Section 1 of the modern paper

[Zainbow]

Hi,
How would you approach the first extended response question in section 1 of the modern paper? It's the question that asks you to incorporate two sources and your own knowledge to a "to what extent" question.
I'm really unsure how to approach this 

thankyou in advance

[sudodds]

Hi,
How would you approach the first extended response question in section 1 of the modern paper? It's the question that asks you to incorporate two sources and your own knowledge to a "to what extent" question.
I'm really unsure how to approach this 

thankyou in advance

Hey! Do you mean the source analysis question marked out of 10 or the 5-8 marker?
If you mean the source analysis marked out of 10 (even if you don't I might as well answer that anyway because it'll probs still be useful to someone - if you meant the 5-8 marker let me know and I'll type up an answer for that too ) first of all you are defs not the only person unsure about how to approach this (the state average totters at 4.5/10... yikes - and that is in the final HSC exam!) so please don't be discouraged Unfortunately a lot of teachers forget that even though you have been taught how to do a source analysis in junior history, the structure of a modern history is actually quite different/strict!

When it comes to approaching this section, just remember that the question is NOT asking you to content drop all of your knowledge on event or syllabus dot point (the question usually centers around one), that is for the 5-8 marker (though of course with judgements!). It is instead asking you to analyse the usefulness of the sources in regards to perspective and reliability - these need to be your focus, not whatever event or issue is at the end of the question.

This is a really easy structure to follow (forget the acronyms they're dumb) that I know works for at least 99% of questions (basically I never came across a question where I couldn't use this, to the extent whereby since this structure was ingrained, source analysis was kinda an autopilot moment in exams where my brain could relax - crazy right I know but you'll get there )

1. Judgement on how Source A (remember to deal with them separately) is useful. This is not whether the source is useful or not, but how useful, so remember to include buzzwords such as highly/partially/etc.
2. Explanation of your judgement (try if you can to link to perspective + reliability)
3. BRIEF explanation of content. Don't go on for too long, just one or two sentences to let the marker know that you know what the content is about (eg. for the 2016 question you'd write a bit on what the WAAC was etc).
4. PERSPECTIVE (make sure to underline). 1-2 sentences on the perspective of the source. Who wrote it, why did they write it, who did they write it for etc etc. Make sure to go beyond just "British perspective" or "German perspective." Be specific.
5. RELIABILITY (make sure to underline). This should be the longest part of your response. Make a judgement upon how reliable it is, and remember the buzzwords (I just answer a question specifically on how to approach reliability so I'll link that thread (have a read of the other stuff on there as well cos it's A+!) Re: Source Analysis Tips and Tricks to get a Band 6 instead of retyping everything again
6. Restate your judgement on usefulness, relating back to how the perspective + reliability demonstrate this.
7. OPTIONAL - if you have time, it's nice to include a short sentence suggesting any other sources that might fill in any gaps that Source A had.
8. REPEAT STEPS 1-7 for Source B
9. OPTIONAL - if you have time, it's nice to include a couple of sentences on how the two sources corroborate/enhance the usefulness of each other.

Doing well in this section really comes down to practice. So many people neglect this section because it's the "easier" section (plus a lot of ppl find it the most boring), but remember that this is the only section where your response are marked in comparison with literally all 10,000+ other modern students in NSW, so you want to stand out Feel free to submit any practice responses you do and we can check over them to see if you're on the right track A lot of other helpful stuff can be found in the various boards here so I defs recommend having a little explore round

I hope this helped! If you are confused with anything let me know and I'll try to clear it up!

- Susie

[Zainbow]

Thank you Susie! 

I meant the 5-8 marker question, but thank you anyway this really helped  I'll definitely have a look around the other boards

[sudodds]

Thank you Susie! 

I meant the 5-8 marker question, but thank you anyway this really helped  I'll definitely have a look around the other boards

All good! So the 5 - 8 marker

Okay so these are the types of questions where you want to demonstrate how knowledgable you are of the course, so they'll give a particular syllabus dot point and you have to basically just tick as many boxes as possible. The key here is to remember that this is a SOURCE BASED study, and thus you must continually refer back to the information provided within the source, using your own knowledge to back them up, and pad them out. Use the sources as a guide for what you should be talking about, or focusing your response on. For example, if the question was "Outline (btw they're not always to what extent, so be prepared for an 'outline', 'explain' or 'describe' etc!) how the war affected women's lives and experiences in Britain", and source A was an advertisement for job openings in a munitions factory, and source B was a photograph of women wearing pants as opposed to dresses, you'd pay particular focus to these two areas - increased occupational opportunities and increased personal freedom. However you'd want to touch on other areas also such as suffrage, to demonstrate your well rounded knowledge (the amount you need to touch on this would depend how long the question is). Now unlike the 10 marker, this is not a source analysis, so you don't need to so start critqueing the source or comparing it, just using it's contents to back up your own judgement.

The structure of these depends on the size of it. If it's a 5/6 marker, a introductory judgement/statement (it'll need to be a judgement for any questions starting with to what extent/explain/evaluate/assess etc. but a statement for any outline/describe/etc .) is enough, and then you immediately jump into your answer. For a 7/8 marker, you also need an introductory judgement/statement, but also a tiny outline of your judgement mentioning VERY BRIEFLY the nature of your sources. Think of it as a mini essay, with a very short intro and conclusion and one paragraph When it comes to the integration of your own knowledge, this essentially means detail, detail and lots of detail. This is where you need to start bringing in any stats, quotes (don't overload them with these though or it turns into a shopping list of historians), tid bits of info that you have that'll make you stand out to the marker. Try and go beyond what the textbook tells you as remember that most kids will be using this. Do your own research on each area of the syllabus and find at least a couple of your own unique detail (that's why detail tables are so important )

Hope this helps! If you have any more questions let us know

Susie

[Zainbow]

Thanks Susie 

[Dylpickle01]

Just a question leading on from this discussion about the 5-8 marker, looking at the 2007 Paper (different format to what is now the norm), the same style question is 10 marks. How would this impact the response? Would the structure be more akin to an essay rather than a mini-essay, and would it require more detail?

P.S the advice you have offered is very very insightful, I am very appreciative.

Thanks! 

[sudodds]

Just a question leading on from this discussion about the 5-8 marker, looking at the 2007 Paper (different format to what is now the norm), the same style question is 10 marks. How would this impact the response? Would the structure be more akin to an essay rather than a mini-essay, and would it require more detail?

P.S the advice you have offered is very very insightful, I am very appreciative.

Thanks! 

Don't do any past papers beyond 2010, because as you mention the format is different, however to answer your question, I'd say it would still be closer to a mini essay rather than a full on essay, like you wouldn't want to be spending too long on an intro or conclusion - 1 to 2 sentences would do - and yes it would definitely need more detail  (again though you won't ever be faced with this situation so dw)