Can someone help me improve my History Essay? (AQA History)
My teacher keeps giving me consistently similar marks, what can I do to improve? I've attached it below, any feedback will be super helpful, thanks in advance!:
To what extent were British governments successful in dealing with the problems facing the economy in the years 1924 to 1939? (25 marks):
From 1924 to 1939, the British government introduced several measures to help deal with the economy, as it was in a difficult position following a decline in staple industries after the first world war due to a lack of investment and increasing foreign competition from the USA and Germany. The issues of unemployment, industrial action and the Great depression of 1929 all contributed to problems faced by the UK government, which in turn implemented several measures with the aim of reducing the impact these challenges had on the country. The 1931 National coalition strived to make the government more effective in a time of crisis and the Conservative subsidy for miners in 1926 aimed to reduce the impact of a strikes by sustaining wages. However, although these methods looked like they were positive in combatting the problems facing the economy, they never completely satisfied the British people, and it could be argued that the only reason Governments decided to help people was because they wanted to sustain party support without upsetting the newly enfranchised voters. Consequently, the British government may not have been successful at dealing with the problems faced by the economy in the years between 1924 and 1939.
In 1926, Stanley Balwin and the Government can be viewed as successfully aiming to tackle economic issues after they pledged a nine – month subsidy in order to stop the TUC and miners going on strike over 13% cuts in there wages and increasing working hours from 7 to 8 hours. For the time period it was enacted, this subsidy could be classed as successful in dealing with the problem of increasing structural unemployment in staple industries because it kept miners in work despite to foreign competition forcing mines to close more frequently. This was also successful at sustaining increasing standards of living amongst the working classes, as demonstrated by the birth rate falling due to less need for several children to bring money in to households. Additionally, this subsidy was also beneficial as it helped calm the rising power of trade unionism, which was causing general anxiety in government, because strikes such as the Red Clyside strike in Glasgow was enticing the ‘’red scare’’, where workers were flying communist flags, which increased fear of revolution like in Russia a few years prior. Baldwin’s ability to follow this up with calling for employers to stop cuts can also be considered successful in handling the problems facing the economy because it helped to keep some wealth in industrial towns, such as Brimingham, Newcastle and Manchester, which was particularly influential as these areas were suffering from rising poverty, as reinforced by 30% of people living below the poverty line by the late 1920s. Living standards were improved on a national scale at this time, and although this was not the primary cause and the 9 month subsidy was not sustainable, the acts of the Conservative government in 1926 were useful at showing that the government was committed to dealing with challenges to the economy, as it successfully attempted to stop unemployment in the staple industry of mining.
Five years later, in 1931, the Government also tried to successfully tackle economic problems when Ramsey Macdonald called for a National government to form under the instruction of the King. This was much more successful than the subsidy of 1926 to hopefully curve a general strike because it removed party barriers, which were stopping the government from implementing effective policy to tackle economic issues. This clearly helped deal with problems as it helped the Macdonald to raise taxes and cut employment benefits without going against the morals of the Labour party, as they had expelled him for not being a ‘man of the people’ after he decided to lead the national coalition. Furthermore, Stanley Baldwin’s willingness to enter this coalition because he did not want the Conservatives to be branded as ‘the party that taxes the poor’’ also shows this measure was the most successful at tackling the economic challenges because it allowed for Parliament to act most cooperatively and effectively after the Great depression, which had worked 15 years prior in the wartime coalition. In consequence, the National coalition could be considered the most successful way of handling economic challenges because it helped stopping of the Great Depression causing severely negative impacts on unemployment levels, as they had reduced by 1939 despite being averaged at 17% instead of 14% like pre – war unemployment levels.
The government’s various Acts and reforms, however, contained many failures in attempting to deal with the economic challenges presented between 1924 and 1939. After the 9 month subsidy for miners in 1926 ended, employers in the sector refused to raise their wages in order to satisfy the demands of the TUC. This shows that the subsidy for miners workers was unsuccessful in the long term, as the government had provided an unsustainable solution to the issue of decline in the staple industries causing unemployment because regardless of their efforts, a general strike occurred in May 1926 due to 1 million miners being locked out of work due to refusal to accept cuts. This measure did little to deal with the economic problems faced by the government, as all this subsidy achieved was ‘kicking the can down the road’ and prolonging the imminent occurrence of a general strike and structural unemployment due to less industry. The National Coalition of 1931 again failed to properly address the issue of unemployment, which was a key economic issue in the inter war years, because their inability to effectively handle the Great Depression of 1929 resulted in a peak of over 3,000,000 people being unemployed by 1933. In reality, National government failed to reduce the pressing issue of unemployment and make Britain more competitive against foreign competitors, such as the USA, resulting in Baldwin having to introduce protectionism in 1934, highlighting the ineffectiveness of the National Government as Britain was in a much worse position economically after it because tariffs needed to be introduced to keep domestic industry alive. The government completely failed to handle the problems surrounding the economy effectively.
