Competition - post a photo you've taken of nature >>

Will I get away with this?

So I had a History exam today.

One of the questions was an 'interpretation' question. You get given a historian's interpretation on a certain event and you have to analyse it.

The key part is that you have to compare their interpretation with OTHER historians that you've studied. If you don't do that then you're limited to 60% for that question.

So. The interpretation question was not on what I expected. All of the interpretations of the historians I had researched and memorised became invalid.

Drastic action was required.

I used the names of the historians I had studied and the names of their books, and made up what they thought about the issue. Apparently Eric Hobsbawm wrote in Age of Extremes that the Bolsheviks won the Russian Civil War because of the fervour and zeal of their forces, and Harold Shukman wrote in The Russian Revolution that they won because of the geographical distance between the opposition forces.

Basically I just took reasons for Bolshevik success and assigned historians to them.

Now, I'm thinking that unless the examiner has actually read these works, then surely they won't know what the historians actually wrote? Would they give me the benefit of the doubt?

Looking at the markscheme on the specimen paper, they don't actually identify individual historians and what they said; they only indicate the viewpoint that some historians' interpretations might take.

Am I a pro ********ter? What are the chances they'll see through me?

(edited 7 years ago)

Reply 1

username2471155

Original post by Abstract_Prism

So I had a History exam today.

One of the questions was an 'interpretation' question. You get given a historian's interpretation on a certain event and you have to analyse it.

The key part is that you have to compare their interpretation with OTHER historians that you've studied. If you don't do that then you're limited to 60% for that question.

So. The interpretation question was not on what I expected. All of the interpretations of the historians I had researched and memorised became invalid.

Drastic action was required.

I used the names of the historians I had studied and the names of their books, and made up what they thought about the issue. Apparently Eric Hobsbawm wrote in Age of Extremes that the Bolsheviks won the Russian Civil War because of the fervour and zeal of their forces, and Harold Shukman wrote that they won because of the geographical distance between the opposition forces.

Basically I just took reasons for Bolshevik success and assigned historians to them.

Now, I'm thinking that unless the examiner has actually read these works, then surely they won't know what the historians actually wrote? Would they give me the benefit of the doubt?

Looking at the markscheme on the specimen paper, they don't actually identify individual historians and what they said; they only indicate the viewpoint that some historians' interpretations might take.

Am I a pro ********ter? What are the chances they'll see through me?

Just pray that the examiner is really stupid or generous, what other a levels do you do? (Sorry I know this isn't anything to do with this)

Reply 2

Abstract_Prism

Original post by zXcodeXz

Just pray that the examiner is really stupid or generous

I mean, how will they actually know what the historians wrote though? I doubt that very many of the examiners have actually read the books. Unless another student says exactly the opposite of what I said, then they're probably not going to check, right?

Original post by zXcodeXz

what other a levels do you do? (Sorry I know this isn't anything to do with this)

Lit, Politics, and BTEC Applied Law.

(AS-levels btw)

Reply 3

username2088165

Well, the examiner might not have much knowledge of history, so I guess you'll just have to hope you get one who doesn't realize that you've made it up!

Reply 4

username2471155

Original post by Abstract_Prism

Nice, you'll just have to hope I guess

Reply 5

Vikingninja

I would just stop worrying and hope it goes positively, can't change anything now and worrying will just stress you. I sort of did something similar last year in geography AS since a question needed examples of rebranding through heritage but we weren't taught that many, however I used a 2 line example from a diagram in a past paper I did the day before, still got an A.

Reply 6

Abstract_Prism

Original post by Leviathan1741

Well, the examiner might not have much knowledge of history, so I guess you'll just have to hope you get one who doesn't realize that you've made it up!

Do you think I'm more likely to get away with it, or more likely to get caught out?

Imagining I just get an average, run of the mill examiner.

Reply 7

username2088165

Original post by Abstract_Prism

Do you think I'm more likely to get away with it, or more likely to get caught out?

Imagining I just get an average, run of the mill examiner.

I think you're probably more likely to get away with it. If you've written it convincingly and the examiner isn't very knowledgeable in history, then I doubt you'd lose marks. There's not much point in worrying about it now though :smile: