This discussion is now closed.

Check out other Related discussions

HIS3N - International relations June 2014

Anyone doing this exam/got any predictions?

I'm doing this exam. I have no predictions though. Just trying to learn everything and write as many essays as I can.

Posted from TSR Mobile

Reply 2

johngob

OP

Original post by GuitarWorm

I'm doing this exam. I have no predictions though. Just trying to learn everything and write as many essays as I can.

Posted from TSR Mobile

Could you help me with historiography?

Reply 3

Charli41

Desperately need help with this exam :/ Have no idea with this historiography :smile:

Prediction wise... NATO or the Berlin Blockade seems likely for question 1 I think, a lot of people seem to think Reagan and militarism or the end of the Cold War is possible for question 2 and my guess with question 3 is the special relationship or the EU :smile:

Reply 4

katericho

Original post by Charli41

Desperately need help with this exam :/ Have no idea with this historiography :smile:

Prediction wise... NATO or the Berlin Blockade seems likely for question 1 I think, a lot of people seem to think Reagan and militarism or the end of the Cold War is possible for question 2 and my guess with question 3 is the special relationship or the EU :smile:

Is that founded upon any kind of evidence? Just wondered why you think those specific topics will come up! :smile:

Reply 5

katericho

Original post by johngob

Could you help me with historiography?

The mark scheme says that historiography isn't really necessary, unless it really goes with what you're saying and actually adds to it. Rather than just name-dropping - which is worse than not using it at all. By showing that you understand the nature of debate around the subject you're arguing through giving both sides of the argument does show historiography. If you do want to put it in you could just comment on it in broader senses such as 'Orthodox historians would regard Soviet expansionism as a main factor in causing the Cold War' when writing an essay about what caused the cold war, or that sort of thing. Hope that helps!!

Reply 6

johngob

OP

Original post by katericho

The mark scheme says that historiography isn't really necessary, unless it really goes with what you're saying and actually adds to it. Rather than just name-dropping - which is worse than not using it at all. By showing that you understand the nature of debate around the subject you're arguing through giving both sides of the argument does show historiography. If you do want to put it in you could just comment on it in broader senses such as 'Orthodox historians would regard Soviet expansionism as a main factor in causing the Cold War' when writing an essay about what caused the cold war, or that sort of thing. Hope that helps!!

Thanks! So I wouldnt need to quote e.g. Gaddis? Could I say something like Gaddis states the Kenan telegram is seminal is establishing containment, this is true....etc? Or is that not right. Also have you got any predictions for the exam?

Reply 7

katericho

Original post by johngob

Thanks! So I wouldnt need to quote e.g. Gaddis? Could I say something like Gaddis states the Kenan telegram is seminal is establishing containment, this is true....etc? Or is that not right. Also have you got any predictions for the exam?

Yeah it's good if you can use historiography that adds to what you're saying! Or backs it up. Id say just make sure you use it context and if you do use it, look back at your sentence and see if it actually adds anything to it, if not then its probably not necessary if you get me? You could maybe say 'Gaddis, for example, argues that Kennan's Long Telegram was seminal in shaping US foreign policy, and determining their position as a superpower. The Long Telegram blah blah blah...' rather than literally just saying X says Y because that can come across as though you're just chucking it in to show that you know his name. Even something like 'for example' demonstrates you're showing his argument is one side of the debate and you understand there are other interpretations. No predictions I'm afraid!!

Reply 8

Charli41

Original post by katericho

Is that founded upon any kind of evidence? Just wondered why you think those specific topics will come up! :smile:

The other history teacher at my college went to a meeting with the exam board and mentioned those as contenders, and said that they can apparently only ask about the topics on the specification sheet, and most have now come up..those topics haven't.

Noone can actually predict what the exam boards will do really, they can be very strange :/ Better to revise everything really :smile:

Reply 9

nazmunali

5

Can I post the exam paper now?

Reply 10

johngob

OP

How did people find it? I did Q 1 and 3

Reply 11

Emma.1994

I was so stressed about this exam! Really happy with how it went though. I did questions 2 and 3. Teacher predicted question 2 so was a god send!

Reply 12

MercyL

What points did everyone do for question 2. I only had half an hour and really rushed it :'(

Reply 13

Charli41

Original post by Charli41

Desperately need help with this exam :/ Have no idea with this historiography :smile:

Prediction wise... NATO or the Berlin Blockade seems likely for question 1 I think, a lot of people seem to think Reagan and militarism or the end of the Cold War is possible for question 2 and my guess with question 3 is the special relationship or the EU :smile:

Feeling quite chuffed, question one included NATO and blockade..and I was right about question two. Question three I was rather rather wrong but ah well :biggrin:

Who did which questions and what did they write about? I did one and two :smile:

Reply 14

MercyL

Hey, what did you do for question 2? It wad such a simple question but I barely had any time at all so Im worried I didn't think it through properly! :no:

Posted from TSR Mobile

Reply 15

Charli41

Original post by MercyL

Hey, what did you do for question 2? It wad such a simple question but I barely had any time at all so Im worried I didn't think it through properly! :no:

Posted from TSR Mobile

I think I didn't write enough for two :/ I wrote about Reagan and his military increases in budget/programmes and the like, then about the failing Soviet economy and Gorbachev's reforms, and then I had so little time I wrote a tiny amount about the summits during the 1980s, but it was almost not worth doing, I only managed a hundred words or so before I needed to go on to write my conclusion :s-smilie:

Reply 16

Fatimac

Original post by nazmunali

Can I post the exam paper now?

Yes please!!

Reply 17

WhiteyBread101

21

Original post by Fatimac

Yes please!!

Unfortunately I'm going to have to close this thread.

As the 2014 papers are being used for mocks at the minute, we can't have them circulating the site in case someone attempts to remember the questions that will be in their mock. As well as being against TSR rules, this doesn't help people in the long run as a mock exam is set for your own benefit to show you what you need to revise.

If you have any questions then please PM me, Thread Closed.

HIS3N - International relations June 2014

Related discussions

Latest

Trending

Trending

Articles for you