Login

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

March 29, 2024, 05:55:37 am

Author Topic: REVS ADVICE FROM A PREMIER'S AWARD RECIPIENT  (Read 3722 times)  Share 

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

a.l.y.2017

  • Adventurer
  • *
  • Posts: 13
  • Respect: +24
REVS ADVICE FROM A PREMIER'S AWARD RECIPIENT
« on: December 19, 2018, 08:38:59 pm »
+15
Introduction
   Welcome to History Revolutions! It’s likely that, prior to picking this subject, you’ve heard many things about it already— such as how competitive the cohort is, how much content there is to memorise, how difficult it is to score well etc. However, while there’s certainly a grain of truth to people’s general impression of this subject, there’s honestly so much more to it than simply ‘memorising a bunch of dates’.
   Revolutions is one of those (rare) subjects in VCE that encourages originality of ideas, critical thinking, reading between the lines, and a touch of dramatic flare. It rewards students that are empathetic, that truly feel for the plight of the oppressed and even the oppressors and can imagine the often complex storyline of these revolutions play out as if they were watching a movie. They understand that the strange and wonderful characters in their textbooks were once real, living, breathing human beings who had their own special quirks and weaknesses and motives and habits and friendships; human beings who were prone to miscalculating and making mistakes and occasionally letting their egos get in the way, as is the case with any human being.
   Revolutions is a subject that rewards students who use the benefit of hindsight to critique and comment and analyse the past whilst understanding, at the same time, that foresight was something most contemporaries lacked. They’re able to identify the cause-and-effect between every major and minor event knowing that history plays out like a row of dominoes— one thing always leads to the next.
   More importantly, Revolutions is a subject that rewards students who not only aren’t afraid of putting in the work, but who also know how to work smart. These are the students that know to work consistently instead of cramming everything the night before, who strive to understand information rather than simply memorising and regurgitating it, and who are constantly learning and refining throughout the year. You don’t have to be a History genius— or even any type of genius— to do well in this subject. All you need is a regular and effective study plan, a lot of self-discipline, and a passion for the subject.
   Of course, with all of that being said, studying a subject like Revolutions does come with its own challenges. Even the most organised, most-hardworking students will have days where they realise, to their horror, that they’re two weeks behind on content. Or, perhaps, you’ll approach the end of the year and realise that you’ve forgotten the entirety of the French Revolution and feel a sense of impending doom as you’ve never felt before. But don’t worry— this is just a thing that tends to happen. Instead of freaking out and beating yourself up over it, try to set aside a few hours on the weekend or over the holidays to sit down and focus on catching up. The key is to pick yourself up the second you feel yourself falling behind, and have faith that everything will work out— because it will.

Marks and Rankings
   SACs. Rankings. Exams. It sounds, and certainly feels, like these things are the be-all and end-all of your short yet very intense VCE career. You’ll find by the end of the year, however, that these bear the mere illusion of significance a lot more than actual significance. 
   Honestly, going into VCE Revolutions, I was extremely concerned with what my rankings were going to be and how that was going to affect my final study score. From the very beginning, I had my heart set on getting a raw 50 in this subject (and this subject only— any more pressure would’ve made me crack), and so I dedicated a ridiculous amount of my time and energy to ensuring that I didn’t lose a single mark the entire year. And although, to my initial relief, I achieved this in the end, I do know other people who ended up getting the same score as me despite losing a mark or two in their SACs and were generally a lot less stressed about attaining a perfect score every time.
   At the end of the day, it really does come to how well you want to do, what score you’re aiming for, and what you know you’re capable of achieving. Obviously, don’t sell yourself short aiming for a 30+ because, to be quite frank, getting above 30 in Revolutions is really very easy. On the other hand, there’s no reason to kill yourself trying to get a 50 if you know you’d be pretty much just as happy with a 48 or a 49.
   Now, in terms of actual SACs, I would personally suggest that you focus a little more on your marks than your rankings. I know this sounds super counterintuitive to the way the actual system is structured (in which your rankings affect your study score, not your grades) but hear me out. The way that marks are rewarded, at Korowa at least, are pretty transparent and consistent. Because of this, I find that it’s a lot less pressure aiming for a 90% on a SAC than aiming to beat the top three students in your class, and it’ll probably also make for a much lighter class atmosphere.
   As a general rule, you’d be looking to average around 98-100% for a 50, 95% for a 45+, 85%-90% for a 40+, and 75%-85% for a 35+. Of course, your SAC marks only make up a very small part of your final study score. A lot more weight is given to how well you perform in the final exam. For example, two people could both finish the year with an average SAC score of 100%, but depending on their exam performance, one could end up getting a 50, while the other might end up getting a 40.
   Basically, the best advice I can give to you is to simply work as much as is appropriate and do the best that you can, as cliche as it sounds. Do not devote your energy to calculating every single SAC mark or beating every other person in the class, because it’s honestly not worth it and will drain the joy out of a thoroughly interesting subject.

