The Student Room Group

OCR A2 Civil Rights 1865-1980

Right, I understand all the content I think, but when it comes to doing essays I haven't a clue how to structure them. For example, I tried to do a practice question earlier, which was:

Assess the claim that Federal Government was more of a hinderance than a help to the development of African American civil rights in the period 1865-1980?

I got as far as my plan before realising I didn't have a clue. Do you do political rights, social rights and economic rights? Or do you split it up into different time periods? Can anyone help? This exam is a week or so away, and it scares me.

Reply 1

-CBee-
Right, I understand all the content I think, but when it comes to doing essays I haven't a clue how to structure them. For example, I tried to do a practice question earlier, which was:

Assess the claim that Federal Government was more of a hinderance than a help to the development of African American civil rights in the period 1865-1980?

I got as far as my plan before realising I didn't have a clue. Do you do political rights, social rights and economic rights? Or do you split it up into different time periods? Can anyone help? This exam is a week or so away, and it scares me.

u have to go through the 100 years and all about the political rights, social rights and economic rights i think it has to be relevent to the question.

Reply 2

-CBee-
Right, I understand all the content I think, but when it comes to doing essays I haven't a clue how to structure them. For example, I tried to do a practice question earlier, which was:

Assess the claim that Federal Government was more of a hinderance than a help to the development of African American civil rights in the period 1865-1980?

I got as far as my plan before realising I didn't have a clue. Do you do political rights, social rights and economic rights? Or do you split it up into different time periods? Can anyone help? This exam is a week or so away, and it scares me.



There are two ways you can tackle this question. First of all don't do it just by time periods - it will just become story telling, by all means point out periods where the federal government did lots or did nothing but going through it chronologically will lead to trouble.

Now the most sophisticated way to answer the question would be through splitting it up into the various things African Americans wanted. So you'll have a paragraph on desegregation, a paragraph on voting rights and perhaps a paragraph on labour rights/economic prosperity (remember in the US there isn't much of a concept of 'economic rights' as such, ideologically they think you have the right to vote, right to speech, whatever, very few believe you have the 'right' to economic prosperity - it's something you work for.)

Then within those paragraphs you would analyse and evaluate all the federal government did to hinder and to help African Americans in that quest for a particular right. For example, Plessy vs Ferguson 1896 was a massive setback for desegregation and held back black civil rights for many years but Brown vs Board of education 1954 corrects that and sets up the modern civil rights movement. You way up things like that to decide whether fed gov was more of a help or a hinderance, and your conclusion will probably be different for different periods - Helpful in the 50s and 60s, hinderence in the 1890s, for example.

The other way you could set it out would be to do it by branch of federal government, so the President, Congress and the Supreme Court. Then try to evaluate how they helped/hindered civil rights over the period in vary broad terms. Then you could come to the conclusion that perhaps overall the Presidents helped more than Congress or whatever.

The great thing about civil rights exam is that you don't have to know anything in detail, you just need to know a little about everything. I'm doing this exam as well so if you wanna talk about anything feel free to pm me.

Reply 3

My teacher said the best way to do these essays is thematically, and suggested we split the essay into themes (which tend to be Supreme Court, Federal Government, States, African Americans/Anti-Rights groups/Trade union development etc - depending on the question), then compare developments/important points in the main time periods for each theme - e.g. reconstruction 1865-1877, Jim Crow, 1877-1940ish, Post-war period (1945-65ish), then 1965-1980. or whichever periods u feel are more appropriate. this makes it easier to establish change and continuities across the period, and suggest which periods were more or less important.
I did this particular question you're talking about as a practise essay, and just split it into help/hindrance as the main themes (rather than lots of themes as I'd do for a 'how important...', 'to what extent...', 'assess the importance...' etc question). This seemed to make more sense, as the question is pretty much wholly focused on Federal Government. You could then quite easily make a point about federal government being more of a hindrance in the early period 1865-WWII, and more of a help thereafter.
Not sure how much sense this makes, I can try and explain better if you want!

Reply 4

Thank you both very much for your help, it's much clearer now :smile: I've had a bit of a nightmare with this unit all year, our teacher left at Easter and we'd only done one proper practice essay (which I didn't finish in time, so she couldn't mark fully).

I like the idea of splitting it up into Presidents, Supreme Court and Congress, would probably help to differentiate it from other responses for the examiner. I'll have another go at the question with al the advice in mind, thanks again!

Reply 5

There seems to be hundreds of ways of doing this question. I set it out by reasons why federal support increased:
- Increased pressure on gov. from AA rights groups and campaigners.
- Increasing personal interest from presidents (less racist people)
- Emergance of AAs as a large group of voters.

My teacher went nuts over it, saying they were "excellent themes" (he never ever gives praise!)


ANYWAY...two days till the exam and I haven't started revision. Luckily I'm a last-minute kinda girl, and know the stuff OKish already. How are you guys getting on? xxx

Reply 6

I'm doing ok, but I still haven't managed to finish a whole essay in the allotted time yet. And I've never had this problem before, but I find it hard to write analytically (i.e. talking about turning points and progression and regression) without writing chronologically within themes. Is it better to say things like "There was progression in both the 1870s and 1960s because of X and Y, but between these two periods there was much regression"? Feels disjointed to me.

Reply 7

I think i know this fairly well, better than i thought.

But i'm having the '0mgz impending exam; forgot how to write an essay thing". If you had a question saying "blah" was a major turning point, discuss - as well as discussing the arguments for and against it being a turning point, would you compare it to other periods? Like "blah was a turning point, but this this and this happened during bleh, playing down the statement blah was a 'major' turning point, since bleh was more-so"?

