Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free

Want help with Russian History essays? :) Watch

Announcements
  • View Poll Results: Was this thread helpful?
    Yes!
    8
    88.89%
    A little ...
    1
    11.11%
    Nope, sorry, it didn't do anything for me
    0
    0%

    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    thanks very much for the fast response
    and thanks for the advice - ill remember to mention every leader
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by crocker710)
    I've just read over this essay and it's quite good. It comes a conclusion that has been drawn form a sustained argument throughout. The only slight slight thing I'd say (and it takes 2 seconds to correct) is you've mentioned every leader by name bar Alexander III ( besides a fleeting comment about him making university entry harder). When you mention Count Witte ( how'd you pronouce that, i sat it like Vit but other people say Vitter digressing :P ) say under Alexander III and you will be fine, good essay

    Tom
    roughly what grade would you have given it?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    What were the different reasons why the rulers introduced economic reforms?
    I know that I could talk about the want to catch up with the west, become a super power? I'm not too sure though. Really struggling! What reasons was there and how would I go about talking about it in an essay?
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by crocker710)
    If you've stuck with a Russian History essay here's the place for you! Post up what you're stuck with and I'll give you a hand where I can. Quote me or inbox me for a quick(er) response, oh, and positive rep is always welcomed
    Hi, when doing a turning point essay, should repression be classed under political or social change or should it be tied in with both? Thanks
    • PS Helper
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by jawain04)
    roughly what grade would you have given it?
    If you made the changes (i.e highlight that you've used Alexander III) I'd give it a 48/60 as it's quite a good essay ,

    Tom
    • PS Helper
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by katielou1993)
    What were the different reasons why the rulers introduced economic reforms?
    I know that I could talk about the want to catch up with the west, become a super power? I'm not too sure though. Really struggling! What reasons was there and how would I go about talking about it in an essay?
    Show Russia's inadequacies by the way they were beaten in war or with economic output stats. A good example is how they were beaten in the Russo-Japanese way in 1904-05, a much smaller country managed to humiliate a huge nation. or use the pre-First World War economic stats to show why Russia was no where near a super power (I've included some in an essay plan on the first page)

    I hope this helped if you're still struggling feel free to post back some more questions,

    Tom
    • PS Helper
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by simonc1993)
    Hi, when doing a turning point essay, should repression be classed under political or social change or should it be tied in with both? Thanks
    The simple answer is that it can go in either , if you've got a paragraph which is lacking on content (try have balanced paragraphs) use it with that. If both are of similar size, use it as a link between both, I.E political repression (political parties were only legal in Russia between 1905 and 1921) and social repression (the NKVD / CheKa) I hope this has helped a little,

    Tom
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by crocker710)
    Show Russia's inadequacies by the way they were beaten in war or with economic output stats. A good example is how they were beaten in the Russo-Japanese way in 1904-05, a much smaller country managed to humiliate a huge nation. or use the pre-First World War economic stats to show why Russia was no where near a super power (I've included some in an essay plan on the first page)

    I hope this helped if you're still struggling feel free to post back some more questions,

    Tom


    I've just found it. Thank you so much!
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by crocker710)
    The simple answer is that it can go in either , if you've got a paragraph which is lacking on content (try have balanced paragraphs) use it with that. If both are of similar size, use it as a link between both, I.E political repression (political parties were only legal in Russia between 1905 and 1921) and social repression (the NKVD / CheKa) I hope this has helped a little,

    Tom
    cheers I'd give you rep but it won't let me because I did recently, I'll just owe you for now
    • PS Helper
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by simonc1993)
    cheers I'd give you rep but it won't let me because I did recently, I'll just owe you for now
    Hehehe I look forward to the upcoming rep

    Tom
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by crocker710)
    Hi Cluadia, could you explain how you're currently structuring your essays? possibly with a quick essay plan for one you've already written and I'll try help you where you're going wrong. All I can say is that you, within each theme, should give a balanced argument, so that you've got within each theme where it agrees and contradicts with the given statement.

    For example with something along the lines of 'Opposition was ineffective in Russia between 1855 and 1964 discuss.' You would identify three or four different areas of opposition. Then within each theme show primarily where it was ineffective but then where there was limited success, coming to a balanced conclusion within the theme. For your overall conclusion draw together these smaller conclusions on the effectiveness of different opposition to gain a balanced and sustained argument.

    If you want to get above a C you need to be doing these essays thematically. It is harder than giving a straightforward two sided essay, as you are forced not to approach the essay chronologically. Stick with the thematic approach.

    Im not sure what your last question is asking, if within each theme you're concluding that the premise in the question is invalid then you're A) having a continuous argument, and B) as long as you attempt to consider the reverse side of the argument as you seem to be doing by 'shooting [it] down',

    If you need any more help feel free to post back,

    Tom


    Hey Tom

    Thanks for the reply - it was really helpful. I am currently structuring my essays thematically, normally going along the lines of social, political, economic etc. For example with the question "Lenin described the Tsarist Russian Empire as a "prison of the peoples" To what extent could that verdict be equally applied to Russia throughout the period from 1855 to 1956? I would approach it in a thematic way looking at lack of democracy, repression, censorship, use of secret police in individual paragraphs weighing up whether or not Bolsheviks were more repressive. Due to the nature of this question (it is pretty one sided) I would probably start looking at the converse argument in each paragraph e.g Tsars were pretty repressive and then go on to counteract this. But then the argument appears very one sided and also like a series of mini essays which leads to comments such as 'would be better with more sustained argument'/ 'more signposting'.

