2017
  • National Moderator
  • ATAR Notes Legend
  • *****
  • Posts: 3705
  • Respect: +2877
Re: History Revolutions Question Thread
« Reply #22 on: September 14, 2017, 07:06:09 pm »
+3
Does anyone have/know where to find a list of practice essay questions?

Best to ask your teacher, as they should have some resources available to them, or should be able to see if the school can purchase these resources for you.
I believe http://alphahistory.com/ also has some essay questions available, unsure whether they fit the style of the exam essay questions. I think also depending on the textbook you have, the textbook should have some practice questions in it :)

Would really recommend asking your teacher though, because they can also always make up essay questions for you - I got my teacher to do this for me when I did Revs.

All the best! :)

oJL8A99A

  • Victorian
  • Trailblazer
  • *
  • Posts: 29
  • Respect: +1
Re: History Revolutions Question Thread
« Reply #23 on: September 25, 2017, 09:57:44 pm »
0
I'm just wondering, for Section A questions 2 and 3 (the 10 markers) do we need to include historians in our responses?

I've heard mixed answers from my teachers, lecturers, and other students and I don't know whether to be safe and include them or save myself time memorising other pieces of evidence.

Thanks  :)

K888

  • VIC MVP - 2017
  • National Moderator
  • ATAR Notes Legend
  • *****
  • Posts: 3705
  • Respect: +2877
Re: History Revolutions Question Thread
« Reply #24 on: September 25, 2017, 10:34:57 pm »
+5
I'm just wondering, for Section A questions 2 and 3 (the 10 markers) do we need to include historians in our responses?

I've heard mixed answers from my teachers, lecturers, and other students and I don't know whether to be safe and include them or save myself time memorising other pieces of evidence.

Thanks  :)
Hi there!
So, these questions are basically the new equivalent of the 3 or 4 pointers from the old study design (when I did Revs)- didn't need historians interpretations in those ones.
However, I just read over the exam report from last year:
Quote from: VCAA
These questions began with the command word ‘explain’ and students should have focused on using primary sources and historical interpretations as evidence to support an argument about the consequences of the Revolution. The highest-scoring answers presented an array of detailed and precise evidence from primary sources and historical interpretations. Answers should always include dates for named legislation or events, and many students placed this in brackets. Some responses included evidence from historical interpretations, but this often disrupted the flow of a tightly controlled argument. The highest-scoring answers began with a one-sentence contention or outline. This helped to focus the response and keep the supporting details focused on the question. High-scoring answers also tended to either use paragraphs or signpost phrases to announce the start of each point and organise the steps in an argument.

Even VCAA are giving mixed signals! The example of the high scoring response has some historian viewpoints in there, though. So to me, it seems that including the historians, as long as you're at the point of comfortably writing high scoring responses/know how to integrate the viewpoint(s), can really be helpful.
VCAA's quote about the example:
Quote from: VCAA
Its strength is also the presentation of detailed evidence from primary sources and historical interpretations that is weighed carefully in the construction of the argument.
So - if you can do it well, from this, I'd say put it in! Why not maximise your marks? Imo, seems like you could still score a high mark with a well written piece (making sure you're focusing on answering the question, not just explaining events) without a historian viewpoint, but I'd argue that as long as you can fit it in well, it'd enrich your piece. The thing about Revs is that it's so important to nail how you answer questions, so I guess you need to ask yourself whether including the historians is gonna make your answers of better quality, or whether it won't.
I mean like, in the end, it doesn't overtly say you have to include historian viewpoints in there - so, probably repeating myself, but I'd argue that you can score well either way. It's not like it says you have to reference other views (unlike in your c. response in question 1).

What does your teacher say? Is there something said specifically in the study design?
Maybe ask your teacher if they can get in contact with a VCAA marker/the head examiner? My teacher regularly liaised with VCAA History people to make sure my class was doing things the best possible way - and I seriously credit that and his general efforts as the main reason I did well :) HTAV might also be worth contacting.