Obviously slightly better written than that :biggrin:

Reply 8

I just did a turning point essay, and I did it:

Arguments for the turning point (in this case the 1920s)
Arguments against the turning point
Arguments for time before being more important
Arguments against " " " " "
Arguments for time after being more important
Arguments against " " " " "

In fact, I'm going to post the essay in the hope that someone can have a look and tell me if it's any good or if I'm still off the mark. I'll be eternally in the debt of anyone who does:biggrin: Here it is:

To what extent was the 1920s the major turning point in the development of labour and trade unions rights in the USA from 1865-1980?

Rights of labour in America have often been in jeopardy, but the 1920s was a time when working conditions improved due to the booming economy. However, arguably events both before and after the 1920s were more important and so whether the 1920s was the major turning point is debateable.

It is true that, under the welfare capitalism of the booming economy of the 1920s, workers had better conditions. For example, the Ford Motor Company gave its workers pension plans and insurance schemes, and even some powers to negotiate over their working conditions. This was certainly important for labour rights because it established their right to work in a safe and secure environment. There were also some advances in trade unions, with the establishment of the Brotherhood of Sleeping Car Porters and Maids by Randolph in 1925. This union was important because it was one of the few unions which admitted African Americans, whose labour rights were often neglected.

However, while welfare capitalism may have improved material conditions, it did little for workers’ and trade unions’ actual rights. In return for pension plans and insurance benefits, workers were strictly forbidden to unionise and the ‘company unions’ industrialists like Henry Ford offered were forbidden from discussing or demanding wage rises, often enforced by the placement of spies in the workforce. This means that, overall, the 1920s cannot be considered a turning point- in fact, although it offered progression in material conditions, there was regression in employees rights under welfare capitalism.

It can be argued that events before the 1920s were more important. The period of 1865-1919 was a time of increasing unionisation, with organisations such as the Knights of Labour and the AFL being established in 1869 and 1881 respectively. This increased membership of unions and was important because it meant that, when wartime production needed to be maintained in World War One, concessions were made to unions and collective bargaining was often recognised as a method of negotiation.

However, once again there are considerable limitations on whether 1865-1919 can be considered a turning point either: for example, if it had been a turning point, then the 1920s would have been a better time for labour and trade union rights. In fact, events such as the Pullman Strike in 1894 and the Homestead Steel Strike of 1893 set a precedent for heavy handed employer and government crushing of organised labour. Similarly, Cochran vs. New York in 1905, which concluded that an enforced 10 hour limit on the working day was unconstitutional, established the principle that government should take a laissez-faire attitude towards industrial conditions. If anything, then the period before the 1920s was a worse time from labour and union rights than the 1920s were.

The period after the 1920s then, in particular the Presidency of Franklin D. Roosevelt and his New deal, is the most likely candidate for the title of major turning point. Acts such as the Wagner Act of 1935, which established the right to collective bargaining and protected workers from blacklisting for union activities, and the Fair Standards of Pay Act in 1938, which set a minimum wage of $25, were extremely significant because they marked a turning point from a laissez-faire and occasionally hostile government, to one which actively encouraged unionisation and protected the rights of workers, especially through the FEPC (established in 1943). The effects of the New Deal and its status as a major event are underlined later acts such as the 1964 Civil Rights Act and Carter’s establishment of a $2.65 minimum wage in 1977, because they show that government attitudes were generally changed.

However, as important as the New Deal was, it cannot be ignored that by 1990 just 16.1% of the workforce were unionised. The increasing technological skill required in even basic jobs from 1950-80 meant the traditional union supporters, blue collar workers, were in less demand. Combined with the limiting effects on union rights by the Taft-Hartley Act of 1947 and un-cooperative governments under presidents Eisenhower and Reagan (who sacked most American Air Traffic Controllers after a strike by their union in 1981), union and labour rights have actually undergone regression for much of the time since the 1960s.

Therefore, although it was the New Deal and not the 1920s which proved to be the more important turning point, there was no real turning point in trade union and labour rights because it very much depended on the nature of the government (whether conservative or more liberal) as to whether these rights were limited or upheld.

Reply 9

The only thing you might like to do in that essay (which as far as I can see is very good) is differentiate between labour rights and trades union rights as two different things...I'll post later an essay to explain what I mean, but at the moment I'm just tearing through the African Americans in a panic!!

Reply 10

Ah thanks very much, I was in such a panic when writing it that I meant to do that but it got lost somewhere along the way!

Reply 11

For a question like 'How far was Martin Luther King the most importance African American leader in the development of civil rights from 1865 to 1980?' how would everyone answer it? The obvious way would be to say how MLK helped and then the likes of Douglass, Washington, Wells, Garvey, Du Bois, Malcolm X etc. Or it could be split into how the leaders helped enforce the fourteenth amendment, the fifteenth amendment, economic factors, and racial pride v white backlash. I'm thinking the latter sounds better.

Reply 12

Division St.
For a question like 'How far was Martin Luther King the most importance African American leader in the development of civil rights from 1865 to 1980?' how would everyone answer it? The obvious way would be to say how MLK helped and then the likes of Douglass, Washington, Wells, Garvey, Du Bois, Malcolm X etc. Or it could be split into how the leaders helped enforce the fourteenth amendment, the fifteenth amendment, economic factors, and racial pride v white backlash. I'm thinking the latter sounds better.


I really hope a question like this comes up. Anyway I'd do the first thing, compare MLK with all the other influential african americans.