Study and Revision
You will receive a lot of different resources in History, including:
-Class handouts and worksheets
-Class readings
-Extended readings
-Notes from PPT
-Textbooks (e.g. Analysing the French Revolution)
-Books (e.g. the French Revolution by Christopher Hibbert)

It’s essentially up to you to organise all the information above in a way that’s consistent, makes sense, can be easily accessed, and doesn’t skip over anything important— especially crucial when you use your notes for exam revision.

From the above, you will also have to extract different types of information:
-Statistics
-Dates
-Important events
-Important people and leaders
-Ideologies
-Points of significance (usually 3 points for each significant individual leader/event)

Everyone will have their own approaches to studying and will likely learn, throughout the year, the strategies that work best for them. To get you started, however, here are a few things I did to stay afloat above the workload.

1) Digital notes and tables.
In the weeks leading up to a SAC, I would make sure to organise all the precision (key events/leaders/ideologies etc.) from my class notes and readings in a table using Word in chronological order, then come up with 3 points of significance for each.
For more complex events, or those that I didn’t have a good understanding of, I would also write my own narrative-like summary on the side so that I could refer back to it in the future.
Essentially, these notes absolutely saved my life when it came to exam time and SAC revision! By simply scanning through these notes, I was able to understand the general chronological order of things which had happened, but also identify the significance of each and how one event linked to another.

2) Study cards
Needless to say, memorisation plays a huge role in succeeding in Revolutions. I found study cards to be the best way to consolidate memory.
At the end of every class, I would more or less try to copy out all the important information from the PPT slides in class, or extract information from class readings and summarise them with the study cards. After handwriting them out the first time, I would then go back to read and highlight them, using a strict colour coding system (green for dates, red/pink for statistics, orange for historians’ quotes, blue for names).
By the end of the year, I had made almost 200 study cards, and I found that I didn’t actually have to do a lot of active memorisation and revision by the time SACs or exams rolled around, as I had consolidated these consistently throughout the year already.

3) Practice responses
This is honestly the most effective way to prepare for your SACs and exams. It’s only through attempting different types of questions and practice responses that you’ll achieve a true understanding of both the content and structure of the exam. Completely practice responses essentially forces you to incorporate historians’ interpretations and precision in your own argument, which in turn will improve your memory, synthesis and writing over time. It also allows you to recognise the gaps in your knowledge or the parts of the study design you’re unfamiliar with, whether that be the connection between two events or the significance of a certain ideology and its relevance to a particular social group etc. Given that Revolutions is extremely strict on clarity of writing and familiarity with the specific structure of questions, it’s definitely best that you prioritise practice responses in the lead up to any assessment or exam!

4) Timelines
Although this is more a matter of personal preference, it can come in very handy if you’re looking for a simple narrative of a particular revolution. In those few hours before a SAC or exam, when practically everyone’s in full-on panic/cram mode, I found it almost comforting to go over a timeline for a certain AOS and give myself a basic rundown of the important sequential events.

