Modern History 2022 HSC exam pack

Students should:

• read the question carefully to ensure that they do not miss important components of the question
• have a clear understanding of key words in the question and consider the intent of the question and its requirements
• engage with what the question is asking, rather than presenting a pre-prepared response
• relate to the question throughout the response, rather than just at the beginning
• sustain their judgements, where appropriate, throughout the response with a clear connection to the question
• use relevant evidence and interpretation to support their response where appropriate
• demonstrate historical knowledge beyond that provided in sources
• communicate ideas and information using relevant historical terms and concepts appropriately
• present a sustained, logical and cohesive response.

Question 1

In better responses, students were able to:

• establish a clear link between the Treaty of Versailles and the rise of the dictators
• explain how Hitler and Mussolini attributed the ‘economic malaise’ of post-World War I to the treaty and used it to aid in their rising popularity, using Source A to support their response
• provide specific examples from the treaty for either Germany or Italy (or others) which were referenced or used by a dictator to gain popularity.

Areas for students to improve include:

• avoiding a simple paraphrasing of the source and therefore not providing a clear response to the question. The source supports the answer, it does not become the answer
• providing examples to support their answer. For example, Mussolini used the failure of the Treaty of Versailles to award Italy what had been promised in 1915 in order to gain popularity and promote himself as a strong leader.

Question 2

In better responses, students were able to:

• explain the perspective of Stresemann communicated at a press conference
• clearly demonstrate an understanding of perspective, specifically Stresemann’s, and establish the basis for it as evident in Source B
• focus on the key word ‘account’ to provide the reasons why this has been said
• provide relevant details about Stresemann (and Weimar) from the source that help account for his perspective.

Areas for improvement include:

• demonstrating an understanding that a person’s position, rank, experience, knowledge, country, gender and political persuasion all influence their perspective and can explain why they hold a particular point of view
• giving accurate examples of the time (1928 and before) which demonstrate historical knowledge and understanding relevant to the question, for example, the likely impact of the Dawes Plan on Stresemann’s perspective.

Question 3

In better responses, students were able to:

• recognise the significance of Source C  as propaganda
• be specific in their identification of both the values and the limitations of the source
• make direct and reasoned links between the values and the limitations of the source and the key words of the question, especially the ‘reasons for the rise of the Nazi party’
• effectively integrate evidence from the source relevant to the points being made.

Areas for students to improve include:

• avoiding just describing the source
• providing more than one value and limitation
• ensuring that quotes from the source are linked to the points being made.

Question 4

In better responses, students were able to:

• demonstrate a clear understanding of the reasons for the collapse of the Weimar Republic and make a judgement about the significance of the Nazi party to that collapse
• explain the ways that the Nazis used the political, economic and social conditions and then link that use to the collapse of the Weimar Republic
• select specific evidence from two sources to support their response.

Areas for students to improve include:

• demonstrating a clear understanding of the reasons for and the significance of the collapse of the Weimar Republic and giving specific examples not included in the sources, for example, the reliance on article 48, the banning of opposition parties, the Enabling Act
• supporting their response with detailed and accurate knowledge about the collapse of the Weimar Republic, rather than narrowly focusing on the popularity of the Nazi party.

Question 6 – China 1927–1949

In better responses, students were able to:

• make a clear judgement as to how significant the Long March was in the rise of the CCP and provide extensive historical knowledge about how the political and social consequences of the Long March contributed to the CCP’s prominence (a)
• make strong links between the Long March and the rise of the CCP, in a sustained and sophisticated argument (a)
• interpret historical detail and information to draw conclusions around all aspects of the question, for example, creating a clear link between how Guomindang (GMD) Nationalist Government failures explicitly contributed to defeat and CCP victory (b)
• provide an explicit evaluation as to whether Communist triumph was the result of the failures of the GMD Nationalists and/or other contributing factors, such as Mao’s leadership, the CCP’s civilian support base, and a disciplined army (b)
• clearly link their historical evidence with the explicit focus of the question.

