History

leaving cert 08

Hey guys just wanna know what ya thought the history paper...i'm pretty pleased with it myself, thought it was a fair paper:)

born2run

It was alright, but just alright

Document was grand, Vietnam no prob

Movements for reform...WHERE WAS HOME RULE??? It's like a good half the book!!!

Sovereignty and Partition - Treaty and Civil War, grand

Dictatorship and Democracy - well dodge, I did the Lenin and Stalin but its crappy enough

I'd say I got around a C

Timans

While I got on alright, and am actually really pleased, I thought it was a horrific paper and I think there will be uproar about it.

1. No Parnell AT ALL!? That's ridiculous. Not only was Parnell not on the paper, but the Home Rule question was Redmond vs Edward Carson!?! That was crazy.

2. No mussolini? What a joke. The propaganda question that came up was Goebells + Riefenstahl, no Speer made it awkward to talk about Nuremberg Rallies. Disgrace.

3. No Sinn Féin 1918 Elections? Joke.

I really think that it was a really harsh paper. I was lucky because I prepared Euch Congress, Cult Nat, and knew Civ Pop pretty well. But yeah, horrible horrible paper I think.

quoteunquote

Thought it was pretty good.

Did the Treaty, GAA and nazi propaganda. Thought Nazi propaganda was a bit iffy but meh. I got through it.

Now I can just forget every single thing I learned. yeaaaaaaaaaah.

boobookitty

No Sinn Fein so I ended up doing carson and redmond.
Coleraine (regurgitated the chapter in the book)
Home Front and Collaboration (had main points but slight waffling)
Vietam - great! basically a timeline with quotes and opinions

I didn't like the doc questions. they were grand but not my favourite.

dip

I was glad Vietnam came up, cos if it had've been the Moonlandings I would've been mucho p*ssed off

What the fudge was going on with the lack of Parnell Questions?? I ended up making a half-assed attempt at the 'problems facing the urban poor question'..

The Modern Irish History section was orgasmic! Had Jack Lynch and Communications prepared and both came up

Though the European Section was a bit weird, didn't expect Stalin to appear, I thought one out of Mussolini, Church-State Relations and Anglo-American were pretty much guaranteed.

Overall a meh-ish paper, could've been worse, but dissapointed Parnell didn't appear.

Livo

totally unexpected. no 1918 election, no parnell... i did the democracy 23-49 one, basically twisting an anglo-irish relations essay, did the land reform and gorbachev... repeated eec 45-73 in div and realignment, wtf?! 73-92 was supposed to come up man!! overall i'd say i did alrightish, but i'm crap at history so it'll prob be my 7th subject...

DowneyBookGirl

Home Front, Cultural Nationalism, The Treaty and Vietnam.
Timing was really all that was against me. But my essays we're good, (albeit the Treaty one was a bit tricky, and I think I focused too much on the negotiations) But apart from that, quite happy. :pac:
Hopefully I kicked Modern History's ass all the way back to the stone age.

titan18

I thought the questions were very weird.The consolidating democracy question was very long and I ended up writing nearly 5 pages on it,and could have done a lot more.But the question on economic and social challenges,49-59,was crappy.Theres hardly anything on it.

Also did the economic growth question in Europe,which was kinda weird as all I could do from my course was the steps to European unity,and twist it.

I was also thinking of doing the propaganda uder Goebbels and Riefenstahl but I havent done the course.I could only do it on my own knowledge and I wasnt too sure if I would be penalised

confey121

I thought it was a nice paper especially the European Dict&Democracy book qts!
My hand is killing me but I am really happy
One thing that did really annoy me - no parnell in any shape or form! how was that possible!

fearceol

i was so delighted with document question! go on the Johnson! could u imagine if Q4 "Why was President Johnson unable to win the war in Vietnam?" was on the leaving cert equivalent course in America!they wouldnt be happy
at all lol!

Ireland Topic 3(sovereignty and partition)-was expecting sinn fein 1918 as was everyone! but the treaty was fair enough,i wrote about how it put a split in the nation which eventually led to the civil war.

