sophiathesecond
Badges: 13
Rep:
?
#1
Report Thread starter 1 month ago
#1
hi! just wondering whether anyone has any advice/sample NEAs for History A-Level, as my teacher hasn't given any examples or much advice yet, preferably on the topic of Russia, but anything else is fine too x
0
reply
bloograpefroot
Badges: 14
Rep:
?
#2
Report 1 month ago
#2
I’ve finished mine it’s not on Russia however I can help you with structure or the jist ect
1
reply
sophiathesecond
Badges: 13
Rep:
?
#3
Report Thread starter 1 month ago
#3
(Original post by bloograpefroot)
I’ve finished mine it’s not on Russia however I can help you with structure or the jist ect
yes, that would be really helpful thanks! maybe some idea of how to go about writing it and what order to put my ideas in etc
0
reply
bloograpefroot
Badges: 14
Rep:
?
#4
Report 1 month ago
#4
(Original post by sophiathesecond)
yes, that would be really helpful thanks! maybe some idea of how to go about writing it and what order to put my ideas in etc
Yes for sure
So Introduction just state your argument and maybe a sentence or two of background information. Then I traduce your Interpretations with one arguing then the other opposing. So and so believes blah whereas… whoever believes. Then end of ur intro write ur overall judgement.

The have ur Interpretation paragraphs there should be one support one against. Include context of the time value info about the historian etc credibility and limitations for both

Then the main body is ur argument for and against but make sure not to do it in order of time as it’ll look like a story have like paragraphs on different topics. In the main body weave in ur 3 sources. These can be letters speeches etc which support ur argument talk about the value and how they support ur point

Then ur conclusion
If u have any questions just drop them
2
reply
sophiathesecond
Badges: 13
Rep:
?
#5
Report Thread starter 3 weeks ago
#5
(Original post by bloograpefroot)
Yes for sure
So Introduction just state your argument and maybe a sentence or two of background information. Then I traduce your Interpretations with one arguing then the other opposing. So and so believes blah whereas… whoever believes. Then end of ur intro write ur overall judgement.

The have ur Interpretation paragraphs there should be one support one against. Include context of the time value info about the historian etc credibility and limitations for both

Then the main body is ur argument for and against but make sure not to do it in order of time as it’ll look like a story have like paragraphs on different topics. In the main body weave in ur 3 sources. These can be letters speeches etc which support ur argument talk about the value and how they support ur point

Then ur conclusion
If u have any questions just drop them
thank u so much omg
0
reply
Sinnoh
Badges: 22
Rep:
?
#6
Report 3 weeks ago
#6
Ooooo Russia. Like, Russian Revolution(s)?
0
reply
sophiathesecond
Badges: 13
Rep:
?
#7
Report Thread starter 3 weeks ago
#7
(Original post by Sinnoh)
Ooooo Russia. Like, Russian Revolution(s)?
yess exactly
0
reply
Sinnoh
Badges: 22
Rep:
?
#8
Report 3 weeks ago
#8
(Original post by sophiathesecond)
yess exactly
It's a great topic for coursework because you've got very established historians who completely disagree on the fundamentals of it. Some of the classic debates around it:
- was Tsarism on its way towards collapse by 1914 or was it quite stable? On the one hand, huge display of patriotism at the outbreak of war and Romanov tercentenary celebrations, on the other, increased street protest, massacre of strikers at Lena. I think Figes and Catherine Merridale both support the idea that collapse was 'inevitable', although given that it literally did inevitably happen that's quite easy to argue.
- factors behind the February revolution; I think one coursework title we had available to us was whether frustration from liberals was the most important.
- the nature of the October revolution; my coursework was on the extent to which it was a Bolshevik coup. This means looking at evidence for popular support and the motives of its leaders. Richard Pipes is very much a proponent of it being a clandestine coup that nobody wanted, Robert Service is critical too, Soviet historians obviously disagree (Neil Faulkner is a modern historian who argues it was a popular revolution), other modern revisionist historians like Edward Acton and Orlando Figes strike a bit of a balance between the two.
- factors behind the Kronstadt revolt; war communism being the main cause?