Areas for students to improve include:

• making sustained and supported judgements throughout the response that are more than generalised descriptive links back to the question. This includes being able to clearly express a view of the level of significance of the Long March (a) and the extent to which the CCP triumphed because of the failures of the GMD Nationalists (b)
• demonstrating a comprehensive understanding of issues, for example, some students chose to argue that the Long March was the key factor in the rise of the CCP, while others argued that while it played a role, other factors contributed more or that it laid the foundations for the CCP to rise (a)
• avoiding a long, unstructured narrative of how the CCP rose to power that does not contain a judgement as to the significance of factors nor attempt to engage in a line of argument (a)
• explicitly showing the causal links between GMD Nationalist failures and how they contributed to CCP triumph, rather than simply providing a descriptive narrative of events
• providing clear and consistent arguments throughout the entire response, rather than engaging with a judgement at the beginning and conclusion
• limiting their responses to the specified time period of the option and selecting the most relevant information to support their views.

Question 9 – Japan 1904–1937

In better responses, students were able to:

• provide a clear judgement that they sustained throughout their response
• demonstrate detailed knowledge that clearly linked their view of the significance of tensions between tradition and modernisation to the development of Japanese politics to 1937 (a). For example, how the tensions between traditional and modern political power structures led to the failure of limited liberal democracy
• clearly consider the impact of militarism on both domestic politics and foreign policy, during the decade of the 1930s, throughout their response (b)
• provide comprehensive examples of how militarism impacted domestic and foreign policy in the development of Japanese politics to 1937
• demonstrate a deep understanding by clearly linking historical evidence with the focus of the question. For example, the significance of the tensions between tradition and modernisation in Japanese politics to 1937 (a), or the impact of militarism on Japan’s domestic politics and foreign policy (b).

Areas for students to improve include:

• maintaining a clear judgement throughout
• providing knowledge that comprehensively addresses the time period indicated by the question. For example, students should discuss the impact of militarism on Japan’s domestic politics and foreign policy during the 1930s and not narrate the rise of militarism in the late 1920s (b)
• ensuring that the information given is relevant to the time period of the option as detailed in the syllabus. For example, detailed discussions of the Meiji restoration are outside the time period of the question (a)
• avoiding a narrative response that may give accurate information from the time period but does not explore the question (a, b). For example, focusing on the rise of militarism instead of the impact of militarism (b)
• providing more specific information that is accurate and avoiding the use of general or vague historical evidence to support their response.

Question 10 – Russia and the Soviet Union 1917–1941

In better responses, students were able to:

• provide a clear, sophisticated and sustained explanation of how the policies of Stalin transformed social and cultural life in Russia. Stronger responses were able to demonstrate how Russia was transformed by Stalin’s policies (a)
• clearly communicate the degree to which Stalin had complete control over the USSR by 1941 (b) and sustain this judgement throughout the response
• demonstrate comprehensive knowledge of a range of Stalin’s policies. For example, social, political and economic policies and the impact these had on transforming social and cultural life in Russia by 1941 (a)
• make a concise judgement of the extent of Stalin’s control over the USSR through the implementation of a range of social, political and economic measures and not just through a discussion of how Stalin came to power (b)
• provide detailed knowledge of how both social and cultural life were transformed though Stalin’s policies, though not necessarily in the same detail (a)
• demonstrate an understanding of the level of Stalin’s control over the USSR by 1941 through reference to his control of various aspects, such as the Party, foreign policy, the arts, society and/or the economy (b)
• use historical terms and concepts to specifically address all elements of the question in order to develop a cohesive response that demonstrates a comprehensive understanding throughout.

Areas for students to improve include:

• engaging with all elements of the question to demonstrate a depth of understanding. For example, including how Stalin’s economic and political policies also impacted on social and cultural life, as well as social and cultural examples (a)
• addressing the full time period of the question. For example, complete control could be achieved through social, political and economic policies up to 1941 (b). Some weaker responses tended to focus on describing the power struggle and did not address beyond the 1920s
• avoiding simply providing a narrative description of social and cultural life in Russia (a) or a description of what life was like in Stalinist Russia (b)
• providing accurate, explicit and relevant historical detail to support their argument and avoiding a narrative of events. For example, not simply stating that Stalin had complete control, but explicitly linking this to an evaluation of whether Stalin had full control by 1941 (b)
• integrating their own judgement throughout the response, rather than just at the conclusion of each paragraph or in the introduction and conclusion
• using explicit historical knowledge, such as specific policies or examples of means of control, including details, rather than generalised statements.

