Join TSR now and get all your revision questions answeredSign up now
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    This paper boosted my confidence for the upcoming exams and hopefully I get an A (touch wood)
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by arcticcmonkeys)
    My teacher bethe n shouting about it, haha. I think he was angry at the fact we had went so in depth with the Nazis and only touched on some other factors, but unification was not wholly covered. I'm hoping I've scraped even 5 marks for it, purely to pull up my grade slightly. I think 4 people in my entire class attempted a Germany essay! Migration and Empire was brilliant. It's positive marking as well, which is great considering I wrote and extra 3 pieces of recall, which I didn't need, on to the 10 markers to ensure I got the marks! I'm confident I'll get high marks for paper 2, which will hopefully shift my grade up. My women and the vote essay was pretty good, so I hope I get maybe 16 or 17. Then my extended essay is predicted an A, not sure how good an A though, hopefully around 23/24. My target grade was an A, I doubt I'll get it after that terrible Germany essay, but nothing can be done now...
    When the History teachers at our school saw the paper, one was close to tears. It must be horrible for them because, I can't say for the other Higher class, but my classes target grades are all A/B and I highly doubt that any of us will get a strong A or strong B maybe
    get a weak A/B. We did the early years of Italy in depth (which didn't help because I don't have a clue at what's going on!) and the latter years of Germany. We only spent 2 double periods on this purely based on the fact that out of the 16 in my class, 14 did SG so we spent time going over what arguments we could include.

    For my botched attempt Italian Nationalism essay, I reckon I gained 7 marks; for Women essay I think 13 possibly 14. I did a practice essay last week and gained 15 but because of time and stress I think I missed a few bits out and for my Extended Essay, I think have about 20/21.

    For Paper 2, I didn't have any problems with the paper however I did through away one obvious point in Q2 when the Q asked "How useful is Source B in explaining the relations between Native Scots and immigrants" The Source clearly said that the Russian/German family were called "German Jews" which would suggest racial hatred but I didn't pick up that point and I said that they changed their names (the boy was called Alec) to more Scottish names to help them fit in! Never mind, I think I gained about 23/24 - I was one mark off an A for Paper 2 in my prelim so we'll see!
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by GoldenOne)
    The backlash from this exam has been incredible!
    Personally, I thought paper 1 was alright. My school does the Atlantic Slave Trade and USA- 1918-1968. For the Slave Trade we'd been told it would be a strange exam if there was no abolition questions (issues 5 and 6) and there wasn't any. For the USA we were told that since the civil rights section made up 50% of the unit, it was almost guaranteed we'd get one of those (issues 2, 5 and 6).

    Some of my classmates just went by what the teachers predicted and came out crying because the issues that came up were 1, 3 and 4. I had studied everything but issue 4 (my school doesn't teach New Deal for USA or affects of slavery on African society for Slave Trade) so I was fine. Just goes to show what happens I suppose.

    Paper 2 was alright as well. We did Scottish Wars of Independence and I don't think I did too badly. My extended essay was alright too, so here's hoping I'm on course for that A :crossedf:
    To be honest, the SQA have mucked up big time. The non-inclusion of the Nazis meant that the 32 people sitting Higher in my school had no option but to cover Italian Unification which only a handful properly understand and feel confident writing a fully developed essay on (In the European section we cover the early years of Italy, latter years of Germany meaning we couldn't do any German Unification Q). I feel almost cheated and so angry by the SQA and I'm just glad that I'm in S6 so won't have to go through this shambles again!
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Am5)
    To be honest, the SQA have mucked up big time. The non-inclusion of the Nazis meant that the 32 people sitting Higher in my school had no option but to cover Italian Unification which only a handful properly understand and feel confident writing a fully developed essay on (In the European section we cover the early years of Italy, latter years of Germany meaning we couldn't do any German Unification Q). I feel almost cheated and so angry by the SQA and I'm just glad that I'm in S6 so won't have to go through this shambles again!
    The SQA have not mucked up at all. Teachers have mucked up on this. In the descriptors the SQA sends out, teachers/ lecturers are told of everything that needs to be taught - which is all 6 essays on nationalism, unification and the Nazis. However, some teachers stupidly thought that because there has been at least one Nazi essay in the paper in recent years that it meant there would be this year, and they were completely wrong. Every year, there is the possibility that there might be no Nazi questions, and candidates should be prepared for that, by learning four essays from each unit of study. For the sake of student's results, I hope teachers stop trying to second guess what's in the paper, which many do already because they're lazy and think they can only teach segments of units to their pupils. In my opinion, the SQA could have done this deliberately because they are very aware that so many pupils and teachers keep relying on the Nazis, when really, they should have knowledge of the full Germany unit. It's a shame that it's worked out badly for some, but this serves as a much needed wake up call. Teachers: teach the full course. Pupils: learn four essays for each unit.