Ireland Topic 5(northern Ireland)was a beautiful question,Coleraine,Civil rights,powersharing all of them were there! i did coleraine-delighted!

Europe Topic3-hard enough to understand the Q i thought,"how did Lenin and Stalin contribute to communism?" i think the key word here was TWIST! i wrote all about war communism,5 year plans,collectivisation,show trials and TWISTED them to suit the answer.i think a lot of ppl were confusd with this Q but if u twisted it to suit you'll be grand!

PLUS 20% OFF RESEARCH TOPIC!

tasha1

I Was Shocked That Parnell Didn't Appear..

End Up Bull****ting Through 3 Pages Of Cultural Nationalism..

Did The Treaty. :]

G'wan The Treaty..

And Hated The European Q's..

Did The Propaganda One..

Don'tcha Know How Important Goebbels Was As Regards Nuremburg Rallies. :]

i hate boards

i will never again have a sense of satisfaction as great as i did when i finished history. such a relief to have it over with, and it went alright too. i had no facts (dates or whatever) but meh.

my finest hour was when i lashed out a bitchin' 3 and a half page goebbels essay in 20 minutes- epic :cool:

amaya4

quoteunquote wrote: »

Thought it was pretty good.

Did the Treaty, GAA and nazi propaganda. Thought Nazi propaganda was a bit iffy but meh. I got through it.

Now I can just forget every single thing I learned. yeaaaaaaaaaah.

:eek::eek::eek::eek::eek::eek::eek: There was a question an Nazi propaganda?????????!!!!!!!! Why did i not see that???!!!

La0Fruitcake

pftt!!! well everything i studied didnt come up dont you no!!! was well confident going into the exam......was like a bull coming out....:pac:


12 pages of utter s**t...................:(

gaybitch

I'm very sad at the moment. History was one of my best subjects, and it went badly. Ran out of time and answered a question wrong. Worst things you can do. I feel dire right now. Really dire.

Docs question - Couldn't think of anything to say on their effectiveness. Wasted time here.

LBJ - I talked about the gradual involvement, him getting thrust into power, the anti-war movement and the guerilla tactics. Prob my best. 2 pages.

Cultural nationalism - I waffled. It wasn't great. 5 pages.

Goebbels/Riefenstahl - Too short. Had to cut end short, no concusion. 4 pages.

Treaty - I talked about the War of Indepence as leading to the Treaty Negotiations. My essay ended as Dev leaves the Dail. That is ****ing bad. I answered it wrong. Very little on the split. Rushed at the end. 4 and a half pages.





Does anyone know how much I'd be penalised on my Treaty Q?

PrivateEye

1) The Treaty/Civil War: This was my dream come true. I'm a history head like, I could tell you where Tom Barry bought his cereal....1913-22 is my big thing, this made me happy.

2) Leni/Joseph Gobbells: Quite strong. Focused more on Goebbels, everyone else?

3) WB Yeats/Conradh na G: Decent question, not a bad answer either I'd hope!

did the Document last.
Got the 40 point question down (HOW MUCH would be required here?)

Then hammered two of the 20 pointers.

and more or less scribbled the last one.

Taking it I lost a few marks across all the essays, I'd still be very confident.

Not had the worlds most amazing leaving cert, this was Gods gift I think.

*and I can see how it would suck for people. history is pot-luck in terms of what will come up. HUGE course.

King Ludvig

Wasnt too bad. I was very worried going in. It was the only exam I got stressed about.

I was delighted to see Vietnam come up like everyone had predicted. Did fine, 2 pages on Q4

Then I did the land reform question. 3 pages. Did well, but couldnt remember some of the conservitives land acts other than Ashbourne and Wyndam and Birrel.

Next I did the Treaty question. 3 pages again. Wrote and entire page on the negoiations which is proberly too much. Otherwise fine

Finally in European, I did the Home Front essay, it was beautiful full marks so glad it came up.

Overall Id say I got a B1 although I was aiming for A, but I still happy....:D

fearceol

ya already i can see that this paper is getting bad reviews! as i said if u did a good research study and decent document question thats 40% in the bag!

