The Student Room Group

Anyone else doing Germany 1918-45 for Edexcel GCSE history?

The exam's this Wednesday, so naturally I've just started revising (yep, very smart of me...)

Is anyone else doing this topic? How are you finding revision? What questions/topics do you think might come up? If there are enough other people sitting the exam on this topic I think it could be quite helpful to set essay questions for each other to plan but I have no idea how popular it is, so let's just see first :smile:

Scroll to see replies

Reply 1
I'm also doing this paper but I can't find many others who are! I'm relying on revision from other exam boards doing the Germany 1918-1945 paper and just hoping that nothing is missed out...
(edited 6 years ago)
Original post by gegem8
I'm also doing this paper but I can't find many others who are! I'm relying on revision from other exam boards doing the Germany 1918-1945 paper and just hoping that nothing is missed out...


Yeah, it does seem quite unpopular; none of my out-of-school friends do it either. Probably because it's boring af.

I think revising from other boards is ok - it's not like AQA is going to say the Depression started in 1924 or whatever. Do you think it'd be helpful to use this thread to suggest essay titles and plan them out or something?
Reply 3
Original post by Sonechka
Yeah, it does seem quite unpopular; none of my out-of-school friends do it either. Probably because it's boring af.

I think revising from other boards is ok - it's not like AQA is going to say the Depression started in 1924 or whatever. Do you think it'd be helpful to use this thread to suggest essay titles and plan them out or something?


I think it would be! 16 markers are definitely a weakness of mine, especially opinion based questions and it's horrible that they're paired with 9 markers also D:
Original post by gegem8
I think it would be! 16 markers are definitely a weakness of mine, especially opinion based questions and it's horrible that they're paired with 9 markers also D:


Great :smile: here's a slightly (semantically) nasty one I made up:

"To what extent was the instability in Weimar Germany between 1918 and 1923 the result of a lack of political courage on the part of its leaders?"
Reply 5
Original post by Sonechka
Great :smile: here's a slightly (semantically) nasty one I made up:

"To what extent was the instability in Weimar Germany between 1918 and 1923 the result of a lack of political courage on the part of its leaders?"


Right, if I had this in an exam then my eyes would probably start tearing up LOL

To a large extent the instability could cause lack of courage because:
First point: The system of democracy where there are many different political parties in one ruling causes conflicts between ideas and very contrasting views, meaning they are unable to bring about one final idea. Leads to a lack of courage as leaders are unable to decide what is best fro the country, leading to economic and social downfall. etc

Second point: The Treaty Of Versailles caused Germany to fall into an economic crisis, having to pay £660 billion (correct me if I'm wrong). The Weimar Republic then increased taxes, causing working class and lower to be affected by poverty etc, leading to distrust of the Weimar Republic by the German public, causing political courage to fall.

I'm unable to think of a third point !! I don't think these plan answers would be efficient enough or even answers the question properly ah sorry!
Reply 6
Original post by Sonechka
Great :smile: here's a slightly (semantically) nasty one I made up:

"To what extent was the instability in Weimar Germany between 1918 and 1923 the result of a lack of political courage on the part of its leaders?"


non merci, if i was asked this i think i would walk out n go cry to my history teacher loool
Original post by gegem8
Right, if I had this in an exam then my eyes would probably start tearing up LOL

To a large extent the instability could cause lack of courage because:
First point: The system of democracy where there are many different political parties in one ruling causes conflicts between ideas and very contrasting views, meaning they are unable to bring about one final idea. Leads to a lack of courage as leaders are unable to decide what is best fro the country, leading to economic and social downfall. etc

Second point: The Treaty Of Versailles caused Germany to fall into an economic crisis, having to pay £660 billion (correct me if I'm wrong). The Weimar Republic then increased taxes, causing working class and lower to be affected by poverty etc, leading to distrust of the Weimar Republic by the German public, causing political courage to fall.

I'm unable to think of a third point !! I don't think these plan answers would be efficient enough or even answers the question properly ah sorry!


Tbh same and I made the question up 😂 I don't think something like this is likely to come up, but it's better to plan for harder questions.

The question is how far a lack of political courage was the main cause of instability. I'd start by defining "political courage" so as not to end up being inconsistent or quibbling over semantics, and consider the main events which demonstrated instability over that period and whether or not each of them was due to the government displaying a lack of political courage.
Original post by simmi1
non merci, if i was asked this i think i would walk out n go cry to my history teacher loool


Haha, it is tricky ngl, but (not to blow my own trumpet) I do think it's a decent question for practising technique, in the sense that you need to start your intro with a clear definition and then carefully analyse the events of the period, which is what you need to do - to varying extents - in every history essay. That is, when you can't BS your way through it and chuck some random dates in xD
Original post by gegem8
Right, if I had this in an exam then my eyes would probably start tearing up LOL

To a large extent the instability could cause lack of courage because:
First point: The system of democracy where there are many different political parties in one ruling causes conflicts between ideas and very contrasting views, meaning they are unable to bring about one final idea. Leads to a lack of courage as leaders are unable to decide what is best fro the country, leading to economic and social downfall. etc

Second point: The Treaty Of Versailles caused Germany to fall into an economic crisis, having to pay £660 billion (correct me if I'm wrong). The Weimar Republic then increased taxes, causing working class and lower to be affected by poverty etc, leading to distrust of the Weimar Republic by the German public, causing political courage to fall.

I'm unable to think of a third point !! I don't think these plan answers would be efficient enough or even answers the question properly ah sorry!