In Conclusion, the British government were unsuccessful in their measures against economic challenges by 1939. The National government of 1931 did help to allow for more radical reform, such as higher taxation in order to combat growing debt and a falling GDP, but all this really achieved was pushing 40% of those working in staple industries into poverty, as they now had poorer pay or no employment at all and even the introduction of unemployment benefits and ‘dole money’ could not combat this, as the Means Test was so difficult to pass and inaccurate. By 1939, a large proportion of economic issues, such as unemployment were significantly worse than before 1924, as reinforced by the average unemployment rate rarely dipping below 1,000,000 and the Economy taking until 1933 to recover to the pre – war rate of 1913. The National Government only lasted 3 years because of it’s ineffectiveness to deal with these policies in 1933, leading to the British government being far from successful when trying to deal with economic challenges.
To what extent were British governments successful in dealing with the problems facing the economy in the years 1924 to 1939? (25 marks):
From 1924 to 1939, the British government introduced several measures to help deal with the economy, as it was in a difficult position following a decline in staple industries after the first world war due to a lack of investment and increasing foreign competition from the USA and Germany. The issues of unemployment, industrial action and the Great depression of 1929 all contributed to problems faced by the UK government, which in turn implemented several measures with the aim of reducing the impact these challenges had on the country. The 1931 National coalition strived to make the government more effective in a time of crisis and the Conservative subsidy for miners in 1926 aimed to reduce the impact of a strikes by sustaining wages. However, although these methods looked like they were positive in combatting the problems facing the economy, they never completely satisfied the British people, and it could be argued that the only reason Governments decided to help people was because they wanted to sustain party support without upsetting the newly enfranchised voters. Consequently, the British government may not have been successful at dealing with the problems faced by the economy in the years between 1924 and 1939.
In 1926, Stanley Balwin and the Government can be viewed as successfully aiming to tackle economic issues after they pledged a nine – month subsidy in order to stop the TUC and miners going on strike over 13% cuts in there wages and increasing working hours from 7 to 8 hours. For the time period it was enacted, this subsidy could be classed as successful in dealing with the problem of increasing structural unemployment in staple industries because it kept miners in work despite to foreign competition forcing mines to close more frequently. This was also successful at sustaining increasing standards of living amongst the working classes, as demonstrated by the birth rate falling due to less need for several children to bring money in to households. Additionally, this subsidy was also beneficial as it helped calm the rising power of trade unionism, which was causing general anxiety in government, because strikes such as the Red Clyside strike in Glasgow was enticing the ‘’red scare’’, where workers were flying communist flags, which increased fear of revolution like in Russia a few years prior. Baldwin’s ability to follow this up with calling for employers to stop cuts can also be considered successful in handling the problems facing the economy because it helped to keep some wealth in industrial towns, such as Brimingham, Newcastle and Manchester, which was particularly influential as these areas were suffering from rising poverty, as reinforced by 30% of people living below the poverty line by the late 1920s. Living standards were improved on a national scale at this time, and although this was not the primary cause and the 9 month subsidy was not sustainable, the acts of the Conservative government in 1926 were useful at showing that the government was committed to dealing with challenges to the economy, as it successfully attempted to stop unemployment in the staple industry of mining.
Five years later, in 1931, the Government also tried to successfully tackle economic problems when Ramsey Macdonald called for a National government to form under the instruction of the King. This was much more successful than the subsidy of 1926 to hopefully curve a general strike because it removed party barriers, which were stopping the government from implementing effective policy to tackle economic issues. This clearly helped deal with problems as it helped the Macdonald to raise taxes and cut employment benefits without going against the morals of the Labour party, as they had expelled him for not being a ‘man of the people’ after he decided to lead the national coalition. Furthermore, Stanley Baldwin’s willingness to enter this coalition because he did not want the Conservatives to be branded as ‘the party that taxes the poor’’ also shows this measure was the most successful at tackling the economic challenges because it allowed for Parliament to act most cooperatively and effectively after the Great depression, which had worked 15 years prior in the wartime coalition. In consequence, the National coalition could be considered the most successful way of handling economic challenges because it helped stopping of the Great Depression causing severely negative impacts on unemployment levels, as they had reduced by 1939 despite being averaged at 17% instead of 14% like pre – war unemployment levels.