Writing
Although most people would say that learning the content is the hardest part of Revs, I would actually argue that the writing is a lot more challenging. Unlike subjects like Literature, Revs requires you to write in a way that’s sharp, concise and confident. There’s absolutely no need to say with two sentences what you can say in one, and the better you become at “packing” your information into a clear sentence, the more effective your argument will be.
One of the major pitfalls for many students is that they tend to narrate instead of argue in their responses. Unfortunately, simply retelling the story of an event that happened without identifying its significance will get you a 5-6/10 at most. How can you tell if you’re narrating? If it looks something like this:

On ___ date, a group of ___ stormed the ___ dressed in ____. This group was called the ___ because of ____. Out of anger they told the ___ to _____, and refused to leave for ___ days until this happened. Finally, the _____ acquiesced and the group of ____ celebrated all the way into the next day.

While this makes for a wonderful story, it does not constitute a wonderful response.
Essentially, you have to make sure that everything you’re writing has both direction and purpose. Each sentence should go deeper than, or add to, the one before it. There should be a clear cause-and-effect, a clear sense of the connection between events, and of course, their significance.
Try using words like these to make your response sound more argumentative:

-Furthermore
-Moreover
-However
-Indeed
-As such
-Hence
-Therefore
-As a result
-Consequently
-Crucially
-Significantly
-Nonetheless
-Despite this

You might have also noticed that I’ve mentioned the word ‘significance’ a couple of times, and you’ll certainly spot this on the exam or your SACs. So what, exactly, does ‘significance’ actually mean?

Something is significant if:
It is the result of something that happened in the past. E.g. ____ was the product of popular disillusionment.
It either directly or indirectly caused something to happen in the future. E.g. ___ catalysed the popular riots.
It somehow changed the social/economic/political order of the time. E.g. __ enabled an unprecedented ___ of economic reforms.
It changed people’s perceptions of something. E.g. ____ granted rising popularity to the ______
It was symbolic of/evidence of something. E.g. ____ evidenced the increasing brutality of a totalitarian state.
The trick is, almost everything can hold a certain degree of significance, though that degree will likely vary. It’s up to you to identify the impacts of this event and what it was the evidence or result of- because everything’s the result of something.

Another term you might have heard quite often is ‘cause-and-effect’. This aligns with the general assumption in History that every event is both an effect and cause of what after came before and after it (think, again, of the domino effect). The truth is that if everything worked in isolation, nothing would ever really change. Cause-and-effect, in a sense, allows you to demonstrate the above: that everything holds significance, and anything can create an impact on anything else. It’s absolutely integral to proving that you have an understanding of the way time and events work throughout human history.

Here are some words you might like to use to demonstrate this relationship:
Catalysed
Galvanised
Conceived
Precipitated
Fomented
Sparked
Manifested
Produced
Created
Inflamed
Aggravated
Incensed
Radicalised
Revolutionised
Transformed
Altered
Shaped

Answering Questions: 5 Marks
This is where we get down to the specifics. 5 Mark questions may come in different forms, but generally speaking, they’re the easiest to answer and you can be as straight-forward as you wish.

Example: Compare and contrast the depictions of Necker in these sources.

The equally unorthodox views illustrated in Source A and B are polarised in their depictions of Necker. As evidenced by the scathing caption- "a new way of regenerating France"- Source A seeks not only to undermine Necker's authority and credibility by presenting the state of France's fiscal affairs as a mere game, but also lambastes the discarded Compte Rendu as the precipitating cause for “DEFICIT”. As such, the continuous "borrowing" that occurred between 1774-1778 as a detriment to the French treasury renders the Compte Rendu to be as much a cataclysmic failure as its "self-centred" (Source B) creator. Contrarily, Jaydon Smith utilises his advantage of hindsight by subverting the populist (popular) line of argument that Necker was motivated by "personal glory", and focuses instead on his "advanced understanding for his time" as a "product" of Enlightenment ideals (i.e. to "keep the monarchy in check). In particular, his recognition of Necker as attuned to the pulse of French society by intentionally generating "public opinion" deviates from Source A's inferred insistence of his incompetence. Regardless, neither sources deny Necker as "commanding the most attention", whether this be through his mendacity as a "finance minister", or his astounding foresight as a "modern politician". 

