5 Top Tips for History Essay Success

[pughg16]

If you do happen to forget a key date, just use the month/year! If you forget the month, just say 'early 1919' etc. Seriously, makers understand the fact that exams situations are stressful, so if you need to do things like that it won't impact your overall result

Ok, thats a relief then!
Just for the conflict & national studies, can I still get a top band mark if i don't use historiography?

[jakesilove]

Ok, thats a relief then!
Just for the conflict & national studies, can I still get a top band mark if i don't use historiography?

For sure. I would say it's way easier to get a band 6 with some (literally even just one) historiography in each essay, but it's by no means essential.

[pughg16]

For sure. I would say it's way easier to get a band 6 with some (literally even just one) historiography in each essay, but it's by no means essential.

Awesome !! I have a couple of quotes up my sleeve, but just wanted to check that we didn't have to have a heavy use of them....otherwise!!!!
Thanks Jake!!

[Fibrahim]

Hii just a question for let's say a question "assess the significance of the new economic policy for the Bolshevik consol ideation of power". How much of the question should specifically target the NEP, because my teacher said 70-80%. But what if I want to argue that the civil war for eg was more significant for the consolidation of power, can I have a paragraph on that or am I losing focus of the question?

[sudodds]

Hii just a question for let's say a question "assess the significance of the new economic policy for the Bolshevik consol ideation of power". How much of the question should specifically target the NEP, because my teacher said 70-80%. But what if I want to argue that the civil war for eg was more significant for the consolidation of power, can I have a paragraph on that or am I losing focus of the question?

Hey hey! Congrats on doing Russia, defs the best National Study (though I am a bit biased  ) 70-80%! Thats a bit extreme. If someone could write that much on the NEP I'd applaud them but for most people I'd say that would be near impossible - you just won't have the detail to suffice your entire response. If I had to put a percentage on it, I'd say 30-40% should be straight on the NEP, and then a bit of related stats/detail/links spattered around later on. If I was confronted with this essay, which I was many times hahaha, what I would do is write a differentiated essay, which is what you touched on at the end of your question! A differentiated essay allows you to focus on the other factors, so it'll let you include a paragraph on the NEP (as that is the stem of the question that MUST come first and should be the longest paragraph of your essay), the social and political policies, the Treaty of Brest Litovsk and the Civil War.

However becareful arguing that another factor is more important than the stem because that can sometimes be mistaken for a split judgement. A better way to approach it would to be like this (this would be the first sentence of your intro):

The NEP was highly significant within the Bolshevik Consolidation of power, however it's significance must be assessed within it's context, as just one in a series of interrelated events which ensured that they maintained control.

So basically your judgement is that each factors importance is relevant to the importance of the others (if that makes sense). So you can then write a paragraph on each of the other factors, but make sure to include at least one linking statement to the NEP (must be in your judgement, but it's really good to include a few throughout your paragraphs as well). So for example in your Civil War paragraph, your topic sentence could look something like this:

Similarly to the NEP, the Civil War was highly significant to the Bolshevik Consolidation of power, as a critical event within a series of interrelated factors that assured control.

And then throughout your paragraph, if you can think of any stats or detail in regards to both the Civil War and the NEP (since the two directly related to each other, as the NEP was a response to War Communism this shouldn't be to hard) then make sure to include!

If you want to get HELLA SOPHISTICATED as in your aiming for those 24-25/25 essays, then you can take a differentiated essay one step further and try to find a direct link with the NEP and all the other factors. This will make it even easier to integrate the NEP throughout your response... and oh look i've done it for you haha  ! I've attached my Bolshevik Consolidation linking table which shows all the ways in which each factor relates to another factor. You don't NEED to do this, you can still get a band 6 without it and if you're confused in an exam I'd suggest doing the other one instead, but if you're confident this is the best way to go. So instead of making a judgement that everything is important and thats it, you could say something like this:

The NEP was highly significant to the Bolshevik Consolidation of power, as one of the many, interrelated factors that clearly demonstrates the importance of popular support in maintaining control

Thus you have linked everything together, and within your responses you can sophisticatedly discuss how each factor works together to ensure this goal, eg. The NEP demonstrates that the social and political reforms must have been a key factor, because when these policies were reintroduced popular support spiked. The NEP demonstrates that the Treaty of Brest Litovsk was important, as both clearly showed how important Lenin's flexibility in regards to Communist Theory and Practice was. etc. etc.