If anyone else has any opinions or a more clear-cut answer, would be glad to hear it!

I'm gonna go have a look over the study design and resources on the VCAA website to see if I can find out anything further :)

patriciarose

  • Trendsetter
  • **
  • Posts: 159
  • Respect: +63
Re: History Revolutions Question Thread
« Reply #25 on: September 28, 2017, 09:16:37 pm »
+3
I'm just wondering, for Section A questions 2 and 3 (the 10 markers) do we need to include historians in our responses?

I've heard mixed answers from my teachers, lecturers, and other students and I don't know whether to be safe and include them or save myself time memorising other pieces of evidence.

Thanks  :)

adding on to the last part of what K888, some people scored high 40s in revs at my school last year, so first year of this study design, and basically we've been taught that you don't need historians for Qs 2&3 but you can use them providing they don't override your primary quotes. the main thing seems to be not letting historians make your argument for you, or drown out your evidence (: but it's definitely possible to get all the marks without it! it's not like a C question where you need a historian for every point (:
SUBJECTS |  English [47], Literature [46], Extension History @LTU [4.5]

ATAR (2017) | 95.95

fish99

  • Adventurer
  • *
  • Posts: 16
  • Respect: 0
Re: History Revolutions Question Thread
« Reply #26 on: October 18, 2017, 04:43:30 pm »
0
Does anyone have some punchy Enlightenment quotes for American Revolution?

madic

  • Adventurer
  • *
  • Posts: 8
  • Respect: 0
Re: History Revolutions Question Thread
« Reply #27 on: October 29, 2017, 06:36:12 pm »
0
With America AOS2, would you count the key knowledge regarding 'economic development' as the actions of Robert Morris (e.g. organising loans from international banks and banning Congress' paper notes)?
Or the ability of Congress to tax under the Constitution (replacing their powers w/ the Articles of Confederation) and states being unable to coin money?

Is there more that I am forgetting?

K888

  • VIC MVP - 2017
  • National Moderator
  • ATAR Notes Legend
  • *****
  • Posts: 3705
  • Respect: +2877
Re: History Revolutions Question Thread
« Reply #28 on: November 03, 2017, 12:59:15 pm »
+4
With America AOS2, would you count the key knowledge regarding 'economic development' as the actions of Robert Morris (e.g. organising loans from international banks and banning Congress' paper notes)?
Or the ability of Congress to tax under the Constitution (replacing their powers w/ the Articles of Confederation) and states being unable to coin money?

Is there more that I am forgetting?
I have very limited knowledge of the American revolution, so hopefully someone can answer specifically! But, from the principles of revs that I know, these seem fine. As long as you have something to write, and you think that you can back yourself up (particularly relating it to the consequences of revolution), then you're all good. :)
If you're stuck, Alpha History provide some pretty good info, and there might be something helpful in the notes section of AN.


Just a general reminder (to anyone reading) that AOS2 is all about the consequences of revolution - the challenges that were faced, etc. These are the key questions to ask for AOS2 (taken from the study design):
- How did the consequences of revolution shape the new order?
- How did the new regime consolidate its power?
- How did the revolution affect the experiences of those who lived through it?
- To what extent was society changed and revolutionary ideas achieved?

I think a big thing to focus on is how revolutionary ideologies are often compromised after the revolution due to the consequences of challenges.
If you can analyse the challenges the new regimes faced, and assess the success of the new regime in addressing the challenges and evaluate the extent to which there was wide-reaching/dramatic change (whether this be progress or decline), you'll be sweet. :)

TheCommando

  • Forum Obsessive
  • ***
  • Posts: 316
  • Respect: +6
Re: History Revolutions Question Thread
« Reply #29 on: November 04, 2017, 11:31:18 am »
0
Hey i was just wondering for the russian revolution, how did the provisional government have a middlclass parlimentary democracy and why do utalk about think when answering the question 'how did the formation of the provisional government in Feb 1917 contribute to the developmentt of the russian revolution'?