Question 11 – USA 1919–1941

In better responses, students were able to:

• engage with all elements of the question while sustaining a clear judgement (a, b)
• make a concise judgement regarding the role played by capitalism in changing society throughout the period. For example, students could consider its role in driving mass-consumerism or the impact of hire-purchase and the ‘buying’ of social mobility (b)
• provide specific historical detail to support their judgements. For example, using detailed evidence about the experiences of different groups because of the Great Depression (a)
• interpret historical detail and information to draw conclusions around all aspects of the question. For example, creating a clear link between cause and consequence, such as suggesting that the slaughtering of excess livestock in the Midwest at the height of the Depression could be interpreted as indicating that the relief offered to farmers was insufficient (a)
• demonstrate a comprehensive understanding of all issues in the question while incorporating information from a range of relevant syllabus content. For example, some students chose to argue that capitalism was the key factor in facilitating social change, where others argued that while it played a role, factors such as industrialisation or consumerism also contributed (b).

Areas for students to improve include:

• ensuring a comprehensive understanding of the time period that allows them to engage with the question in a meaningful manner and avoiding irrelevant information. For example, discussing the experience of groups prior to 1929 without paying due attention to the impact of the Great Depression (a)
• attempting to create continuous links back to a central line of argument so that the response avoids becoming a narrative, or a list of groups, without reference to a judgement around the impact of the Depression (a)
• using specific and relevant historical evidence and terms, rather than creating a list of details.

Question 12 – Iran 1945–1989

In better responses, students were able to:

• sustain an explicit judgement throughout the response, supported by historical terms and evidence
• demonstrate a clear and comprehensive understanding of the time period. For example, understanding the evolving nature of Iran’s relationship with the USA, and with other Islamic nations, from 1979 to 1989 (b)
• provide a range of examples and evidence to support a sustained judgement, with attention paid to specific detail. For example, using the names and dates of policies, groups and laws and avoiding simply listing ideas
• create sophisticated links between the elements of the question and the evidence used. For example, using specific detail or historical data to discuss the way ideology underpinned the multiple factors that led to the 1979 revolution, such as nationalism or Westernisation (a)
• address the question with a comprehensive understanding of the broad scope of the topic itself, drawing on evidence from multiple areas of the syllabus to construct a sophisticated judgement that was sustained throughout.

Areas for students to improve include:

• addressing all aspects of the question. For example, some responses were able to provide explicit detail around Khomeini’s social reforms but unable to engage with ideas central to foreign relations (b)
• avoiding creating responses that are overly focused on quotes from historians at the expense of clearly communicating their own judgement. Students should interpret the evidence within the response to draw conclusions based on their own understanding, rather than overloading their response with long quotes that do not create meaningful links to the judgement being made
• avoiding simply providing a narrative description of the time period. For example, rather than providing the story of Iran back to British and Russian influence, continuing to refer to the cause-and-effect factors relating to the oil industry that contributed to anti-Western ideology (a).

Question 13 – Conflict in Indochina 1954–1979

In better responses, students were able to:

• address the whole period of the Vietnam War, rather than just addressing the events post-1968,  for example, detailing the strategies/tactics/policies before Tet and how they influenced the USA’s eventual withdrawal (a)
• include a range of extensive historical knowledge and evidence to support their argument, for example, detailing the impact of Tet on the home front and how that influenced Nixon’s decision to introduce the policy of Vietnamisation (a)
• provide a detailed explanation of the changing nature of the importance of communism and how that impacted the shaping of the conflict (b)
• make a sophisticated argument which linked to the level of significance of either communism or nationalism in shaping the conflict.  For example, linking the US attempt to contain communism with its role in developing the ARVN forces (b)
• refer to the significance of nationalism or communism for Cambodia and Laos, and not just Vietnam, as the question clearly asks about the conflict in Indochina (b).

Areas for students to improve include:

• avoiding long narratives about the course of the war, for example, detailing the events of the Battle of Tet or the bombing campaigns (a)
• explicitly linking their points with the withdrawal of the USA, rather than just detailing their impact (a)
• making a clear judgement as to whether nationalism or communism was more significant, rather than just giving reasons why both were significant (b)
• presenting their points in a logical manner.

