ATAR Notes: Forum
VCE Stuff => VCE Humanities => VCE Arts/Humanities/Health => VCE Subjects + Help => VCE History: Revolutions => Topic started by: sarahmushy on November 11, 2010, 05:45:52 pm
-
WELL DONE GUYS! IT's FINALLY OVER!
How did everyone go?
Russia was awesome, except for the document analysis! :o
-
Best feeling ever. I threw out my notes and they filled up my once empty bin!!! I don't even care that I made up half of my historiography.
I'm just glad I deffs didn't fail!
-
The extended response question was so similar to 2009( which evidently we did for our SAC)! Russia was really good for Revolution Two. France "publication" question was a tad ambiguous as did it encompass the Cahiers de Doleances? AOS2 was unexpected, but question d lent itself towards a discussion of the sans-culottes during the period (June- September 1792). I'm happy its all over!
-
I didnt do nearly as well as i had hoped. My exhaustive hours of study proved to be in vain, pretty much fucked up lol.
France was screwed for section A, the first question was retarded as.
Russia was easy as.
Overall it was easy, just putting sentences together proved to be my issue.
Oh well, it is what it is.
-
I went ok I guess....Eh....
...
Mwahahahahahahha! It is over! :)
-
YEAAH! ITS OVER! LAST EXAM! loved the essay on france, but the exxtract gave me a wtf feeling ;-; so true too. we didn't have aircon and had to turn off the fans halfway since they were 'distracting'
-
I loved russia for sections one, especially 'how did world war one contribute to the development of the revolution'...
france in section 2 was okay- i didn't like the source that much haha
-
Q 1 of Russia Section A was awesome and exactly what i had studied.
LOVED the essay topic for China, almost identical to the prac one we did yay!
well done guys! :)
-
lol nacho it was fair hot
i got a 32 degree exam in the gym tomorrow ahhh fml
how did you find it?
-
So much easier than I though, and I did it in pretty quick time aswell, and had alot of time to check over.
Rev 2 Russia was good as because we actualy already seen that document and reviewed it, and had very similiar questions!
-
just wondering, for france section 2, what was the answer for the 6 mark question, about 'describe the agitation before the estates general' (something like that)
I found that question most confusing lol
-
Thanks to all help guys....good luck with ur enter scores :angel:
cranberry out
-
It feels good but I dragged on too much, LOL! And keep using repetitive words because I went blank on how to spell basic English words, haha! Ahhh. Hopefully I will get a descent SS since I rambled... :(
-
I thought it was a fairly easy exam. sadly that might drive up the A+ cut off :(. but I suppose it's still possible to rejoice in that it's over.
-
@Spreadbury - that won't matter. If you're better than 90% of the state, you'll still get A+. If everyone gets an advantage, no one gets an advantage.
-
What was needed in the question regsarding the Dismissal of Necker for France section A? Was it information regarding tennis court oath, national assembly, storming of Castile and great fear? And did the public question for part A France emcompas the englightment ?
-
yeh. question 1 was ... how publications effected developement of rev in 1789, so it could be any publications. E.g remonstrances from 1788, sieyes what is the third estate, enlightenment works such spirit of the laws/social contract, encyclopediae.
dismissal of necker i didn't do so well haha.
Id imagine you had to summarize how the public felt about necker, and point out how his dismissal occurred at a time of great pressure, and radicalization of the people. Im interested what others said for these two questions.
-
Dismissal of Necker for part a was easy, and it appealed to me. However the publications one was a little iffy so i just switched to Russia...
People were spending over 35% more on bread due to the "freak hailstones" which caused "severe damage" (malone). Necker was in favour of price regulations, so when he was dismissed the peasantry got pissed.
Also, due to his February Compte Rendu issued in 1781, he was seen as "the only minister capable of tackling the nation's finance problems." (lynch, not the exact quote but pretty accurate.) So when he was dismissed, people were like "wat ze fehk brew?"
Lol i should have done france for part A ):
i didnt know anything about the convention and passed 1793, which i had to talk about in the essay ahhhhh.
-
I found it absurdly easy. This exam was a joke, which is why I'm worried. I may have dropped a mark, can I still get a 50+? I'm ranked 11th in a class of 14, my sac scores are bad but it doesn't matter cos both sac and exam will be the same mark cos of how it ranks. I answered the France "question one" by talking about the social contract by Diderot and how political pornography depicted Louis as a leader that is promiscuous, and related that to modernistic parazzai (which is what apprently gets you "50 student" marks: an ability to understand. For the Russia essay, I demonstrated my knowledge by going into the Stalin regime and the collapse of the soviet union. Even though it was out of the study design, it affirms the revisionist belief that communism was "intrisically faulty" - Robert Figes. Anyway, I'm, worried with one Russia mark. It asked us to point out two characters - I chose "Tsarina" as one rather then "Tsarina Alexei"? Hope thats okay. Hope everyone kicked us! Please let me know what you guys think x.
-
For the Russia essay, I demonstrated my knowledge by going into the Stalin regime and the collapse of the soviet union. Even though it was out of the study design, it affirms the revisionist belief that communism was "intrisically faulty" - Robert Figes.
Are you sure you're supposed to go out of the study design?
"Most students showed good awareness of the framework required for their answer and confined their responses to the appropriate time frames"
http://www.vcaa.vic.edu.au/vcaa/vce/studies/history/revolutions/assessreports/2009/histrevs_assessrep_09.pdf
haha so worried about this exam now!
-
lolz dont be worried, it isnt anything assential. U still can get 15/15 for the essay without it. I just did it cos i had extra time
-
I found it absurdly easy. This exam was a joke, which is why I'm worried. I may have dropped a mark, can I still get a 50+? I'm ranked 11th in a class of 14, my sac scores are bad but it doesn't matter cos both sac and exam will be the same mark cos of how it ranks. I answered the France "question one" by talking about the social contract by Diderot and how political pornography depicted Louis as a leader that is promiscuous, and related that to modernistic parazzai (which is what apprently gets you "50 student" marks: an ability to understand. For the Russia essay, I demonstrated my knowledge by going into the Stalin regime and the collapse of the soviet union. Even though it was out of the study design, it affirms the revisionist belief that communism was "intrisically faulty" - Robert Figes. Anyway, I'm, worried with one Russia mark. It asked us to point out two characters - I chose "Tsarina" as one rather then "Tsarina Alexei"? Hope thats okay. Hope everyone kicked us! Please let me know what you guys think x.
Well considering her name was Alexandra, and her son was called Alexei it was probably a good thing you didn't specify the name :)
-
I think I spelt the Tsarinas name as Alexander, but I'm pretty sure I correctly identified Rasputin....
I really did enjoy that question, nothing beats a good Rasputin essay, particularly when most quotes mention him to be 'premiscuous, indulgent in orgies, and his brutal murder, where he just wouldn't die'.
I think for Rasputin though, many people would have left out ministerial leapfrog, which would be crucial information.
-
I think I spelt the Tsarinas name as Alexander, but I'm pretty sure I correctly identified Rasputin....
I really did enjoy that question, nothing beats a good Rasputin essay, particularly when most quotes mention him to be 'premiscuous, indulgent in orgies, and his brutal murder, where he just wouldn't die'.
I think for Rasputin though, many people would have left out ministerial leapfrog, which would be crucial information.
As long as you put in the fact he died in 1913 and upon his return on April 3rd released his Theses, you should be right.