History Aptitude Test

Scroll to see replies

Not a lot. Did a bit of basic revision of last years AS course and discussed the speciment papers with a teacher, but I'm told they design it to discourage preparation, so I just tried not to stress myself out about it.

Reply 21

Aphrodite007

I also spent too long on 1a and 1b, meaning my 1c wdidn't really make sense, it was awful. I loved part 2 though, it was a really nice source.

Reply 22

general_store

I think i probably picked a bad period for 1c, and probably either missed the point or did too many points for 1 a. Overall though, i thought it wasn't as bad as some others on the website and question 2 i thought was pretty nice, although i probably picked out some really random things from it. Isn't it about 3 weeks till we found out if we get interviews. I did get my college acknowledgement/ request for written work today though

Reply 23

playingcards

I spent ages trying to word A in a really clever and intelligent way; which was successful but to the detriment of my other answers. B went quite well, although I probably got a bit carried away on a supremacy theme. C was a nightmare; I did Russian Tsarism and just basically rewrote history. Spent too long on the actual changes and not the factors. Part 2 was quite good; less to say than in other years, but more instantly obvious. Did anyone else spend a lot of time talking about the rold of women in the society?

Reply 24

holzash

Hi. I am applying for Oxford and Durham too. Also going for University college and hoping it wont affect my application!? how did everyone find the HAT test today? does anybody know how long it will be before they get back to us? :smile:

Reply 25

abali

I thought the HAT went quite well; We study the Early Modern Period at school, so I was glad to see the extract was on the Renaissance; it allowed me to relax a little. The first two questions weren't bad, and for the essay question I wrote about how the French Wars of Religion were caused by a lack of strong image and character in the monarchs when compared to the earlier Valois Monarchs.

And the second question was good fun, I got to write a lot about the subjugation of Korean society to the Japanese and the possibility of a revolution in the future :smile:

. How did everyone else find it?

I believe the next you hear from the Uni is them sending you a letter to tell you if you've an interview or not. Does anybody know if we get our HAT marks, or any chance to find out how we've done?

Reply 26

Nabsee

playingcards

Did anyone else spend a lot of time talking about the rold of women in the society?

Hey, looks like this thread is active again.

I didn't spend a lot of time talking about that. :s-smilie:

I mentioned the fact that girls were educated, I talked a lot about cultural divides, and the fact that society seemed to function normally in certain ways, with schools, religious authorities, despite the Japanese presence. I'm worried that I was too simplistic and generalised, or that my answer read too much like a list in places. Hmm, mentioned the passive resistance too. What else did everyone else pick up on?

Reply 27

lazzyfuzzylou

Overall I was pleasantly surprised, I thought question 1 was a godsend because in the past papers on the site, I could never EVER get to grips with what the author was saying. And if I did I failed to put it in words. However, loved the theme of question 1 because it related to my AS course last year (sort of) which was Wolsey and Henry VIII in the 1520s and 1530s..

However my 1c may have missed the mark - I wrote about the relative importance of the factors leading to the shift from Weimar to a Nazi dictatorship, but looking back I am thinking that possibly I shouldn't have done all the 'this factor is more important because..' stuff. But oh well.

Question 2 was okay, I felt like I was missing stuff though because the source was far more obvious than those in the past papers. Wrote lots on the terror society, repression and patriotism, and got a bit in there about the preservation of history too.

I also wrote on the back of my first sheet of paper, realised, and then had to write it all out again on another sheet..

Reply 28

Nabsee

lazzyfuzzylou

I also wrote on the back of my first sheet of paper, realised, and then had to write it all out again on another sheet..

I'm a little bit worried now. :smile:

I wrote on the back of my second paper before my examiner told me not to, but she said not to bother to write it out again, so I numbered the pages instead, to make it clear that there was writing on the back.

Reply 29

randomness

lazzyfuzzylou

I also wrote on the back of my first sheet of paper, realised, and then had to write it all out again on another sheet..

Yeah so did I! And i then remembered and had to rewrite it again! very annoying.

Reply 30

Jon of the North

I think T timed 1a and 1b quite well, but my 1c was just rambled. I also went for a generic, boring example in Nazi Germany for 1c, and I just hope my discusion about the factors that led to their rise to power and the factors they created was enough! Part 2 was good, quite a lot to mention, and I think I used enough imagination! I did catch the 'female' thing though, menioning that they must have achived realtively equal status with men by that period.

