History (HL) - The Aftermath

Richyj_0

So how did you all do? I know it hasn't happened yet but I just decided to get the thread up early so past after your exam...Good luck!

Fuascailt

I was doing this exam this time last year....still traumatised!!

Idjit

I finished it early. It was OK. I was really hoping that the bombing of belfast would come up coz I had that prepared but i had cultural identity prepared and that came up.i struggled thru a question about the industrialisation of belfast but 'how dictators use propaganda and fear came up so once again i was pleased. also bus boycott was up this year so im all smiles for document q! now i just have to prepare for chemistry and music and im done bring on the 12th of august! WOO!

ateam

Jade182 wrote: »

I finished it early. It was OK. I was really hoping that the bombing of belfast would come up coz I had that prepared but i had cultural identity prepared and that came up.i struggled thru a question about the industrialisation of belfast but 'how dictators use propaganda and fear came up so once again i was pleased. also bus boycott was up this year so im all smiles for document q! now i just have to prepare for chemistry and music and im done bring on the 12th of august! WOO!

What else was asked do you know? Parnell? C na G/FF economic polices? SHow Trials?

Idjit

There was a q about how parnell and butt differed as leaders but it made me feel blind panic just looking at it. I dont know about those other things,I usually just circle things that are immediately familiar(and comforting)and start them without trying to figure out what the other questions are talking about,it stops me from panicking!
The exams just over officially now so there should be more people soon able to tell you.

Fuascailt

Jade182 wrote: »

There was a q about how parnell and butt differed as leaders but it made me feel blind panic just looking at it. I dont know about those other things,I usually just circle things that are immediately familiar(and comforting)and start them without trying to figure out what the other questions are talking about,it stops me from panicking!
The exams just over officially now so there should be more people soon able to tell you.

Ah, I could write that ol' Parnell/Butt essay in my sleep last year. Anyone fancy throwing up the paper?

U MAD

OL History was handy!

J/S

Waaahhh

Neither CnaG economic policies or Rise Of Sf was asked, they were my two bankers. I struggled through a question on 'Why were the anglo irish treat negotiations of 1921 controversial'. Bit of a c*nt of a question if ya ask me. There was a fair question on comparing Dev's economic policies and his handling of Anglo Irish relations, but didn't study it so was stuck with the other one!! Rest was fair enough.
Only easy ones left now:D

Dr Gradus

Handy enough paper!

Ran out of time a bit at the end though but overall im quite pleaed.

Nazi propaganda, lock out and eucahristic C all the way!

Fuascailt

Fuascailt wrote: »

Ah, I could write that ol' Parnell/Butt essay in my sleep last year. Anyone fancy throwing up the paper?

It's on examinations.ie already. They're very very quick.

ateam

Waaahhh wrote: »

Neither CnaG economic policies or Rise Of Sf was asked, they were my two bankers. I struggled through a question on 'Why were the anglo irish treat negotiations of 1921 controversial'. Bit of a c*nt of a question if ya ask me. There was a fair question on comparing Dev's economic policies and his handling of Anglo Irish relations, but didn't study it so was stuck with the other one!! Rest was fair enough.
Only easy ones left now:D

The Anglo-Irish Treaty question is hard alright - details of the people involved, their experience or lack of, the main issues - partition and the oath, the signing off (not telling Dev) and then the Treaty itself.

Easy Dev question there, Anglo-Irish relations and economic polices - a gift.

What else came up in Europe?

Gi joe!

No Anti-Semitism or Church State Relations!:eek: That was tbh a shock, but the questions were lovely and general, did France

The Sovereignty questions were also broad, especially for the de Valera one.

A Lemass question was lovely too, but had to incorporate social and education changes to supplement the economic changes

Overall happy enough with the exam:)

AR-15

That test went pretty good. Had the Butt/Parnell question already prepared so that went fine. I thought the propaganda/terror question was straightforward and easy to write about. The Northern Ireland question was alright. It helped that it included the war years. I struggled a lot on part d of the documents question though.

Motorbreath

I'd like to consider myself a fairly decent History student...

...but what in the name of christ was that?! :mad:

moneyman

Documents question was fine, as predicted.

Essay questions were quite hard actually. Not much of the predicted stuff came up.


