Edexcel History Unit 2 6H102 20/05/15

When will they be published, any ideas?

Regards - G.

You can say the Punch magazine within that context is questionable because it supports female emancipation and the feminine cause, therefore such views are likely and deem such a source to be questionable. So you're not wrong mate, your right.

Your performance in one question will never affect how your examiner markas the next question, better answers would have clearly differentiated between Status (Pay and respect by men) and Opportunities (In the tertiary section and more choice) however this might set you back to about level 3 but no to the point of a C or D.

So you're saying its reliability is questionable because it supports women's suffrage, so how does it undermine itself in terms of reliability if it supports women's suffrage, that's a complete fallacy, supporting women's rights was the message of the source which has no effect on it's integrity ?

So you're saying its reliability is questionable because it supports women's suffrage, so how does it undermine itself in terms of reliability if it supports women's suffrage, that's a complete fallacy, supporting women's rights was the message of the source which has no effect on it's integrity ?

The view it expresses which supports the notion that women's status and opportunities did improve is questionable. WHY it is questionable would be due to the fact that they support female emancipation and are pro-feminism, henceforth such views are likely to be depicted from punch magazine, which one can question in terms of its usefulness.

When weighing the evidence that's what I found and interpreted, all 3 were questionable in their expression and how they emphasized and supported their views because, ultimately, they all derived from one specific belief and that was either pro or anti emancipation.

What did you think about the exam? What'd you comment when evaluating?

For the one on Punch, I wrote that they were in favor of women's suffrage therefore exaggerated women's work during the war in order to persuade the general public to support women's suffrage (described events during the war)

For the source by that committee, I said it describes events before women 'flooded' the work place but it anticipated events such as women entering in large numbers but being paid less and for long hours, however these precautions taken may have circumvented it and protected Opps and Pay
(desrcibes events before the war)

The third source was from a working men's newspaper with strong trade union ties, they were unhappy with women diluting and substituting men's jobs therefore published that in an attempt to get the public to expect women to leave and this speculation would force them to give their jobs back to men.

question: if you get a date wrong, but the point is still valid and applicable, will they ignore the date being wrong?

question: if you get a date wrong, but the point is still valid and applicable, will they ignore the date being wrong?

That's cool but did you mention whether they were useful in answering the question? So like I said for all 3 sources their usefulness is questionable because each of the Sources author's have a specific agenda.

Source 10 was during the midst and pinnacle of female war recruitment into industries in 1916, and was produced by Punch a pro-feminist magazine and article. Moreover Source 12 would be driven by the fact that demobilization of 3 million men was occurring and of course, newspapers and mass forms of publication were generally opposed to female emancipation and would express such attitudes to the contention in the question. Additionally, Source 11 was written by M. Bondfield who as the secretary of the Women's Labour league would express such opinions due to the principle that she herself was a member whom supported equal opportunities within workplace environments.

That's what examiners want to see... Evaluation. Not a narrative description.

What they want to see is cross referenced sources used to back up a argument and counter argument (which supports then disagrees with the question), integrated with the provenance which assess its reliability (Nature, Origin, Purpose and audience) , and then coming to an overall judgement in the conclusion.

How did you get corruption of the church from the sources?

That was in source 1. it said that the pope's treatment of henry (referring to the great matter) lead to henry reforming the church because henry saw it to be corrupt.

I have a general question guys, all responses are welcome!

During my exam I noticed my handwriting went from okay to barely readable. Does anyone else find that this trend is also apparent when they do exams etc?

I hope the examiner is having a really good day the moment they mark my paper, he'd be in for a surprise!

Regards - G.

My handwriting went from "wtf" to medieval arabic. I wonder how those on the examiner reports keep their handwriting super neat. (And even then I still have a hard time reading them ...)

You can just retake one unit if that's what you want to do, loads of people at my school retook unit 2 this year without having to do unit 1 again

The Grade Boundaries for last year's paper on Unit 2 History:

44 - A
40 - B
36 - C
32 - D
28 - E
"" - U

Overall, to get an A grade one is required to achieve 14 on a 20 marker and then 30 on the 40 marker.
A B grade would be 13 on a 20 marker and 27 on a 40 marker.
A C grade would be 12 on a 20 marker and 24 on a 40 marker.

However, to achieve a 'secure' grade attempt to gain 2 or 3 marks above the grade boundary set.

Good luck everyone!

Aghhhh. I managed to get a U last year as I got about 25 marks Hoping that I can get at least a C but I'm really worried that I ****ed up the 20 marker.