Turn on thread page Beta

AQA A2 History 3N: Aspects of International Relations, 1945-2004 watch

    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Hey Guys just started a new discussion over the upcoming 2013 exam, anyone got any tips, pointers or rumours about what they think the exam question may be, also I'm having trouble with my historiography, I only seem to be using a broad perspective of differing views, orthodox, revisionist, post-revisionist, traditionalist and have few historians apart from the likes of Dulles in my essays, has anyone got any tips to where to find more or do I meet the mark criteria for the acknowledgement of different views and current debates?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    So with historiography you can use people like Gaddis for example he believes that Khrushchev sent the missiles into Cuba to close the missile gap. From here you can say Gaddis is right or wrong whatever you believe.. The best way to find historiography is to just read up online on certain topics and see what authors have said
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Samzali1)
    So with historiography you can use people like Gaddis for example he believes that Khrushchev sent the missiles into Cuba to close the missile gap. From here you can say Gaddis is right or wrong whatever you believe.. The best way to find historiography is to just read up online on certain topics and see what authors have said

    So do you have to be specific with your histiography? Or can it just be the acknowlegement of debate and differentiating views? Any ideas what might be on the exam aswell?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by joefish94)
    So do you have to be specific with your histiography? Or can it just be the acknowlegement of debate and differentiating views? Any ideas what might be on the exam aswell?

    If you have specific historiography use it, and then say if u agree or not. It is always better to have a historians name... Thats what i do i try and put one person in per question. No idea Im re taking this exam .. Do you have any ideas?
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Ohh okay thankyou, so what are you aiming for and get last time? And I don't really know, I have a feeling it may be détente or secon world war, but it's difficult to pick out patterns for determination because of the lack of actual exam questions!
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by joefish94)
    Ohh okay thankyou, so what are you aiming for and get last time? And I don't really know, I have a feeling it may be détente or secon world war, but it's difficult to pick out patterns for determination because of the lack of actual exam questions!


    I had a target grade for A last year... I got a C I REALLY need an A this year to get into Warwick ... Those 2 topics are my worst nightmare all the treaties and stuff .. What are u aiming for?
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    A*, I need 93% in this exam! The thing is I'm actually feeling pretty confident about it, fingers crossed those two topics come up, I'll be a happy bunny.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by joefish94)
    A*, I need 93% in this exam! The thing is I'm actually feeling pretty confident about it, fingers crossed those two topics come up, I'll be a happy bunny.
    Hey, can you give some tips on how you would structure an essay, so like would I do arguments for and against or what?... I really don't know the right essay structure for int. relations :/
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by sensimillia)
    Hey, can you give some tips on how you would structure an essay, so like would I do arguments for and against or what?... I really don't know the right essay structure for int. relations :/
    I think it depends on the essay tbh.. But the basic theme is to start with your into (obviously) but make sure you put your argument from the start so straight away in your intro reword the question to show the examiner you understand the question, then give your view.

    The main body of the argument is up to you how you structure it, but personally I would just do a paragraph or two for and a paragraph or two against,but make sure that your argument is clear throughout the essay, so if you do not agree with the point for say why, also it says in the mark scheme for an A* that a high level of synopticity is required, and that students must be aware of the historical debate, and that the essay is well structured, so make sure that when you write, you write with purpose. A point that our teacher said was that a lot of people are thinking while they are writing about what to write next thus allowing their essay to not recieve 100% concentration, it is best to write a 5 minute plan for yourself at the start to ensure you know what you are writing about next, even if it takes you 10 minutes, you still have 40-35 minutes to write a well planned out essay!
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by joefish94)
    I think it depends on the essay tbh.. But the basic theme is to start with your into (obviously) but make sure you put your argument from the start so straight away in your intro reword the question to show the examiner you understand the question, then give your view.