Essays I did:
Strike and Lockout - Prepared (4 pages)
Dictators and their use of Propaganda - Unprepared (but I did prepare rise of Fascism and most of it actually fitted into propaganda quite nicely, so I turned it round a bit and I think I good a good essay out of it. I told my history teacher what I did and he said it sounded fine) - 3 pages.
Cultural Identity - Unprepared. Got about 1pg and 3/4 done before I ran out of time. Got a couple decent paragraphs done from memory, but will lose marks here.

Overall it was a pretty tough paper. One of my friends, who is extremely intelligent, managed to have none of the essays that came up prepared. He still wrote a combined 11 pages for 3 essays, so I'd say he did fine, but he wasn't happy.

Weekend Warrior

What a disaster! Think I failed. Document question - had hoped for the Moon Landing, struggled through the Bus Boycott. I did Butt/Parnell which went fine, and then it all fell apart. Wrote four pages about Hitler and Stalin for the propaganda/terror one, stressed out about time and left it mid-sentence with no conclusion or anything. Worst of all, nothing I knew came up for Ireland Topic 3, so I ended up writing three dodgy paragraphs on Anglo-Irish treaty negotiations and then a few vague bulletin points hoping for some marks.
I really, really wanted to do well in history; I don't know where it all went so wrong!

sock puppet

ateam wrote: »

The Anglo-Irish Treaty question is hard alright - details of the people involved, their experience or lack of, the main issues - partition and the oath, the signing off (not telling Dev) and then the Treaty itself.

Easy Dev question there, Anglo-Irish relations and economic polices - a gift.

What else came up in Europe?

How did dictators use terror and/or propaganda to maintain power.

Conditions in Britain in the inter-war years

Conditions in France in the inter-war years

The there was a question where you could talk about different things. One was resistance to Fascist rule and another was technology of warfare. Not sure what else.

I did the terror one. I didn't write about propaganda just terror in Stalin's regime. Was an easy question. Very handy paper overall.

Waaahhh

Motorbreath wrote: »

I'd like to consider myself a fairly decent History student...

...but what in the name of christ was that?! :mad:

Yeha lot of the predictions made here and elsewhere were way off...

ThatWouldBeNice

Motorbreath wrote: »

I'd like to consider myself a fairly decent History student...

...but what in the name of christ was that?! :mad:

I know, right?

No church-state relations...
No Holocaust (if only, right? )...
No rise of Sinn Fein...
No "conditions that lead to rise of Fascism"...
No effect of WWII in Ireland...

It worked out okay in the end, I did Unionism, Dev and Terror 'n' Propaganda. Hopefully a B. But good God :eek:

Waaahhh

Weekend Warrior wrote: »

What a disaster! Think I failed. Document question - had hoped for the Moon Landing, struggled through the Bus Boycott. I did Butt/Parnell which went fine, and then it all fell apart. Wrote four pages about Hitler and Stalin for the propaganda/terror one, stressed out about time and left it mid-sentence with no conclusion or anything. Worst of all, nothing I knew came up for Ireland Topic 3, so I ended up writing three dodgy paragraphs on Anglo-Irish treaty negotiations and then a few vague bulletin points hoping for some marks.
I really, really wanted to do well in history; I don't know where it all went so wrong!

If you wrote four pages you're surely fine!!

Fuascailt

Just had a look there, Dictatorship and democracy was a bit of a bitch, me thinks. Irish sections seemed pretty fair, v. broad questions...

bricky10

Delaps predictions were not that correct ah sure I think I did ok anyway.

ironictoaster

I think we can officially say that trying to predict history in the leaving is absolute waste of time.

However, as a student who struggled with higher level history I thought it was good paper. Thank the Lord.

predominanantly

I did the propaganda/ terror one for D&D.. but I only focused it on Hitler and propaganda. If it was a propaganda question on Nazi Germany I would have done really well... it said and/or. Will I lose that much marks for covering so little??

Twilightning

I can't for the life of me finish that paper in the time given. I could only do Montgomery, propaganda in Europe and changes to education/Irish culture. Didn't touch a third essay.

sock puppet

predominanantly wrote: »

I did the propaganda/ terror one for D&D.. but I only focused it on Hitler and propaganda. If it was a propaganda question on Nazi Germany I would have done really well... it said and/or. Will I lose that much marks for covering so little??

No I don't think so. I only wrote about Stalin and terror. If they wanted you to do more than one it would have just said and. As long as you got a good essay done you'll be fine.

damienricefan

Lovely Paper.

