extension history HELP! (1 Viewer)

[rositamadeline]

my teacher has failed to give us any kind of run down on schools of history and so my whole extension history class (yes, all two of us) have kind of freaked out since we figured out how much information we are missing, if anyone can give me some kind of comprehensive guide to the schools of hsitory (i have postmodern already) it would be much appreciated

 

[ari89]

Its still early in the year. By this stage for me I had only done Herodotus, Thucydides, Bede and Christian historiography and Gibbon and that lasted me through until about term 2 where I did von ranke...then after that we pretty much forgot about it and I just worked on my project in most of the class time.

If you need help try and get your hands on John Warren's history and the historians. That book is pretty thorough however I don't think it touched on many of the historical debates. Another book (that seemed like a summary of Warren's) was one written by a history teacher directly for the course published by the history teachers association.

I don't think anyone is going to post a comprehensive guide on the schools of history in here so you should take your chances researching yourself

All the best with history extension this year

 

[brolgaballet]

POST-STRUCTURALISM examines the instability of language as both a genre and in terms of its narrative discourse (conventions...language etc) mainly summarised by hayden White (1973 was popular) ...very similar to post-modernism, and parallels in many ways to the concept of meta-history. because language is unstable (it is relative to context and its meaning changes over time) so too is history which is communicated through language. think about how many times the understanding of an event changes. came about after ww2 (symbolism)


MODERNISM is the idea that history can achieve 'truth' through rational thinking and following certain ways eg analysing the historians and bearing that in mind to write subjectively. very much along the lines that history is a search for meaning...reason....truth...understanding. that is why they call it post-modernism because it is a progression from that 1930s school of thought arguing meaning and truth cannot be found because they merely exist as social constructs)

 

[Dave2007]

You need 3 historians, roughly like this:

1.) Thucydides OR Herodotus

2.) Ranke OR Bede

3.) Jenkins OR Hobsbawm.

Once you've chosen, (and considering you don't have a good teacher or textbook to do it yourself) generate (i.e. copy from the internet or someone else you know personally who got full marks) a good set of notes on those 3. Memorise them.

Then practise applying that to essay questions until you get 25/25.

And there! You've only got the major work (infinite advice here on that) and the case study (pretty much all have exemplar responses in the resource section to memorise) left and you've got full marks in ext hist.

 

[ari89]

You need 3 historians, roughly like this:

1.) Thucydides OR Herodotus

2.) Ranke OR Bede

3.) Jenkins OR Hobsbawm.

Once you've chosen, (and considering you don't have a good teacher or textbook to do it yourself) generate (i.e. copy from the internet or someone else you know personally who got full marks) a good set of notes on those 3. Memorise them.

Then practise applying that to essay questions until you get 25/25.

And there! You've only got the major work (infinite advice here on that) and the case study (pretty much all have exemplar responses in the resource section to memorise) left and you've got full marks in ext hist.

You'd need to prepare more than 3 historians. They could give you an article on anything and if your historians that you have memorised don't fit into that article and you just list off random information you will severely be punished mark wise. If they simply wanted three historians you have memorised the topic would not be a 3unit subject. They expect much more from you.

 

[Dave2007]

You're probably right.... I never said it was the tactic I used, but it will certainly get you good marks with a minimum of effort.

Personally I've prepared all 6, did it on my own, and am ready to answer the article and question whether its on aims+purposes, methodology, whatever.

But if you have no teacher, little time to work on it and little textbook info/sources like original poster, preparing these 3 well should get you through most of the time.

 

[ari89]

You're probably right.... I never said it was the tactic I used, but it will certainly get you good marks with a minimum of effort.

The answer is either no...or by good marks for minimum effort you mean that the marks will correlate the amount of effort. You could possibly get 20/50 with that approach if you're lucky.

 

[MMalone]

If you can get your hands on Ken Webb's text book and the Board of Studies source book of readings, your set. Know as many of the historians, trying to spread them accross as many schools as you can, know their works and a couple of quotes each for them, then you should be right.