‘Compare and contrast’ means:
Identifying similarities and differences between the two sources
Identifying relationship between sources (are they contradictory or congruent?)
Getting to the core/key message of each source
Consistently quoting, referring back to sources
No need for precision/your own knowledge
No need for historians’ interpretations
No need for an argument

Example: Using your own knowledge and the sources, explain why Necker wrote the Compte Rendu.

Published in February of 1781, the rapidly popularised Compte Rendu (20,000 copies sold) intended first and foremost to bolster the confidence of loaners in hopes of reviving the economy through "borrowing" after France's financial over-exertion in the American Revolutionary War (1775-1783, 1,200 million livres expended). However, as referenced in Sources A and B, it's plausible that Necker simultaneously sought to inflate his own "reputation for financial wizardry", whereby the reported 10 million livre surplus would inspire commendatory "public opinion", hence consolidating his "personal glory" and influence. Furthermore, Louis XVI's patent indifference (Source A) to the "words on the floor" somewhat sustains Smith's argument that Necker, as an Enlightened thinker, desired to "keep the (evidently incompetent) monarchy in check" by purposely "stimulating" controversy surrounding the legitimacy of the Compte Rendu. Hence, in offering an unprecedented transparency to royal accounts, Necker's publication indeed demonstrates the discernment of a man with "advanced understanding" (Source B), but also reflects the immense pressure of "regenerating France" at a time when "borrowing" was tradition and fiscal reform was resisted with entrenched hostility.

‘Using your own knowledge and the sources’ means:
Including precision such as statistics, names, dates
Consistently quoting, referring back to sources
Answering the question at hand (why Necker wrote the Compte Rendu)
Explaining the sources’ unique interpretation of /answer to the question
No need for historians’ interpretations

Answering Questions: 10 Marks
As with the 5 mark questions, different types of 10 mark questions will appear in SACs and exams.

Example: Evaluate the significance of Necker's Rendu as a precipitating cause of the revolution between 1781 and 1788. You must use the sources and refer to historian's views in your answer.

Whilst Sources A and B contradict orthodox views of Finance Minister Necker, Source A censures Necker as a catalyst for economic turmoil, whereas Source B acknowledges his ingenuity and "advanced understanding" of the French populace. Regardless, Necker's momentous role in the unfolding of the Financial Crisis (1781-1788) is made apparent in both. 
 
In the short term, Necker's Compte Rendu effectively "stimulated" public interest in France's financial affairs and thus escalated a still-nascent revolutionary situation. In his haste to "seek personal glory", the grand scale of the Compte Rendu- grand both in its popularity and its reported surplus of 10 million livres- would essentially pave the "primrose path to perdition" (Schama) for his successor, Calonne (1783). The consistent accumulation of debt between "1774-1778" and the final "product" of "DEFICIT" (112 million livres by 1786) would undermine the legitimacy of Calonne's Plan for the Improvement of Finances (20 August 1786) as the acute urgency of fiscal reform was lost in translation. Furthermore, at its root, the Compte Rendu failed to achieve its original purpose  of "regenerating France" (Source A). Rather, it merely augmented "staggering public debt" (Historian Harris) by continuing a tradition of heavy "borrowing" (520 million livres loaned between 1777-1781) with "ruinous rates of interest" (Harris). Hurtling towards insolvency (1786) and later bankruptcy (1788), Necker's inability to remedy France's disastrous "financial administration" (Bouille) would intensify the widespread desire for reform.   
 
However, the incompetence of King Louis XVI himself was also a key contributor to the dissolution of royal absolutism (1789). Louis' troubling indifference in Source A to the "game" before them (representing domestic finances) paints him as an ignoramus, seemingly oblivious to the Compte Rendu lying at his feet. Crucially, Louis' refusal to support his finance ministers (Turgot, Necker, Calonne, Brienne) in their endeavours (Turgot's proposed equal taxation, Necker's Compte Rendu 1781, Calonne's territorial subvention 1786) would render financial collapse ineluctable. A vacillator instead of a "great statesman", his "shows of weakness"  and "inadequacy as a ruler" (Richard Cobb and Colin Jones) would position him to accept the recommendations of his ministers by foolishly engaging in the American War of Independence (1775-1783)- a fiscal and political calamity that would drive the nation to debt (1,200 million livres) and despair. Thus, perhaps Necker's falsified reports did not lie at the heart of economic disaster, but rather a feebly-led monarchical body to which he was a mere part of.
 
