Modern History Exam Discussion (and Suggested Answers!)

[sudodds]

OK SO HERE IT GOES:

I'M READY.

Section 1: Really thankful I discovered that Events to Armistice dot point as it made up the majority of my info I used for Question 7.

Yes!! I know when I saw that I was so grateful that that had come up on the question thread!

For the MC I had:
1. D, 2. B, 3. C (I personally had C here Susie as I couldn't see how it related to B - I think I get your explanation but at the same time I can't see the tactical success in Source B so I'm also not 100% at all haha). 4. A, 5. Woodrow Wilson, 6. Just contrasted Wilson's idealistic aims as shown in the source + own knowledge of 14 points vs Clemenceau's want for revenge and all victorious allies to punish Germany as in source + own knowledge of stats he wanted like 25,000 machine guns surrendered by Germans and reparations.

Awesome! Smashing section I so far!!!

Question 7: Source C: I contrasted the Somme, where tanks were used ineffectively with Amiens where 552 tanks, 800 aircraft, artillery fire was all used in coordination with each other and how this demonstrated the change of tactics over time and how it was successful as 24,000 POW captured in 3 days. Also looked at Hamel for Source D and how 60 Mark V tanks were used with 600 guns and how tanks were used more effectively again also alluding to the developments eg. they now carry cribs. Referred to how as a result of all these battles combined and the change in tactics, able to break impenetrable Hindenburg Line and war over. That was that in essence

Awesome!! Sound absolutely fantastic detail in their dancing phalanges - I'm sure you smashed it

Question 8: Okay - I think I was an idiot here and off memory wrote both sources were partially useful when Source A is limited. Would I lose a mark for this?

I said Source A was partially useful too! No stress You can definitely argue that it was partially useful

For Source A I said it was useful in that it provided historians with an idea into how propaganda was used on the American home front for rationing (used the stat of u boats sinking 500000 tonnes here) and thus demonstrating how America was a helpful ally contrasting this with Germany's allies who didn't even break through one line from 1914-1917.

oooo interesting argument! I like how you linked it to the failure of Germany's allies as well - great point

I said it was limited in that it didn't show the impact of propaganda and whether it actually did lead to German collapse/Allied victory. Also did perspective American Govt. and thus highly reliable as evidence of propaganda used. From that brief summary of what I wrote, do you think they would still mark me down for partially useful rather than of limited use?

Nah, sounds like that was a fantastic analysis of Source A, no worries at all!

For Source B I did partially as while Hindenburg discussed some good reasons eg. lack of manpower following Ludendorff Offensive, lack of resources, bad morale, he was writing a memoir and thus could have steered the failure of the war away from his own failings as commander and towards other reasons. Also said it lacked specifics/details and brought in some of my own to show how it would be more reliable.

another very interesting point! Looks like you absolutely smashed this section Dancing Phalanges! Not that I'm surprised, but still impressed, as it was quite a tricky Section!

SECTION 2 - GERMANY
So for both Germany and Pacific I feel like I picked the worse question haha!

Seeing as, at least for Germany, both questions looked pretty good I doubt it will have affected you that much if at all Well done!

PERSONALITY – Speer
My most confident section out of the paper.

Woohoo! Definitely think that Section III was really great overall - no curve balls, which was fantastic, and definitely would have worked well for all the different personalities

Part b
A nice take on the shaper/shaped by events type question.
Argued hitler's (I literally wrote Hitler 3-4 times instead of speer and kept having to cross it out because i did personality after germany haha!!)
significance moderately influenced by his contribution to change eg.

AHAHAHAHA used to do this all the time with Lenin and Trotsky!

Change
Work in transforming armaments ministry with efficiency etc.
Changed public perceptions of himself at Nuremberg trials by going against other Nazis who wanted to idolise hitler thus impact his significance in history
Not change
Took advantage of existing german values of volksgemeinschaft and its sense of permanence and dominance in the success/significance of his architecture eg. Germany stadium and Nuremberg rallies as propaganda
Took advantage of existing ideology r.e other races inferior through exclusion of jews in jew flats and exploitation of slave labour in order to profit his efficiency and therefore significance in war effort

Again, though I don't know Speer, from what little I do know this sounds like an awesome response! No wonder you're confident

CONFLICT IN THE PACIFIC
Ok – so I really feel like I should have done option B. It was way easier to write heaps about and I knew thousands of stats. However, I was scared off by the idea of someone like Bruce Dennett marking my work with years of experience in military strategy since that’s the bit I was lacking in understanding – how specifically the Japanese failed militarily etc.