    I also have a similar problem with the essay title; "Trotsky described war as the "locomotive of history' Can it be argued that change in Russia in the period 1855 to 1956 was caused only by involvement in wars". I would naturally structure this into social change, political change, economic change etc and weigh them up again, coming to a conclusion. But my teacher says it is easier to get better marks by doing it sort of two sided - looking at economic, social, political on one side in a series of paragraphs and then looking at them again on the other side - the side of the argument that you are arguing and then concluding. I think that this is because the statement is true applied to certain themes and not others - applies to political change but less to the others. I am really confused - to me it is just easier to get each theme all in to one paragraph and then weigh it up - but apparently there are better ways to do it!


    Thanks again!
    Claudia
    • PS Helper
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Claudia.lethem)
    Hey Tom

    Thanks for the reply - it was really helpful. I am currently structuring my essays thematically, normally going along the lines of social, political, economic etc. For example with the question "Lenin described the Tsarist Russian Empire as a "prison of the peoples" To what extent could that verdict be equally applied to Russia throughout the period from 1855 to 1956? I would approach it in a thematic way looking at lack of democracy, repression, censorship, use of secret police in individual paragraphs weighing up whether or not Bolsheviks were more repressive. Due to the nature of this question (it is pretty one sided) I would probably start looking at the converse argument in each paragraph e.g Tsars were pretty repressive and then go on to counteract this. But then the argument appears very one sided and also like a series of mini essays which leads to comments such as 'would be better with more sustained argument'/ 'more signposting'.

    I also have a similar problem with the essay title; "Trotsky described war as the "locomotive of history' Can it be argued that change in Russia in the period 1855 to 1956 was caused only by involvement in wars". I would naturally structure this into social change, political change, economic change etc and weigh them up again, coming to a conclusion. But my teacher says it is easier to get better marks by doing it sort of two sided - looking at economic, social, political on one side in a series of paragraphs and then looking at them again on the other side - the side of the argument that you are arguing and then concluding. I think that this is because the statement is true applied to certain themes and not others - applies to political change but less to the others. I am really confused - to me it is just easier to get each theme all in to one paragraph and then weigh it up - but apparently there are better ways to do it!


    Thanks again!
    Claudia
    Hiya Claudia,

    In response to your first essay, I would read the question as saying that Tsarism was very repressive as lenin described and then it's asking you to A) confirm that's the case and B) analyse if Russia between 1917 and 1964 [I'm presuming you mean 1964 and not 1956 never forget Khrushchev especially with this question] was as repressive and then to what extent was it more repressive. So a generic paragraph would go like this,

    Yes Tsarism was repressive
    example one
    example two
    Tsarism was liberal to an extent
    example one
    Communism was as repressive as Tsarism
    example one
    example two
    Communism was more repressive than Tsarism
    example one
    (depending on certain paragraphs) Khrushchev provided the 'liberal' side of communism but this wasn't typical of the views of leading communists as he was removed for power in 1964 unlike any other leader who all died in office (officially, you could say a lot of them lost true power before they died but that doesn't help your argument lol)

    repeat this three times, concluding that A) lenin was right when he said what he said, but once communism established itself in 1917 it wasn't just the jailer at the prison gate but the firing squad in the execution yard with Khrushchev holding the only blank bullet {oooo I like that analogy I'm going to try use this somewhere else haha}

    You seem to know your way around a thematic essay and you should definitely stick to it. If you address the change brought (and not brought) about by war in the three themes you have named you'll be absolutely fine. If you repeat the same theme twice in different parts of the essay it doesn't flow and you're in danger of repeating yourself. If you've got an essay you've already written I can have a look at it and see what exactly your teacher is trying to say, it might not be a structural issue more style.

    Remember this is a national examination, and because 1 teacher in 1 classroom says their way is best it doesn't mean it is. The majority of people will be told to approach this theme by theme

    Hope this helped a bit more,

    Tom
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Hello again, im trying to find more themes to include if a industrialisation question comes up. So far you've said to mention Growth and Development, the Status of the Russian economy, and War. What else could I mention?
    • PS Helper
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by katielou1993)
    Hello again, im trying to find more themes to include if a industrialisation question comes up. So far you've said to mention Growth and Development, the Status of the Russian economy, and War. What else could I mention?
    Hiya Katie,

    Pace / speed.

    This is hugely important when looking at communist advances, time constrains on spectacularly ambitious aims were imposed (Stalin's Five Year Plans ect).

    It's easier if you give me a question that you're working on so I can help you with the specific themes related to that question,

    Tom
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by crocker710)
    Hiya Katie,

    Pace / speed.

    This is hugely important when looking at communist advances, time constrains on spectacularly ambitious aims were imposed (Stalin's Five Year Plans ect).