Though this is all valid for the HSC (and this isn't just me saying this my teacher was an experienced marker + I've had convos with an ex-senior marker about this), that being said if your teacher insists you need 70-80% on the NEP... then for now and until the HSC exam you might need to try and work around those guidelines as they'll be the ones marking your responses (I don't know how you're going to get 70-80% in there, unless you try the more sophisticated differentiated essay method? maybe). Maybe have a discussion with them though and see whether they'll accept differentiated essays? Maybe when they say 70-80% that just means that you're continually relating your work back to the NEP even when talking about other factors (which would be doable and also extremely sophisticated).

I really hope this helps! Sorry for the massive slab of text hahaha. Good luck, and if you need anymore help let us know

[Fibrahim]

Thank you sooooooo much, this is so helpful you are a legend

[sudodds]

Thank you sooooooo much, this is so helpful you are a legend

No worries! Be sure to come back if you have any more questions

[Newbalance101]

Thank you so much for this post. I was wondering how you suggest going about studying for the different essay's that may come up in modern history? It seems like a lot and I'm curious to hear of how other people did it. Thanks in advanced

[sudodds]

Thank you so much for this post. I was wondering how you suggest going about studying for the different essay's that may come up in modern history? It seems like a lot and I'm curious to hear of how other people did it. Thanks in advanced

Hey newbalance!
Judging by your post in the essay marking thread we didn't study the same topics So in regards to specific stuff I'm probs not the best to answer, but in general I think the best way is to just do a shit tonne of practice papers. Familiarise yourself with the format of the exam, and the types of questions that they commonly ask. I'd write essays based on past papers, but also take syllabus dot points and turn them into general questions (ie. not extremely specific, so like I did Russia so a general question would be "account for Stalin's rise to power" rather than "to what extent was ideology critical to Stalin's rise to power" you get me?) to make sure that you are 100% confident with anything that they can throw your way.

ALSO writing adaptable essay scaffolds is a good idea. I don't know if this is the same for indochina, but I know with the Cold War, you could almost always count on (for essays that covered the first two syllabus areas) writing about the crises, containment and the arms race, so memorising an ADAPTABLE (adaptable. adaptable. key word - adaptable) paragraph or scaffold for each was a good idea and something I found super useful I also highly suggest writing a detail table based around the syllabus dot points as detail is a super important addition to modern essays that'll help you to push the top marks Just include any relevant quotes, stats or interesting info (I think an example for mine for WW1 can be found around the forums - it's defs in the notes tab).

I hope this helped!!

[Newbalance101]

Hey haha its me again. I have another question. In regards to Conflict in Indochina my history teacher told us not to quote historians (as many are in a revisionist period regarding the Vietnam War? I think was the reasoning) and instead to quote mainly primary sources or people in the events (so JFK, HCM, Diem, Nixon, etc) I was wondering if anyone else was told this or is it just us? And how much extra research would you suggest doing for modern history. I read somewhere that the more you do the generally better you go?

[bowiemily]

Hey haha its me again. I have another question. In regards to Conflict in Indochina my history teacher told us not to quote historians (as many are in a revisionist period regarding the Vietnam War? I think was the reasoning) and instead to quote mainly primary sources or people in the events (so JFK, HCM, Diem, Nixon, etc) I was wondering if anyone else was told this or is it just us? And how much extra research would you suggest doing for modern history. I read somewhere that the more you do the generally better you go?

Hey there,

I studied Indochina, and my teacher never suggested this. However, I could see how revisionists could skew the focus of your essays. Quotes from the period are more likely to relate to the dot points / themes and challenges in this study. I really liked the historian James S Olson and his book 'Where the Domino Fell'. A quote I liked to use is: 'By 1968, 30 610 American troops would be killed in action, all because Presidents Eisenhower, Kennedy and Johnson wanted to battle communist threats and win reelection'.

I did a lot of extra reading for Modern History. I tended to read a lot of articles written by historians, as this was quicker than reading an entire book. Otherwise, I would read specific chapters on dot points where my information was lacking. Eg. Reading a chapter on rebuilding the North economically post 1954. However, you should keep this in mind how many resources your teacher is giving you. If you feel like you've got enough content and readings from class, don't stress about finding extra information. You can always share your notes amongst your class mates as well 

[Thebarman]

Hey guys!