Most significantly, the obstinacy and radicalism of the Nobles in the pivotal Parlement Crisis (1787-1788) would strike a powerful blow to Louis' regime. Mirroring the scepticism and indignation of the Assembly of Notables (convened 1787), the Parlements' opposition to the King (refusal to ratify Brienne's reforms, July 1787) would galvanise magistrates and urban workers alike into doing the same. This, to some degree, corroborates Source B's redeeming interpretation of Necker as a "modern politician", as it was indeed "public opinion" that ignited revolutionary fervour, inspired riots (towns Pau, Rennes, Dijon, Brittany) and finally tarnished the dignity and aura of His Majesty. In particular, the Day of Tiles (7 June 1788) witnessed the collective power of the peoples once united by dissatisfaction, thus signifying the irreversible "breakdown of royal authority" (Schama) as the revolution came to life. 
 
In the final analysis, although the escalation of revolutionary incidents can be partly attributed to the problematic Compte Rendu, Sources A and B both deny the reality that Necker was not the sole producer of socio-economic issues, but rather a "product" of his times.

‘Evaluate the significance… using source and historians’ interpretations’ means:
Must develop your own argument in relation to the question and the sources
Must address and quote the sources frequently throughout
Must include your own knowledge in the form of precision
Must include at least 3-4 historians’ interpretations
Must ‘contextualise’/ identify the relationship between sources, what they argue and what type of sources they are and their perspectives (e.g. contemporary, historian, orthodox…)
3 paragraphs is fine, but 2 paragraphs would also suffice, structured according to Source A- First paragraph, Source B- Second paragraph

Example: Explain how the National Constituent Assembly tried to establish a more enlightened and equitable society from Oct 1789-September 1791.
 

Optimistically described as the "years of achievement" (Doyle), the reforms implemented by the National Constituent Assembly (9 July 1789) did, to an extent, fulfil the revolutionary vision of a progressive and just society. Nonetheless, the amendment of France's past fundamental flaws did also facilitate the creation of new ones.
 
Significantly, the NCA were successful in reviving and revising a previously crippled national economy to the benefit of the French populace. The introduction of a common system of weights and measures (May 1790), abolition of former taxes in favour of three new direct taxes (land, import/export and commercial profit) and eradication of internal customs duties (Decree Providing for a  Uniform Tariff, 31 October 1790) all realised the still-nascent notion of economic equality, and thus demolished the system of pecuniary privilege ingrained in corporatism. Furthermore, the nationalisation of church property ( biens nationaux) as issued in the Decree Confiscating Church Property (2 November 1789) would initiate the sale of Church lands to restore a treasury depleted since 1786 (112 million livres debt), ultimately breaking the territorial monopoly of the Church (10% of land in France) and in turn decentralising their power as a separate, superior entity.
 
In addition, the legal and administrative reforms initiated by the NCA were integral to creating a system of justice in the new society. By restructuring the justice system to introduce juries and replacing the seigneurial court with elected Justices of the Peace, all citizens- and their 'inalienable rights' (DORMAC 26 August 1789)- were granted legislative protection from injustice, thus securing France its newfound status as the most enlightened nation in the world. Moreover, the standardisation of capital punishment to death by sword and, eventually, the guillotine (1792) further indicate a shift towards humane, unbiased treatment of individuals and away from the inequity inherent in the Ancien Regime. Nonetheless, it cannot go unnoticed that not all were equally advantaged by such reforms- the division between active and passive citizen in the tier system was arguably exclusionary, as only 4.3 million men were recognized by the Bourgeois-dominated Assembly.
 
