Why is this response an exemplar? (1 Viewer)

[a8o]

I was reading through the resources page hoping to find a new approach to War Communism and NEP and found the following Examplar Band 6 response.


http://www.boredofstudies.org/courses/arts/history/modern/2002_Modern_History_HSC_Exemplar_Q10a_BOS.pdf
]

http://www.boredofstudies.org/cours...2002_Modern_History_HSC_Exemplar_Q10a_BOS.pdf
[/URL]

Now, correct me if I'm wrong, but that uses no sources as we've been taught to use and it answers the question chronologically not thematically. I thought such a structure would immediately disqualify that paper from a band 6. Was it just a poor year that year?

I'd appreciate your views on this essay.

 

[Trippendicular]

Yeah, isnt one of the criteria for band 6 something about using appropriate historical sources or something, which implies a use of historiography. It was well written and covered the question pretty well but I thought you couldnt get band 6 without sources

 

[Sarah168]

I was always under the impression that answers can be answered either chronologically as well as by a sequence of themes. The discerning factor is the question itself. A thematic sequence is not always appropriate.

In terms of historiography, it is encouraged somewhat but a response can easily land in the band 6 catagory (esp in the conflict studies) without fancy quotes from historians. I've seen exemplar Germany answers (the national studies is where the general mentality of "MUST MUST use historiography to get Band 6" exists) without it and it's extremely logically argued and well written so there is no way it can get a mediocre mark. This is information I got from a teacher who marks at the ...marking centre (lol). In the book form of exemplars, you can see that one Germany exemplar has historian's quotes by the bucketload and the other doesn't. the point is to show how to argue well with or without it.

 

[rama_v]

I was always under the impression that answers can be answered either chronologically as well as by a sequence of themes. The discerning factor is the question itself. A thematic sequence is not always appropriate.

In terms of historiography, it is encouraged somewhat but a response can easily land in the band 6 catagory (esp in the conflict studies) without fancy quotes from historians. I've seen exemplar Germany answers (the national studies is where the general mentality of "MUST MUST use historiography to get Band 6" exists) without it and it's extremely logically argued and well written so there is no way it can get a mediocre mark. This is information I got from a teacher who marks at the ...marking centre (lol). In the book form of exemplars, you can see that one Germany exemplar has historian's quotes by the bucketload and the other doesn't. the point is to show how to argue well with or without it.

Thats a very vaild point. Probably the only place where its absolutely critical to use historians quotes is in the national studies section. I did modern last year and just to be on the safe side my feind and i found some quotes after a lot of searching for the international studies section ( we did the United Nations). But I would just learn at least two or three quotes for WWI, a bit more for teh natinoal study and a a few more for the personality study. Dont really worry about including quotes in the other sections, the teachers are not likely to know them anyway when they mark it especially if you are doing some obscure little topic like we did for the last section.

 

[Sarah168]

haha hint hint :quoting for the 1st 1st section might be a good idea

 

[a8o]

I tend not to quote passages from historians, but paraphrase their arguements. I find it extremely difficult to remember quotes and rather pointless when I could instead be spending revision time understanding the topic area better and gaining more perspectives on it. This is what i did in my half yearlies last week, but at this stage it's a moot point because I have no idea how I went. It seems by reading htis essay the thread which debates (Quoting or Paraphrasing (Ancient Forum) should really include a third option. Arguing logically and incorporating facts transperently.

I've really got no idea how to replicate this kind of response.