The Student Room Group
Competition - post a photo you've taken of nature >>
Competition - post a photo you've taken of nature >>
Competition - post a photo you've taken of nature >>

CIE History IGCSE

Scroll to see replies

Reply 20
Avatar for lidzxxx
lidzxxx
4
Yeah! I didn't find it too bad although I'm dreading the paper on Friday - any advice or help would be appreciated as I really struggle with the source work stuff!
I liked the exam a lot! except italian militarisation i swear that was not on the syllabus at all????
I thought it was good! The 4-markers were a little iffy, and I struggled to get two completely separate points for 2 of my 6-markers, but other than that it was good :smile: I did 5, 7, 11. What about everyone else?


Posted from TSR Mobile
i also did 5, 7, 11! and i reeeeally struggled to get 3 points for why containment was introduced but it was pretty good otherwise! also..metellaest.. cambridge latin course?
The paper today was meh. I did the depth study on World War One, which was a breeze, but questions 7 and 8 were a pain. Especially question 8 but that's mostly because I didn't revise it thoroughly 'cause I was expecting a question on Versailles or at least the peace treaties of 1919-1923. And the thing about containment really bothered me. :colonhash:
Oh and for the paper on Friday, just keep in mind when analysing the sources what the actual purpose/message of the source is. If it's meant to be propaganda, if it's meant to portray someone in a good or bad light, if it's meant to stop the public from panicking in response to a certain situation, etc.
What have those of you who have taken the questions based on the League of Nations and the German depth study used as your content book/revision?

For the past two years, my teacher has made us use the the Ben Walsh Cambridge IGCSE Histroy Modern World History, and I believe there is only one mention of the Lytton Commission throughout the book, in one sentence even. How did those who took question 5 answer that? It was ridiculous for my class and I to take. :frown:

The Italy Militarism in 1930s four mark question was also quite insane. I'm quite demoralised after spending much time with the revising over the book and the questions not reflecting the content very well at all. :'(
Original post by ReflexAlex
What have those of you who have taken the questions based on the League of Nations and the German depth study used as your content book/revision?

For the past two years, my teacher has made us use the the Ben Walsh Cambridge IGCSE Histroy Modern World History, and I believe there is only one mention of the Lytton Commission throughout the book, in one sentence even. How did those who took question 5 answer that? It was ridiculous for my class and I to take. :frown:

The Italy Militarism in 1930s four mark question was also quite insane. I'm quite demoralised after spending much time with the revising over the book and the questions not reflecting the content very well at all. :'(


If you learnt about the failures of the League of Nations in the 1930's, then you should know about the "Lytton Commision" - response of League for Japan's invasion of Manchuria.

This is only a theory, but I'm pretty sure the Ben Walsh book is an old one, perhaps the syllabus has changed slightly since its publication? - either way, in the official "Complete 20th Century History for Cambridge IGCSE" book it was mentioned clearly.
The Nazi Soviet Pact vs Britan-France gurantee of Poland was a pretty difficult question imo. What were people's arguments for it?
Yeah we have the Ben Walsh one as well, and during my whole two years doing this course nobody ever mentioned the Lytton Commission to us and this was reflected when everyone came out of the exam asking what the hell the Lytton Commission was :smile: Literally nobody in our whole year got that question except one girl who buys all these extra books and researches around the topics etc. Honestly idk we all found the exam rather difficult, the questions were so different to the ones I usually see when I do past papers. Treaty of Versailles or the Big Three didn't come up at ALL so that sucked :frown: I'm hoping the grade boundaries will be low because I trashed that exam...
Original post by DontSweatIt
The Nazi Soviet Pact vs Britan-France gurantee of Poland was a pretty difficult question imo. What were people's arguments for it?


I produced two paragraphs based off of how, firstly, the Nazi-Soviet Pact had given Hitler the increased confidence in invading Poland without the risk of a war on both the Western and Eastern fronts. And secondly, how the British-France Guarantee to Poland was the ultimatum which was broken by Hitler to ultimately start World War Two itself. I developed both point to ultimately culminate with the two factors and arguements being just as important as other in starting the WWII and without the two, WWII may not have started.