    Good luck with your exams.


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    I agree with you to a certain extent, teachers shouldn't guess what is going to appear but the SQA is at fault to some extent because many students across Scotland only had one other option to cover if the Nazis didn't appear and if there are not 100% confident on the second topic, they are screwed!

    The main reason why our European Unit is split across early Italy and latter Germany and we miss out German Unification and German Nationalism is simply the lack of time we have to cover the whole course. Teachers are feeling the squeeze this year not to mention the implementation of the new Nationals this year and new Highers in the forthcoming year. Also, this year, our school has moved from 6 periods per week of each subject to 5 per week to make way for a Wider Achievement column
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by AspiringMedic8)
    The SQA have not mucked up at all. Teachers have mucked up on this. In the descriptors the SQA sends out, teachers/ lecturers are told of everything that needs to be taught - which is all 6 essays on nationalism, unification and the Nazis. However, some teachers stupidly thought that because there has been at least one Nazi essay in the paper in recent years that it meant there would be this year, and they were completely wrong. Every year, there is the possibility that there might be no Nazi questions, and candidates should be prepared for that, by learning four essays from each unit of study. For the sake of student's results, I hope teachers stop trying to second guess what's in the paper, which many do already because they're lazy and think they can only teach segments of units to their pupils. In my opinion, the SQA could have done this deliberately because they are very aware that so many pupils and teachers keep relying on the Nazis, when really, they should have knowledge of the full Germany unit. It's a shame that it's worked out badly for some, but this serves as a much needed wake up call. Teachers: teach the full course. Pupils: learn four essays for each unit.

    Good luck with your exams.


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    I agree. Unfortunately I fall in to the this category - we spent basically the entire Germany unit focusing on both aspects of the Nazis. We only had summary sheets on the other topics, which didn't go in to depth at all. My attempt at a unification essay was so poor, because I only knew basic points and not solid knowledge. I'm so disappointed as history was probably my strongest subject this year Best of luck with your exams.


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Am5)
    When the History teachers at our school saw the paper, one was close to tears. It must be horrible for them because, I can't say for the other Higher class, but my classes target grades are all A/B and I highly doubt that any of us will get a strong A or strong B maybe
    get a weak A/B. We did the early years of Italy in depth (which didn't help because I don't have a clue at what's going on!) and the latter years of Germany. We only spent 2 double periods on this purely based on the fact that out of the 16 in my class, 14 did SG so we spent time going over what arguments we could include.

    For my botched attempt Italian Nationalism essay, I reckon I gained 7 marks; for Women essay I think 13 possibly 14. I did a practice essay last week and gained 15 but because of time and stress I think I missed a few bits out and for my Extended Essay, I think have about 20/21.

    For Paper 2, I didn't have any problems with the paper however I did through away one obvious point in Q2 when the Q asked "How useful is Source B in explaining the relations between Native Scots and immigrants" The Source clearly said that the Russian/German family were called "German Jews" which would suggest racial hatred but I didn't pick up that point and I said that they changed their names (the boy was called Alec) to more Scottish names to help them fit in! Never mind, I think I gained about 23/24 - I was one mark off an A for Paper 2 in my prelim so we'll see!
    Some of my class were just scraping Cs so this obviously wasn't good news! I understand, that was similar to my class. Everyone had done SG, so my teacher basically chose to focus on the nazis purely because we all had a reasonable understanding.

