Login | Register
Enrol now for our new online tutoring program. Learn from the best tutors. Get amazing results. Learn more.

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

January 27, 2021, 05:02:04 am

Author Topic: Modern History Essay Marking  (Read 54387 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

sudodds

  • HSC Lecturer
  • National Moderator
  • Part of the furniture
  • *****
  • Posts: 1753
  • "Seize the means of the HSC" ~ Vladimir Lenin
Re: Modern History Essay Marking
« Reply #195 on: October 04, 2017, 12:26:39 pm »
Hello
i need some help with albert speer essay writing
Hey! What exactly are you struggling with when it comes to the personality study response :)
FREE HISTORY EXTENSION LECTURE - CLICK HERE FOR INFO!

2016 HSC: Modern History (18th in NSW) | History Extension (2nd place in the HTA Extension History Essay Prize) | Ancient History | Drama | English Advanced | Studies of Religion I | Economics

ATAR: 97.80

Studying a Bachelor of Communications: Media Arts and Production at UTS 😊

Looking for a history tutor? I'm ya girl! Feel free to send me a PM if you're interested!

Korrasami

  • Forum Regular
  • **
  • Posts: 70
Re: Modern History Essay Marking
« Reply #196 on: October 07, 2017, 02:07:28 pm »
Can anyone please mark my source analysis from the 2016 paper?

Source A would be highly useful for a historian studying the impact of the war on women's lives and experiences in Britain as it is a primary poster encouraging women to enlist in the Women's Army Auxiliary Corps, to ensure more men engage in the battle efforts. As a poster however, it is limited in providing excessive information such as what roles women played in the WAAC, however the source still proves to be a valuable source for the historian when used in conjunction with other sources to gain a greater understanding of the impact of war on women's lives in Britain. Due to the source being a British government poster, its reliability is upheld as the historian is able to gain a British perspective which is vital for a historian studying the impact of war on women in Britain, which therefore establishes its usefulness.

Source B would also be highly useful for a historian studying the impact of the war on women's lives and experiences in Britain, as it reveals the roles, conditions women experienced when undergoing work in munition factories, providing information on the wages and the differing views of women working in munition factories. Furthermore, this source is highly useful as it a book entailing historical detail, which has been peer-reviewed to ensure any non-factual information has not been included, therefore increasing its reliability, despite being a secondary source. Moreover, as the source is being told from a British perspective, it increases its usefulness for the historian wanting to learn about women's lives in Britain. However, assessing its limitations show that it does not mention the impact and experiences of women outside munition factories, however it still useful when used in conjunction with other sources to gain a greater understanding. Nevertheless, the source still ensures its usefulness to an historian studying the impact of war on women's lives and experiences in Britain.

dancing phalanges

  • Forum Leader
  • ****
  • Posts: 745
Re: Modern History Essay Marking
« Reply #197 on: October 07, 2017, 02:13:12 pm »
Can anyone please mark my source analysis from the 2016 paper?

Source A would be highly useful for a historian studying the impact of the war on women's lives and experiences in Britain as it is a primary poster encouraging women to enlist in the Women's Army Auxiliary Corps, to ensure more men engage in the battle efforts. As a poster however, it is limited in providing excessive information such as what roles women played in the WAAC, however the source still proves to be a valuable source for the historian when used in conjunction with other sources to gain a greater understanding of the impact of war on women's lives in Britain. Due to the source being a British government poster, its reliability is upheld as the historian is able to gain a British perspective which is vital for a historian studying the impact of war on women in Britain, which therefore establishes its usefulness.

Source B would also be highly useful for a historian studying the impact of the war on women's lives and experiences in Britain, as it reveals the roles, conditions women experienced when undergoing work in munition factories, providing information on the wages and the differing views of women working in munition factories. Furthermore, this source is highly useful as it a book entailing historical detail, which has been peer-reviewed to ensure any non-factual information has not been included, therefore increasing its reliability, despite being a secondary source. Moreover, as the source is being told from a British perspective, it increases its usefulness for the historian wanting to learn about women's lives in Britain. However, assessing its limitations show that it does not mention the impact and experiences of women outside munition factories, however it still useful when used in conjunction with other sources to gain a greater understanding. Nevertheless, the source still ensures its usefulness to an historian studying the impact of war on women's lives and experiences in Britain.

Do you have a copy of the exam as all the sources are copyrighted?
HSC 2017 (ATAR 98.95) - English Advanced (94), English Extension 1 (48), Modern History (94), Studies of Religion 1 (48), Visual Arts (95), French Continuers (92)

Download our free discovery trial paper!