However, the church reforms of 1790 heralded a new era for the NCA, whereby the progress achieved thus far would give way to conflict and factionalism. Whilst the NCA did address the corruption of the former First Estate by abolishing the tithe and annates, banning pluralism and increasing the income of parish priests from 1000 to 1200 livres, the Civil Constitution of the Clergy (July 1790) marked the steady erosion of support for the Assembly. In enabling the populace, and not the Pope, to dictate a matter of spirituality, the NCA had perhaps overstepped the line of 'Enlightenment' to enrage a still-somewhat-conservative, devoutly religious majority unwilling to utilise their political power to undermine the holy. Moreover, the Clerical Oath (27 November 1790) only exacerbated pre-existing tensions, splintered the clergy (only 55% of clergy took oath) and produced active opponents of revolution. Hence, the Church reforms not only stand as "the Constituent Assembly's most serious mistake" (Doyle), but also evidence a society psychologically unable to adjust to the NCA's idea of progress, or equality.   
 
In the final evaluation, although the NCA did push French society in the direction of enlightenment and equity, there remained a considerable distance between where they stood, and where they claimed to be.
 
‘Explain the significance…’ means:
Demonstrating to the examiners exactly what and how much you know
Directly answer the question, including your own perspective/argument
Must include your own knowledge in the form of precision
Only need 1 historian interpretation (best to have it in conclusion)
Organise response either chronologically or thematically or both
3 paragraphs is standard



Answering Questions: Essays

Example: Analyse the significance of the Treaty of Versailles as a cause of the Chinese Revolution to 1927.

China's treatment at The Treaty of Versailles (June 1919) epitomised the hypocritical, exploitative and exclusionary nature of Western powers, spurring the masses and intellectuals alike into active resistance against the foreign enemy (Japan, the Allies). From the unjust treaty blossomed a new wave of radical intellectual thought that would come to characterise definitive moments of the revolution, including the May 4th Movement (4 May 1919) and the forging of ‘fraternal bonds’ with Russia. As such, the fundamental significance of the Treaty of Versailles perhaps lies in its conception of Chinese nationalism; whilst nationalist fervour had arguably been in development prior, the Treaty amalgamated the threat of the West with China’s deteriorating socio-political condition, conveying to the Chinese the drastic need for revolution from below as a means of protecting the nation and expelling encroaching foreign forces.

Immediately, the Treaty of Versailles marked China’s rupture with Western ideologies and the subsequent birth of Marxism in China. As Lynch proposes, the Chinese Revolution was largely a revolution against the World, in order to join it. Indeed, the pro-Western, anti-Confucian New Culture Movement (mid 1910s-1920s) witnessed the attempts of intellectuals such as Chen Duxiu (New Youth Magazine) and Hu Shi (Bai Hua) to align China with the Western world of science and democracy. Similarly, China’s contribution of 200,000 men to the war effort in WWI (1914-1918) evidence a genuine belief in the Allies’ promises of self-determination in the post-war settlement. Therefore, the Allies’ later refusal to return the Shandong province (transferring it instead to Japan), or extend its policy of national sovereignty to China did not only spark “outrage” from the populace in a “tale of international betrayal” (Fenby), but also precipitated a complete disillusionment with the West as a whole. Evidently unable to “join” the West, the trajectory of the revolution was thus drastically altered as China turned from Western democracy to Marxist-Leninism instead, heralding the emergence of Marxism in the Marxist study group (Spring 1919) and eventual establishment of the CCP (1921) as China’s dominant political party.

Subsequently, radicalised by anti-imperialist sentiment, the Treaty of Versailles would trigger the May 4th Movement (4 May 1919) as a galvanising force of the revolution. The demonstrations held by 3000 students from 13 universities in Beijing and 100,000 in Shanghai on May 4th signified a shift from the cultural dimension of the New Culture Movement to a populist base and political mobilisation. As the movement spread to 20 provinces within a month, culminating in a nationwide, tangible expression of dissatisfaction, it certainly appeared to encapsulate the “frustrations and ambitions” of the Chinese “despairing of the state of the country” (Fenby) and intent on national resurgence. From the May 4th Movement also blossomed Chinese nationalism; united in their resentment not only at the West but also at the failure of their own government to protect the land and peoples of China (warlord era 1912-1927), the imminence of Japanese imperialism bolstered the appeal of a strong and unified China for the Chinese. This upsurge of nationalism would also heighten the popularity of the CCP (Chinese Communist Party) and GMD (Guomindang) as a means of providing a centralised government and ending an era of anarchy and humiliation.