Wouldnt it be great if there were short questions for history just like Geography!? 10 short questions at 100 marks for them all!.....nice

melboix

I thought it was rather sexual. Absolutely thrilled about Treaty/Civil War and Goebbles/Riefenstahl...they were both a bit more than amazing as questions. My Modern Ireland one was on Jack Lynch, a little dodgy but not too bad. Document was grand altogether! I think my contexturalisation was a bit off, but I can deal with that. Seriously, just over the moon about the Treaty & Propaganda q's.

Biology and I'm done!

Fol20

Although none of my first choices came up,i was pretty pleased as there was an essay in all sections that i learned..for dictatorship i did the impact on the civ pop. for move for political+social reform i did land reform.for impact of partition i did euch congress..i thought the paper wasnt bad

Stevieo

To be honest, I was shocked with the predictability of this paper...

America - The first year, so they're bound to play it safe and opt for Vietnam. At any rate, the question was such twaddle that anyone who remembers anything about Vietnam could waffle it with ease!

Sovereignty - While 1918 didn't crop up, anyone worth their salt at history would have guessed the Anglo-Irish Treaty and/or the Eucharistic Congress would come up...we were gifted with BOTH of them.

Northern Ireland - Dunno how many of you doing this, but the only case study not up so far was Coleraine, and badda bing, here we have it. I opted for the Civil Rights Movement, which again was totally foreseeable...

Dictatorship - Admittedly the hardest part of today, but there was questions on Russia and Germany the last two years...and yet again there we're gifted with them. Chose Goebells/Riefenstahl myself, which was kind of difficult at the worst, just a code for propaganda really!

I think it's been easily the nicest of the three history papers so far!

LayLay

Im very disappointed with the paper. History was one of my favourite subjects and Im not happy at all. Nothing I really revised came up...

Bonzo-Reborn

i was absolutely ecstatic!! what a great paper!!

Vietnam i squeezed 4 pages out of

The treaty i got 3 and a half

Cultural nationalism i got about 3

and Nuremberg rallies i got 4

im so delighted i know i did quite well, i got an a2 in the pre's hopefully i got that again

Doorzie

Irish 1870-1914- i did the lock out larkin n all that!did well

Irish 1914-49- I did treaty i wrote about the negociations..negociating the treaty in the dail and the consequences...am I ok 4 dat??

Euro-Dictators I did propaganda...I did rallys, black propaganda and reifenstahl hitler youth movements!!Am i ok 4 it!??

Kathy_x_x

Vietnam.. just wrote a load of rubbish but everyone says they put the same stuff in

Movements for reform : only did parnell so I had to do a whole cultral nationalism essay from memory from like September

Soverignty : no FF.. had to make up an essay on the treaty thing

Deomocracy : All I can say is thank god for Goebbels


I cried for the first 40 minutes of the exam... I hated it

Fuascailt

I thought it was sick. None of our teachers predictions came up. In Ireland Topic 2 I did the land reform qu, wrote that land agitation caused Gladstones land acts to a certain extent, but didnt cause the Conservatives acts. Did anyone else do that qu? I was lucky, i had learnt the treaty this morning, and i managed the propoganda one. THe Doc was alright. I wrote well over five pages for each essay, so i'm hoping that it will be ok.

I was hoping for an A1 and would settle now for a B. There is people in my class who were going for A1s and are now hoping that they passed. My teacher was practically in tears when she saw the paper.
This course is ridiculously large. I'm going off now to write an angry e-mail to Batt O' Keefe

Dr. Baltar

It was an ok paper for me.
Definately not the best that could have come up.

For Pursuit of Soverignty I would definately have preferred a Rising or Sinn Féin election Question but I went with the treaty instead.
It was a C-worthy Answer

For Government, Economy & Society I did the "what were the main problems from '49 - '73"
Once again it was only an ok answer

For Division and Realignment in Europe I began the Gorbachev essay and realised I was going nowhere with it.
So half way through I changed to help and hinderance of the European Economy
I was very happy with this essay.

As for Lyndon B. Johnson. I love him! What a guy! I so Aced that part of the Question.

