Modern History 2018 HSC exam pack (archive)

Students should:

• ask for an extra writing booklet rather than writing beyond the lines provided
• ensure you take the time to read each question carefully
• respond directly to the question
• plan extended responses so as to structure responses in logical and sustained manner
• use key words and justify their judgement with specific and relevant historical content with a clear argument
• ensure their judgement is clear, supported and sustained when a question requires a judgement
• avoid narration of the topic/period
• use evidence and detailed historical information to explicitly support your argument. This evidence and historical information should be accurate and reliable
• ensure that their response covers the full period identified and not only part of the period when a question requires reference to a specific historical period.

Question 6

In better responses, students were able to:

• make a specific reference to Source A
• provide their ‘own knowledge’ which was clearly not evident in Source A

Areas for students to improve include:

• creating a response which clearly addresses the question.

Question 7

In better responses, students were able to:

• make a specific reference to BOTH Source B and Source C
• provide their ‘own knowledge’ which was clearly not evident in Source B and Source C
• create a response which addresses BOTH German and Allied experiences.

Areas for students to improve include:

• limiting the amount of quoted material from the Sources to a few words.

Question 8

In better responses, students were able to:

• comment on the nature of Sources in relation to the question asked
• apply a range of relevant tests for reliability
• demonstrate an understanding of layers of perspective
• make a judgement about usefulness in relation to the question.

Areas for students to improve include:

• limiting ‘contextual’ information which does not pertain to the question or the nature of Sources
• ensuring that the full scope of the question is addressed, that is the Spring Offensive as a turning point.  

Question 10 – China 1927–1949

In better responses, students were able to:

• demonstrate a deep understanding of how significant the Long March was in Mao Zedong’s rise to power both during the march but also in the long term, for example, with respect to Mao’s teachings (a)
• make a definite judgement considering other factors that contributed to his rise to power, for example, the fall of Jiang (a)
• provide a broad range of evidence from the period to support their discussion (a)
• use the evidence to explicitly support the argument (a)
• demonstrate detailed knowledge on nationalism as a dominant force, for example, alliance between CCP and GMD (b)
• make a definite judgement of its importance (b)
• provide a broad range of evidence from the period to support their discussion (b)
• use the evidence to explicitly support the argument (b).

Areas for students to improve include:

• demonstrating the ability to make a judgement of to what extent rather than re-telling the Long March and events afterwards (a)
• increasing their accuracy and breadth of knowledge (a) and (b)
• showing the ability to make a judgement of to what extent rather than re-telling events (b)
• clearly evaluation of nationalism as a dominant force (b)
• greater breadth of knowledge was required for a higher response. Weaker responses were not sustained (b).

Question 14 – Japan 1904–1937

In better responses, students were able to:

• demonstrate the impact of internationalism and its influence on Japan as a world power (a)
• make a definite judgement of the importance of internationalism (a)
• provide a broad range of evidence from the period to support their discussion (a)
• use evidence to support their argument (a)
• demonstrate detailed knowledge on militarism and its impact on Japanese politics and society (b)
• make a definite judgement of its significance for both politics and society (b)
• provide a broad range of evidence from the period to support their discussion, for example, diplomacy, Mukden incident, rise of Shintoism, Marco Polo Bridge Incident and linking them to militarism (b)
• use historical knowledge to support their argument, rather than merely provide a narration of events (b)

Areas for students to improve include:

• showing the ability to make a judgement of to what extent rather than re-telling events (a) and (b)
• making a definite evaluation rather than a chronological checklist (a) and (b)
• increasing accuracy and breadth of student knowledge (a) and (b).

Question 15 – Russia and the Soviet Union 1917–1941

In better responses, students were able to:

• address the question to make a clear and sustained judgement about the extent that VICTORY in the Civil War was significant in the Bolshevik consolidation of power
• cover the whole time period until 1924 (a)
• engage with the focus of the question for a significant portion of the response to show an understanding of the role the Civil War played in consolidation (a)
• use detailed, accurate historical information to support their argument throughout
• make a judgement about how much other factors contributed/were significant to Bolshevik consolidation (a)
• provide more specific links to how victory in the Civil War aided in Bolshevik consolidation (a)
• address the question and make a clear and sustained judgement about the extentthe show trials and “the Terror” SHAPED BOTH the Communist party and Soviet society. They covered the whole time period 1934-1941 (b)
• use detailed, accurate historical information to support their argument throughout (b)
• potentially discuss other influences that shaped the party/society, for example, economic factors, social and cultural policy (b)
• show a comprehensive understanding of the issue(s) raised in the question (b).