    That is still a valid point for paper 2! You don't need to worry about it, if the knowledge is correct then your marker will give you it. I mentioned the fact that they received hardships at school due to their background You might do better than you think in your essays, so you will get a strong B or possibly an A! Well done


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    did anyone do special topic 5: the impact of the great war? What did you write for the recall of the how far and fully?
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Am5)
    To be honest, the SQA have mucked up big time. The non-inclusion of the Nazis meant that the 32 people sitting Higher in my school had no option but to cover Italian Unification which only a handful properly understand and feel confident writing a fully developed essay on (In the European section we cover the early years of Italy, latter years of Germany meaning we couldn't do any German Unification Q). I feel almost cheated and so angry by the SQA and I'm just glad that I'm in S6 so won't have to go through this shambles again!
    As AspiringMedic8 says, it's not down to the SQA what the teachers decide to teach you. My teacher gave us a list of the issues that were in the course and could come up in any exam. They made it clear that while they could guess at what could potentially come up, nothing was guaranteed since anything from the course could 'potentially' be in the exam, and the only way to be safe would be to prepare eight different essays. Apologies, but if anyone's responsible, its your teachers for their assumptions.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    It's really bothering me that nearly everyone here said their teachers predicted essays. At the beginning of the year, having previously sat Modern Studies, I thought predictions would happen for History but from day one my teacher made sure we knew not to take any chances and couldn't stress enough to us that you CANNOT predict history essays, so I really cannot understand why some teachers still think they can. Because of my teacher, I learned every essay on Britain and America and I am beyond happy with my essays. If anything, make sure you learn all your essays because listening to "predictions" and only learning 3 out of 6 essays, to me, is just setting yourself up for the worst.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    I am very aware that I should not have followed predictions. However, at my school we do a two year higher and covered all of unification last year. This year we focused on source work, extended essays and the Nazis. I am far more confident with Nazi essays and Britain essays. For the exam I prepared three essays entirely for germany, none came up. However, I glanced over growth of nationalism that morning. In the exam I wrote three pages of a growth of nationalism essay until I realised I can't do it and then I switched to obstacle to unification which I havent covered since last February (my own stupidity landed me here). Overall I feel that I have 15-17 for women, 10 at least for obstacles to unification and at least 23 in the sources. In my extended essay I also have at least 25 so I'm fairly happy.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by aabbey)
    It's really bothering me that nearly everyone here said their teachers predicted essays. At the beginning of the year, having previously sat Modern Studies, I thought predictions would happen for History but from day one my teacher made sure we knew not to take any chances and couldn't stress enough to us that you CANNOT predict history essays, so I really cannot understand why some teachers still think they can. Because of my teacher, I learned every essay on Britain and America and I am beyond happy with my essays. If anything, make sure you learn all your essays because listening to "predictions" and only learning 3 out of 6 essays, to me, is just setting yourself up for the worst.
    Sorry, but it doesn't matter now, what is done is done and frankly you have just repeated what has already been said on this forum, may I ask why? As by the tone of your comment you appear to be patronising.

    As I said before, I learnt 3/6 essays because my teacher had advised me, in fact I wasn't taught 6 topics and I never knew there were 6 topics. Yes, I was lucky that in the Britain unit one topic out of the three I had revised came up and that in the German unit two out of the three topics I had revised came up, but there is no need to tell me that I was wrong to do so, because after all ​the exam has passed!
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    To the people on this thread who are rubbing it in for people who were told not to revise/weren't taught things and disguising it as 'advice': Please don't bother. Yes, we understand how pleased you are with yourself for revising the right things but I think those who made these mistakes they have worked it out for themselves where they went wrong and don't need some know it all stating the obvious.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by LCRMG)
    To the people on this thread who are rubbing it in for people who were told not to revise/weren't taught things and disguising it as 'advice': Please don't bother. Yes, we understand how pleased you are with yourself for revising the right things but I think those who made these mistakes they have worked it out for themselves where they went wrong and don't need some know it all stating the obvious.
    Preach it!
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by arcticcmonkeys88609)
    Some of my class were just scraping Cs so this obviously wasn't good news! I understand, that was similar to my class. Everyone had done SG, so my teacher basically chose to focus on the nazis purely because we all had a reasonable understanding.

