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

AQA A2 HISTORY HIS3B: The Triumph of Elizabeth, 1547-1603. 10th June 2016 Watch

    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by elen90)
    Do you write plans or do you just hop right into it? If you do write plans what would your structure be?
    Spoiler:
    Show
    E.g. I would do a question such as 'How much of a threat was MQoS to Elizabeth?' as:

    Intro - present ways in which she could be a threat (domestically, internationally, religiously tying these together), outline argument but acknowledge that opposing side will be examined too as there is evidence to the contrary.

    FOR
    1 - Threat in Scotland + support of France, exacerbated by vulnerability of Elizabeth being in early stage of reign.
    2 - Dynastic threat - succession crisis.
    3 - Domestic threat - 1569 Rebellion, 1571 + 1586 Plots supported by Spain
    Whilst maintaining that religion underpinned all of these (esp. after 1570 Papal Bull).

    AGAINST
    1 - Lack of threat in Scotland + loss of French support.
    2 - Lack of domestic threat - rebellion suppressed, plots uncovered, her survival was only due to Elizabeth's reticence to execute.
    3 - Lack of religious threat - Catholicism increasingly unpopular, Parliament by and large Protestant, no evidence to suggest that 1588 Armada was result of her execution.

    Conc - in earlier years she was a great threat but due to her failures here, threat dwindled as time passed, Catholic opposition was ongoing but not really due to her presence, and Elizabeth's religion ultimately retained predominance.
    I'm never short of content or arguments/historiographical debate but I struggle to hit the top grades due to my erratic structures.

    With such a structure as above, would you be more tempted to simply do the 3 for/3 against in order or would you follow a for/against, for/against, for/against structure? I do the second but my teacher says it's confusing.
    I used to do the exact same thing as you and get my marks docked for it. I thought 'well, you wanted balance, so here's your balance'. Basically, what my teacher explained to me is that you are trying to make your own argument (independent judgement) and if you are arguing (for example's sake) for the question and then you put a point against it, you are effectively counteracting your own argument. It is necessary to show balance though, so start off with your argument against what you popped in the introduction, then halfway through after about 3 points that "some may argue" say "on balance" and hammer your argument home. Basically manipulate the examiner into thinking you are right through the powers of persuasion and hard facts . Then just reiterate your largest points succinctly in your conclusion, and you will probably find your marks shoot up! Good luck for tomorrow
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by emmappleby22)
    Does it matter too much if you don't add in any historian quotes? I'm struggling to remember many 😅


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Honestly, not really. Read an exam script from a student a few years ago who got 40/45 with NO historiography whatsoever. Not even a classic Guy or Haigh name drop
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by emmappleby22)
    Does it matter too much if you don't add in any historian quotes? I'm struggling to remember many 😅


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    From what I understand from my teacher, you don't have to remember the exact quotes, but you need to know the interpretation of a historian on the given topic, and then lead the essay based on that for good marks. I haven't ever really used direct quotes in my essays on this in my assessments I have gotten As without them.

    (Original post by V1008)
    Hi guys, the thread is so useful! Hope you all do well, hope they are kind to us!!
    Im really struggling with my essay intros it doesnt flow like normally what i would do is

    E g. Between 1571-1588 the cath threat to elizabeth both at home and abroad was neutralised with relative ease. How convincing is this view?

    Id give some arguments for and against? In the intro any tips on how to like impress the examiner from the onsent in the intro
    I would establish your own interpretation against another historian and then use the rest of the essay to debate the idea between yours and the historians, splitting down into themes or time periods dependent on the essay. So for instance, I would point to Elton for that essay and say he basically thought the exact opposite, and then espouse my view. Then I would split internal and external, first showing his interpretation and giving him evidence, then contrast my own against his with more evidence, eventually coming to a neat conclusion at the end of each paragraph, and then one at the end too.

    That's what I have found to be successful at least.
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by TercioOfParma)
    Go and read the examiners reports, they are usually a very good source to guess what they will set.
    "Manystudents castigated Archbishop Grindal for having the temerity to challenge Elizabeth overthe issue of prophesyings; few bothered to consider that he might have had a point."

