Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free
x Turn on thread page Beta
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by annmcc)
    Susan Doran believed it "burnt out" on its own due to the length of Elizabeth's reign rather than due to Elizabeth's actions of neutralising it
    Yes but the reasons it burnt out were also due to Elizabeth's conciliatory policy which allowed Catholicism to 'wither on the vine.' Doran was relatively positive regarding the virtues of the Elizabethan Settlement, so you can use her as a historian supporting its inclusive nature in the broad success Elizabeth had achieved in defeating Catholicism by the end of the reign.


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Could anyone give an idea as to what you should ideally include in order to reach high level 4/ level 5 and the differences between them? The mark scheme is so vague - what's the difference between a highly analytical level 4 answer and a highly analytical level 5 answer? Last minute exam nerves have truly set in so any advice would be greatly appreciated
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Endless Blue)
    Yes but the reasons it burnt out were also due to Elizabeth's conciliatory policy which allowed Catholicism to 'wither on the vine.' Doran was relatively positive regarding the virtues of the Elizabethan Settlement, so you can use her as a historian supporting its inclusive nature in the broad success Elizabeth had achieved in defeating Catholicism by the end of the reign.


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    What do you mean by the conciliatory policy?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    I really hope there's a question on religion over the three reigns and one about Elizabeth's reign and whether or not it was a success or something like that... i'm screwed if there are questions on anything to do with government and a dodgy fp policy :/
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by estock)
    I really hope there's a question on religion over the three reigns and one about Elizabeth's reign and whether or not it was a success or something like that... i'm screwed if there are questions on anything to do with government and a dodgy fp policy :/
    this came up last year so it probably won't be religion again! hopefully it'll be religion for Elizabeth though as that hasn't come up for a while!
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by estock)
    I really hope there's a question on religion over the three reigns and one about Elizabeth's reign and whether or not it was a success or something like that... i'm screwed if there are questions on anything to do with government and a dodgy fp policy :/
    3 reigns on religion was last years question, so unlikely it will be on this year!
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by bkd12345)
    this came up last year so it probably won't be religion again! hopefully it'll be religion for Elizabeth though as that hasn't come up for a while!
    yeahh, something on puritans being a threat or how successful were they or something would be quite nice or if her settlement was a success... I really hope it's not a horrible paper :/
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by estock)
    yeahh, something on puritans being a threat or how successful were they or something would be quite nice or if her settlement was a success... I really hope it's not a horrible paper :/
    yeah puritans would be sooo good, like wouldn't be as difficult to write an essay on that and there hasn't been a direct question on that whereas there has been one on the catholic threat. Hope there isn't a horrible foreign policy one :confused:
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Okay so even though I started revision pretty late I'm pretty confident with Edward and Mary's reign & Elizabeth's settlement and Foreign Policy.

    Is there anything I should definitely put my focus on?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by bkd12345)
    yeah puritans would be sooo good, like wouldn't be as difficult to write an essay on that and there hasn't been a direct question on that whereas there has been one on the catholic threat. Hope there isn't a horrible foreign policy one :confused:
    i'm wondering if they'll do a 'how serious a threat were the puritans to Elizabeth?' like they did with the Catholic question a couple year backs. As much as I don't like fp I'd take it over government or the later years any day!
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Do you think a question on French relations would be asked in line with the Netherlands war like the Spanish ones in the previous two papers? I was thinking and I don't know if they'd do that 3 years in a row... so I thought maybe it could be asked in a question about the impact of France on the Catholic threat or radical Puritanism...really unsure though. What do you think?
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by annmcc)
    What do you mean by the conciliatory policy?
    Basically she included them in her Settlement. The Catholic external elements were retained in order to encourage them to attend church services and recusants were only given a 1 shilling fine for not attending a weekly service.

    Contrast this to Mary I's extreme heresy laws that were incredibly unpopular and arguably counter-productive in the Catholic restoration.

    Sorry for the confusion, hope this helps. I suppose I do take a more positive view to the ES than some, though, aha.


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by FringeGal)
    Okay so even though I started revision pretty late I'm pretty confident with Edward and Mary's reign & Elizabeth's settlement and Foreign Policy.

    Is there anything I should definitely put my focus on?
    Given the previous papers, I think:

    - Mid-Tudor Crisis
    - Elizabethan Settlement
    - Catholic threat
    - Puritan threat
    - Scotland/France

    However it really is anyone's guess I'm afraid, there is no consistency whatsoever in the past papers




    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by hfn123)
    Could anyone give an idea as to what you should ideally include in order to reach high level 4/ level 5 and the differences between them? The mark scheme is so vague - what's the difference between a highly analytical level 4 answer and a highly analytical level 5 answer? Last minute exam nerves have truly set in so any advice would be greatly appreciated
    I agree it's difficult to tell the difference in the mark scheme itself.

    However, the way examiners mark is essentially as follows:

    1. Place it into a band (L3/L5 eg)
    2. Determine whether upper or lower end of that band
    3. Assign mark/45

    So basically between L4 and L5 they are looking at the overall quality of the essay. Good structure, focus on the q, detailed evidence, good use of English etc are all essential.