Altogether I'm content with the paper. If I get a B I'll be delighted, but somehow I think I've gotten a high C.

thebigcheese22

anyone know how much id get if i had a last essay with the hungarian uprising round 3 pages but no conclusion?would i lose my a like?!coz i absolutely nailed irish history :P just really wanted an a and i was freakin last night!

A-Bit-Dodge

****ing ridiculous, all the questions were too broad, I studied cumann na ngael AND fianna fail but it was such a massive question o them about democracy I just abandoned it and bluffed the treaty. 1923 to 1949 is way too big I think, same for Lenin and Stlain, I would have been there all day, NEP, War Communism, Five Year Plans AND Collectivisation? Yer having a laugh...

A girl in my class was so pissed off with no Parnell she did the Cult. Nationalism question and put in little digs everywhere to annoy her corrector she spelt Annie Hornimann like Anny Horney-Man and so on and so forth, very childish but she reckoned she was ****ed anyway... didnt like that paer at all... way too broad

Rosstafarian

Bonzo-Reborn wrote: »

i was absolutely ecstatic!! what a great paper!!

Vietnam i squeezed 4 pages out of

The treaty i got 3 and a half

Cultural nationalism i got about 3

and Nuremberg rallies i got 4

im so delighted i know i did quite well, i got an a2 in the pre's hopefully i got that again

Was that essay about The Nuremburg Rallies??

Personally, my ideal essays didn't come up, nor did my 2nd choices for that matter. I think I did OK with what came up but I was capable of a higher grade in History if the paper suited me better. Maybe I studied the wrong stuff, I don't know, but at the end of the day unless you have every essay in all your topics covered then it's a lottery, as it is for the majority of students I presume. So anybody who did well I am happy for you, but I wouldn't go patting yourself on the back too much.... You got lucky.... Some of us didn't! I don't think you could describe a history paper as good or bad.... It just suits certain people and not others..... except for those rare people who cover everything..... Those people will get an A1 no matter what the paper is like....

Sorry for going on....

armbruster

terrible harsh paper. Questions that came up in the past repeated. A load of bull**** that what it is. However, at least one thing I studied in each section came up. Phew


Question - why could LBJ not win the war in Vietnam?

opposition
dead US
the fact that they would continue on with guerilla warfare forever

Don't know about an A1, maybe chance of an A2.

Ekels

A cracking paper! The case studies were nice and broad.
I did 4 and 3/4 on document (that was lovely contextualisation Q)
4 on Eucharistic Congress
3 and 1/2 on Lock-Out
3 and 1/2 on Bismarck

Overall, I'm happy. I was also surprised at the lack of Parnell, but when they had put in the Lock Out and Gaa, they couldn't put in a third case study.

I'm not very sure regarding what get's the A. I mean, would 3+ pages of very relevant points and very good level of expression do the trick?

Ekels

armbruster wrote: »

terrible harsh paper. Questions that came up in the past repeated. A load of bull**** that what it is. However, at least one thing I studied in each section came up. Phew


Question - why could LBJ not win the war in Vietnam?

opposition
dead US
the fact that they would continue on with guerilla warfare forever

Don't know about an A1, maybe chance of an A2.

I threw in a mention to the financial situation. i.e refusing to give General Westmoreland 200,000 more troops to combat Tet Offensive because of the high level of costs as it was.
But it was a very reasonable question I thought.

How much did you write, if you reckon you may have got an A2? Our pre's were ridiculously corrected so I have no idea.

I've also read that 1 in 8 gets an A. That's interesting because in the 2 years the course was on, among the 30+ students per year, there have been no A's.

melboix

No A's? Where, dude? History dishes out more A's than Geography. Or at least, there's a higher percentage of 'em.

Rosstafarian

melboix wrote: »

No A's? Where, dude? History dishes out more A's than Geography. Or at least, there's a higher percentage of 'em.

Seriously? That's an interesting statistic..... Gives me hope that does

Eegah

Absolutely terrifying paper. None of my 1st choices came up...and I was so sure...no Bus Boycott, no Parnell, no Sinn Fein, no Church-State relations...