Documents both nice and easy to navigate

Did Treaty Negotiations, one of my babies!

Did Sunningdale Agreement Importance, a bit patchy and dodgy in places but i'd say i still did okay

Did Hitler completely for Dic & Dem, Think that was my best essay, i just love preaching those aryan ideals ! haha

say I got my B!!!

english4490

thought it was pretty ok, vut i did the essay on de valera's economics/angli irish policies and that went to ****e! also i had to end my last essay on cold war crises fairly abruptly! but there were 2 of us in the exam hall writing a few minutes over the finish time!

Waaahhh

damienricefan wrote: »

Lovely Paper.

Documents both nice and easy to navigate

Did Treaty Negotiations, one of my babies!

Did Sunningdale Agreement Importance, a bit patchy and dodgy in places but i'd say i still did okay

Did Hitler completely for Dic & Dem, Think that was my best essay, i just love preaching those aryan ideals ! haha

say I got my B!!!

Can I ask what you wrote for the treaty Q? Like I know the terms were controversial but what actually was controversial about the negotiations? That's what had me stumped!!

moneyman

predominanantly wrote: »

I did the propaganda/ terror one for D&D.. but I only focused it on Hitler and propaganda. If it was a propaganda question on Nazi Germany I would have done really well... it said and/or. Will I lose that much marks for covering so little??

I'm pretty much the same, but I did mention Mussolini and Italy a little bit. Just focused on Hitler more; I suppose it's natural. Just curious, what points did you make about propaganda? I hadn't the question prepared, but think I did OK. Just want to see what other people did. Just a few quick headings is all I'm asking, don't want you to go into detail!

Fuascailt

sock puppet wrote: »

No I don't think so. I only wrote about Stalin and terror. If they wanted you to do more than one it would have just said and. As long as you got a good essay done you'll be fine.

You could def choose between propaganda and terror. Unclear as to whether you needed more than one dictator, i'd imagine you'd be grand.

manutd4life

i did alright.not the best but not the worst either.i got 2 pages for every essay (will that matter?)

i answered:
1.how the treaty negotiations were controversial.talked about the negotiaitions and went on totalk about how they led to a civil war
2.how dictators use propaganda and terror.talked about mussolini,hitler and stalin although about 7 of the 8 paragraphs were about hitler
3.the apprentice boys one.wrote evrything i could remember about them and then included the coleraine university

VivaLaVida

For the people who did Dev's anglo irish and economic policies, which did you say the more effective or whatever? Hadn't studied it properly at all but had to do it.

Thought it would have gone better really.

phic

Oh dear...well, that wasn't fun!
Did the essay about propaganda and terror, did Stalin, Mussolini, Hitler cos well, why not?
then I did that beauty of an essay about tk.whitaker/lemass! glorious.
Then it all went so so wrong! Nothing I'd prepared for Irish topic 3 came up, so I wrote 4 pages of RUBBISH on treaty negotiations, which i'd only read over once, right before the exam, so was VERY bad.
Document q. was grand.
Anyone else think that question about the word Negro was a bit odd? what did everyone else write for it?

OxfordComma

Tough but fair paper overall. The DBQ was grand but the essays were a bit tricky! I got such a shock when I saw it first, but it went pretty well once i settled down. Hopefully I got my A

For Propaganda/Terror, I dealt with Mussolini, Hitler and Stalin separately. Lovely question

Waaahhh

phic wrote: »

Oh dear...well, that wasn't fun!
Did the essay about propaganda and terror, did Stalin, Mussolini, Hitler cos well, why not?
then I did that beauty of an essay about tk.whitaker/lemass! glorious.
Then it all went so so wrong! Nothing I'd prepared for Irish topic 3 came up, so I wrote 4 pages of RUBBISH on treaty negotiations, which i'd only read over once, right before the exam, so was VERY bad.
Document q. was grand.
Anyone else think that question about the word Negro was a bit odd? what did everyone else write for it?

Yeh I wrote MLK Jr. is saying it so it mustn't be offensive! :pac::pac::eek:
I know that logic sucks ass...

Weekend Warrior

phic wrote: »

Oh dear...well, that wasn't fun!
Did the essay about propaganda and terror, did Stalin, Mussolini, Hitler cos well, why not?
then I did that beauty of an essay about tk.whitaker/lemass! glorious.
Then it all went so so wrong! Nothing I'd prepared for Irish topic 3 came up, so I wrote 4 pages of RUBBISH on treaty negotiations, which i'd only read over once, right before the exam, so was VERY bad.
Document q. was grand.
Anyone else think that question about the word Negro was a bit odd? what did everyone else write for it?

