Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

October 24, 2019, 05:15:32 am

Author Topic: History Extension Question Thread!  (Read 44133 times)  Share 

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

abhiroop.pal1

  • Adventurer
  • *
  • Posts: 22
  • Respect: +2
Re: History Extension Question Thread!
« Reply #390 on: January 03, 2019, 10:11:35 pm »
+3
Hello everyone, I'm just feeling a bit confused on what we can and cannot do for our major work according to NESA. I have had some people tell me that we are not allowed to do any topic that crosses over with anything that we could have been taught in years 11 and 12, while other people have told me that I can choose any topic as long as I personally have not studied it in class. I normally would not ask and just pick something totally different to what's in the courses, but I am interested in doing mine on the motivations of Pope Urban II for calling the First Crusade, which would overlap heavily with the Crusades subject for extension history, however we are doing JFK for our course. Similarly, I was thinking of doing something involving Order No. 227 instead if I can't do the crusades, but that might overlap with the Russian national study we're doing in modern history.

Hey!

I believe you cannot pick a topic that coincides with ANY Stage 6 (Y11 or year 12) syllabus.

If it is however a very different perspective that is different from the syllabus. I think it's okay!

Hope I helped!

SirIllic

  • Fresh Poster
  • *
  • Posts: 3
  • Respect: 0
Re: History Extension Question Thread!
« Reply #391 on: January 03, 2019, 11:26:03 pm »
0
Hey!

I believe you cannot pick a topic that coincides with ANY Stage 6 (Y11 or year 12) syllabus.

If it is however a very different perspective that is different from the syllabus. I think it's okay!

Hope I helped!
Yep, that sounds about right thanks. I guess I'll just have to have a crack at something else, it's a shame that year 11 and 12 covers so many interesting topics. :P
2019 HSC:
Modern History - Ancient History - History Extension - Business Studies - Mathematics Standards 2 - English Standard

Vee__

  • Fresh Poster
  • *
  • Posts: 2
  • Respect: 0
Re: History Extension Question Thread!
« Reply #392 on: January 18, 2019, 10:39:40 pm »
0
Hi!
I'm really struggling with developing a question for my topic. I was to investigate the ways in which interpretations of Christopher Columbus have changed but am not sure about it. I was also thinking of using the lens of colonialism, imperialism or nationalism to look at the impacts Christopher Columbus has made i.e. the Taino genocide, Columbus Exchange.
I have tried to write an essay focusing on key questions such as 'what is history?' and 'who are the historians' but am finding it difficult to answer 'what is history?'
Any feedback would be greatly appreciated!

persie

  • Fresh Poster
  • *
  • Posts: 2
  • Respect: 0
Re: History Extension Question Thread!
« Reply #393 on: January 26, 2019, 11:25:55 am »
0
I was wondering if there were any regulations around crossing over evidence from ancient or modern history into extension history essays?

I've got an essay recently, just in class so no assessment mark, and it fits pretty clearly with some of the points raised about historian practice in Pompeii and Herculaneum that we've covered in ancient. Am I allowed to include it?

Also, are we allowed to cross over evidence from historiography into the case study and vice versa?

katie,rinos

  • Moderator
  • Forum Leader
  • *****
  • Posts: 880
  • Respect: +878
Re: History Extension Question Thread!
« Reply #394 on: January 27, 2019, 08:09:17 pm »
+2
I was wondering if there were any regulations around crossing over evidence from ancient or modern history into extension history essays?

I've got an essay recently, just in class so no assessment mark, and it fits pretty clearly with some of the points raised about historian practice in Pompeii and Herculaneum that we've covered in ancient. Am I allowed to include it?

Also, are we allowed to cross over evidence from historiography into the case study and vice versa?

Hey,
Welcome to Atar Notes!!  :D

You can definitely talk about any evidence from Ancient or Modern in your extension history essays, so you could include info about historians practises in Pompeii and Herculaneum. You can also add in info from your major work to your history extension essays if it fits. You are allowed to cross over evidence from historiography into your case study (and the other way around) as long its relevant.

Hope this helps!  ;D
Class of 2017 (Year 12): Advanced English, General Maths, Legal Studies, Music 1, Ancient History, History Extension, Hospitality
2018-2022: B Music/B Education (Secondary) [UNSW]

persie

  • Fresh Poster
  • *
  • Posts: 2
  • Respect: 0
Re: History Extension Question Thread!
« Reply #395 on: January 28, 2019, 11:00:35 am »
+1
Hey,
Welcome to Atar Notes!!  :D

You can definitely talk about any evidence from Ancient or Modern in your extension history essays, so you could include info about historians practises in Pompeii and Herculaneum. You can also add in info from your major work to your history extension essays if it fits. You are allowed to cross over evidence from historiography into your case study (and the other way around) as long its relevant.

