General Thoughts: History Ext (1 Viewer)

[Rafy]

Share your exam thoughts here

 

[brarbie95]

Best exam EVEEEER!

Question 1- Learnt 2 historians who were popular, 2 who hated popular, two who were arguably both (15 pages)

Question 2- All three of my JFK historians were relevant because they created their work after the release lf previously inaccessible evidence! (12 pages)

Really good for our case study and chosen historians

 

[emayms]

First question was great - had some great references to include and felt as I truly addressed the question.

The second, in particular for my case study (Elizabeth) was a bit harder. The question lent itself well to particular case studies better than other - like JFK woyld have been perfect. But I'm not complaining got my head around how I was going to approach it and answered the question to the best of my ability.

 

[Jawa]

Not the greatest, but I wasn't expecting to smash it...

First question was a little unorthodox I thought, not the usual purpose question but I think I weaselled my way out of it alright. - How did people adapt their historians? I found it difficult to get my head around implementing 'the usual suspects' and had to use comparisons of Paul Ham and Peter Fitzsimmons, Macaulay and Butterfield.

Second Question was a little dry for Imperialism, thought I went ok though disagreeing with it and conversely stating that changing interpretations are brought about through historians personal influences and social discourse

 

[Brendonnelly]

Question One was a massive surprise for me- I didn't have any really populist historians... So I argued historiographical debates between Elton and CArr and Von Ranke and Gibbon alienated those who simply had an interest in the past. Then I linked it to Titanic, because I knew I would need a populist source, saying that they didn't focus on the historiography, they focussed on simply recreating the past, and that's why it was popular.
Question Two was better, for Elizabeth- I disagreed with the quote, saying that historians came to different conclusions based on the same evidence, and thus it had very little impact on interpretation of her issues, only saying that the puritan choir theory was dismissed.
Do you reckon my answer for Question 1 could scrape above 20? Or would the lack of equal populist to academic ratio damage it?

 

[Chrasity]

Truly a difficult exam. Only wrote 6 pages for each, could've written so much more, but my essays were very clear and concise. I hope I can speak the same amount of volume as someone who wrote heaps.

Ugh, the first question was horrible. Took a different approach into exploring the conflict between popular and academic history by showing society's changing values of history by comparing historians who wrote dull and Empirical history with sensationalist historians and the reactions of their context. Then I developed into an argument of partially resolving the conflict through professionalism and educating society of the "uses and abuses of the past".

Second question was basically just the role of revisionism in relation to Spain and the Aztec Empire by cross-referencing a lot of interpretations of historians chronologically as they were able to access more evidence. I then developed into an argument of the fabrication of evidence, subverting the "no evidence/no history" theory" where historians can construct history towards their purpose.

 

[Chrasity]

I linked it to Titanic, because I knew I would need a populist source, saying that they didn't focus on the historiography, they focussed on simply recreating the past, and that's why it was popular. Do you reckon my answer for Question 1 could scrape above 20? Or would the lack of equal populist to academic ratio damage it?

Wow, that was a good integration of the depiction of history. I reckon you could scrape a 20!

 

[eXanimo]

I focused heaps on uncommon case studies for the first question. Went of the basic Herodotus/Livy/Tacitus structure before delving into the post-modern nature of the public opinion and based most of my response on the history wars, the internet and Assassins creed (Yes, seriously, apparently markers love shit like that).

Ended up with 9 pages, and i analyses the extent, causation and future prospects of the division. Not sure how i'll go, hopefully 45+, but my ranking will make sure i'll get a top band.

 

[samfullstop]

Loved the exam, the questions were so good!

 

[inJust]

Fuck, I didn't mention assasin's creed or Titanic. I just said that it revolved full circle - seeing the Herodetean tradition be a nexus of academic and popular history, which then split and is now merging again. Hahah, I mentioned facebook and twitter and all that jazz though hahaa.

 

[prettysparkles]

Fuck, I didn't mention assasin's creed or Titanic. I just said that it revolved full circle - seeing the Herodetean tradition be a nexus of academic and popular history, which then split and is now merging again. Hahah, I mentioned facebook and twitter and all that jazz though hahaa.

haha lyk neither i mean we didn't study at all about titanic or asssassinans creed but yeah i just talked about lyk herodtus and popularity

 

[Samuel_1994]

Didn't like q1 at all – went against it by arguing that populist and academic historians are really the same thing underneath in terms of all being ideologically positioned and biased workers etc which I backed up by showing how Von Ranke, Carr and Elton all were, even though they claimed to be objective, before going into how White shows that all history really is just narrative so is relative to the present etc to argue there wasn't really a difference other than the fact that academics see their history as better even as it's really the same and so forth. Ended up throwing in a bit on Wikipedia (as it was in the source's title) and actually Assassins Creed as well!, showing how they really aren't very different to Elton et al. Wasn't what I was hoping for but seemed fine. Wrote 5 booklets.

Q2 was great – just went against it for Eliz and said that it wasn't new evidence but historians personal context purpose etc that caused changed interpretations. Nothing too complicated. 4 booklets.

Overall, wasn't too too bad… shame its the day before legal!

 

[campbellkwan]

didnt you guys answer the multiple choice on historiography at the back??? brarbie said it was a,b,d,c i agree with her =D

also baulko!

 

[Brendonnelly]

Haha just to clarify, I decided to use Titanic on the spot, we didn't actually study it in class.

 

[avro]

I wrote about academic history, like empiricism, and how these methods can be used to underpin the popular history in our society. Like the Australian census, which cements ideas on multiculturalism/national identity through the study of quantitative data. I also explored how popular history such as national legends and stories are being rejected by academic historians through their methodologies and context which allows them to reveal a different insight into popular history.

I forget what I wrote about in the convict women case study essay, but it was a pretty stock standard case study essay. Happy with it, 10 pages for each. Hope everyone else went well

 

[brarbie95]

didnt you guys answer the multiple choice on historiography at the back??? brarbie said it was a,b,d,c i agree with her =D

also baulko!

Hahaha go enjoy your post-hsc freeem campbie xoxo

 

[cornchips1]

Fml am I the only one did Elizabeth for q2 and agreed with the quote......

 

[teganjoyy]

Fml am I the only one did Elizabeth for q2 and agreed with the quote......

As long as you argued it well it won't matter

 

[killerg0d]

I mentioned 300 LOL

 

[Mem94]

The questions were a bit odd but I think I managed to do well. Praying my arguments were clearer than I think they were...