Bruce can be pretty scary ahaha. He a gem last year, being willing to read over my major work for extension, and one of his bits of feedback was literally just a highlight of an entire paragraph, and the word "Bollocks" right next to it ahaha, gotta love him <3

So I went with a) Assess the effect of conflict in pacific on civilians in occupied territories.
I was definitely 100% comfortable with writing this – thesis being that the effect varied according to how each occupied territory aided the war effort so being:
PARA 1: Malaya – military significance – little care for human safety – destructive impact
PARA 2: Dutch east indies – natural resources – slave labour – significant impact too
Para 3: Thailand – little significance and collaboration from thai govt. – some economic sanctions – yet escaped much of destruction
Only one qualm on this – I put one statistic in the dutch east indies para instead of Malaya – reckon ill lose a mark for this or the markers wont even notice haha

SORRY FOR THE LONG POST but that is me done – just wanted to hear people’s thoughts!
Hope everyone did well!

Highly doubt they'll notice, no stress

CONGRATULATIONS DANCING PHALANGES!!!! Sounds like you absolutely smashed this paper All of your hard work has paid off!!

Now go and take a well deserved break

Great work,

Susie

[sudodds]

YAYYYYY!!!!!

OVERRRR!!!!  
CONGRATS EVERYONE!!!!

i also did C for that WW1 MC....?!?! so hope its right!!
and i alluded to totalitarianism in Germany??!? hope its ok?!...

WOOHOOOOO!!!!!

How did you find the paper overall droodsh? And I'm sure that alluding to totalitarianism is fine for the Germany essay - no stress!

[sudodds]

Hell yeah - looks like its C. Cheers guys.

For Russia I took option (a) (probably the least popular) and went:

If I had done this paper I would have done (a) as well! Was disappointed that we didn't get a B-COP question You lucky things you

Affirmative:
Appeased the peasants - no involvement in the Whites, instead they made their own Green armies.
Enabled Trotsky to reform the Red Army, crucial for victory by 1921.
Forced the development of War Communism (as the Treaty Terms were harsh) and hence the NEP.

Awesome! Sounds like a fantastic way to answer the question I love how you linked all the different factors to the Treaty That is one of the harder parts, but it looks like you did it really well!

For Indochina I took B (not sure if I should be talking about the Khmer Rouge here as it said "communist victory in Indochina"? did it anyway):

From what I've been told this was the nicer question of the two, so good idea choosing this one

Affirmative:
Nationalism inspired the Viet Cong to be incredibly devoted - gave me a chance to talk about Tet
Nationalism inspired the support of the peasantry required for a People's War and also crucial for Pol Pot.
Communism was a factor - Chinese/USSR support for Khmer Rouge/North, communism forced the USA to look at the conflict from a Cold War perspective and hence led to improper strategies/tactics (war of attrition).

Again, sounds like a fantastic way to respond to this question!

Great work

Susie

[sudodds]

I feel like I did reasonably well. The core wasn't too hard and I'm quite confident with my answers (well I was, until I saw Susie's answers  I picked c for 1 and c for 3). Very happy with the source analysis, shout out to Susie for the amazing breakdown in the video 

Aye I'm not NESA! Nothing to say that i'm 100% correct with my answers - don't count your chickens until they hatch!
And yay!!!! i'm so glad you found it useful

I feel like I had really good arguments for Sections 2 and 4 (Germany and Indochina), but I'm unsure on how well my discussion of examples were. I ensured that each paragraph was linked to the overall judgement, but I guess I won't know how well (or how bad) I went until 14th December.

Arguments are always the main thing don't worry, so as long as they were strong thats the main thing!

As for the personality (we did Speer), I have to say that was the part I was most worried about. I knew the content and I had great examples, but up until yesterday I still had trouble managing to answer both parts in the required time. Luckily the questions were pretty easy (I disagreed with the statement in part b, what did everyone else do?) and I managed to finish in time. I only had two body paragraphs for part b but they were quite extensive and detailed, so would it still affect me for not having three?

