** LC History 2014 - Before and after discussion **

JD244

My timing was cat again. 6 pages on Stalin, 5 on LBJ, and 3 on the Gaelic League, would that have done for the Gaelic League I mentioned everything in the book eead over it this morning so it wasn't too bad.

The Treaty didn't come up either and it was almost guaranteed by the History Teachers Association or something along the lines of that.

All in all not a bad exam though.

Sonic_u

RAnderson1995 wrote: »

overall, even though some sections involved a bit more thinking and use of knowledge because the questions weren't straight forward i think it was a nice paper!

ah 'twas lovely! Blitz was a bit of a shock but it was easy enough, we'd done a question on Parnell and home rule not so long ago and America was do-able . Found dictatorship and democracy a bit tricky(not a big fan of jorrow, hadn't done Russia in the war never covered church and state in detail) but if you tought through it it was fine :P

iamthestig

I think it was lovely because of the Church State Relations question and the Northern Ireland options!

wanderlost

I wouldn't have believed you if you told me before the exam that I would end up doing the Jarrow March... THE ****ING JARROW MARCH! WTF!!!

Nick_1494

That was f*** awesome. Everything I needed came up and the case study I wanted. I was ****ting a brick before it but almost danced out of it. And my crazy principle gave us chocolate for "energy" so I passed french and history (touch wood!) and got a free crunchy. Not a bad days work...

cggreene

thank **** I learned jarrow 5 mins before the exam

anklebiters

every question definitely required a bit of thought before diving in.
I didn't really go in-depth for WW2 for stalin though do you think im going to lose loads of marks??! I mentioned it in regard to 5 year plans and results of show trials- will it be ok?

Sunningdale/Anglo was lovely

LC767

I feel like I messed my France question up. I thought when it said 'fortunes' it was looking for the good things and I only had the challenges learnt so I tried to spin some good things out of it

oswinoswald

that exam was beautiful.
all i vaguely studied was
bismarck and wilhelm's foreign policies
the jarrow march
and wb yeats
and what came up was
bismarck and wilhelm's foreign policies
the jarrow march
and wb yeats

ExpensiveClock

oswinoswald wrote: »

that exam was beautiful.
all i vaguely studied was
bismarck and wilhelm's foreign policies
the jarrow march
and wb yeats
and what came up was
bismarck and wilhelm's foreign policies
the jarrow march
and wb yeats

Some men just want to watch the world burn

JD244

oswinoswald wrote: »

that exam was beautiful.
all i vaguely studied was
bismarck and wilhelm's foreign policies
the jarrow march
and wb yeats
and what came up was
bismarck and wilhelm's foreign policies
the jarrow march
and wb yeats

I would never have thought to study them by themselves, well I wouldn't know about Bismark because we didn't do that book. Ask me this morning and I'd have said your mad but wow, there you go.

MightyMandarin

oswinoswald wrote: »

that exam was beautiful.
all i vaguely studied was
bismarck and wilhelm's foreign policies
the jarrow march
and wb yeats
and what came up was
bismarck and wilhelm's foreign policies
the jarrow march
and wb yeats

No offence to because you did nothing wrong, but you are the reason why there are major flaws in our exam system. Of the ~25 essays I studied and was fully prepared for, 1 essay, yes 1, came up today. The other 2 I did well, I happened to know alot more than I thought. It's grossly unfair on students who study ridiculous amounts of stuff and then have none of it appear, while chancers like you (again no offence) study 3 essays and have them all appear. Despite my exam going well today, I am really píssed off because of this.

AoifeCN

MightyMandarin wrote: »

No offence to because you did nothing wrong, but you are the reason why there are major flaws in our exam system. Of the ~25 essays I studied and was fully prepared for, 1 essay, yes 1, came up today. The other 2 I did well, I happened to know alot more than I thought. It's grossly unfair on students who study ridiculous amounts of stuff and then have none of it appear, while chancers like you (again no offence) study 3 essays and have them all appear. Despite my exam going well today, I am really píssed off because of this.