Question 14 – Conflict in the Pacific 1937–1951

In better responses, students were able to:

• provide an argument based on the reasons for Japan’s defeat in World War II, moving beyond just key events which contributed to the victory. These responses sometimes included, but were not restricted to, the inability of the Japanese to match the industrial might of the Allies and the resulting economic exhaustion; superior allied strategy leading to key victories; superior allied technology; and the leadership of Japan and its inability to adapt during the course of the war (a)
• make a sustained judgement in relation to the impact of the Pacific War on the home fronts of Australia and Japan. While it was not necessary to compare Australia and Japan, better responses did use this opportunity to emphasise their judgement of the impact (b)
• make discerning choices in selecting and connecting relevant points to emphasise causality regarding the defeat of the Japanese.  For example, make a judgement on key factors (a), or grouping impacts relating to the home fronts of Australia and Japan (b)
• present a response that used a range of points to demonstrate their historical knowledge. For example, discerning the key points of why Japan was defeated in World War II (a) or the different impacts on the Japanese and Australian home fronts (b)
• make use of precise evidence to directly support their argument.

Areas for students to improve include:

• making a clear and direct causal link between their chosen points and why they led to the defeat of the Japanese in World War II, rather than a narrative or description of events (a)
• addressing the question in a balanced manner, rather than just focusing on one event, for example, explaining the dropping of the atomic bombs in isolation (a)
• making more than generalised links back to the question. For example, making specific value judgements throughout the response on the impact on the Australian and Japanese home fronts, rather than just identifying and describing the impacts (b)
• stating points based on sufficient historical knowledge and evidence to support an argument, rather than using unconnected information as their argument.

Question 15 – Conflict in Europe 1935–1945

In better responses, students were able to:

• provide a clear and sophisticated explanation of the most significant turning point of the conflict in Europe, based on a comprehensive understanding of the broader issues and in relation to other events which occurred (a)
• provide a clear and sophisticated explanation of why the Allies won the European war, moving beyond just key events which contributed to the victory, but connecting events to broader issues and factors (b)
• move beyond select events to consider the European theatre of war more broadly, with a focus on select events or factors within this broader context
• use evidence to supporttheir explanation and/or argument, rather than providing evidence which did not necessarily contribute to their explanation/argument
• provide a clear judgement where appropriate, even when discussing other factors which led to the turning point (a) or allied victory (b).

Areas for students to improve include:

• ensuring that information included is used as evidence to support an argument, rather than simply providing it without making its relevance to their judgement clear
• providing a clear position in response to the question asked, whether that be identifying what the single most significant turning point of the conflict was (a), or providing reasons as to why the Allies were victorious in Europe (b)
• ensuring that evidence used is relevant to the option and the question asked and avoiding the use of content from the ‘Power and Authority’ topic not relevant to ‘Conflict in Europe 1935–1945’
• using evidence that is specific, accurate and relevant to the argument.

Question 16 – The Cold War 1945–1991

In better responses, students were able to:

• demonstrate a comprehensive understanding of the role of ideology, as well as economic and political concerns, in shaping the policies adopted by both the USSR and the USA (a)
• demonstrate a comprehensive understanding of the impact of economic and political developments on the emergence of détente (b)
• provide extensive and accurate historical detail relevant to the question. For example, in (a), this included the entire period of the Cold War, but for (b), it included the entire period from the onset of the Cold War to the start of détente
• support their judgement throughout their response with reference to a broad range of accurate and detailed historical information.

Areas for students to improve include:

• ensuring that evidence provided is used throughout each response to support the argument or judgement they are making, rather than including knowledge that, while relevant to the option, is not linked to the question or required to answer it
• ensuring that they are prepared with historical knowledge and understanding to be able to support their response with evidence that is extensive, accurate and relevant
• taking a clear, sustained position in response to the question, even if taking the position that ideology and economic and political concerns were equally significant in shaping Cold War policies (a).