The government’s various Acts and reforms, however, contained many failures in attempting to deal with the economic challenges presented between 1924 and 1939. After the 9 month subsidy for miners in 1926 ended, employers in the sector refused to raise their wages in order to satisfy the demands of the TUC. This shows that the subsidy for miners workers was unsuccessful in the long term, as the government had provided an unsustainable solution to the issue of decline in the staple industries causing unemployment because regardless of their efforts, a general strike occurred in May 1926 due to 1 million miners being locked out of work due to refusal to accept cuts. This measure did little to deal with the economic problems faced by the government, as all this subsidy achieved was ‘kicking the can down the road’ and prolonging the imminent occurrence of a general strike and structural unemployment due to less industry. The National Coalition of 1931 again failed to properly address the issue of unemployment, which was a key economic issue in the inter war years, because their inability to effectively handle the Great Depression of 1929 resulted in a peak of over 3,000,000 people being unemployed by 1933. In reality, National government failed to reduce the pressing issue of unemployment and make Britain more competitive against foreign competitors, such as the USA, resulting in Baldwin having to introduce protectionism in 1934, highlighting the ineffectiveness of the National Government as Britain was in a much worse position economically after it because tariffs needed to be introduced to keep domestic industry alive. The government completely failed to handle the problems surrounding the economy effectively.
In Conclusion, the British government were unsuccessful in their measures against economic challenges by 1939. The National government of 1931 did help to allow for more radical reform, such as higher taxation in order to combat growing debt and a falling GDP, but all this really achieved was pushing 40% of those working in staple industries into poverty, as they now had poorer pay or no employment at all and even the introduction of unemployment benefits and ‘dole money’ could not combat this, as the Means Test was so difficult to pass and inaccurate. By 1939, a large proportion of economic issues, such as unemployment were significantly worse than before 1924, as reinforced by the average unemployment rate rarely dipping below 1,000,000 and the Economy taking until 1933 to recover to the pre – war rate of 1913. The National Government only lasted 3 years because of it’s ineffectiveness to deal with these policies in 1933, leading to the British government being far from successful when trying to deal with economic challenges.
what comments and mark did your teacher give for this?
Original post by history tutor
what comments and mark did your teacher give for this?
15/25, I have a target grade of an A and i want to hit it, but my teacher is putting me in the same bracket no matter the approach I take. Do you know how i could improve it?
Original post by n.jasmine
my goal in my history essays is at always add some balance to show you have complex thinking and are able to make a judgement- maybe that will help??
e.g. point... however... conclusion for each paragraph
lmk if this is unclear lol
e.g. point... however... conclusion for each paragraph
lmk if this is unclear lol
This does help, thanks. I think I'm just scared of having my argument made too unclear lol but that structure does seem best.
Overall it's pretty good. I like how you set the context in the introduction.....industry hollowed out by war.....and you make a real effort to prove you arguments by reference to statistics which is excellent. I would slightly disagree with the marking. I would put it a little higher.
Here are some suggestions.........
"they never completely satisfied the British people" ...............i.e. a statement which is unsupported by any argument or evidence. My reply would simply be.......'oh really?'
So I would have written it like this:
"In reality, National government failed to reduce the pressing issue of unemployment as witnessed by the desperation of men who were prepared to march from Jarrow to London in search of work in the famous 1936 Jarrow march. The fact that they were doing this in 1936, some 6 years after the global economy started to falter indicates that at least one key component of British economic policy (the need for full employment) had been badly mishandled."
Then if you really want to wow the teacher, make international comparisons........
"The failure to protect the once formidable British shipbuilding industry, and thus indirectly, to reduce unemployment sooner, should be contrasted with the activist approach followed by Roosevelt and Hitler. Whilst their end objectives were obviously different, both understood the power of the central government to stimulate the economy with what Keynes had been arguing for for some time: massive government spending."