Hope this helps!  ;D

Thanks so much!

Eliza.Mallitt

  • Fresh Poster
  • *
  • Posts: 1
  • Respect: 0
Re: History Extension Question Thread!
« Reply #396 on: February 01, 2019, 04:38:31 pm »
0
Hi!,

I was wondering with the major work, do we agree or disagree with evidence/ sources? can I challenge traditional views and form something that has a different perspective?

Thank you!

katie,rinos

  • Moderator
  • Forum Leader
  • *****
  • Posts: 880
  • Respect: +878
Re: History Extension Question Thread!
« Reply #397 on: February 01, 2019, 05:17:41 pm »
+3
Hi!,

I was wondering with the major work, do we agree or disagree with evidence/ sources? can I challenge traditional views and form something that has a different perspective?

Thank you!
Hey, Welcome to the forums!! :D

You can both agree or disagree with your sources and you can challenge some of the traditional views to come up with your own perspectives on the history. The essay should be analytical so you should have strong judgements of your sources, views and historians.

Hope this helps! :) 
Class of 2017 (Year 12): Advanced English, General Maths, Legal Studies, Music 1, Ancient History, History Extension, Hospitality
2018-2022: B Music/B Education (Secondary) [UNSW]

Catherine Atkins

  • Fresh Poster
  • *
  • Posts: 1
  • Respect: 0
Re: History Extension Question Thread!
« Reply #398 on: March 10, 2019, 04:02:20 pm »
0
Hi all,
I attended Susie's head start lecture for history extension in the January school holidays, which made me re-evaluate the major work completely, I'm so glad it did!
As a result I have decided on a topic but was wondering if anyone had any ideas of possible case studies I could use
My topic is:
- The manipulation of history for political gain and how that has impacted the documentation and teaching of history ( a case study I was thinking of was the teaching of Aboriginal history in Australian schools depending on what government is in power)
Any ideas would be greatly appreciated!

owidjaja

  • MOTM: JAN 18
  • Moderator
  • Part of the furniture
  • *****
  • Posts: 1202
  • Bibliophile. Stationery addict.
  • Respect: +862
Re: History Extension Question Thread!
« Reply #399 on: March 10, 2019, 10:59:18 pm »
+1
Hi all,
I attended Susie's head start lecture for history extension in the January school holidays, which made me re-evaluate the major work completely, I'm so glad it did!
As a result I have decided on a topic but was wondering if anyone had any ideas of possible case studies I could use
My topic is:
- The manipulation of history for political gain and how that has impacted the documentation and teaching of history ( a case study I was thinking of was the teaching of Aboriginal history in Australian schools depending on what government is in power)
Any ideas would be greatly appreciated!
Hey there,

Welcome to ATAR Notes! Glad you enjoyed Susie's lecture :)

Your topic sounds really interesting, as well. I think your case study is fine, but if you'd like more ideas, here are a few I have in mind:
- British imperialism and how the UK teaches these issues (this looks like a good article to read)
- Textbook tampering, especially in Japan and the denial of their war crimes
- Holocaust denial, especially the case between Irving vs Lipstadt

Hope this helps!
2018 HSC: English Advanced | Mathematics | Physics | Modern History | History Extension | Society and Culture | Studies of Religion I

ATAR: 93.60

2019: Aerospace Engineering (Hons)  @ UNSW

kellycai

  • Fresh Poster
  • *
  • Posts: 1
  • Respect: 0
Re: History Extension Question Thread!
« Reply #400 on: April 06, 2019, 07:55:22 pm »
0
Hi Guys,

I was wondering when writing an essay for question 1, how many historians should you know? Should I know all of the historians that I have learnt in class or should I know generally what each historian has done and written about?

Another question is if the question asks for 2 other relevant sources, do you just do two or do we do three? Because I've heard some poeple say to always do one more historian than the question requires.

Thank youuuuu :)

owidjaja

  • MOTM: JAN 18
  • Moderator
  • Part of the furniture
  • *****
  • Posts: 1202
  • Bibliophile. Stationery addict.
  • Respect: +862
Re: History Extension Question Thread!
« Reply #401 on: April 06, 2019, 08:34:58 pm »
+2
Hi Guys,

I was wondering when writing an essay for question 1, how many historians should you know? Should I know all of the historians that I have learnt in class or should I know generally what each historian has done and written about?

Another question is if the question asks for 2 other relevant sources, do you just do two or do we do three? Because I've heard some poeple say to always do one more historian than the question requires.

Thank youuuuu :)
Hey there,

Welcome to the forums!

I'd recommend you generally knowing the historians you have studied and really knowing the historians you've used in your past essays. For example, because I always referred to postmodernism in my essays, I knew it a lot better than talking about the relationship between Hamilton and Herodotus so I'd end up quoting Keith Jenkins. Another thing you should remember is that it depends on the source and question, which is why I'd recommend at least knowing what each historian says about/their impact on historiography.