Yeah, I thought it was strange too! I just it was obviously the acceptable word at the time, blah blah, for Document A, Martin Luther King was black and he used it so it was clear that as a black man he himself didn't find it offensive, and for Document B that the author appears objective yet sympathetic to the black people so he obviously didn't pin any negative connotations on the word.

Claypigeon

VivaLaVida wrote: »

For the people who did Dev's anglo irish and economic policies, which did you say the more effective or whatever? Hadn't studied it properly at all but had to do it.

Thought it would have gone better really.

I said his Anglo-Irish policies and management of them went better in the end overall as without the proper handling of the Anglo-Irish Agreement, Ireland would not have regained her treaty ports and thus would have been involved in World War Two and would not have been able to set itself apart as an independent state by remaining neutral.

Ontopic I did

Propaganda/Terror in relation to Stalin, Hitler and Mussolini
Devs Anglo Irish vs Economic
Coleraine/App Boys
Full document

Want a c3 I think I got it

moneyman

Weekend Warrior wrote: »

Yeah, I thought it was strange too! I just it was obviously the acceptable word at the time, blah blah, for Document A, Martin Luther King was black and he used it so it was clear that as a black man he himself didn't find it offensive, and for Document B that the author appears objective yet sympathetic to the black people so he obviously didn't pin any negative connotations on the word.

I wrote pretty much the exact same thing!

predominanantly

moneyman wrote: »

I'm pretty much the same, but I did mention Mussolini and Italy a little bit. Just focused on Hitler more; I suppose it's natural. Just curious, what points did you make about propaganda? I hadn't the question prepared, but think I did OK. Just want to see what other people did. Just a few quick headings is all I'm asking, don't want you to go into detail!

Hmm. Goebbels - minister, radios, burning books etc
Children- changing the school books history, great lie, Hiter Youth, LGM etc
Leni Refenstahl -films, anti-semitism, olympic games then leading to
Albert Speer and Nuremberg etc etc

Then it was like five minutes until the end so the last two paragraphs don't really make any sense. I think I wrote about christology and the feel-good factor of the nazis. And I think I wrote the sentence 'Hitler loved Wagner.' without explaining it at all.. which is kind of embarassing.



What did you do?

Davidius

It could have been worse. I was personally hoping for the Moon Landing for the case study but things never go my way.

I didn't really know much about anything in the Irish 1870-1914 options. I attempted the Parnell/Butt question but I ran out of time in the end with 2 pages done.

I got a decent bit out of the propaganda and terror question. I mostly applied it to Nazi Germany but I through in Stalin and Mussolini when I could.

I thought the de Valera question was also pretty nice. It wasn't spectacular but I could do it.

Probably ended up with a C but I can always hope.

Waaahhh

predominanantly wrote: »

Hmm. Goebbels - minister, radios, burning books etc
Children- changing the school books history, great lie, Hiter Youth, LGM etc
Leni Refenstahl -films, anti-semitism, olympic games then leading to
Albert Speer and Nuremberg etc etc

Then it was like five minutes until the end so the last two paragraphs don't really make any sense. I think I wrote about christology and the feel-good factor of the nazis. And I think I wrote the sentence 'Hitler loved Wagner.' without explaining it at all.. which is kind of embarassing.



What did you do?

Oh yeah, nothing like 'Der Meistersinger von Nurnberg'!!
What's Christology??

Gi joe!

VivaLaVida wrote: »

For the people who did Dev's anglo irish and economic policies, which did you say the more effective or whatever? Hadn't studied it properly at all but had to do it.

Thought it would have gone better really.

I said his anglo-irish relation policy was far superior, as Dev's main focus was to achieve sovereignty and independence from Britian, which he did and how his economic policies took the backseat and were often used as an instrument of independence-eco war.

sock puppet

Fuascailt wrote: »

You could def choose between propaganda and terror. Unclear as to whether you needed more than one dictator, i'd imagine you'd be grand.