As a precautionary measure, I also mentioned how the Policy of Appeasement had played a part in also giving Hitler increased confidence and arrogance to risk an invasion of Poland, however I don't believe it to be relevant.
Original post by igcsepupil
Yeah we have the Ben Walsh one as well, and during my whole two years doing this course nobody ever mentioned the Lytton Commission to us and this was reflected when everyone came out of the exam asking what the hell the Lytton Commission was :smile: Literally nobody in our whole year got that question except one girl who buys all these extra books and researches around the topics etc. Honestly idk we all found the exam rather difficult, the questions were so different to the ones I usually see when I do past papers. Treaty of Versailles or the Big Three didn't come up at ALL so that sucked :frown: I'm hoping the grade boundaries will be low because I trashed that exam...


EXACTLY. Some one in the exact same situation as I am. Thank you for confirming my fears of the Ben Walsh book. THANK YOU
r.i.p ben walsh yo.

- this is the one you want -> might be useful for the depth/sources (see if your school has it or go to a library.. do they still exist?)
Original post by DontSweatIt
r.i.p ben walsh yo.

- this is the one you want -> might be useful for the depth/sources (see if your school has it or go to a library.. do they still exist?)


I think it's too late for that now, HAHA, but thank youu anyway Sir
Reply 34
Avatar for tashex
tashex
2
Does anyone have any Paper 2 Gulf States resources, petrified for the source exam. hope everyone did well today!
Reading all the responses is nice because I did question 5 and 6 I believe the one with the Lytton commission and Italys increase in militasism were quite mean, even my teacher said so. The Nazi-Soviet pact and British-french guarantee were also quite mean in my option but I just gave it a go and we'll see in august. Did anyone do USA as depth study? I did the first of the two questions so not the one about the new deal and honestly I really enjoyed it. I felt they were nice and question c on the economic boom was great there was so much you could write aboutI filled up a second answer booklet just for that question.
Reply 36
Avatar for igggy
igggy
2
Original post by ReflexAlex
I produced two paragraphs based off of how, firstly, the Nazi-Soviet Pact had given Hitler the increased confidence in invading Poland without the risk of a war on both the Western and Eastern fronts. And secondly, how the British-France Guarantee to Poland was the ultimatum which was broken by Hitler to ultimately start World War Two itself. I developed both point to ultimately culminate with the two factors and arguements being just as important as other in starting the WWII and without the two, WWII may not have started.

As a precautionary measure, I also mentioned how the Policy of Appeasement had played a part in also giving Hitler increased confidence and arrogance to risk an invasion of Poland, however I don't believe it to be relevant.


i also wrote these points but i think your supposed to come to a conclusiona dn clearly state which one you believe rather than sitting on the fence
Original post by ReflexAlex
What have those of you who have taken the questions based on the League of Nations and the German depth study used as your content book/revision?

For the past two years, my teacher has made us use the the Ben Walsh Cambridge IGCSE Histroy Modern World History, and I believe there is only one mention of the Lytton Commission throughout the book, in one sentence even. How did those who took question 5 answer that? It was ridiculous for my class and I to take. :frown:

The Italy Militarism in 1930s four mark question was also quite insane. I'm quite demoralised after spending much time with the revising over the book and the questions not reflecting the content very well at all. :'(


We used the same book!
Original post by saraetcetera
Just finished my exam, P12.
I did quite well but I was so mad that there was no question on Versailles. Depth Study Germany was easyyyy though :smile:


Did the exam today too, that first 4 marker about the commission thing, whaat?? Apart from that I think it went okay
Original post by tashex
Does anyone have any Paper 2 Gulf States resources, petrified for the source exam. hope everyone did well today!


I don't have any resources per se, but I would recommend googling past paper 2s (or at least source questions) for your other topics (eg TOV, League of Nations etc) and doing those. Also remember to always assess provenance and purpose of source and how reliable each is, as well as giving both sides of the argument (which is SO important for history) :smile:

Quick Reply

Related discussions

Latest

Trending

Trending

Articles for you