Question 18 – The Arab-Israeli Conflict 1948–1996

In better responses, students were able to:

• demonstrate a comprehensive understanding of how the 1967 and 1973 wars shaped the Arab–Israeli conflict, linking both these wars to broader contexts or features (a)
• demonstrate an extensive and accurate historical knowledge of the time period relevant to the question
• provide a detailed explanation of why Israel invaded Lebanon, moving beyond the immediate causes and linking to longer-term factors and events, such as the influx of Palestinian refugees in 1948 and 1967, as well as ‘Black September’ in 1970 (b)
• provide a response that was structured logically and cohesively.

Areas for students to improve include:

• ensuring that the war included in the response is not confused, in terms of both key facts and significance
• ensuring that the judgement of which war was more significant is clear and the response is sustained, logical and cohesive. This is also important if an alternative judgement that both wars were of equal significance is presented
• presenting reasons for Israel’s invasions to provide judgements on the contribution of various factors, as opposed to simply listing causes in chronological order (b).

Question 20(a) – The Cultural Revolution to Tiananmen Square 1966–1989

In better responses, students were able to:

• describe in detail how the 1949 revolution left a legacy in China
• provide specific supporting historical details relevant to the revolution and its aftermath
• provide relevant historical details regarding political and social conditions and how the cultural and economic conditions changed. This included factors such as the economic redistribution of land and agricultural reforms like the movement to collective farms, changes in women's rights and marriage, and changes in literacy, schooling and education.

Areas for students to improve include:

• providing specific, rather than vague and general, historical detail about the legacy
• staying within the scope of the question and avoiding irrelevant information, such as including a focus on pre-revolution content.

Question 20(b) – The Cultural Revolution to Tiananmen Square 1966–1989

In better responses, students were able to:

• make explicit and specific links to the source which address how the Red Guards contributed to the Cultural Revolution
• provide specific and detailed supporting information about a range of relevant impacts, such as the destruction of the Four Olds and attacking the intelligentsia
• correctly use a range of relevant historical terms, for example, the Gang of Four, the Four Olds, Mao’s Cult of Personality and propaganda.

Areas for students to improve include:

• providing a consistent answer to the question with an explicit and not implied reference to the source which is supported by historical information, including the role of the Red Guard rather than simply who they were
• avoiding irrelevant information that is outside the scope of the question
• ensuring that the response is organised with a clear structure and logical flow, rather than a straight narrative of the actions of the Red Guards.

Question 20(c) – The Cultural Revolution to Tiananmen Square 1966–1989

In better responses, students were able to:

• provide a logical, relevant and consistent judgement in response to the question of the impact of economic reforms on Chinese society. This includes reference to the Four Modernisations, industry and its privatisation, employment, and security. Better responses also included aspects such as reforms under Deng, such as educational reforms, the political structures of the CCP or openness to the West
• maintain their judgement consistently throughout the response, but also support it with reference to a range of specific examples and the changing nature of Chinese society during Deng’s time in power.

Areas for students to improve include:

• consistently linking historical evidence to a judgement throughout the response, not just in the introduction and conclusion
• responding within the time period of the question
• providing specific, detailed and relevant supporting historical detail, not just vague and generalised statements.

Question 21(a) – Civil Rights in the USA 1945–1968

In better responses, students were able to:

• explicitly describe racial segregation and engage logically with its nature or the main features which characterised segregation in the USA
• provide specific supporting historical details relevant to the question.  For example, relevant laws and areas in society where segregation was evident, such as in public amenities, the armed forces, schools and employment.

Areas for students to improve include:

• providing specific, rather than vague and generalised, historical detail
• staying within the scope of the question and not providing irrelevant information. For example, many students talked generally about discrimination, rather than focusing on the nature of segregation itself
• ensuring that they ‘describe’ as directed to in the question and not limit the response to an outline or list.

Question 21(b) – Civil Rights in the USA 1945–1968

In better responses, students were able to:

• provide an explicit and specific explanation about the role that Rosa Parks played in the development of the Civil Rights movement
• provide specific and detailed supporting information about the development of the Civil Rights movement and the role of Rosa Parks
• make explicit use of the source within the response, signposting when the source was used with ‘Source G ’ or the name of the author. Better responses integrated phrases or paraphrases from the source with their own knowledge, rather than pulling large sections from the source
• consistently make links back to the question
• correctly use a range of relevant historical terms, for example, bus boycott, non-violent protest.

