History Extension 2008 (3 Viewers)

[Kujah]

i think for the first section it might be changing interpretations or approaches towards history or historiography - hope so, i'd love something along those lines, i had it for my trial. anyone got any thoughts for the case study? hopefully only one or two debates, but what about the question?

I hope its not a major focus on how historians go about to use their evidence, or w/e on the lines of methodology. I'm hoping for something about different interpretations, context etc etc

 

[sonyaleeisapixi]

My trial was abuse use of evidence, so thatd be prettty sweet, but my picks something about the role of a historians context and whatever else.

 

[Kujah]

Anything on po-mo and dissing objectivity and modernism would be great

 

[fallenstar]

I WANT POMO.
and a focus on subjectivity would be brill.
i'd also love changing approaches to history.

what I do to engage with the source is challenge it based on my personal throughline, backed up with historians of course. (obviously I also use historians to agree with aspects of the source if it fits my argument.)
i use obscure historians who fit in with general issues like 'historical truth', subjectivity, aims and purposes etc.
My Ext teacher, who's been a marker a few times, told us markers get effing sick of reading Herodotus, Thucydides and von Ranke over and over unless they are done brilliantly so I choose lesser-known historians.

is anyone scared for this even though they've done really well all year? i am.

 

[PeterRickards]

well, lets just say the exam will be fun

as to the source. we got told that you should continually reference it such as enabling it to bring up the historians u mention

like if it mentions "scientific history" youd say how they refer to ranke, then go on about ranke.

then u go back to source, find the next one

etc etc. seemed to work well for us in trials and our teacher is known for harsh marking so i guess we shall see in exam aye.

one issue could be having to assess the actual source on its own, that can be rather tricky, deciphering the ideology and viewpoint of historian. 2005 killed alot of ppl with the postmodern Jenkins.

GOOD LUCK EVERYONE!!!

ps. how come most ppl are only talkinga bout 4 or 5 historians???

aren't we meant to be doing like 10 ? i swear i'll kill my teacher for making us learn 10

we do like Ranke, Gibbon, Marx, Braudel/bloch/febvre (annales), Butterfrield (Whig), Carr, Elton, Jenkins, Munslow, White (postmodern) and then tie in with reynolds and windschuttle for aussie debate

LAME!
im pissed i had to remember that much shit.

 

[Kujah]

Markers notes tell us that they don't want an array of historians, but rather, an in-depth discussion and argument.

@fallenstar: definitely, lol, after the whole year's prep, I still feel scared

 

[dance2urownbeat]

my teacher only focused on two historians! jenkins and windschuttle. so as back up in case we get one of their quotes, i'm cramming southgate today since i was focusing on case study yesterday (american democracy- only class in the STATE who does it apparently! points for originality i guess)

 

[Kujah]

And for the '05 Jenkins source, it was because most classes stopped at Ranke or Elton, and didn't even touch po-mo.

 

[fallenstar]

Markers notes tell us that they don't want an array of historians, but rather, an in-depth discussion and argument.

@fallenstar: definitely, lol, after the whole year's prep, I still feel scared

argh, isn't it terrible.
i am frightened despite the fact i got 100 for the major work and 96 overall.
teachers are speculating i'll get a state ranking which just makes it worse.
like
now 45+ isn't enough, it has to be a state ranking.
gahhh.

 

[Kujah]

LOL, same, our teacher's going to kill us (2 students) if we don't get at least an E4. And we did excellent in our MWs and trials, so she's expecting that we're going to get high. The pressure's building up :/

 

[Kujah]

Its weird, I'm still re-editing my essays again and again cos of this 'fear'.

 

[brad616]

The Annales school used a total history style- rather than focus on political and military history, we can look at other factors such as sociology, geography, anthropology etc etc. You've historians like Bloch, Braudel, Le Roy etc etc... It only started to flourish in the early 20th century.

On the other hand, you've got Marxism and the 'class' struggle. And how economic factors and this struggle drives history. Marxist historians include Christopher Hill, Eric Hobsbawm*.

Please Postmodernism we do it so much in English Extension 1 might as well have it in history.

I think aims and purposes THIS IS MY LAST EXAM

 

[gorby2008]

Please Postmodernism we do it so much in English Extension 1 might as well have it in history.

I think aims and purposes THIS IS MY LAST EXAM

Aims and purposes has been done twice in Section 1 (once in 2003 and in 2006) so I doubt they'd do it this year.
I'm hoping pomo source too.

 

[eb590]

Anyone studying Queen Elizabeth I? Which debates are you planning to focus on? I'm doing Identity and Gender and Religion, but I have leadership as backup - hope its a good question for this case study!

 

[Kujah]

Anyone studying Queen Elizabeth I? Which debates are you planning to focus on? I'm doing Identity and Gender and Religion, but I have leadership as backup - hope its a good question for this case study!

Yep, same. I'm doing gender/identity and religion. I suspect that would ask for only or two debates, cos anything more than that would limit the depth of discussion.

 

[eb590]

Yep, same. I'm doing gender/identity and religion.

ok awesome that's really good, hopefully they only ask one debate, the most ive ever seen is two. gender and identity is deep enough on it's own without religion, especially for elizabeth. good luck tomorrow!

 

[Kujah]

Thanks. You too

 

[kirankiza]

I'm doing Elizabeth too and im really scared cause i never eem to get it right.. i can do pretty ok at the first question cause what they want is like tons of evaluation and critical thought but i cant seem to be able to write the right stuff for elizabeth.. any tips??

 

[eb590]

I'm doing Elizabeth too and im really scared cause i never eem to get it right.... any tips??

Well at this stage I would just read over your practise responses, maybe do a mind map of each debate you are studying on a separate page. know your quotes well and most importantly just use the source. intertwine parts of it into your opening and concluding statement for each paragraph. e.g so and so's view that....clearly parallels Bassnett's portrayal of Elizabeth as...
just stuff like that. this isn't an exam where you can just rote learn a response, so the best thing you can do is just be confident in your case study and use the source well - hope this helps, and good luck!

 

[kirankiza]

thanks for that good luck to you too