I'm glad you found the question accessible!! I thought it was a pretty good question too And 2 paragraphs is A-okay for Part B no stress! I had 2 paragraphs last year for one of my essays and they're meant to be even longer! As long as the argument and the detail is there, then you'll be fine

Anyways, apart from all that, I'm also very annoyed at one other thing. I want to know how much my peers' marks will affect mine and the rest of class? One of the students in my class didn't attempt one section. A WHOLE SECTION!!!! 25 MARKS!!! I'm angry and annoyed and frustrated. Even though I know there's nothing anyone can do anymore, I'm still slightly worried about how this (or any mark, really) affects the rest of the cohort.

That sucks, but it shouldn't affect you too much, if at all! I had two girls in my ancient cohort literally not attempt the entire thing (one girl wrote her essay in french? but like, she can't speak french? she just wrote random french phrases?) but I still got a band 6 mark for the subject

GREAT WORK ZAINBOW!! Sounds like overall you went really well, even if you're a bit concerned with a few areas Everyone feels like that after leaving an exam - I remember I literally almost cried tell my teacher afterwards that I only gave myself 30 mins for Cold War, and it literally didn't affect me at all! We blow our "failures" up in our mind, when often they weren't even failures, they could just be "neutrals" or even "successes in disguise".

Good job and congratulations! It's over now!!!

Susie

[dancing phalanges]

Spoiler

I'M READY.Yes!! I know when I saw that I was so grateful that that had come up on the question thread!Awesome! Smashing section I so far!!!Awesome!! Sound absolutely fantastic detail in their dancing phalanges - I'm sure you smashed it
I said Source A was partially useful too! No stress You can definitely argue that it was partially useful
oooo interesting argument! I like how you linked it to the failure of Germany's allies as well - great point
Nah, sounds like that was a fantastic analysis of Source A, no worries at all!
another very interesting point! Looks like you absolutely smashed this section Dancing Phalanges! Not that I'm surprised, but still impressed, as it was quite a tricky Section!
Seeing as, at least for Germany, both questions looked pretty good I doubt it will have affected you that much if at all Well done!
Woohoo! Definitely think that Section III was really great overall - no curve balls, which was fantastic, and definitely would have worked well for all the different personalities
AHAHAHAHA used to do this all the time with Lenin and Trotsky!Again, though I don't know Speer, from what little I do know this sounds like an awesome response! No wonder you're confident
Bruce can be pretty scary ahaha. He a gem last year, being willing to read over my major work for extension, and one of his bits of feedback was literally just a highlight of an entire paragraph, and the word "Bollocks" right next to it ahaha, gotta love him <3

Highly doubt they'll notice, no stress

CONGRATULATIONS DANCING PHALANGES!!!! Sounds like you absolutely smashed this paper All of your hard work has paid off!!

Now go and take a well deserved break

Great work,

Susie

Thanks so much for going through this Susie! Can't thank you enough for the whole year

[_____]

If I had done this paper I would have done (a) as well! Was disappointed that we didn't get a B-COP question You lucky things you
Awesome! Sounds like a fantastic way to answer the question I love how you linked all the different factors to the Treaty That is one of the harder parts, but it looks like you did it really well!
From what I've been told this was the nicer question of the two, so good idea choosing this one
Again, sounds like a fantastic way to respond to this question!

Great work

Susie

Phew. Only thing is I've found out now that the Second Indochina War didn't technically include all the BS going on in Cambodia. Fortunately I focused on Vietnam, but I could lose marks for not knowing something so elementary. Still think I can scrape 88+ raw though.

[sudodds]

Really annoyed with my exam technique, didn't get a chance to finish Conflict in Europe question, had to resort to using dot point form. Overall, I think I did reasonably well.

Ah that's a shame, but don't stress too much! I was very pressed for time with Cold War last year (stupidly left myself only 30 mins to write a whole essay), and I didn't write everything that I wanted to, but it still went well in the end

Glad you think it went well overall though! What was your favourite section?

[sudodds]

Also, i'd just like to give a quick thank you to Sudodds for her very useful book  It practically carried me through the core section.

No worries!!! I'm so glad that you found it useful Overall, how did you find the exam today, Microsoft Word (love the username aha)?