- I did however manage to salvage a good 5 pages on Cultural Nationalism
- The document question was easy enough, although I detested that cartoon! What was with the questions BEFORE the documents? 4 pages altogether.
- The Goebbels/Riefenstahl question was unexpected but not impossible - a good 3 and a half pages
- The Treaty/Civil War question was sheer hell. Barely scraped together 2 pages of shapeless fact crap. Very vague...ugh. That whole section was bull****

So yeah, one of the toughest exams so far. But not as bad as geogrpahy for me...I'm hoping for a B/strong C.

Horrible questions for the most part, and what was with all the printing anomalies?

I'm soooo glad it's over. Art History and German left now...cake.

melboix

Rosstafarian wrote: »

Seriously? That's an interesting statistic..... Gives me hope that does

I rather liked it M'teacher also said that he'd heard no rechecks have been lowered over the last two years. Dunno how true that is, but it's another nice thought.

The thing with History is that so few do it cos it's such a challenging exam, only like...5300 sat it or something? Which isn't that much, so I think they try to encourage people to do it by having this lovely marking way of theirs

Ekels

melboix wrote: »

No A's? Where, dude? History dishes out more A's than Geography. Or at least, there's a higher percentage of 'em.

Yeah, none last year definitely. I'm not sure about the year before. But that may have been down to the teaching. In Killarney.

melboix

That's a bit unfortunate Hope it changes for yiz this year!

xxniamhxx

La0Fruitcake wrote: »

pftt!!! well everything i studied didnt come up dont you no!!! was well confident going into the exam......was like a bull coming out....:pac:


12 pages of utter s**t...................:(

i know how u feel... hated the paper... we left out a good bit of the european history and we had a choice of 1 out of 4 for it...

Caoimhe89

Ugh... well I guess it was okay (as in, I could actually do 3 essays) but they weren't my first choices by a long shot

1. Carson vs Redmond - not great, not awful. A lot of waffle I fear. I didn't have many points... ugh... not so sure now! 5 1/2 pages
2. Treaty - Somehow inspiration hit as I wrote. Not so bad. Could've done with something smarter than 'and then there was a civil war' as an ending.
3. Propaganda - Hadn't studied it. Just tried to think of anything I could that was something to do with Propaganda. Every paragraph started with "Goebbels also was involved with..." Even if he wasn't. like the nurmberg rallies...

Could've been better, could've been worse. I REALLY want an A1. I guess an A2 wouldn't kill me...

anie_bawny

woo,delighted with that paper,couldn't believe i knew at least one from each section.I was begining to panic that i wouldnt
I did 4 pages on vietnam.really good question,was nice and open
Done the treaty question 3 pages.felt it was a bit dodgy but i wrote the same essay for the mocks and got 85.iv a feeling that was a bit generous though.
Economic and social challenges 49-59- my best question i think.4 pages on that one.
goebelles-alright.a bit dodgy.i went completly off the point at the beginning!:o
much better than what i had hoped for.have no idea what grade i would have gotten,could have been a D,could have been a B

bUILDERtHEbOB

I wrote a class essay on cultural revival, I think it was 3 pages but it couldve been 4, I forget, anyway, I wrote 2 decent pages on the Eucharistic Congress and 2 pages of 1/2 bull**** 1/2 true stuff on Propaganda. I also bull****ted my way through the documents essay. I'm hoping for a minimum C1.

Crania

An absolutely horrible exam to end a horrible course!

The test was grand for me, because there was an essay in each section that suited me. But my god, I'd say there was some lot of people in my class and in the country as a whole who were fecked! Like I nearly would've bet my house on Parnell coming on, and there were several people in my class who did just Parnell. The question on Politics was simply gruesome in that section, Redmond and Carson?! CARSON?! God, that would've been awful. I'd pay money to see someone's answer on that question!

No Mussolini, Church-State Relations or AA Pop Culture was a real shocker! And they asked the social and economic problems in Britain for the third year in a row, craaaaaazy! What the hell was the deal with the Russia question?! Stalin AND Lenin, feck sake that would take you all day! That was too broad, but then the Propaganda question was very limited(like most things in this History, either too broad or too limited, rarely just right!), grrrrr they just can't seem to get anything right in this history course! Thankfully I knew a load about Civ Pop in Britain, as my teacher has been heavily pushing it all year.