Areas for students to improve include:

• avoiding simply giving reasons for why the Bolsheviks won the Civil War or describing what happened in the Civil War (a)
• incorporating a line of argument/judgement into their responses instead of a narrative/descriptive response (a)
• providing more specific links to how victory in the Civil War aided in Bolshevik consolidation (a)
• answering the question asked rather than writing everything they know about the topic (a) and b)
• avoiding simply describing what the Show Trials were or the types of Terror employed (b)
• incorporating a line of argument/judgement into their responses instead of a narrative/descriptive response (b)
• making a more explicit link to how the Terror and Show Trials shaped BOTH the party and society (b)
• referring back to the question more often to engage with a line of argument throughout (b).

Question 17 – USA 1919–1941

In better responses, students were able to:

• provide a clear judgement
• provide specific evidence to support the discussion with is detailed, relevant and accurate.

Areas for students to improve include:

• ensuring the historical information is relevant to the question
• incorporating a line of argument/judgement into their responses instead of a narrative/descriptive response.

Personalities in the Twentieth Century is discontinued in the new course.

Question 20 – Conflict in Europe 1935–1945

In better responses, students were able to:

• provide a clear judgement about the extent and nature of the impacts of the war on civilians in both Britain and Either Germany or the Soviet Union (a)
• use evidence to explicitly support that judgement (a)
• sustain their judgement throughout the response, providing a contrast of Britain and Germany OR the Soviet Union where appropriate and relevant (a)
• provide specific evidence to support the discussion which is detailed, relevant and accurate (a)
• provide a sophisticated evaluation of the significance of D-Day and the liberation of France to the end of the conflict, supported by detailed discussion of how these events contributed to the end of the war (b)
• relate these two key factors to the broader range of factors which brought about the end of the war, while maintaining a focus on the two factors of D-day and the liberation of France. Other factors include the North Africa campaign and the Eastern Front (b)
• use detailed, accurate and reliable evidence to support their discussion, rather than merely provide the evidence alongside a discussion (b).

Areas for students to improve include:

• avoiding mere descriptions of the home fronts in Britain and Germany OR the Soviet Union. The evidence must be linked to an argument (a)
• avoiding significant imbalances in addressing the two different home fronts (a)
• avoiding generalised information which may be confused with the home fronts during World War 1 (a)
• avoiding merely re-telling the narrative of WWII with either limited or no genuine links to the issues raised in the question (b
• discussing D-Day and the liberation of France in detail, even if they do believe that other factors were more significant in determining the end of the conflict in Europe.
• avoiding the use of pre-prepared responses (b).

Question 21 – Conflict in Indochina 1954–1979

In better responses, students were able to:

• make a clear judgement about the impact of the strategies and tactics of the US and South Vietnam, with sustained arguments supported by detailed historical information as evidence (a)
• draw clear links between the strategies and tactics used by the US and South Vietnam and the communist victory, explaining how the strategies and tactics led to (or did not lead to) the communist victory (a)
• argue other reasons for the communist victory, that is, strategies and tactics used by the North Vietnamese and Vietcong (a)
• make a clear judgement about the role US policies in Indochina played in Pol Pot’s rise to power, and systematically detailing how each policy contributed to Pol Pot’s rise to power (b)
• support their arguments with relevant, detailed historical information as evidence (b)
• state other reasons for Pol Pot’s rise to power such as the Vietcong, Sihanouk and Pol Pot himself (b).

Areas for students to improve include:

• making their arguments sustained rather than lapsing into a long narrative about the period
• making their arguments logical and sequential
• avoiding lapsing into a long narrative about the strategies and tactics used by the US and South Vietnam in Indochina and not linking them back to the question, that is how they led to communist victory (a)
• ensuring the historical information is relevant to the question, that is, the impact on Pol Pot’s rise to power, and not the impact on the war in Vietnam (b)
• avoiding writing that policies led to Pol Pot’s rise to power without explaining how they did so (b)
• using the evidence to support the argument, rather than merely provide evidence alongside (but not explicitly supporting) the argument (b).