You'd be ticking a lot of boxes with that........knowledge of a key event, international comparisons give some context to Britain's successes and failures and you've dropped in some economics in there as well (Keynes was a British economist who developed the Keynesian economic philosophy of massive government spending to stimulate a subdued economy).
That would get you a few more marks.
Here are some suggestions.........
1.
whenever you get a 'to what extent' question you should try in your introduction to let the reader know the criteria you are going to be using. Reduction in days lost to strike, wage levels, % of people in poverty, unemployment levels........whatever fits your argument, just suggest it in the intro.
1.
Avoid naked statements like this:
1.
Grammar...."curve a general strike" curve or curb? I assume the latter.
2.
You make a good point about the depression triggering mass unemployment and say 'In reality, National government failed to reduce the pressing issue of unemployment and make Britain more competitive against foreign competitors' again good points but you miss out a crucial piece of evidence, the 1936 Jarrow march.
"In reality, National government failed to reduce the pressing issue of unemployment as witnessed by the desperation of men who were prepared to march from Jarrow to London in search of work in the famous 1936 Jarrow march. The fact that they were doing this in 1936, some 6 years after the global economy started to falter indicates that at least one key component of British economic policy (the need for full employment) had been badly mishandled."
Then if you really want to wow the teacher, make international comparisons........
"The failure to protect the once formidable British shipbuilding industry, and thus indirectly, to reduce unemployment sooner, should be contrasted with the activist approach followed by Roosevelt and Hitler. Whilst their end objectives were obviously different, both understood the power of the central government to stimulate the economy with what Keynes had been arguing for for some time: massive government spending."
You'd be ticking a lot of boxes with that........knowledge of a key event, international comparisons give some context to Britain's successes and failures and you've dropped in some economics in there as well (Keynes was a British economist who developed the Keynesian economic philosophy of massive government spending to stimulate a subdued economy).
1.
no mention of the empire? Huge resources of men and material..........could they have done more to stimulate the British economy by tapping in to that? Trade deals etc.
(edited 4 months ago)
Original post by history tutor
Overall it's pretty good. I like how you set the context in the introduction.....industry hollowed out by war.....and you make a real effort to prove you arguments by reference to statistics which is excellent. I would slightly disagree with the marking. I would put it a little higher.
Here are some suggestions.........
"they never completely satisfied the British people" ...............i.e. a statement which is unsupported by any argument or evidence. My reply would simply be.......'oh really?'
So I would have written it like this:
"In reality, National government failed to reduce the pressing issue of unemployment as witnessed by the desperation of men who were prepared to march from Jarrow to London in search of work in the famous 1936 Jarrow march. The fact that they were doing this in 1936, some 6 years after the global economy started to falter indicates that at least one key component of British economic policy (the need for full employment) had been badly mishandled."
Then if you really want to wow the teacher, make international comparisons........
"The failure to protect the once formidable British shipbuilding industry, and thus indirectly, to reduce unemployment sooner, should be contrasted with the activist approach followed by Roosevelt and Hitler. Whilst their end objectives were obviously different, both understood the power of the central government to stimulate the economy with what Keynes had been arguing for for some time: massive government spending."
You'd be ticking a lot of boxes with that........knowledge of a key event, international comparisons give some context to Britain's successes and failures and you've dropped in some economics in there as well (Keynes was a British economist who developed the Keynesian economic philosophy of massive government spending to stimulate a subdued economy).
That would get you a few more marks.
Here are some suggestions.........
1.
whenever you get a 'to what extent' question you should try in your introduction to let the reader know the criteria you are going to be using. Reduction in days lost to strike, wage levels, % of people in poverty, unemployment levels........whatever fits your argument, just suggest it in the intro.
1.
Avoid naked statements like this:
1.
Grammar...."curve a general strike" curve or curb? I assume the latter.
2.
You make a good point about the depression triggering mass unemployment and say 'In reality, National government failed to reduce the pressing issue of unemployment and make Britain more competitive against foreign competitors' again good points but you miss out a crucial piece of evidence, the 1936 Jarrow march.
"In reality, National government failed to reduce the pressing issue of unemployment as witnessed by the desperation of men who were prepared to march from Jarrow to London in search of work in the famous 1936 Jarrow march. The fact that they were doing this in 1936, some 6 years after the global economy started to falter indicates that at least one key component of British economic policy (the need for full employment) had been badly mishandled."
Then if you really want to wow the teacher, make international comparisons........