Finally, the Treaty of Versailles would bring about the onset of Russian intervention in China, resulting in the establishment and violent dissolution of the First United Front. In response to the signing of the Treaty of Versailles (June 1919) the Karakhan Manifesto (25 July 1919) would ultimately unite China and Russia in their shared anti-imperialist, anti-Western sentiments. In offering financial aid, military aid organisational training, and political support (300 Soviet advisors sent to China) to strengthen the GMD, Russia would also contribute to reshaping the structure of the Nationalist Party to one of democratic centralism, further departing China from the liberal model it originally aspired to and foreshadowing the militaristic, dictatorial authority of Chiang Kai Shek in the GMD after Sun’s death (March 1925). In addition, the union of the GMD and CCP forces under the Sun-Joffe Pact (January, 1923) and during the Northern Expedition (July 1926) would yield cataclysmic results, fracturing the GMD into left (government established in Wuhan) and right wing (Nanjing) whilst the Nationalist and Communist parties continued vying for power. Hence, this forced “marriage of convenience” (Fenby) would ultimately backfire on both the Soviet Union and the Chinese with the outbreak of Civil War after the Shanghai Massacre (90% of CCP killed, April 1927), temporarily crippling the CCP and permanently severing the First United Front.
 
In the final analysis, as the humiliation borne of the Treaty of Versailles forced China to confront her own backward state and the unyielding stance of the West, a dogged struggle to revive the great ‘Middle Kingdom’ emerged, submerging the nation irrevocably in revolution.

‘Analyse the significance…’ means:
You consider the significance and impact of the event in question only (do not try to argue that something else is more significant)
You provide context and briefly outline your body paragraphs in the introduction
Include around 2 historian interpretations
Separate your body paragraphs with a distinct topic/focus for each
Include your own knowledge/precision

If you'd like more tips, model essays or my notes for either the French or Chinese Revolution, the following are available to purchase either separately, or as a complete package (10% off in this case):

-FRANCE AOS 1&2 Practice Responses: $25
-CHINA AOS 1&2 Practice Responses: $25
(100+ essays in total: ALL full marks, and graded by experienced VCAA examiner)

-FRANCE AOS 1&2 Notes: $25
-CHINA AOS 1&2 Notes: $25
(including original points of precision, significance, event summary: 100+ pages of formatted notes in total)

-Essay Plans:  Detailed 3 point plan for every single point on the study design, ensuring you'll be able to tackle any essay topic (over 20 pages in length): $20


I'm also taking students for Revs tutoring in 2019. Please email [email protected] if interested.

« Last Edit: December 19, 2018, 08:40:48 pm by a.l.y.2017 »
ATAR: 99.70

Literature [50], History: Revolutions [50] + Premier's Award 2017, Chinese SLA [47], Psychology [43]

Selling notes + essays for Literature and Revolutions. Contact: [email protected]

BlameTheKulaks

  • Adventurer
  • *
  • Posts: 17
  • Respect: +5
Re: REVS ADVICE FROM A PREMIER'S AWARD RECIPIENT
« Reply #1 on: December 24, 2018, 12:39:18 pm »
+2
I know you've kind of touched on this a little bit, but i can't really emphasise enough how important it is to work with historical interpretations sooner rather than later. This had me stressed till the day before lol.

Also, the study design is your friend! 9/10 questions have been a copy paste of a dot point so if you can organise info under each point it makes thinking through questions so much easier.
2017: Psychology [37]
2018: English [50], Revolutions [48], Legal [44], Philosophy [41], Global Politics [43]
ATAR: 98.95

2019: LLB (Hons) / BA @ Monash
Tutoring French and Russian revs - PM if interested!