Is it necessary to know about a few historians before going into an exam? We haven't done any work regarding the POVs of certain historians.

Also, I don't suppose you have any timeline resources for the WWI core topic that includes key dates and events?

Thanks

[sudodds]

Hey guys!

Is it necessary to know about a few historians before going into an exam? We haven't done any work regarding the POVs of certain historians.

Also, I don't suppose you have any timeline resources for the WWI core topic that includes key dates and events?

Thanks

Defs not NECESSARY, but it can be a nice addition to an essay. Will the top students probably include some historiography? Yes. Does that mean you cannot achieve a band 6 (even full marks) without it? NO. The markers would much rather see your own arguments than the parroted arguments of a historian, so don't worry if you haven't studied this in class. Quotes can be easily found online also

I don't have a timeline resource on me, though there are defs some great ones online. However don't get too caught up in dates and the timeline of events. Focusing too much on this can sometimes lead to more narrative like responses as you feel like you have to discuss everything in detail and in order. It is a better idea to focus on the syllabus dot points as they are, as many of the ww1 questions are just syllabus dot points with a question mark at the end (lazy lazy bostes). My teacher by his own admission "wasn't a dates man," in that he often forgot them, and thus "neglected" (i use that term lightly because it didn't negatively affect me) to teach them, and I found that I hardly every spoke about dates specifically within my responses. Events yes, but more often than not they were the exact events mentioned in the syllabus - eg. Verdun. Timelines are great as light revision, but don't rely on them.

Hope this helps!

Susie

[christinaaa]

In terms of Source Analysis, could you provide tips on writing one?

[sudodds]

In terms of Source Analysis, could you provide tips on writing one?

Hey Christina!
Can defs help you out with that one In terms of just general tips:

1. JUDGEMENTS JUDGEMENTS JUDGMENTS. If your source analysis doesn't begin with a judgement as your first sentence YOU WILL LOSE MARKS in the HSC. The judgement should look like this - "Source A would be highly/partially/etc. useful to a historian studying ___________." As it is a to what extent question, the word before useful - eg. highly, partially, limited - is really important. The question isn't asking you if the source is useful or not (spoiler alert - NESA will never give you a useless source), but HOW useful it is.

2. DEAL WITH THE TWO SOURCES SEPARATELY. This is not the time to write an integrated response. Deal with both the sources, but in two distinctly separate paragraphs or sections. The only time you can ever discuss them both is right at the end, where you can talk about how they compliment each other (this is by no means something that you HAVE to include - but it can be nice. No longer than 2 sentences though!)

3. KEEP IT SIMPLE. - Don't go crazy overboard with your analysis. It's great to be sophisticated, but this isn't extension history. It is enough to say that because it was written by a historian, the source is neutral with no underlying ideological or political agenda. You don't need to go into any human psychology here.

4. EXPLICITLY MENTION PERSPECTIVE AND RELIABILITY - It's shocking to me how this isn't drawn out enough within responses since it is literally in the question (not a criticism of the students, moreso the teachers who neglect to inform them of their importance, or even neglect it themselves within their own source analysis guides!). You must dedicate a section of your response to each of these two concepts (reliability a significant chunk!), and you should underline them whenever you mention them. As these are in the question, the markers will be looking out for these buzzwords, and if they think you've missed they will mark you down.

5. DETAIL - BUT DON'T GO OVERBOARD - As you should know by now, detail is super important in Modern History. However, the 10 mark source analysis will never ask you to describe or explain a particular event or issue. What I mean by this is that yes, an event or issue may be included in the question, but that isn't the focus - the focus are the sources. Do not stray your discussion away from the sources. It is great to show your depth of knowledge (in fact it's essential), but as soon as you start writing entire paragraphs on just the intricate details of the Ludendorff Offensive you're not answering the question. Use detail to provide BRIEF context to the source, and to back up your arguments upon usefulness and reliability.

If you're concerned about structure - I'd have a look at this thread
 This is the structure that I used during the HSC devised by my own Modern teacher (an accredited History Teachers Association lecturer so defs knows his shit haha), and I can honestly say it's foolproof. I never came across a question that didn't work with this structure. I'd also take a look at this thread created by Jake

Hope this helps!

Susie