Which exam board is it for? My essay for OCR just took four historians and did a lengthy explanation and review of their arguments. Might feel weird sort of attacking established historians but you will have things to say. Look at the primary evidence they use, look at what sort of evidence it is (before the fall of the USSR, western histories were quite reliant on defectors from the USSR) and back it up or refute it with your own evidence.
1
reply
sophiathesecond
Badges: 13
Rep:
?
#9
Report Thread starter 3 weeks ago
#9
(Original post by Sinnoh)
It's a great topic for coursework because you've got very established historians who completely disagree on the fundamentals of it. Some of the classic debates around it:
- was Tsarism on its way towards collapse by 1914 or was it quite stable? On the one hand, huge display of patriotism at the outbreak of war and Romanov tercentenary celebrations, on the other, increased street protest, massacre of strikers at Lena. I think Figes and Catherine Merridale both support the idea that collapse was 'inevitable', although given that it literally did inevitably happen that's quite easy to argue.
- factors behind the February revolution; I think one coursework title we had available to us was whether frustration from liberals was the most important.
- the nature of the October revolution; my coursework was on the extent to which it was a Bolshevik coup. This means looking at evidence for popular support and the motives of its leaders. Richard Pipes is very much a proponent of it being a clandestine coup that nobody wanted, Robert Service is critical too, Soviet historians obviously disagree (Neil Faulkner is a modern historian who argues it was a popular revolution), other modern revisionist historians like Edward Acton and Orlando Figes strike a bit of a balance between the two.
- factors behind the Kronstadt revolt; war communism being the main cause?

Which exam board is it for? My essay for OCR just took four historians and did a lengthy explanation and review of their arguments. Might feel weird sort of attacking established historians but you will have things to say. Look at the primary evidence they use, look at what sort of evidence it is (before the fall of the USSR, western histories were quite reliant on defectors from the USSR) and back it up or refute it with your own evidence.
ooh sounds like you had loads of points! Mine's for AQA, my question is about brutality as a method of control in Russia, I've found lots of sources, I'm just struggling to find contrasting interpretations for Stalin!
1
reply
Sinnoh
Badges: 22
Rep:
?
#10
Report 3 weeks ago
#10
(Original post by sophiathesecond)
ooh sounds like you had loads of points! Mine's for AQA, my question is about brutality as a method of control in Russia, I've found lots of sources, I'm just struggling to find contrasting interpretations for Stalin!
What is the title specifically?
0
reply
sophiathesecond
Badges: 13
Rep:
?
#11
Report Thread starter 3 weeks ago
#11
(Original post by Sinnoh)
What is the title specifically?
To what extent was brutality the key method of maintaining control of Russia in the years 1855-1953?
0
reply
Sinnoh
Badges: 22
Rep:
?
#12
Report 3 weeks ago
#12
(Original post by sophiathesecond)
To what extent was brutality the key method of maintaining control of Russia in the years 1855-1953?
Ah yeah. 'Official' histories of the Soviet Union from around that time may well disagree, you could dedicate some space in the essay to pointing out the contradictions. There were a few material incentives used if I remember it right; like bigger apartments, radios, for 'shock workers'.
0
reply
bloograpefroot
Badges: 14
Rep:
?
#13
Report 3 weeks ago
#13
(Original post by sophiathesecond)
ooh sounds like you had loads of points! Mine's for AQA, my question is about brutality as a method of control in Russia, I've found lots of sources, I'm just struggling to find contrasting interpretations for Stalin!
Oh yeah well I think you only need three and if you obviously can’t find an interpretation saying staking is good or whatever possibly something a bit more positive about his personality etc. If not if u could try and find someone else or another group which used brutality as a method and then overall side smith ur Stalin point
0
reply
X

Quick Reply

Attached files
Write a reply...
Reply
new posts
Back
to top
Latest
My Feed

See more of what you like on
The Student Room

You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

Personalise

How are you feeling now you've started university?

I'm loving it! (51)
13.93%
I'm enjoying it but I'm still settling in (94)
25.68%
I'm a bit unsure (63)
17.21%
I'm finding things difficult (127)
34.7%
Something else (let us know in the thread!) (31)
8.47%

Watched Threads

View All
Latest
My Feed