undotwa said:
The question said "Using source x", so I interpreted that I was only meant to talk about what was represented within the source. So I didn't talk about anything else (like bakeries etc.). We didn't really study this in class either and so I just simply described features within the source, which suggested how food was prepared and sold i.e. food kept warm over the counter in pots for ready access by consumers. I couldn't remember any specific names, but I'm not sure whether this was strictly necessary as the question did not not imply that one ought to bring in one's own knowledge. I could be really wrong however.
yea, that's a problem i have with that particular question format, i never know if i can talk about stuff outside the source. i mean, they're always on your ass about referencing the sources when they tell you to, so theoretically you should do exactly what the question says, and it DOESN"T say 'and knowledge from other sources', so what do you do?
for me, i saw the question during reading time and hated it, but then, when going through the exam, miraculously managed to SKIP THE PAGE ENTIRELY, and thus missed out on the whole four marks.
i feel bitter, because, even though it was a bogus question, i totally could have fudged 2 or 3 marks in only a short time. sucks to be me, in any case.
i had no idea what those things were, i had seen some pics of them in some books i was reading once, and was like 'what the F are those things and how do they work?', but stupidly never actually looked into it.
i probably would have talked about all the different food they ate, mentioned the charcoal tripods because i actually know about those, and then talked about how they were all vacationy and commerical with tonnes of bakeries and fast food joints and inns and stuff.
(but we'll never know how i did, will we, because i MISSED THE DARNED QUESTION >< *very bitter*)