    I SPOT A PURITAN SYMPATHIZER! Must talk about my otb Huldrych Zwingli and sarcastically reproach Elizabeth's vigilance.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Ah, I'm so glad to find some discussion about this exam! I'm imagining that because it's the last year, they're going to throw in questions that are hard and they have avoided asking in the past. I haven't seen a question on Puritans, so I'm wondering if they'll come up (or possibly intertwined with the Catholic threat, like which was the greater threat). Nor a specific question on France, which considering it's a fairly big topic is quite odd. This has all been interesting stuff to read anyway, thank you everyone
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    I thought I would just put in here, you need to get an average of 34/45 in each question to get an A by last years paper, so you don't even need to get two A grade responses to get an A grade.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by TercioOfParma)
    Not a problem. I think they will do a mixture of both in order to ensure a decent spread of marks. I can kinda see there being a question on rebellions and another on religion based on last years examiner's report.
    Even though it was rebellions last year?
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by sineaddow98)
    Even though it was rebellions last year?
    Yeah, there will still be questions that involve them probably.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by katinthehat)
    "Manystudents castigated Archbishop Grindal for having the temerity to challenge Elizabeth overthe issue of prophesyings; few bothered to consider that he might have had a point."

    I SPOT A PURITAN SYMPATHIZER! Must talk about my otb Huldrych Zwingli and sarcastically reproach Elizabeth's vigilance.
    I think i remeber reading this, your comment made me laugh immensely
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    Are rebellions that likely considering it was last years question? How likely do you think it is for examiners to repeat question topics in consecutive years?
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by a_bit_of_a_noob)
    I think i remeber reading this, your comment made me laugh immensely
    #ArchbishopOfBanterbury
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by a_bit_of_a_noob)
    Are rebellions that likely considering it was last years question? How likely do you think it is for examiners to repeat question topics in consecutive years?
    It probably won't come up as a specific question for 1547-1558 but they could still be included in an answer. For example, using rebellions in an effectiveness of government question ☺️


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    [QUOTE=emmappleby22;65611615]It probably won't come up as a specific question for 1547-1558 but they could still be included in an answer. For example, using rebellions in an effectiveness of government question ☺️







    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    How would you structure a parliament question?


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by a_bit_of_a_noob)
    Are rebellions that likely considering it was last years question? How likely do you think it is for examiners to repeat question topics in consecutive years?
    They repeated royal authority one year, applying it to Elizabeth instead of Mid-Tudor Crisis, so it has happened
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Theendoftheworld)
    Ah, I'm so glad to find some discussion about this exam! I'm imagining that because it's the last year, they're going to throw in questions that are hard and they have avoided asking in the past. I haven't seen a question on Puritans, so I'm wondering if they'll come up (or possibly intertwined with the Catholic threat, like which was the greater threat). Nor a specific question on France, which considering it's a fairly big topic is quite odd. This has all been interesting stuff to read anyway, thank you everyone
    Puritans have come up before, but a while ago!

    I reckon it's going to be extent of mid-Tudor religious reform. Then a meaty Q on Elizabethan parliament and Spanish/French FP.
    Spoiler:
    Show
    'Elizabeth's authority was threatened more by Puritan extremism than by Catholic opposition in the years 1559-1603' ATVOTV
    'The Elizabethan Church Settlement provided no lasting solution to the problems of dissent from Catholics and radical Protestants in England' ATVOTV with reference to the years 1558-1580
    'The Puritan challenge was a significant danger to Elizabeth's religious settlement' ATVOTV
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    Would you peeps say that throwing out dozens of arguments would be a good idea in the essays? As in, rather than go very in depth with but a few events, would it still be alright to mention many various events and happenings without mentioning as many details pertaining to those events? In the way of writing more than just 3 main body paragraphs of pros and cons to certain factors with regards to the question's quote or what not.

    In short, would one be doomed for having good general knowledge but little 'specialized' or in depth knowledge? As long as the debate itself would be sound and still include a few dates?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    can anyone help me with a plan for this question struggling a bit,
    Elizabeths involvement in ireland is one of a cycle of successful failures, assess the validity of this view
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by emmappleby22)
    How would you structure a parliament question?


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    I would certainly look at the role of parliament as being doing what the monarch and Privy council told them too, and the slow growth in autonomy and sense of self evidenced after james came to the throne and bills that went directly against Elizabeth's intention for religious policy (Strickland bill 1571, Cope Bill and Booke 1585 etc.). Beyond that dependent on the question.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    What points would you make in terms of france helping elizabeth to achieve her foreign policy aims?
    - Anjou's intervention (didnt she provide financial support)
 
 
 
  • 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
    Would you like to hibernate through the winter months?
  • 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.