[Zainbow]

Aye I'm not NESA! Nothing to say that i'm 100% correct with my answers - don't count your chickens until they hatch!
And yay!!!! i'm so glad you found it useful
Arguments are always the main thing don't worry, so as long as they were strong thats the main thing!
I'm glad you found the question accessible!! I thought it was a pretty good question too And 2 paragraphs is A-okay for Part B no stress! I had 2 paragraphs last year for one of my essays and they're meant to be even longer! As long as the argument and the detail is there, then you'll be fine
That sucks, but it shouldn't affect you too much, if at all! I had two girls in my ancient cohort literally not attempt the entire thing (one girl wrote her essay in french? but like, she can't speak french? she just wrote random french phrases?) but I still got a band 6 mark for the subject

GREAT WORK ZAINBOW!! Sounds like overall you went really well, even if you're a bit concerned with a few areas Everyone feels like that after leaving an exam - I remember I literally almost cried tell my teacher afterwards that I only gave myself 30 mins for Cold War, and it literally didn't affect me at all! We blow our "failures" up in our mind, when often they weren't even failures, they could just be "neutrals" or even "successes in disguise".

Good job and congratulations! It's over now!!!

Susie

Thanks Susie!

[sudodds]

Think I did OK but seeing the World War 1 answers kind of freaked me out a little! The 8 and 10 Marker threw me off (a bit) though I still had stuff prepared, but I think I messed up with talking about the sources properly...or I'm just second-guessing myself

Again, remember that I'm not NESA! This is just what I *think* the answers are - I could be wrong with a few of them! Especially considering I think Section I was pretty tricky overall.

You're probably just second-guessing yourself Everyone does after an exam - I know I did! I left the exam feeling less than confident tbh. Focus on the positives

Super happy with Russia though, I saw bolshevik consolidation of power and wanted to get up and do a happy dance in the middle of the exam.

Don't worry, I was doing the happy dance for you! Such good questions - especially cos i was expecting them to be brutal and give you guys power struggles and soviet foreign policy!

EITHER WAY It wasn't that bad overall. For that problematic MCQ I also put C, but I can kind of see how it could be B as well..


Overall, well done everyone!! We're done!! Super happy and proud of all of us

So glad that you found the paper to be pretty decent! I definitely agree

I'm sure you absolutely smashed it diesxel! You've worked so hard this year, there is no way that you haven't!

Great work

Susie

[sudodds]

BOOOOYEEEEEAAAAAAAAAAHHHHHHHHHH GO U LEETLE HISTORIANLY PPL!!!!!!!!!! history is history
and yeh i wldnt say it was easy but damn BOSTES were much more favourable than i was expecting!!!
yipeee! ATB with the rest of ure exams!

I'm so glad that you thought the exam was pretty good bun00! What was your favourite section? I'm sure you did so well!!

[rodero]

Overall it was a pretty decent exam! I definitely can't complain with the questions at all

I was so happy to see that as the own knowledge question - I instantly recalled the info that I posted the day before, so that helped out heaps I will say though, that the wording of the question was a bit vague. You would have needed to understand the sources to see where they were really pointing you towards. I.E, the photograph of the Capture of the Hindenburg Line, and the recount of the technologies used in the final stages of war would have pointed to events leading to the Armistice.

I'd say that the question that I was least confident would be the Germany, Great Depression question. Ironically, it was the question that I wanted to get, because I still hadn't covered much of the content. However, after a painful day of cramming I actually became better at other sections of the syllabus than the one that was assessed... I just feel like it was such a vague question, as it didn't specify a time frame or anything! So I worked my way up from the Depression to Hitler's consolidation of power, and I don't know if that's correct or not :/

Regardless, I felt really confident after WW1, Speer and much of the Conflict in Europe essay. I reckon if I can dish out a solid 19/25 for Germany, then a Band 6 could still be possible

[bun00]

I'm so glad that you thought the exam was pretty good bun00! What was your favourite section? I'm sure you did so well!!

ahhh definitely germany!! it was the only section that i pretty much let my hand dance all over the paper (with gorgeous handwriting ) and all over the desk and all over the examiner and everywhere without having to stop and think "is wot im saying the legit truth or am i just making up crap to fill in time?"..sooo was definitely my best!! i chose the great depression question as im def more confident with the earlier syllabus dotpoints (and hey...."the great depression was the only thing that put the wind in hitlers sails" )! also i did germany first so that put me on 10 confident arrogant lil toes for the next sections (of which i made up a lot of stuff nah it was prolly true!)
thanks soooo much susie for everything ure a legendarrryyy laddeee!!

[sudodds]

finally decided to face my fears and go through this thread ahahaha here's a quick rundown rant on the exam:

ww1: what the actual hell... usually i'm awful at sources but i didn't understand a thing. like, the first question i was stumped and i saw "eat less wheat" so i was like YES BREAD then didn't have time to go back over the answers which i could've changed. oh well. the rest was okay but this section was harder than trials which was strange because cssa tends to be pretty confusing. because this question went so badly, i lost confidence in the rest of the exam... so yea.