Korrasami

  • Forum Regular
  • **
  • Posts: 70
Re: Modern History Essay Marking
« Reply #198 on: October 07, 2017, 02:27:13 pm »

dancing phalanges

  • Forum Leader
  • ****
  • Posts: 745
Re: Modern History Essay Marking
« Reply #199 on: October 07, 2017, 03:12:51 pm »
Can anyone please mark my source analysis from the 2016 paper?

Source A would be highly useful for a historian studying the impact of the war on women's lives and experiences in Britain as it is a primary poster encouraging women to enlist in the Women's Army Auxiliary Corps, to ensure more men engage in the battle efforts. As a poster however, it is limited in providing excessive information such as what roles women played in the WAAC, however the source still proves to be a valuable source for the historian when used in conjunction with other sources to gain a greater understanding of the impact of war on women's lives in Britain. Due to the source being a British government poster, its reliability is upheld as the historian is able to gain a British perspective which is vital for a historian studying the impact of war on women in Britain, which therefore establishes its usefulness.

Source B would also be highly useful for a historian studying the impact of the war on women's lives and experiences in Britain, as it reveals the roles, conditions women experienced when undergoing work in munition factories, providing information on the wages and the differing views of women working in munition factories. Furthermore, this source is highly useful as it a book entailing historical detail, which has been peer-reviewed to ensure any non-factual information has not been included, therefore increasing its reliability, despite being a secondary source. Moreover, as the source is being told from a British perspective, it increases its usefulness for the historian wanting to learn about women's lives in Britain. However, assessing its limitations show that it does not mention the impact and experiences of women outside munition factories, however it still useful when used in conjunction with other sources to gain a greater understanding. Nevertheless, the source still ensures its usefulness to an historian studying the impact of war on women's lives and experiences in Britain.

Okay sweet, Susie can probably provide better feedback but mainly I would say for Source A, it is of limited usefulness in my opinion as you have said, it does not specify the impact of the WAAC on women and would thus, only be useful to historians in that it is an example of a way women in Britain were given employment and contributed to the war effort, yet as you have said, a historian would need to study this in conjunction with other sources to gain a better understanding of the impact of the war on women in Britain. Also, with perspective, as it is from the perspective of the British Government it is likely propaganda, and thus displays the impact of the WAAC on women in a positive light. As such, it is limited in its usefulness for historians studying the negative impact of the WAAC on women such as the risk of artillery shelling as while they did not actively participate in combat, they were close enough to the front line to be at risk.

For Source B, I would make the distinction clearer that it is more useful than Source A as it presents both the positive and negative impacts of war on women. With perspective, you could mention it is from the perspective of a historian specifically rather than saying it is from a historical book - only a small thing just so you are mentioning perspective more. To your criticism of the source, I agree it is limited in that it only discusses munitions but maybe just double check with Susie as obviously sources generally don't have info relating to everything. I think it should be fine but I would double check :)
HSC 2017 (ATAR 98.95) - English Advanced (94), English Extension 1 (48), Modern History (94), Studies of Religion 1 (48), Visual Arts (95), French Continuers (92)

Download our free discovery trial paper!

Korrasami

  • Forum Regular
  • **
  • Posts: 70
Re: Modern History Essay Marking
« Reply #200 on: October 07, 2017, 04:07:31 pm »
Okay sweet, Susie can probably provide better feedback but mainly I would say for Source A, it is of limited usefulness in my opinion as you have said, it does not specify the impact of the WAAC on women and would thus, only be useful to historians in that it is an example of a way women in Britain were given employment and contributed to the war effort, yet as you have said, a historian would need to study this in conjunction with other sources to gain a better understanding of the impact of the war on women in Britain. Also, with perspective, as it is from the perspective of the British Government it is likely propaganda, and thus displays the impact of the WAAC on women in a positive light. As such, it is limited in its usefulness for historians studying the negative impact of the WAAC on women such as the risk of artillery shelling as while they did not actively participate in combat, they were close enough to the front line to be at risk.

For Source B, I would make the distinction clearer that it is more useful than Source A as it presents both the positive and negative impacts of war on women. With perspective, you could mention it is from the perspective of a historian specifically rather than saying it is from a historical book - only a small thing just so you are mentioning perspective more. To your criticism of the source, I agree it is limited in that it only discusses munitions but maybe just double check with Susie as obviously sources generally don't have info relating to everything. I think it should be fine but I would double check :)

Thanks heaps! You definitely mentioned things that I could've mentioned! Hopefully Susie can have a look at it, I like having differing feedbacks! :D