No Sinn Fein 1918 or Economic Policies of CnaG and FF really annoyed me as I was sure they'd be there. Well I was defo sure of Econ Policies, yet again no economic question for the third year! Thankfully I knew the Euch Congress. In fairness they questions weren't too bad for this section, as the Treaty was so heavily tipped by practically everyone.

The Documents seemed to be harder than usual, I generally breeze through the Docs, but found it a good bit trickier today. The contextualisation was alright, they could've asked easier things there but there was plenty of scope in that question. However I didn't get the paper done and was only half way through the Contextualisation when time was up, hopefully I won't lose too many marks there though. It's very dissapointing because I know Vietnam like the back of my hand and it's just terrible the way you don't get a chance to show off what you know in this course.

Went in hoping for an A1, as I had been getting all year, but I doubt I got it, due to my very bad answering of most of the Document questions, hopefully I'll get an A though.

This exam was just another thing to add onto a very long list of examples showing how the people behind this History course just seem to have a clue! The whole course is terrible, way too much info, too much stupid things, everything is too modern(I prefer modern, but like in fairness it's not giving us a proper historical education. The Junior Cert was much better in that at least we got to learn about lots of different areas of history). History is by far my favourite subject. Like I love history, I read historical books for leisure at home, but never has a school subject(except for maybe Irish) turned me off something as much as this did over the last two years. I was never as happy finishing any subject as much as I was today. Thank God that horrible course is over now and I can actually go back to loving history again. It's just not good when a school subject actually turns you off something. It should be the other way around, I'm afraid History in its current format is going to get a bad reputation and nobody will do it, especially considering there has now been three hard exams in the first three years of the new course. I could talk all day about how terrible most things are with this exam-not enough time, only getting asked on one thing from a whole book means someone who does nothing all year could be very lucky. I think short questions with a few-mini essays would be much better, test the whole book rathewr than just one bloody chapter. I could go on and on and on about the various problems with this! It's over now though.....! Ahhhhh I love history again!

God, this turned into a long rant, I hope people don't think I complain about everything. It just this History course has annoyed me so much over the last two years!

The Volt

15 pages later i'm a happy bunny.

Did the home front cramming this morning and it paid off

ateam

I thought it was a fair exam. An exam like that is never going to suit everyone and that's why if you've studied several topics per question, you wouldn't be complaining now.

The case studies were all asked - the GAA, 1921 Treaty, Eucharistic Congress, Propaganda, even Show Trials could have been brought into the Russia question. Only surprise really was inter-war economic problems question in Britain and Germany. The Jarrow March for the third year running. And then another question in relation to Britain with the "home front" question. And Mussolini wasn't asked, I'd say that surprised a few.

Parnell could have been brought into the land question looking at the Land War 1880-1882, ending with the Kilmainham Treaty.

Just a little perplexed about the question on Irish governments consolidating democracy 1922-1945. Could Anglo-Irish relations be brought into this? What did people write?

33% God

I thought it was fine except for the dictatorship and democracy question.

We never did Britian in school so i just made it up

Livo

ateam wrote: »

Just a little perplexed about the question on Irish governments consolidating democracy 1922-1945. Could Anglo-Irish relations be brought into this? What did people write?

yup, i twisted an anglo-irish relations essay... did cnag's ambassors and league of nations and imperial conferences (balfour declaration, statute of westminster) and then the dismantling of the treaty, the economic war and neutrality...i hope it fit in okay!!

they went pure hell for leather for the old case studies...hungarian uprising came up, WTF?!

BMH

Exams aren't supposed to be predictable, students are supposed to engage with the given question on the day, not cough a load of facts up onto the page.
If anything, today's exam discouraged rote-learning since you had to analyse the actions of the key personalities and give your own view. I agree that the choices for Movements for Reform were pretty limited in scope, and the Vietnam question was stupidly broad, but overall it wasn't a bad paper.

Bonzo-Reborn

Rosstafarian wrote: »

Was that essay about The Nuremburg Rallies?? quote]

goebells yeah!! he was minister for propoganda and public enlightenment!:)