the essay for individual and society was a gift, and the stimulus for the story was fairly adaptable. all round a better exam than the previous years i feel
festivals question for sparta was great because thats the only thing i studied properly in the entire syllabus
army question seemed dodgy but good once you get writing because facts come back
did anyone mention that they had an economic role? since their equipment made a use of sparta's...
religion question was great, not difficult at all. the archaeology question threw me off because it was at the end of the syllabus so i skipped over it a bit :(
water question was an easy way to lose 3 marks if you didnt study such a small part of the syllabus, but an easy 4 if you did.
Wtf at question a) for xerxes.
relationship with persians and non-persians haha. I knew this was going to be in there. it was the one thing I didn't study thinking it wasnt going to be in there, and it was, and I knew it was. argh
but - broad question. bullshitting ftw
I argued that it would not have been as great a turning point without the air war and north africa
but i did say it was a major turning point regardless, because it set the stage for stalingrad and kursk
i argued kursk was THE turning point because germany could no longer launch blitzkrieg...
Don't pretty much all tests have some sort of disadvantage/advantage to some students?
You can't argue about this cos then people who do harder topics or mixed topics rather than all Russia/all Germany etc will complain that they were disadvantaged.
Although, if it asked something that wasn't...
This pissed me off - 6 years of fairly simple early life/public life questions with maybe an evaluation one thrown in there every once in a while, and then this whacked out crap. But I sort of made it work for Trotsky.
I argued that he shaped events, and that events shaped him. Was sort of...
Kaos, i did the same thing basically. Except my second difference was the nature of being human rather than quality of relationships
i somehow worked in consumerism in there just ot make myself feel like ive done everything i studied.
for a second i was considering doing the two differences as...
section 1 = pretty hard at first, but once you think about it, its easy
section 2 = ditto, but to a lesser extent. easier
section 3 = easy
overall a better paper than previous years
The frontline question was piss easy but as usual i wasted too much time on the first section and lost time at the end
harwood was a bit... wtf. but once you thought about it for a minute it was easy
in the wild question was hard to structure but once you get going its pretty much the same...
It's possible. Some people write really fast; others have really big handwriting. Some just do a mind dump and write everything they know rather than thinking and structuring what they want to say. Some are a sick combination of the three, writing upwards of 20 pages per section.
Then there's...
Section 1 - 7 pages
Section 2 - 5 pages (pissed off about this but oh well)
Section 3 - 8 pages
I feel I did really well on 1 and 3, especially 3 as 1 had some bodgy questions, but Section 2 I'm not that happy about. my creative was solid but I felt slightly too short and a bit rushed.
but...
I basically did what you guys did. Pretty much moulded what I knew into the answer.
Also I commented on how certain aspects of the journeys were expected (such as the pretty obvious sign that Caliban's plot would fail) but how an unexpected twist leads to the outcome being unexpected (lol).