Reply 31

ElHierro

It seems to be a recurring theme that people are dissatisfied with their part c answers, well, here's one more person who thinks their essay was just too disjointed, rambling and lacking in analysis. This situation perhaps came about due to my picking a topic I knew very little about, francoist Spain, as opposed to something obvious and sensible like the fall of tsarism. On the other hand, the other questions weren't too bad.

Reply 32

DayOldPorridge

I thought it was actually kind of enjoyable. xD And I'm probably the only one who thinks this way. To be honest I hadn't really prepared beforehand; all I had done was look at the sample questions from past papers but didn't actually get around to writing practice answers until just a few hours before the test. When I was actually doing the test I almost finished an hour early but spent the remaining time adding some details and adding a few paragraphs to the last answer. Basically just wrote whatever came off the top of my head.

For 1c I wrote about something I thought most people won't think of discussing; Emiliano Zapata, a Mexican revolutionary, and extreme conditions that cause people to rise up against their government. I was pretty satisfied with my answer to the second question as well, although I'm probably one of the very few who didn't discuss the promincence of Christianity in Korea. One of the highlights that I did touch up on was the tactic used by many rulers/repressors of instilling fear in its people through threats of violence, even against children. However, another thing I added was that this can prove ineffective if a society is pushed to such desparate circumstances that the people, in response, rebel against these oppressions. I also included that deep roots in one's culture and traditions may perhaps even more sooner motivate the oppressed peoples to move against a supressing government or rulership.

Reply 33

DayOldPorridge

Does anybody know if we get our HAT marks, or any chance to find out how we've done?

I asked Christ Church about this today and the secretary in the admissions office there told me that if you'd like to see your marks, you'll have to ask for them after the interview (or even if you don't get interviewed, at least sometime after they usually make those decisions), but wasn't too specific. I'm sure you'll probably have to ask the college you're applying to, though.

Reply 34

jcroft

I think the HAT test went ok too; I on the other hand didn't have any idea about the renaissance or Korea (which I presume you weren't supposed to) as I've been studying totally different parts of history. That's a little frustrating...okay maybe very frustrating.

If it doesn't happen, it doesn't happen right?!

Always look on the bright side...

How are the essays going? Nov 10 right?

Reply 35

paterex

thought it went ok seeing as i havent written anything substantial by hand for over 4 months and had done very little preparation! my main concern over 1C (did tsarist russia) is my abysmal handwriting after panicking over time (turned out that i finished 10 minutes early) after being pedantic about fitting 1A into exactly 15 lines!!...really enjoyed the korea question though, although it was kind of annoying that i couldnt talk about the stuff i knew about imperial japan (thus kind of making it harder than the renaissance stuff, which i didnt know anything about beforehand!!)...glad i spotted the stuff about the girls though...the guy i was doing it with who i chatted to afterwards said that i was an idiot and was sucking up to lefties/feminists hahahaha

Reply 36

paterex

to be honest i knew a bit about imperial japan but that made the korea question harder...actually having to hold back on knoweldge and simply looking at the source...just my two cents though

Reply 37

SlickNick

I had nooo clue about Korea...but I think that was a good thing, because it forced me to only concentrate of the source I had. As far the the 1c....I used Italian unification.

Reply 38

DayOldPorridge

I personally didn't worry about having knowledge of Korea or any of the time periods in the passages; they only want to know how you think and analyse these sort of problems, not the amount of facts you know.

Reply 39

DayOldPorridge

Just something I'd like to add; it's a good idea to link the passages and the time periods they're set in to any books/movies/plays you've read or seen. Although these may not always be accurate, they give a nice background and might help you in trying to describe the events/conditions of those times a bit. When I was practicing, I found that having reading the Lord of the Rings helped me a lot with the Icelandic question, as I was able to write more in-depth about how their lifestyle might have been and that due to the harsh conditions and the need to survive amongst other clans, the women perhaps held higher positions within their own clan and held more traditional views of vengeance and the like. Also, due to these same reasons, the men were expected to behave a certain way and because of this need for survival, clan members were expected to have strong loyalties for each other, and would be expected to defend each other even if it meant meeting their own demise. Thank you, Tolkien! ^^