"The failure to protect the once formidable British shipbuilding industry, and thus indirectly, to reduce unemployment sooner, should be contrasted with the activist approach followed by Roosevelt and Hitler. Whilst their end objectives were obviously different, both understood the power of the central government to stimulate the economy with what Keynes had been arguing for for some time: massive government spending."
You'd be ticking a lot of boxes with that........knowledge of a key event, international comparisons give some context to Britain's successes and failures and you've dropped in some economics in there as well (Keynes was a British economist who developed the Keynesian economic philosophy of massive government spending to stimulate a subdued economy).
1.
no mention of the empire? Huge resources of men and material..........could they have done more to stimulate the British economy by tapping in to that? Trade deals etc.
I'm so sorry for the late response, I've been so busy at school with revision and mocks i forgot to respond.
Than you so much for the feedback! I actually took this side of history's paper last Thursday and I did do some more revision which led to me being able to make further points such as international comparisons.
I will 100% look to implementing this advice via adding further events like the Jarrow march into my writing. I can see how that could limit my marks.
Once again thank you so much! This was the first time I had used the student room and i didn't expect a response. Your feedback is going to help me see a broader view of how to improve beyond what my teacher tells me 🙂
Quick Reply
Related discussions
- Which gcse option is better to pick and more easier and less stressful???
- A-level History Study Group 2023-2024
- a level predicteds
- How do I improve my grades?
- Year 12 Mocks
- Yr 12 : I need help
- A-level History Study Group 2022-2023
- How can I achieve A-A* in a-levels!!!!!
- A levels
- Comparing Geography and History GCSE
- GCSE Exam Discussions 2024
- A-level Exam Discussions 2024
- Grade 9 help!!
- I got A*AA for my A-Levels - ask me anything.
- How? what? To get grade 9 .
- URGENT !!! Help with 3rd A Level options !!!
- GCSE options
- A- level options
- Help (ALEVEL history NEA)
- What are your favourite history and law revision methods?
Latest
Trending
Last reply 13 hours ago
Edexcel A Level History Paper 1 (9HI0 1A-1H) - 23rd May 2024 [Exam Chat]Last reply 1 day ago
AQA A Level History Paper 1 (7042/1A-1L) - 23rd May 2024 [Exam Chat]Last reply 1 day ago
AQA A Level History Paper 2 (7042/2A-2T) - 7th June 2024 [Exam Chat]Last reply 3 days ago
Edexcel A Level History Paper 2 (9HI0 2A-2H) - 7th June 2024 [Exam Chat]Last reply 5 days ago
Edexcel GCSE HISTORY PAPER 1 (1HI0 10-13) - 15th MAY [Exam Chat]Last reply 1 week ago
OCR A-Level HISTORY PAPER 3 (Y301-Y321) - 23rd MAY [Exam Chat]Last reply 2 weeks ago
History Edexcel A level Britain Transformed and USA Conformity and ChallengeLast reply 3 months ago
AQA A-level History USA: Making of a Superpower (7042/1K) - 24 May 2023 [Exam Chat]Last reply 3 months ago
AQA A Level History - Making of Modern Britain(2S) Exam Chat - 9th June 2023Trending
Last reply 13 hours ago
Edexcel A Level History Paper 1 (9HI0 1A-1H) - 23rd May 2024 [Exam Chat]Last reply 1 day ago
AQA A Level History Paper 1 (7042/1A-1L) - 23rd May 2024 [Exam Chat]Last reply 1 day ago
AQA A Level History Paper 2 (7042/2A-2T) - 7th June 2024 [Exam Chat]Last reply 3 days ago
Edexcel A Level History Paper 2 (9HI0 2A-2H) - 7th June 2024 [Exam Chat]Last reply 5 days ago
Edexcel GCSE HISTORY PAPER 1 (1HI0 10-13) - 15th MAY [Exam Chat]Last reply 1 week ago
OCR A-Level HISTORY PAPER 3 (Y301-Y321) - 23rd MAY [Exam Chat]Last reply 2 weeks ago
History Edexcel A level Britain Transformed and USA Conformity and ChallengeLast reply 3 months ago
AQA A-level History USA: Making of a Superpower (7042/1K) - 24 May 2023 [Exam Chat]Last reply 3 months ago
AQA A Level History - Making of Modern Britain(2S) Exam Chat - 9th June 2023