    It's easier if you give me a question that you're working on so I can help you with the specific themes related to that question,

    Tom

    So would that include the production targets and the speeding up of industrialisation of 100 years in just 10? How would I go about evaluating it?

    Questions that I'm struggling on are things like:
    Assess the view that in the period from 1855 to 1956 the communist rulers tried to modernise Russia whereas the Tsars did not
    and
    The need to modernise their backward economy was the most important reason why the rulers of Russia introduced reforms'. How far do you agree with this view of the period from 1855-1964


    Also, I really dislike the questions - 'Reluctant reformers'. How far do you agree with this view of the rulers of Russia in the period from 1855-1964

    Thanks
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    Hi Tom,

    Just wondering how you would structure: 'The rulers of Russia preferred repression to reform'. How far do you agree with this view of the period 1855 to 1964?

    Knowledge isn't really the problem e.g. Alexander III and repression, Alexander II and Emancipation etc.

    However, this seems to lend itself towards an argument based approach...

    Thanks!
    • PS Helper
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by mc13177)
    Hi Tom,

    Just wondering how you would structure: 'The rulers of Russia preferred repression to reform'. How far do you agree with this view of the period 1855 to 1964?

    Knowledge isn't really the problem e.g. Alexander III and repression, Alexander II and Emancipation etc.

    However, this seems to lend itself towards an argument based approach...

    Thanks!
    Hi MC

    I would structure this in the classic Social, Political and Economical style.
    Political repression = political parties only legal between 1905 and 1921
    political repression evident under Stalin = purges
    political repression under Alexander III = after death of his father
    however, not so much under Alexander II = was going to make Russia a constitutional monarchy until assassinated
    not so much under Khrushchev = de-stalinisation
    Not repressive = Provisional Government

    Ect. ect. I would do this again for social and economical repression and come to a drawn conclusion along the lines of 'Although the areas in which Russia was extremely repressive have been long stated, there were clear areas where repression was not favoured over repression such as under Khrushchev'

    I hope this has helped,

    Tom
    • PS Helper
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by katielou1993)
    So would that include the production targets and the speeding up of industrialisation of 100 years in just 10? How would I go about evaluating it?

    Questions that I'm struggling on are things like:
    Assess the view that in the period from 1855 to 1956 the communist rulers tried to modernise Russia whereas the Tsars did not
    and
    The need to modernise their backward economy was the most important reason why the rulers of Russia introduced reforms'. How far do you agree with this view of the period from 1855-1964


    Also, I really dislike the questions - 'Reluctant reformers'. How far do you agree with this view of the rulers of Russia in the period from 1855-1964

    Thanks
    Hi Katie,

    With the first and last question are not just looking at economic reform, but wanting you to look at Social and Political reforms as well. If you have a quick look at the essay I've outlined above this post it should go something along the same lines as that.

    The middle question is a more difficult question. It's looking at the reasons why the Tsars wanted to reform their country. One reason was, as is stated the need to modernise their economy which was brought about by defeats in war. Another reason they wanted to reform was to avoid social unrest (for example 1905 and 1881 and Khurshchev). if you repeat this with one or two more reasons why the Tsar wanted to reform and look across the whole period you should be fine,

    I hope this has helped,

    Tom
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by crocker710)
    Hi MC

    I would structure this in the classic Social, Political and Economical style.
    Political repression = political parties only legal between 1905 and 1921
    political repression evident under Stalin = purges
    political repression under Alexander III = after death of his father
    however, not so much under Alexander II = was going to make Russia a constitutional monarchy until assassinated
    not so much under Khrushchev = de-stalinisation
    Not repressive = Provisional Government

    Ect. ect. I would do this again for social and economical repression and come to a drawn conclusion along the lines of 'Although the areas in which Russia was extremely repressive have been long stated, there were clear areas where repression was not favoured over repression such as under Khrushchev'

    I hope this has helped,

    Tom
    Great Tom, thank you!

    I'll have to owe you some rep for now.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by crocker710)
    Hi Katie,

    With the first and last question are not just looking at economic reform, but wanting you to look at Social and Political reforms as well. If you have a quick look at the essay I've outlined above this post it should go something along the same lines as that.

    The middle question is a more difficult question. It's looking at the reasons why the Tsars wanted to reform their country. One reason was, as is stated the need to modernise their economy which was brought about by defeats in war. Another reason they wanted to reform was to avoid social unrest (for example 1905 and 1881 and Khurshchev). if you repeat this with one or two more reasons why the Tsar wanted to reform and look across the whole period you should be fine,

    I hope this has helped,

    Tom


    Yes, it has thanks! although I have come across now a question that i'm really struggling to deal with. 'How far do you agree that the impact of industrialisation on Russia and its people, both before and after 1917, differed only in terms of extent in the period 1855-1956?
    If I got that in the exam, I would seriously not have a clue what to write. Would I mention the effects of industrialisation on the urbanisation and how it was more extreme under Stalin? I'm so stuck!
 
 
 
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • Poll
    Will you be richer or poorer than your parents?
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • 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.