    The main body of the argument is up to you how you structure it, but personally I would just do a paragraph or two for and a paragraph or two against,but make sure that your argument is clear throughout the essay, so if you do not agree with the point for say why, also it says in the mark scheme for an A* that a high level of synopticity is required, and that students must be aware of the historical debate, and that the essay is well structured, so make sure that when you write, you write with purpose. A point that our teacher said was that a lot of people are thinking while they are writing about what to write next thus allowing their essay to not recieve 100% concentration, it is best to write a 5 minute plan for yourself at the start to ensure you know what you are writing about next, even if it takes you 10 minutes, you still have 40-35 minutes to write a well planned out essay!
    ohh okay thanks that helps quite abitt, cheeers
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    My Teacher gave me this question: 'world politics from 1991-2004 shows that the principle of collective security cannot be applied in international crises'. How far do you agree with this view of the UN's interventions in this period?

    Don't really know how to structure this...any help?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Dan God)
    My Teacher gave me this question: 'world politics from 1991-2004 shows that the principle of collective security cannot be applied in international crises'. How far do you agree with this view of the UN's interventions in this period?

    Don't really know how to structure this...any help?


    Ooo this question looks good, i'll do a plan for it tomorrow and ill type it all up! It seems to be leaning towards the idea that the UN failed or was a success? So for example collective security couldn't be established in the international crises of Somalia because the UN switched from humanitarian aims to political aims in the region... And USA the superpower did not want to intervene which is why they failed.... Is that what u were thinking?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Samzali1)
    Ooo this question looks good, i'll do a plan for it tomorrow and ill type it all up! It seems to be leaning towards the idea that the UN failed or was a success? So for example collective security couldn't be established in the international crises of Somalia because the UN switched from humanitarian aims to political aims in the region... And USA the superpower did not want to intervene which is why they failed.... Is that what u were thinking?
    That sounds good
    I was also thinking change overtime. For example there was a collective effort led by the UN in the first Gulf War, but the US seemed to be more unilateral in its approach after 9/11 e.g. Iraq and Afghanistan undermining the UN
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    any predictions on questions? I havent yet covered post 1991 relations... plus anyone got any tips on revising? Im struggling with historiography - how are people tackling this, like what do you need to know, how many examples etc.

    Thanks!
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Dan God)
    That sounds good
    I was also thinking change overtime. For example there was a collective effort led by the UN in the first Gulf War, but the US seemed to be more unilateral in its approach after 9/11 e.g. Iraq and Afghanistan undermining the UN
    Not one of the best plans ever i attempted it in 10 mins. Is this how you would tackle the question?

    'World politics from 1991-2004 shows that the principle of collective security cannot be applied in international crises.’ How far do you agree with this view of the UN’s intervention in this period?

    Intro – Show your line of argument and then define collective security – a system for international peace. UN failed in this case for many reason

    • Collective security cannot be applied when superpowers interests are being threatened. USA (oil) in Kuwait – Appears as if the UN are united and are going to lead a collective security response to the invasion- UN coalition forces dominated by US troops – Undermined.

    • CS cannot be applied in international crisis especially when the UN lacks organisation- Rwanda- Major failure – No peace established – didn’t prevent a genocide- France a member state of the UN use their presence in Rwanda to protect Hutu allies (committed the genocide)

    • East Timor- Success at facilitating elections but the UN’s main role is to be peacekeepers not hold elections- Failure in preventing violence ( Mentioned a slight success but then argued against it)

    • Collective security cannot be applied due to the system in which the UN works- Darfur China and Russia vetoed intervention – Economic interests- Clear lack of political will to help in the region- Failure. UN undermined in these situations. 2004

    Oh yes and historiography is hard to find on this topic and the EU.. i dont have much :/
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Samzali1)
    If you have specific historiography use it, and then say if u agree or not. It is always better to have a historians name... Thats what i do i try and put one person in per question. No idea Im re taking this exam .. Do you have any ideas?
    I'm so glad there's so many of us!!