As for your question on "2 relevant sources", the term source is a bit vague since some may argue that it refers to historian or an actual text. Regardless of which one your teacher says, it just means that they want you to be able to integrate other ideologies with the text since one of the rubric points is to demonstrate an understanding on historiographical issues. There isn't a set number of historians that you should use, but you'd naturally incorporate other historians in your response because I'd think it would be difficult to use the same two or three historians throughout the whole essay.

Hope this helps!
2018 HSC: English Advanced | Mathematics | Physics | Modern History | History Extension | Society and Culture | Studies of Religion I

ATAR: 93.60

2019: Aerospace Engineering (Hons)  @ UNSW

caramel333

  • Adventurer
  • *
  • Posts: 11
  • Respect: +8
Re: History Extension Question Thread!
« Reply #402 on: June 16, 2019, 10:14:20 pm »
0
Heyo,

Recently in class my teacher provided a stimulus for a what is history essay howeverI'm having a little trouble wrapping my head around i :Pt:

  “Madness of the past are not petrified entities that can be plucked unchanged from their niches and placed under our modern microscopes. They appeared, perhaps, more like jellyfish that collapse and dry up when they are removed from the ambient sea water (12)”

It is suppose to link to issues surrounding historical interpretations however further elaboration is appreciated. Cheers  :)
HSC 2019: English Advanced | Music 1 | Business Studies | Studies of Religion 1 | Ancient History | History Extension

owidjaja

  • MOTM: JAN 18
  • Moderator
  • Part of the furniture
  • *****
  • Posts: 1202
  • Bibliophile. Stationery addict.
  • Respect: +862
Re: History Extension Question Thread!
« Reply #403 on: June 17, 2019, 07:41:36 pm »
+2
Heyo,

Recently in class my teacher provided a stimulus for a what is history essay howeverI'm having a little trouble wrapping my head around i :Pt:

  “Madness of the past are not petrified entities that can be plucked unchanged from their niches and placed under our modern microscopes. They appeared, perhaps, more like jellyfish that collapse and dry up when they are removed from the ambient sea water (12)”

It is suppose to link to issues surrounding historical interpretations however further elaboration is appreciated. Cheers  :)
Hey there,

Essentially the quote is trying to say that the past isn't a stagnant piece of knowledge ("petrified entities"). It's critiquing the way we assess the past due to our inbuilt bias ("placed under our modern microscopes"). Therefore we should take its context into account ("more like jellyfish that collapse and dry up when they are removed from the ambient sea water").

Hope this helps!
2018 HSC: English Advanced | Mathematics | Physics | Modern History | History Extension | Society and Culture | Studies of Religion I

ATAR: 93.60

2019: Aerospace Engineering (Hons)  @ UNSW

Lyly78

  • Fresh Poster
  • *
  • Posts: 2
  • Respect: 0
Re: History Extension Question Thread!
« Reply #404 on: June 18, 2019, 08:46:55 pm »
0
oof I hope I'm doing this right. So if it's not too much to ask but could I please get some general feedback on my major work so far.

It is not often that nations learn from the past, even rarer that they draw the correct conclusions from it.” (Henry Kissinger)

With reference to the above statement, evaluate the reasons behind textbook revisionism and their impact on society in the Asia Pacific region from 1970 to 2016.


The purpose of History varies depending on context and when used for education is a powerful tool. Only when used correctly for the benefit of society can its potential be fully recognised. However, History is susceptible to revisionism that alters its role as a beneficial educational tool which can lead to detrimental effects on society. This has been displayed through the recent revisionism of comfort women in Japanese textbooks and Aboriginal people in Australian textbooks. They have been compromised heavily by a political agenda to promote a nation to be proud of however create a society ignorant of the past. Eventually, overtime Australian textbooks have come to adapt to the changing times but Japanese textbooks still remain in the past and adhere to the notion above. This essay will address the reasons behind these textbook revisionisms and their impact on society through the development of each nation’s textbooks.

There is a clear contrast between the common purpose of history versus its use in education. The purpose of historical inquiry is not simply to present facts but to search for an interpretation of the past. It’s widely accepted that an understanding of the past allows greater insight into the present. There are predominantly two purposes of history, the philosophical or scientific, and the civic. From a philosophical or scientific standpoint, the historical truth is regarded as the highest value. It becomes compromised once tailored to the demands of the public. On the other hand, the civic purpose of history is to help a community- a nation, a religious or ethnic group- understand the present in ways that orient that group to the future.. Thus, the representation of history varies depending on its purpose.

