Turn on thread page Beta
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    how do you think it went? the Qs were ok but i somehow screwed it up.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Smokyjoe123)
    how do you think it went? the Qs were ok but i somehow screwed it up.
    I think my friend was doing it today, did it have the 2nd question asking about 'hitlers charisma' or something? I was doing "Britain and the radical state: Chartism" from the same paper (edexcel right?), but i noticed that question when i flicked through the book, and the general consenus from the other class was "oh ****."

    I thought the chartism exam was rather good...

    Anyway, im sure you did fine
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    I loved it well part A even if the three sources all said the same pointless things. Whoever was discussing resistenz and widerstand before I bow down to you and love you!!!!!

    Steve
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Question a was cool. For B I waffled on about propaganda, and its use to cultivate the Hitler myth, but also the importance of terror, forcibly attempting to 'unite' Germany.
    Briefly questioned whether or not Germany was actually united, and touched upon the extent to which Hitler actually had control- but I didn't really go into the strong/weak, intentionalist/structuralist thang too much.

    It was hard to determine whether they wanted us to do the monolithic/polycratic party debate or to discuss the importance of propaganda, terror etc...

    What ya'll put for B?
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    i prefered Qb. i just wrote about whether hitler was charasmatic, or if it was a myth. other mechanisms such as terror and the extent of unity.
    I didnt think it was focussed on the monolithic/polycratic debate but all questions are your own interpretation and as long as what you write had focus it doesnt matter
    Qa was ok, but i didnt use the courses much, they were backing up the same ideas basically.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Grifter)
    Question a was cool. For B I waffled on about propaganda, and its use to cultivate the Hitler myth, but also the importance of terror, forcibly attempting to 'unite' Germany.
    Briefly questioned whether or not Germany was actually united, and touched upon the extent to which Hitler actually had control- but I didn't really go into the strong/weak, intentionalist/structuralist thang too much.

    It was hard to determine whether they wanted us to do the monolithic/polycratic party debate or to discuss the importance of propaganda, terror etc...

    What ya'll put for B?
    I preferred question a. For b, according to my teacher, it was basically asking you to argue for the volksgemeinschaft, e.g. policies, propaganda (myth), and use of terror/force. Therefore it wasn't intending for you to argue the polycratic state/monolithic. However, equally you could have gotten in the weak/strong dictator if you argued it the right way. Apparently there also wasn't too much to say about historiographical info, because my teacher says the board might be trying to get away from the intentionalist/structuralist argument, which everyone's learnt!
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    1. Extent of unity I addressed only briefly
    2. The extent of support and opposition (here I brought in intentionalist v structuralist, weak v. strong)
    3. Other methods i.e force/terror and removal of legal constitution
    4. Hitler's charisma as a "myth" and Goebbel's propaganda ministry as creating this --> linked to importance of a polycratic system...

    That was pretty much my argument I think.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by LondonSteve181)
    I loved it well part A even if the three sources all said the same pointless things. Whoever was discussing resistenz and widerstand before I bow down to you and love you!!!!!

    Steve
    your welcome
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Question: can I possibly get a high level 2 (20/21) for question B) if I don't make a conclusion, and that I touched on several topics (furher principle/polycratic nature/divide and rule; propaganda; role of terror) but with a few examples of explicit knowledge (e.g. number of people imprisoned)?
    Out of all the 4 subjects I took, I can't believe I'll end up screwing up History. Especially when I just need C for this paper (37/60). I spent too much time on question a), hopefully I'll get a high mark (17-20).
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Last year the mark for an A was 42, B was 36 or something and C was about 32. That's not to say it can't change, but the mark for a C will definitely be lower than 37.

    Dave
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    If you don't make a conclusion but if you've nicely argued throughout I imagine that it's more than a L2 - a high L3 more like. As long as the argument is there and your point of view is clear throughout....(a conclusion simply makes this explicit)

    As for the rest of what you addressed, it sounds similar to what I put, so I think you will be fine - propaganda, role of terror, polycratic, and Hitler/fuhrerprinzip. I asked my teacher about all of the above, she said it was fine. As long as it answers the question really!
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Qa was a gift. no problemo at all.