The Treaty of Versailles imposed a reparations bill charging £6.6 billion (and not £660 billion) on Germany to be paid in kind, declared in 1921. (You asked me to correct you :wink:.) Otherwise, some excellent points you have here.
Reply 10
Original post by Sonechka
Tbh same and I made the question up 😂 I don't think something like this is likely to come up, but it's better to plan for harder questions.

The question is how far a lack of political courage was the main cause of instability. I'd start by defining "political courage" so as not to end up being inconsistent or quibbling over semantics, and consider the main events which demonstrated instability over that period and whether or not each of them was due to the government displaying a lack of political courage.


Ahhhhhh events okay okay, I just explained reasons for instability. That makes much more sense now.
Do you think that the exam board would ask within a couple of years like your question? Or do you think it is more likely that they would ask for over a longer period of time?


Posted from TSR Mobile
Reply 11
Original post by CandidateZero
The Treaty of Versailles imposed a reparations bill charging £6.6 billion (and not £660 billion) on Germany to be paid in kind, declared in 1921. (You asked me to correct you :wink:.) Otherwise, some excellent points you have here.


Haha thank you, I thought it didn't look right!


Posted from TSR Mobile
Original post by gegem8
Ahhhhhh events okay okay, I just explained reasons for instability. That makes much more sense now.
Do you think that the exam board would ask within a couple of years like your question? Or do you think it is more likely that they would ask for over a longer period of time?


Posted from TSR Mobile


I'd say a couple of years since it's a depth paper, and the course is divided into quite clear periods (those being the initial instability of the Weimar Republic from 1918-23, the recovery from 1924-29, the Depression and political turmoil from 1929-33, Hitler's rise to power over that same period, life/propaganda/strategy/policy in Nazi Germany from 1933-39, the war from 1939-45 and the collapse of the Nazi state over the end of that period).
Reply 13
Original post by Sonechka
I'd say a couple of years since it's a depth paper, and the course is divided into quite clear periods (those being the initial instability of the Weimar Republic from 1918-23, the recovery from 1924-29, the Depression and political turmoil from 1929-33, Hitler's rise to power over that same period, life/propaganda/strategy/policy in Nazi Germany from 1933-39, the war from 1939-45 and the collapse of the Nazi state over the end of that period).


I feel as though I need to revise a bit more for this over the next couple of days... Ah starting to stress now.
Question for you now though:
How far would you agree that propaganda was the main cause that Nazis were able to achieve the majority vote in order to pass the Enabling Act?
Reply 14
Original post by Sonechka
Haha, it is tricky ngl, but (not to blow my own trumpet) I do think it's a decent question for practising technique, in the sense that you need to start your intro with a clear definition and then carefully analyse the events of the period, which is what you need to do - to varying extents - in every history essay. That is, when you can't BS your way through it and chuck some random dates in xD


yeah definitely agree it's best to prepare for the worst and it is a really good question for practicing technique (and what to do if edexcel screws you over).
I didn't realise at the time how much I should have appreciated our development study, you didn't need to know AS much detail for each event!! We did medicine through time, not sure what you did but it was mainly progression, regression etc that 16 markers were on!! With depth you literally need to know the colour of hitler's socks and the weather each day lmao
Original post by gegem8
I feel as though I need to revise a bit more for this over the next couple of days... Ah starting to stress now.
Question for you now though:
How far would you agree that propaganda was the main cause that Nazis were able to achieve the majority vote in order to pass the Enabling Act?


Ooh, good question!

Paragraph 1) Propaganda was arguably the main reason in that the Nazis used many common motifs of their propaganda as justification for the Enabling Act. The main example is the emphasis on the threat posed by Communists; this was one of the principal justifications of the Enabling Act following the Reichstag Fire, and by using anti-Communist propaganda the Nazis were able to portray the Act as a measure taken for Germany's safety. Another motif is that of strong government and an end to the weakness of the Weimar Republic, which was represented by the Act.
2) On the other hand, the Nazis were often a lot more explicitly coercive when getting the Enabling Act passed. They banned the Communists, intimidated the SDP and watched over voters as they crossed their ballots to scare them. They also sent their opponents into exile or killed them outright. Such tactics are far more explicit than propaganda usage and could be said to have played a more direct role in inspiring fear, crushing opposition and thus getting the Act passed.
3) Another factor in the passing of the Act is the weakness of the Weimar government and how easy it was to manipulate. The Act would not have passed or even been floated had political intrigue and squabbling between von Papen, von Schleicher and related rival factions not caused Hitler to be appointed Chancellor, and this appointment was also due to inept Weimar politicians misconceiving the situation and underestimating the Nazis. Moreover, Hitler could very easily persuade Hindenburg to ratify whatever he wanted him to, showing that checks on the Chancellor's power were failing. Thus the Act could not have passed if the government weren't so weak in the first place.
(edited 6 years ago)
Reply 16
for a 16 marker is 3 points/factors okay? I try to do 4 but sometimes just can't think of enough to say
Reply 17
If the exam board is with Edexcel then yes I am sitting this paper tomorrow
Good luck for tomorrow everyone!

If anyone wants to try another question now: "'Women were unimportant to the Nazi state." Discuss'
Original post by Sonechka
Good luck for tomorrow everyone!

If anyone wants to try another question now: "'Women were unimportant to the Nazi state." Discuss'


What topics do you or your teacher predict to come up in the Germany exam tomorrow ??? Especially for the 16 and 8 markers....???
Also you do do History A right ?

Quick Reply

Latest