I understand where you're coming from and to be honest I am one of those "chancers". My big 3 that I studied were : Stalin, Parnell, Johnson. of course I did know more, but these are the ones I was best at and I did them because they come up nearly every year! It's impossible to learn two big books worth of material that's why I agree that there is defiantly a flaw in the system because so much is left up to chance, not just with history but with most subjects! I rely a lot on my predictions of what will come up.

oswinoswald

MightyMandarin wrote: »

No offence to because you did nothing wrong, but you are the reason why there are major flaws in our exam system. Of the ~25 essays I studied and was fully prepared for, 1 essay, yes 1, came up today. The other 2 I did well, I happened to know alot more than I thought. It's grossly unfair on students who study ridiculous amounts of stuff and then have none of it appear, while chancers like you (again no offence) study 3 essays and have them all appear. Despite my exam going well today, I am really píssed off because of this.

One out of 25? Your essays must have been really specific. I do 8 honours subjects, I'm not counting history as one of my top six. I wasn't being a 'chancer' as you put it, i was going into the exam just looking to pass it. Not my fault if all my favourite topics came up!! In my opinion learning essays off by heart and regurgitating them in the exam is just as much a 'major flaw in our exam system'

Aarong9224

oswinoswald wrote: »

In my opinion learning essays off by heart and regurgitating them in the exam is just as much a 'major flaw in our exam system'

Exactly.

MightyMandarin

oswinoswald wrote: »

One out of 25? Your essays must have been really specific. I do 8 honours subjects, I'm not counting history as one of my top six. I wasn't being a 'chancer' as you put it, i was going into the exam just looking to pass it. Not my fault if all my favourite topics came up!! In my opinion learning essays off by heart and regurgitating them in the exam is just as much a 'major flaw in our exam system'

Don't get me wrong, I detest rote-learning and the stuff which I did learn, I understood fully. I studied roughly 20-25 essays, by essays, I mean topics, I don't learn essays off per say, most of the stuff I learn, I'm able to combine it with other events, such as the Johnson essay, where I combined Urban Poverty, Civil Rights aswell as Vietnam.

Although you claim you were just 'trying to pass', you did take a chance and you are fully in your right to do so, and it paid off. I was just having a moan about how the system pisses me off. I too have favourite topics, it's just that learning 3-4 of my favourites would not have been safe enough for me.

oswinoswald

MightyMandarin wrote: »

Don't get me wrong, I detest rote-learning and the stuff which I did learn, I understood fully. I studied roughly 20-25 essays, by essays, I mean topics, I don't learn essays off per say, most of the stuff I learn, I'm able to combine it with other events, such as the Johnson essay, where I combined Urban Poverty, Civil Rights aswell as Vietnam.

Although you claim you were just 'trying to pass', you did take a chance and you are fully in your right to do so, and it paid off. I was just having a moan about how the system pisses me off. I too have favourite topics, it's just that learning 3-4 of my favourites would not have been safe enough for me.

you misquoted me I did not say i was 'trying to pass' goodbye

MightyMandarin

oswinoswald wrote: »

you misquoted me I did not say i was 'trying to pass' goodbye

Apologies, you were 'looking to pass'. Better?

BilboxThorin

So guys I have a quick question about learning off answers and I didn't really think about this until now. I've always just learned of sample answers word for word. And I mean WORD FOR WORD. I learned off the section of the book on Church State Relations exactly how it is and I'm just wondering if they will think that I was cheating? I know this is probably a stupid thing to worry about but I can't get it out of the back of my mind...

RAnderson1995

Sonic_u wrote: »

ah 'twas lovely! Blitz was a bit of a shock but it was easy enough, we'd done a question on Parnell and home rule not so long ago and America was do-able . Found dictatorship and democracy a bit tricky(not a big fan of jorrow, hadn't done Russia in the war never covered church and state in detail) but if you tought through it it was fine :P

I had a feeling they'd pull a stunt and put the blitz up tbh!
we didn't do Parnell and home rule, but apparently it was a nice question!
my old teacher gave us literally 2 pages on jarrow march and that's it, luckily we got a new teacher this year!

Sonic_u

RAnderson1995 wrote: »

I had a feeling they'd pull a stunt and put the blitz up tbh!
we didn't do Parnell and home rule, but apparently it was a nice question!
my old teacher gave us literally 2 pages on jarrow march and that's it, luckily we got a new teacher this year!

