CIE History IGCSE

did you do the question on the League??? I accidentally said that the Manchurian invasion was in 1936 and I feel so bad because I feel like I'll do terribly now because i got the date wrong ((

The significance of this is so minor it's not even worth thinking about. It will not add to your mark, nor will it affect your mark (as long as you say enough otherwise).

I said that it was mostly the structure, because it meant that even a powerful League with a good membership would have its work hampered by inefficient bureaucracy etc. I talked about the lack of an army, small secretariat, and the veto, and then for membership how the USA was missing, it was eurocentric, and GBR and FR were unwilling leaders

I said that it was mostly the structure, because it meant that even a powerful League with a good membership would have its work hampered by inefficient bureaucracy etc. I talked about the lack of an army, small secretariat, and the veto, and then for membership how the USA was missing, it was eurocentric, and GBR and FR were unwilling leaders

League membership issues > League structure/organisation.

Without the USA, or the USSR, the League's punishment mechanisms: economic sanctions, military sanctions are severely limited and undermined.

For example, Japan's main trading partner in 1931 (year of invasion of Manchuria) was the USA and thus economic/trade sanctions deployed by the League would prove to be ineffective. The League were also afraid to deploy military sanctions, as they weren't confident they'd be able to defeat the Japanese army - especially without the backing of major superpowers like the USSR, or the US.

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 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 I'm hoping the grade boundaries will be low because I trashed that exam...

Anyone else do the Cold War? If so what were people's arguments for the Berlin Blockade world security question... I mean, how did the Berlin Blockade not cause a threat to world security?

I have a past paper that our school made for us on paper two but how could I send it to you guys? (It's on paper btw)

Did anyone do the New Deal in the depth study for America?

I have a past paper that our school made for us on paper two but how could I send it to you guys? (It's on paper btw)

Good luck for Friday everyone!

I have a question about Q6 on the sources paper. One teacher I asked said that it is better to group the sources as to whether they agree or not and explain all the 'yes' answers and then all the 'no' answers (or vice versa). The other said that it is better to go through them one-by-one and answer 'yes' or 'no' individually to make sure you don't miss anything.

Is there an official way to do it or will either be marked equally right?

I personally go through them one-by-one, as it allows me to analyse them more thoroughly. If there's a source that reinforces a statement that I made for another, I add it in the next paragraph. I do this because I remember reading in a mark scheme somewhere that one point supported by several sources (i.e. 1 paragraph with many sources) will be marked as 1 point. Obviously I want to be on the safe side so therefore I seperate each source to a paragraph.