    Examiners' reports of the past few years show that you don't need to use names and you really shouldn't get bogged down in too much historiography detail. I've summed up the general key thoughts from previous reports here:

    Spoiler:
    Show
    June 2012
    • Overt references to historiography but not explicit detail
    • Focus on specifics of question
    • Cover as much of period in question as possible (not continuous detail and finely tuned but indicative content and exemplars)
    • Restrict analytical content
    • Analysis is key instead of bolted on comments


    June 2011
    • Use historiography as tool for own analysis and linkage of ideas
    • No need for names of historians
    • DEVELOP LINKS
    • Historiography not needed in length-DO NOT DOMINATE ANSWER
    • Don’t produce a narrative
    • Select detail for reason, don’t just chuck it in
    • Good understanding of détente


    June 2010
    • Understand historiography and apply to own analyses
    • Understand focus of questions
    • Wide ranging and depth to knowledge
    • Maintain sustained analysis to contribute toward the maintenance of a sustained argument
    • Establish position from outset and systematically argue throughout answer
    • Sound basis of well selected substantive detail
    • Develop integrated commentary


    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Not liking this question i hate the EU out of all the topics!!!

    To what extent should the expansion of the EU be considered a success in the period 1991-2004 - I did this question and got the lowest mark EVER out of all my essays :'( Any help ?

    Thanks
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    How much contextual (like off the syllabus or textbook) knowledge do you guys know/include in your answers?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Samzali1)
    Not one of the best plans ever i attempted it in 10 mins. Is this how you would tackle the question?

    'World politics from 1991-2004 shows that the principle of collective security cannot be applied in international crises.’ How far do you agree with this view of the UN’s intervention in this period?

    Intro – Show your line of argument and then define collective security – a system for international peace. UN failed in this case for many reason

    • Collective security cannot be applied when superpowers interests are being threatened. USA (oil) in Kuwait – Appears as if the UN are united and are going to lead a collective security response to the invasion- UN coalition forces dominated by US troops – Undermined.

    • CS cannot be applied in international crisis especially when the UN lacks organisation- Rwanda- Major failure – No peace established – didn’t prevent a genocide- France a member state of the UN use their presence in Rwanda to protect Hutu allies (committed the genocide)

    • East Timor- Success at facilitating elections but the UN’s main role is to be peacekeepers not hold elections- Failure in preventing violence ( Mentioned a slight success but then argued against it)

    • Collective security cannot be applied due to the system in which the UN works- Darfur China and Russia vetoed intervention – Economic interests- Clear lack of political will to help in the region- Failure. UN undermined in these situations. 2004

    Oh yes and historiography is hard to find on this topic and the EU.. i dont have much :/
    Super...Thanks
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Samzali1)
    Not liking this question i hate the EU out of all the topics!!!

    To what extent should the expansion of the EU be considered a success in the period 1991-2004 - I did this question and got the lowest mark EVER out of all my essays :'( Any help ?

    Thanks
    I know what you mean. It looks more like an essay I'd get in economics.

    Political stability
    Safe transition from socialism to capitalism after collapse of communism in eastern Europe e.g. Copenhagen agreement 1993
    Closer links between east and west - decrease tension
    But
    Potential conflict with Russia if the EU militarised
    Tension among applicant states after agenda 2000 - latvia and Lithuania felt Estonia had been treated more favourably

    Economic
    Closer links through increased trade - removal of protectionism
    100 million extra consumers
    Free labour movement - increased employment for new members
    But
    Existing members felt they were propping up the east - tension among east and west?

    Environmental
    Agenda 2000 - improved nuclear conditions, transport policy coherent with w Europe, improve water and air pollution.

    Oveerall enlargement more beneficial to new members
 
 
 
The home of Results and Clearing

2,025

people online now

1,567,000

students helped last year

University open days

  1. Bournemouth University
    Clearing Open Day Undergraduate
    Wed, 22 Aug '18
  2. University of Buckingham
    Postgraduate Open Evening Postgraduate
    Thu, 23 Aug '18
  3. University of Glasgow
    All Subjects Undergraduate
    Tue, 28 Aug '18
Poll
How are you feeling about GCSE results day?

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.