Areas for students to improve include:

• providing relevant, specific and detailed historical information.  For example, not dismissing Rosa Parks after one or two sentences and then writing about another figure, such as Martin Luther King Jr, for the rest of the response
• relying heavily on the source to provide either the answer to the question or the bulk of the supporting evidence
• ensuring that the response is organised with a clear structure and logical flow, rather than being a straight narrative of events.

Question 21(c) – Civil Rights in the USA 1945–1968

In better responses, students were able to:

• provide a logical, relevant and consistent judgement in response to the question which included clear quantifiers – such as ‘substantial’, ‘moderate’ or ‘limited’ – about the extent to which social attitudes led to the successes of the Civil Rights movement
• maintain their judgement consistently throughout the response
• support their judgement with reference to a range of specific relevant historical detail, such as the Civil Rights Acts of 1964 or desegregation, which effectively engaged with both components of the question: changes in social attitudes and the success of the Civil Rights Movement
• effectively use a range of relevant historical terms and concepts, for example, social attitudes, the Civil Rights Movement.

Areas for students to improve include:

• providing a response which logically links to the question, for example, being able to define social attitudes
• consistently linking historical evidence in the judgement made throughout the response, not just in the introduction and conclusion
• providing specific, detailed and relevant supporting historical detail, rather than vague and generalised statements, and ensuring that all historical detail is used to support the judgement and not just describe or narrate what happened.

Question 24(a) – Apartheid in South Africa 1960–1994

In better responses, students were able to:

• describe in detail the policy of apartheid in practice – that is, not just the laws but what the experience of apartheid was like for those who lived under the system
• provide relevant, explicit and specific historical details about the practice of apartheid, such as segregation, including into Bantustans, the pass system, or the disadvantage in education and employment – or, conversely, the advantages for white people.

Areas for students to improve include:

• providing specific, rather than vague and general, historical detail
• staying within the scope of the question and avoiding irrelevant information. For example, the details of specific legislation in the area of apartheid or the responses of black people to it
• ensuring to ‘describe’ as directed to in the question and not limiting the response to an outline or list.

Question 24(b) – Apartheid in South Africa 1960–1994

In better responses, students were able to:

• provide a detailed  explanation about the problems faced by South Africa in the transition to democracy
• provide specific and detailed supporting information about the process of the transition to democracy (late 1980s–1994), mentioning specific events and people who were part of this process
• make explicit use of the source at least once within the response to provide explicit meaning, signposting when the source is used with ‘Source J ’ or the name of the author
• integrate phrases or paraphrases from the source with their own knowledge, rather than referencing large sections from the source
• consistently make links back to the question
• correctly use a range of relevant historical terms in their explanation, for example, CODESA, Inkatha.

Areas for students to improve include:

• providing relevant, specific and detailed historical information. For example, not focusing the response on the ‘40 years of apartheid’ (Source J ), but instead focusing on the process of transition to democracy
• not relying only on the source to provide either the answer to the question or the bulk of the supporting evidence, but using it to support the response as directed.

Question 24(c) – Apartheid in South Africa 1960–1994

In better responses, students were able to:

• provide a logical, relevant and consistent judgement in response to the question about the extent to which the methods of control used by the South African government influenced international responses to apartheid
• maintain the judgement consistently throughout the response
• support the judgement with reference to a range of specific relevant historical detail which effectively engaged with both components of the question: methods of control and international responses to apartheid
• cite specific examples, such as the Free Mandela movement, the sporting sanctions or the Gleneagles agreement
• effectively use a range of relevant historical terms and concepts, for example, sanctions, repression, the South African Police.

Areas for students to improve include:

• having a developed knowledge and understanding of the syllabus content to be able to effectively engage with terms in the questions
• providing responses which logical link to the question, for example, knowing about methods of control, such as tactics of repression and oppression
• consistently linking historical evidence to the judgement throughout the response, not just in the introduction and conclusion
• providing specific, detailed and relevant supporting historical detail, rather than vague and generalised statements
• ensuring that all historical detail is used to support the judgement, not just narrate what happened.