I had a feeling the treaty wouldn't come up tbh but I was expecting the Eucharistic congress instead :P 2 pages? jaysus, not much happened but it's still a case study.I always just found it really difficult to write on so I tried to avoid it

ConorR32

Got an A1 in the mocks with little or no work and no real teacher for fifth year. Got 90% (lost marks for not having a conclusion on one essay and a few small things in the document section). Broke myself studying last night, knew every date from every case study, could have done all essays from my books, but ****ed myself over with timing. Put weeks of endless work into my RSR. Now I face at best a B2. No contextualisation, didn't finish USSR question, didnt finish cultural identity, but got nigh on 8 pages on LBJ. Absolutely panicked and lost track of time!! Was not myself at all going in. Let that be a lesson to all who are doin History next year! TIMING is everything! You can have a HUGE interest in history and have read widely like I have, but if you can't regurgitate what you need in 2 hours 50 mins, it's all for nought.

I'm probably repeating now, looking for medicine, hoping to be the first EVER doctor from my school, determined this time! And it wont be happening again!

Sonic_u

ConorR32 wrote: »

Got an A1 in the mocks with little or no work and no real teacher for fifth year. Got 90% (lost marks for not having a conclusion on one essay and a few small things in the document section). Broke myself studying last night, new every date from every case study, could have done all essays from my books, but ****ed myself over with timing. Put weeks of endless work into my RSR. Now I face at best a B2. No contextualisation, didn't finish USSR question, didnt finish cultural identity, but got nigh on 8 pages on LBJ. Absolutely panicked and lost track of time!! Was not myself at all going in. Let that be a lesson to all who are doin History next year! TIMING is everything! You can have a HUGE interest in history and have read widely like I have, but if you can't regurgitate what you need in 2 hours 50 mins, it's all for nought.

I'm probably repeating now, looking for medicine, hoping to be the first EVER doctor from my school, determined this time! And it wont be happening again!

how much did you write in your two unfinished essays? apparently they count how many paragraphs you have and divide the marks up like that (ie, 6 paras at 12 marks each) you could've lost out a bit on the cumulative(I think?) mark but if you wrote enough you could be fine shame about the contextualisation but you technically could still get an A2

MightyMandarin

ConorR32 wrote: »

Got an A1 in the mocks with little or no work and no real teacher for fifth year. Got 90% (lost marks for not having a conclusion on one essay and a few small things in the document section). Broke myself studying last night, new every date from every case study, could have done all essays from my books, but ****ed myself over with timing. Put weeks of endless work into my RSR. Now I face at best a B2. No contextualisation, didn't finish USSR question, didnt finish cultural identity, but got nigh on 8 pages on LBJ. Absolutely panicked and lost track of time!! Was not myself at all going in. Let that be a lesson to all who are doin History next year! TIMING is everything! You can have a HUGE interest in history and have read widely like I have, but if you can't regurgitate what you need in 2 hours 50 mins, it's all for nought.

I'm probably repeating now, looking for medicine, hoping to be the first EVER doctor from my school, determined this time! And it wont be happening again!

Unlucky man, sometimes the exams just f*ck you over on the day. History is one of those exams where you can know everything but can't write it down fast enough.

RAnderson1995

Sonic_u wrote: »

I had a feeling the treaty wouldn't come up tbh but I was expecting the Eucharistic congress instead :P 2 pages? jaysus, not much happened but it's still a case study.I always just found it really difficult to write on so I tried to avoid it

I didn't study anything to do with Britain ... never uderstood the notes she gave us and we didn't have time to redo things with our teacher this year, but sure it didn't exactly make a difference in the end!

ally69

Any one who did the NI question on religious affiliation and cultural identity, what did yous write for it? And what did yous write for the D&D Jarrow as well? Thanks :-)

wanderlost

Was Document A objective or subjective, and why?

MightyMandarin

ally69 wrote: »

Any one who did the NI question on religious affiliation and cultural identity, what did yous write for it? And what did yous write for the D&D Jarrow as well? Thanks :-)

For cultural identity, I talked about the royal orders, then about the apprentice boys specifically, their marches and how they are controversial, then discussed the battle of the bogside in full. I wasn't prepared at all for the question, I never did it before and didn't revise the apprentice boys. But I knew some stuff myself, I'm quite interested in NI myself, and I knew that, that question was referring to the influence of the orders and the affects of it. I would've put in a paragraph on Catholic cultural identity but I didn't have enough time.

plmko

wanderlost wrote: »

Was Document A objective or subjective, and why?

Objective because it was full of facts and showed no emotional reaction which sided with anyone.

B then was subjective as it had no facts only an emotional reaction about suffering etc etc

plmko

Did anyone else feel that the 20 marker for the document was a little mean the way it just said Belfast? In sample papers I had always seen questions referring to Northern Ireland so I found myself limited on the information I could give for this question.