Yeah it was. Though I thought the terror part was aimed very clearly at Stalin. There's much more substance in the Stalin section on terror and writing on Hitler would have been pointless for me as I wouldn't have been able to give them equal treatment. Hope I was right anyway.

manutd4life

will i be dropped marks for only writing 2 pages for each essays?

i have quite small handwriting and i'm pretty sure i answered what the question was asking:
anglo irish treaty:negotiations,terms,dail division,how it lead to civil war
propaganda and terror:nuremberg rallies,show trials,persecution of jews,concentration camp

i just hope they would have answered the questions.

predominanantly

VivaLaVida wrote: »

For the people who did Dev's anglo irish and economic policies, which did you say the more effective or whatever? Hadn't studied it properly at all but had to do it.

Thought it would have gone better really.

I basically said anglo-irish was good cause he dismantled the treaty (which doesn't really make any sense) but bad because the british didn't like neutrality and ecomoic was just all bad economic war.

I hadn't a clue. I wanted rise of sinn fein soooo bad.

xprincessashx

AAAHHH disgusting! Horrible. Stupid tute teachers predictions were all WRONG.
Only thing that went vaguely well was the ol' DeV question.
My points are lowering every day...

At least my worst exam is over.

Nihilist21

That test went really quite well, the only thing annoying was the hand pain I suffered from all the writing.

1) The documents question was handy, easy questions.

2) Next I did the European question on terror/propaganda, that was also handy, got down my 12 paragraphs.

3) Then I did the NI question on the social and economic effects of the troubles, could only think of 3/4 economic paragraphs but overall I got 12/13 paragraphs done for that question too, so that should be okay.

4) Then I did the Sovereignty and Partition question on Cultural Identity, I liked that question but was running low on time so only got 11 paragraphs done on that (a couple were pretty odd, did a weird paragraph on dancing...).


Overall I hope I got an A from that, not sure if I will or not, my handwriting was pretty dire from about page 10 onwards.

phic

Waaahhh wrote: »

Yeh I wrote MLK Jr. is saying it so it mustn't be offensive! :pac::pac::eek:
I know that logic sucks ass...

Weekend Warrior wrote: »

Yeah, I thought it was strange too! I just it was obviously the acceptable word at the time, blah blah, for Document A, Martin Luther King was black and he used it so it was clear that as a black man he himself didn't find it offensive, and for Document B that the author appears objective yet sympathetic to the black people so he obviously didn't pin any negative connotations on the word.

Yeah thats pretty much what I said too,its the most logical answer I could think of! if MLK's cool with it, its grand!!
I also said it was unnacceptable now because as the civil rights movement progressed, they wanted to distance themselves from what the white oppressors had called them?
I don't really see how anyones supposed to know the answer to that, its one of them just cos questions!!

predominanantly

Waaahhh wrote: »

Oh yeah, nothing like 'Der Meistersinger von Nurnberg'!!
What's Christology??

I dunno know if that's the word for it. Like, christian images.. like how he decended down the steps at nuremberg with light behind his head.

I may have actually made this up.. cause I just checked my notes and I can't see it. Damn. I must have read it somewhere..

moneyman

predominanantly wrote: »

Hmm. Goebbels - minister, radios, burning books etc
Children- changing the school books history, great lie, Hiter Youth, LGM etc
Leni Refenstahl -films, anti-semitism, olympic games then leading to
Albert Speer and Nuremberg etc etc

Then it was like five minutes until the end so the last two paragraphs don't really make any sense. I think I wrote about christology and the feel-good factor of the nazis. And I think I wrote the sentence 'Hitler loved Wagner.' without explaining it at all.. which is kind of embarassing.



What did you do?

Your essay sounds much more on topic than mine; since I hadn't studied it, I had to turn my "Rise of Fascism" essay into propaganda.

I did:

Totalitarianism - People taught slogans such as "You are nothing. Your state is everything". Were taught how to be ideal fascist (couargeous, obedient etc.)
Nationalism - Were essentially brainwashed into thinking they were elite, this created ultra-nationalism, etc. etc.
Superleader - Hitler and Muss shown as heroic, great men. Hitler made people think they were "herrenvolk". Taught that racial impurites (eg Jews) had to be gotten rid of.
Youth - holiday camps, indoctrination etc.
Media - put to great use. Importance of speech recognised (Hitler had hypnotic effect at Nuremberg etc.)

Then briefly mentioned Goebbels in the conclusion.

Think I'll lose marks for not mention enough about him and nothing about Refenstahl considering the essay is about propaganda?