    Qb was really strange. In the end i tried to break down the question. I wrote about:

    - Percieved unity due to Gestapo pressure but not really united.
    - Less united as time went on (change over time!)
    - Hitler as a great orator.
    - Use of propaganda machinery (ie radio)
    - Many people united behind Hitler but not behind Nazi PARTY.
    - Was Hitler in control? (Struct v's Intent)

    May be also other things but i can't remember. Should i have included anything else??

    The Struct v's Intent COULD be brought in as the question asked about Hitlers charismatic 'leadership' - did he lead? Although it should not have formed the bases of your arguement.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by !Laxy!)
    Qa was a gift. no problemo at all.

    Qb was really strange. In the end i tried to break down the question. I wrote about:

    - Percieved unity due to Gestapo pressure but not really united.
    - Less united as time went on (change over time!)
    - Hitler as a great orator.
    - Use of propaganda machinery (ie radio)
    - Many people united behind Hitler but not behind Nazi PARTY.
    - Was Hitler in control? (Struct v's Intent)

    May be also other things but i can't remember. Should i have included anything else??

    The Struct v's Intent COULD be brought in as the question asked about Hitlers charismatic 'leadership' - did he lead? Although it should not have formed the bases of your arguement.
    that sounds really good, I think I covered most of that, but didn't really touch on Struturalist/intentionalist, although I used historiography on the Gestapo. Argh! I should not be on here, it's making me feel worse!
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    I just cried for the first 20 minutes in the foetal position until someone dragged me from the exam hall.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    yeah i thought it was ok, annoying to keep referring back to unity though cos i always felt like i wanted to trail off the point, and it didnt leave alot of room to discuss everything in detail, but i think i did ok!
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    I didn't even talk alot about the role of terror i just discussed how important hitler's charismatic nature was for unification. talked about propaganda, state paternalism and i discussed how it was made to appear as though it was everyone's duty to Hitler to denounce dissent, quoted Gellately about Gestapo etc. Suppose i made some mention but i argued that it was most important and proceeded to say why. Hope that's ok that i didnt go itno volumes about Gestapo and terror. I didn't think the gestapo etc was about unification it was more about splintering society making it so that ppl didn't trust one another etc. Oh well, part a rocked and my argument for B was strong, used sources well and own knowledge etc, quoted Reifenstahl, lol.

    Steve
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Dave_2004_G)
    Last year the mark for an A was 42, B was 36 or something and C was about 32. That's not to say it can't change, but the mark for a C will definitely be lower than 37.

    Dave
    You have saved my hope by telling me this. I was, and still am slightly depressed after doing the paper. Especially when I done so well in class mocks doing past papers- high Level 3 and 4 all the time. Really need the 3As to get into LSE.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    No way will 42 get an A, more like 48. 42/60 is 70%, thats the B percentage. An A is normally around 80% therefore 48/60. C will be something like 36/60, 60%
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by BobDukesteez)
    I just cried for the first 20 minutes in the foetal position until someone dragged me from the exam hall.
    Amazing quote! I'm gonna be feeling just like in my bio exam tomorrow. One more history exam, then I'll never have to recall a fact again... just wow...
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    what exam board is this cos i thought i had a history paper on nazi germany tomorrow....
 
 
 
Turn on thread page Beta
Updated: June 21, 2005
The home of Results and Clearing

4,482

people online now

1,567,000

students helped last year

University open days

  1. Bournemouth University
    Clearing Open Day Undergraduate
    Fri, 17 Aug '18
  2. University of Bolton
    Undergraduate Open Day Undergraduate
    Fri, 17 Aug '18
  3. Bishop Grosseteste University
    All Courses Undergraduate
    Fri, 17 Aug '18
Poll
A-level students - how do you feel about your results?

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.