Australian history textbooks in the past have not been so favourable to the portrayal of Indigenous Australians. Their representation was determined by the government at the time who exhibited a white Australian view. This view lead to the revisionism of Australian textbooks that removed the presence of any indigenous Australians. “Unlike their conservative counterparts, they (Australian Labour politicians)  see education as more a pathway to personal growth within a public school system than as a means of defending the national psyche”.  This statement shows that the purpose of history differs for many and thus affects the way its represented. It also shows how history is constructed to suit the purpose of the authors, in this case politicians. Early Australian textbooks were written during the White Australia period and thus predominately it was portrayed that White people were the developers of the nation. This can be seen in the following extract from the preface of A Junior History of Australia by A. L. Meston, published in 1950: The object of this little book is to tell the wonderful story of our own country. Fewer than one hundred and fifty years ago no white man lived in our land. In so short a space of time by the pluck, hard work, and energy of our grandmothers and grandfathers, and of our mothers and fathers, a splendid heritage has been handed down to us. This extract assumes the reader is white. Aboriginal students are overlooked. Similarly, Aboriginal contributions to each and every stage of national development are ignored.

Fast forward, Australian high school history textbooks convey a different tale. They now represent the role of Indigenous Australians in the development of Australia. Research has shown that students who aren’t represented in textbooks perform worse academically. Thus the representation of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander allowed students to acknowledge their cultural identity. “To avoid students being subjected to overt or covert in-school propaganda exercises, it is vital that the subject be taught as a non-ideologised, discipline-based, expert-led investigative activity.” As much as we’d like to make history objective there is still some extent of it. When choosing what topics to teach, that in itself is already subjective since certain topics may be believed to be more important than the other despite being presented truthfully with facts. [examples of modern australian history textbooks]. However, Australia has made an improvement throughout the years learning from their mistakes.

Henry Reynolds is an Australian historian whose primary work has focused on the frontier conflict between European settlers in Australia and indigenous Australians. In multiple academic articles Reynolds has explained the high level of violence and conflict involved in the colonisation of Australia, and the Aboriginal resistance to numerous massacres of indigenous people. Critics such as Geoffrey Blainey and Keith Windschuttle label his approach as a "black armband view" of Australian history. However, Reynolds responds by saying “better a black armband than a white blindfold”. His books are based on evidence available in archives and recorded during frontier times, and has been successful in changing initial views during the 20th century about peaceful settlement.  He has also however shown that in earlier times (pre 1900) white Australians were well aware of the violence against the Aborigines and believed they were a 'dying race'. His book titled “Why weren’t we told?” accounts for Reynold’s personal journey towards the realisation that he and other Australians alike grew up with a distorted and idealised version of the past. He shatters the myths about ‘ peaceful’ history. For example in chapter 11, Reynolds talks about the thoughts of white Europeans 'invading' as opposed to 'settling' in Australia: 'the idea of invasion is considered as an unsuitable option in contrast to the conventional idea of a peaceful settlement. He additionally addresses the media’s reluctance to utilize the term 'invasion'. This affects the political scene of Australian culture as for example, John Howard constantly denies the thought that Australia was invaded it's setting the Aboriginal individuals and white individuals against one another'. This blatant denial leads to the failure of integrating and reforming many legislations for Indigenous Australians such as land ownership due to the aspect of ‘invasion’ not being recognised as what it was. It discusses the distorted and idealised version of the past that older Australians grew up with and other political issues at the time concerning aboriginal people. Ultimately, it highlights the consequences of continuous denial of Aboriginal people in history.

Another Australian historian is Inga Clendinnen. Her interests lie in understanding how people think and introducing other people to the problems and lessons of history.her article, “Who owns the past?”. She discusses how history should be presented. According to John Howard, history should be presented as an “objective record of achievement”. However, it is not the jobs of Historians to nurture a national identity or do the work of myth according to Clendinnen. Clendinnen discusses the contrast between stories, and facts. She asserts that understanding history involves understanding that there are many stories about the same event and constant facts that the conservatives wish to push cannot convey that. In the end of her article, Clendinnen says; “I would like students at every level to study Australian history because I believe that one of the best ways to “teach values” is to exercise minds by engaging them in investigation of conflicts between competing values and interests, always with a proper regard for clarity and justice of analysis and the relevance of evidence.”

Overall, Australian History textbooks have learned from the past and drawn the correct conclusions from it and still continue to do so. In the past, history textbooks were compromised due to political agendas. Reynold portrays the political agendas at the time and questions who owns the past and is actually able to alter it. He discusses the distorted and idealised version of the past that older Australians grew up with and other political issues at the time concerning aboriginal people. Ultimately, it highlights the consequences of continuous denial of Aboriginal people in history. Iendinnen discusses the contrast between stories, and facts. She asserts that understanding history involves understanding that there are many stories about the same event and constant facts that the conservatives wish to push cannot convey that. If history were to be presented due to political agendas it would leave a lasting impact on Australian society leaving them ignorant of the past and letting mistakes repeat.