    I think a good conclusion is really the key distinction between a high L4 and low-middle L5. This isn't GCSE RS so you need to do more than say 'I agree/disagree' and reiterate your arguments; instead, offer judgement explicitly in relation to the question. For instance, if a q like 'Elizabeth failed domestically and in foreign policy 1558-71', perhaps argue that she succeeded internally but failed abroad, or however you've taken the essay overall. Don't have 4 paragraphs supporting the statement and then disagree with it at the end!

    Hope this is useful, just my thoughts. And relax before Monday, just go over your stuff and I'm sure you will be fine.


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Endless Blue)
    I agree it's difficult to tell the difference in the mark scheme itself.

    However, the way examiners mark is essentially as follows:

    1. Place it into a band (L3/L5 eg)
    2. Determine whether upper or lower end of that band
    3. Assign mark/45

    So basically between L4 and L5 they are looking at the overall quality of the essay. Good structure, focus on the q, detailed evidence, good use of English etc are all essential.

    I think a good conclusion is really the key distinction between a high L4 and low-middle L5. This isn't GCSE RS so you need to do more than say 'I agree/disagree' and reiterate your arguments; instead, offer judgement explicitly in relation to the question. For instance, if a q like 'Elizabeth failed domestically and in foreign policy 1558-71', perhaps argue that she succeeded internally but failed abroad, or however you've taken the essay overall. Don't have 4 paragraphs supporting the statement and then disagree with it at the end!

    Hope this is useful, just my thoughts. And relax before Monday, just go over your stuff and I'm sure you will be fine.


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Thank you so much, that's so helpful!

    So, if the first thing examiners do is place you in a band it must be important to immediately display qualities relevant to a certain band.

    Does that mean the deciding factor between Level 3 and 4 for example is synopticity? Sorry if this seems like a redundant question after your really informative answer, I'm just worried that no matter how good certain elements are (e.g. analysis) I will fail to meet certain requirements of Level 4/5, automatically restricting my grade.

    Sorry if this is confusing! Again, any help would be greatly appreciated
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by estock)
    i'm wondering if they'll do a 'how serious a threat were the puritans to Elizabeth?' like they did with the Catholic question a couple year backs. As much as I don't like fp I'd take it over government or the later years any day!
    Im SO hoping it will be something like that! the later years came up last year so it could be gov or fp, i just don't like either!
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by hfn123)
    Thank you so much, that's so helpful!

    So, if the first thing examiners do is place you in a band it must be important to immediately display qualities relevant to a certain band.

    Does that mean the deciding factor between Level 3 and 4 for example is synopticity? Sorry if this seems like a redundant question after your really informative answer, I'm just worried that no matter how good certain elements are (e.g. analysis) I will fail to meet certain requirements of Level 4/5, automatically restricting my grade.

    Sorry if this is confusing! Again, any help would be greatly appreciated
    Yeah, synopticity is definitely a requirement for L4/L5. It doesn't need to be hugely prevalent or anything - a good way to incorporate it would be using it to illustrate certain points. E.g if talking about the successes of the Elizabethan Settlement, you could contrast her inclusive policy towards Catholics for the first ten years to the failure of Mary's unpopular, extreme heresy laws.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    Can anyone summarise the following Foreign Policy events for me? Some of my notes are lacking detail.

    -1562 intervention in France
    - 1579 Francis marriage negotiations

    - MQS situation in Scotland after 1560 but before flees to England in 1568. As I understand it, she returned as a ceremonial/figurehead monarch but Protestants rebel against her again?

    Thank you.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Can someone tell me about Elizabeth's relationship with burgundy? I know both she and Philip wanted to maintain the traditional good Anglo-Burg relations but nothing else


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Endless Blue)
    Can anyone summarise the following Foreign Policy events for me? Some of my notes are lacking detail.

    -1562 intervention in France
    ...

    -Fighting in France broke out between Catholics and Protestants in March 1562
    -Duke of Guise led Catholics. Prince of Conde led Protestants.
    -Elizabeth pressured by Leicester (Robert Dudley) to send help to Protestants.
    -Added incentive for her to get involved was to nab back Calais while France was weak.
    -She promised Conde 6000 men and a loan of 30k with control of the port Le Havre as security.
    -Conde captured by Catholics and Duke of Guise assassinated.
    -Both French sides leaderless, they teamed up to drive the English out of Le Havre.
    -Unfavourable peace settlement with the Treaty of Troyes in 1564.
    -Calais lost for good - Cateau-Cambresis 'keep the peace' deal voided.
    -Massive blow to Elizabeth's prestige, and quadrupled her cautiousness in terms of getting involved in foreign affairs again - as we see strongly in her attitude towards the Netherlands.

    Don't know if that helps much, I'm not too detailed on it myself but that's my notes on it. Would be interested to see what other people would add to this...
 
 
 
Reply
Submit reply
Turn on thread page Beta
Updated: June 7, 2015
Poll
Do you like carrot cake?

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.