It definitely was the trickiest section, so you're not alone finding it confusing - hell, as you can probably tell my responses, I found it pretty confusing as well! Most of the sources didn't relate to the most prominent aspects of the syllabus dot points they were deprived from - it was quite weird.

germany: i did this one last which i'm really annoyed at because in reading time, question b was really good (stood out to me most) and i wish i did it earlier because i would've finished it. at first glance, i saw "total power" so i thought totalitarianism, but then i thought it wasn't exactly? but for sure this question was the best one out of all. i'm relatively confident with this one, even though i didn't finish it and had so much more i wanted to write.

Awesome work fantasticbeasts3! I'm sure you confidence is deserved - i've seen the amazing answers you've given others in relation to Germany, I'm positive that, even if you feel like you didn't have enough time, it would still have been a cracker of an essay!

personality study, gorbachev: if i didn't stuff up the first part of the response i would've been so happy with it. i finished ww1 in about 35 minutes (wtf honestly could've looked over that stupid bread question) and started writing for part a, then realised i was writing about background. wasted about 5 minutes which was just ugh. then i started again, rambled on too much of the first rise to prominence dot point, eating into my time for part b, so had to cut that one short, and had to cut down on collapse of eastern europe which is irritating because that's like half of what gorbachev did? super annoying.

I feel like writing about background isn't that much of a bad thing Sure, it's not strictly rise to prominence, however I'm sure various aspects of background would definitely have contributed to it!

I understand why your frustrated, but remember to focus on the positives instead I'm sure that not mentioning one thing won't affect you too badly, as they don't expect people to mention EVERYTHING in a personality study essay anyway, as there just isn't enough time!

cold war: most people in my school didn't like question a which is really odd because it seemed a lot easier. probably just me. thought this one went quite well while i was writing, but looking back at it now, i don't think i sustained my thesis well enough... smh i hope whoever is marking this is less tired than me during the exam (probably not) because i can't even understand what i wrote.

Yeah, probably because of the "ideology" part right?

Don't overthink things I thought I didn't "sustain my thesis" (hell i didn't even think I had a thesis!) for the personality study last year, and that ended up being my best section! I'm sure you did much better than you expect!

anyway, all in all i walked out really not confident about the whole thing. crazy how it takes just one section to make you feel crap... should've done germany first, but that's okay. honestly, i'm not expecting more than 70 for this exam (no exaggeration whatsoever), but it's over.

best of luck for the rest of your hsc everyone,
fantasticbeasts

I'm sure you did better than 70, and that you're just overthinking things Fully appreciate that you feel disappointed, and you are 100% allowed to feel that way after an exam! I felt like utter shit after mine But I'm sure that everything went okay. And even if, by chance, something did go a bit iffy, then you've been working so consistently this year and that will be acknowledged through moderation! Remember that there is scaling as well A raw 82 in drama got me a 91 scaled, and that subject is known for scaling like shit, whereas modern scales well, so even if you did get 70, you'd probably still leave with a band 5 at the very least!

Great work! Good luck with your next set of exams <3

Susie

[sudodds]

You guys are all making me unsure of my answers ;(!

Noooo!!! None of us here know the answers Just our interpretations of the question, and, especially with essays, you can interpret it completely different, but still get an awesome mark!

For both Weimar and Conflict in Europe, I chose question a. To be honest, I felt as though I could have answered either a or b for both so I spent about 5 minutes panicking about which question to do.

Better to be able to answer both, than none at all! Great work preparation wise!!

For the Weimar essay I was able to inject quotes from historians but for the conflict question I only mentioned Turner and Churchill and basically paraphrased what they said. I didn't really use statistics but I tried to connect the smaller ideas to the main overarching theme and make lots of links so I'm a bit worried.

Hey! stats and quotes only count as detail, so don't worry if you don't have many of them specifically! So glad that you had a lot of links! They're awesome, and really good to have in order to push you into the higher bands! Don't stress, I'm sure you did fantastic!

Oh well, Modern History is done and dusted. Out of all my exams so far, this one makes me feel the most nostalgic as I genuinely enjoyed history.

I feel nostalgic just looking at your paper! Definitely one of the subjects that sticks with you I still tag/get tagged in modern memes by my friends, even a year later!

Great work Kaya!! Now take a break, you've earned it!

Susie