Question 22 – Conflict in the Pacific 1937–1951

In better responses, students were able to:

• address the question with a detailed, sustained judgement of the impact of both US and British policies during the whole period 1937–1941 (a)
• write in clear detail about specific policies as evidence and responses to them were valuable (a)
• explore the impact of Japanese foreign policy and concepts such as imperialism and nationalism either in conjunction with or as a counterpoint to US and British foreign policy (a)
• note the existence of tension at the start of the period and the reasons for it, and that the period finished with the heightening tension and war tied to Pearl Harbor (a)
• address the question with a sophisticated, coherent and sustained evaluation, supported by accurate detail (b)
• focus on Midway as a turning point to present a strong argument and support it with detailed and relevant historical information (b)
• understand the detail of relevant events rather than presenting a narration of these events, thereby building an argument on the evidence contained within those events (b).

Areas for students to improve include:

• needing to make a judgement about the significance of US and British policies in growing tensions or the other factors (a)
• making a judgement about the various turning points in the war: Battle of the Coral Sea, Battle of Midway, Battle of Guadalcanal and New Guinea  
• making a judgment of value that is, to a slight extent, to a significant extent, to a limited extent, undoubtedly, etcetera.
• providing the reasons for their view and the evidence that supports it.

Question 23 – Arab-Israeli Conflict 1948–1996

In better responses, students were able to:

• demonstrate a deep understanding of how the issues which emerged from the war in 1948 determined the events which followed, which in turn compounded these issues. For example, better responses not only identified the issue of Palestinian refugees, but also how this issue led to the Fedayeen, Palestine Liberation Organisation (PLO) and ongoing tension (a)
• provide a broad range of evidence from the period 1948–1967 to support their discussion (a)
• use the evidence to support their argument, rather than merely provide evidence alongside and not explicitly supporting their argument (a)
• demonstrate a comprehensive understanding of the role of the superpowers, particularly the complex and changing nature of that engagement (b)
• recognise and explore the differing roles of the USSR and the USA, and how this changed over time, especially after 1973 (b)
• refer to a broad range of examples, including the peace process, rather than just a limited period of time (b)
• carefully consider the objectives of the superpowers and how these impacted their roles, rather than treat these as completely independent issues (b).

Areas for students to improve include:

• using accurate knowledge, particularly in relation to the 1948, 1956 and 1967 wars, which were often conflated (a)
• providing breadth of information as many responses only discussed the immediate aftermath of the war, rather than the longer-term manifestations of the issues raised by the 1948 war (a)
• avoiding over-simplistic arguments that demonstrate a general impression of the issue, rather than a detailed understanding (b)
• using more precise and accurate detail to support arguments (b)
• avoiding merely telling the narrative of superpower involvement. They must attempt to link this evidence to an argument (b).

Question 24 – The Cold War 1945–1991

In better responses, students were able to:

• identify and discuss the crises within the stated time period (including Berlin 1961, Cuba 1962 and Czechoslovakia 1968) with some detail (a)
• provide a clear assessment of these crises and how they affected the policies and strategies adopted by the superpowers, such as the policy of containment and détente (a)
• discuss both the short term and long term impacts of these crises, for example, the establishment of a hotline following the Cuban Missile Crisis (a)
• make a clear judgement of the extent to which the Vietnam War and the Sino-Soviet split shaped détente (b)
• discuss both events in detail and demonstrate how each contributed to the move toward détente (b)
• draw upon the other factors which also shaped Détente, such as the Cuban Missile Crisis 1962 (b).

Areas for students to improve include:

• avoiding merely identifying the crises and policies/strategies, telling the story of the Cold War from 1961–1968, and ensuring that they explain how the crises actually affected these policies/strategies (a)
• establishing a clear position with regards to the question from the outset and sustaining their argument right through the whole extended response (a)
• ensuring that they have an accurate knowledge and understanding of both events, especially the Sino-Soviet split (b)
• ensuring that they address both events even if they argue that there were other factors which had a more profound impact on the development of the Vietnam War and the Sino-Soviet split (b)
• ensuring that the historical information they provide in support of their argument is detailed, relevant and accurate (a) and (b).