    That is still a valid point for paper 2! You don't need to worry about it, if the knowledge is correct then your marker will give you it. I mentioned the fact that they received hardships at school due to their background You might do better than you think in your essays, so you will get a strong B or possibly an A! Well done


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Thank you! Good luck with the rest of your exams!
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Am5)
    Thank you! Good luck with the rest of your exams!
    Thanks! Good luck in yours as well.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Am5)
    I agree with you to a certain extent, teachers shouldn't guess what is going to appear but the SQA is at fault to some extent because many students across Scotland only had one other option to cover if the Nazis didn't appear and if there are not 100% confident on the second topic, they are screwed!

    The main reason why our European Unit is split across early Italy and latter Germany and we miss out German Unification and German Nationalism is simply the lack of time we have to cover the whole course. Teachers are feeling the squeeze this year not to mention the implementation of the new Nationals this year and new Highers in the forthcoming year. Also, this year, our school has moved from 6 periods per week of each subject to 5 per week to make way for a Wider Achievement column
    The SQA isn't at fault at all. There are six possible essays, three of which will appear in the exam. It is not the SQA's responsibility to accommodate teachers who don't actually teach all of the course. This would undermine the whole concept of being knowledgable on every/most parts of the Higher History and dumb down the qualification as a whole.

    (Original post by GoldenOne)
    As AspiringMedic8 says, it's not down to the SQA what the teachers decide to teach you. My teacher gave us a list of the issues that were in the course and could come up in any exam. They made it clear that while they could guess at what could potentially come up, nothing was guaranteed since anything from the course could 'potentially' be in the exam, and the only way to be safe would be to prepare eight different essays. Apologies, but if anyone's responsible, its your teachers for their assumptions.
    You're right, although teachers are obliged to teach everything that's in the SQA descriptors to avoid things like this happening. It's a shame that it has come to this point, really

    (Original post by LCRMG)
    To the people on this thread who are rubbing it in for people who were told not to revise/weren't taught things and disguising it as 'advice': Please don't bother. Yes, we understand how pleased you are with yourself for revising the right things but I think those who made these mistakes they have worked it out for themselves where they went wrong and don't need some know it all stating the obvious.
    I apologise if you think I was offending anyone with my contribution. I simply highlighted that betting on certain essays is not effective and a very risky strategy. It's not about learning the "right" things, as you say, rather, it's about learning everything. I am sorry if the exam did not work out for you, but I felt I needed to voice my annoyance at the teachers involved in cutting corners and show candidates who might be sitting the exam next year that this should be avoided.

    Good luck with the rest of your Highers.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Ami_)
    Preach it!
    Haha
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by AspiringMedic8)
    The SQA isn't at fault at all. There are six possible essays, three of which will appear in the exam. It is not the SQA's responsibility to accommodate teachers who don't actually teach all of the course. This would undermine the whole concept of being knowledgable on every/most parts of the Higher History and dumb down the qualification as a whole.



    You're right, although teachers are obliged to teach everything that's in the SQA descriptors to avoid things like this happening. It's a shame that it has come to this point, really



    I apologise if you think I was offending anyone with my contribution. I simply highlighted that betting on certain essays is not effective and a very risky strategy. It's not about learning the "right" things, as you say, rather, it's about learning everything. I am sorry if the exam did not work out for you, but I felt I needed to voice my annoyance at the teachers involved in cutting corners and show candidates who might be sitting the exam next year that this should be avoided.

    Good luck with the rest of your Highers.
    You're coming across as very patronising. Thanks anyway for your highlighting of the fact that I was stupid to follow my teachers instructions of "only learn the Nazi essays, they will definitely come up" but I'm pretty sure I realised that I was wrong when I turned the page to find no Nazi questions and not when I came on this and read your 'helpful' advice.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by jen123456)
    did anyone do special topic 5: the impact of the great war? What did you write for the recall of the how far and fully?
    Yes, I did.
    So for Question One I expanded on four source points and then discussed Scots involvement in the Battle of Loos, the Battle of Arras and the fact that propionately Scots had the highest percentage of deaths on the Western Front.
    For Question Three I again expanded on four source points and then wrote about shipbuilding on the Clyde, the Dundee jute industry and diversification of businesses (Beardmore ect).
    I wish I included slightly more recall just in case (ran out of time), but hopefully I have scored at least 8.
    What about you?
 
 
 
Poll
Should MenACWY vaccination be compulsory at uni?
Applying to university

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

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