hey! does anyone have any tips for writing the personality essays? mine are (i think) more historiographical than anything else. is that what we're supposed to be doing?
(i'm doing Leni if that means anything)
Hey samsclaire!
The key with personality study essays (assuming you are talking about Part B here mainly) is being able to distinguish between the types of questions they can ask! Though sometimes schools can be vary in regards to their own assessment task questions, for the HSC the types of questions they can ask can be broken down into three categories:
- Overall significance : To what extent was your personality a significant figure in national and/or international history? HINT: If they're on the HSC syllabus, they're probably pretty significant
This is by far the easiest type of question you can receive, which is why they haven't actually asked anything like this since 2013 (and are unlikely to do so in the future).
- Shaped by/Shaped events: To what extent was your personality a product of their time, or did they shape their time?
-
Interpretations: If you look at the final dot point of the syllabus for your personality, you will find the various debates surrounding them
For Trotsky it is "Naive idealist v. Practical Revolutionary". Pretty sure for Leni it is "Nazi Propagandist" and "Feminist Icon"
These essays in particular tend to be more historiographical, focusing upon why certain interpretations of your chosen personality has arisen, what did they do that has led historians and popular discourse to brand them a ___________.
Like every modern history essay, you want to make a strong judgment at the beginning, that remains consistent throughout your response. E.g. "Leni Riefenstahl was a highly significant figure within German history, therefore the statement is highly accurate" or "Leon Trotsky was, to a highly significant extent, the engine of his own success, thus the statement is highly accurate". Though nuance is great, particularly in the "interpretations" responses (ie. you should mention both sides of the debate) you still need to assert a final, overall judgment, based upon your own interpretation of the evidence
Historiography is definitely a great thing to be including within these sections. Last year we had an interpretations question for our HSC, and my essay basically looked like a history extension essay (ie heapppps of historiography) and I received full marks for part B
HOWEVER make sure that you don't go overboard, and detract from your own judgement by overloading the marker with other peoples opinions. Make sure that you only use historians and historiography to back up your own statements and judgements, rather than just listing quotes
Finally, the big thing that you want to keep in mind is TIME (approximately 27 mins for Part B). You don't have very much of it, however it is still expected to be in full essay structure :/ This can make it really challenging. Standard length is about 5 pages, but if you can sacrifice a bit of time from Section I to devote to this section I'd defs recommend it! The shortened time also means you need to be more selective about what you talk about. For me, I always chose the 3 most significant events to discuss, rather than everything. A great way to assess which events are the best for each type of question (because it can vary) is to construct an argument table
My version for Trotsky is attached below, to give you an idea of structure!
Good luck, hope this helps
Susie
Home
Help
Search
Login
