Modern History 2024 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:

• outline specific roles played by women in Nazi Germany.
• identify the relevant information in the source to use to support their response.

Areas for students to improve include:

• using specific historical terms and concepts.

Question 2

In better responses, students were able to:

• explain the value of each source
• effectively contrast the value of the sources, such as audience or type.

Areas for students to improve include:

• demonstrating a clear understanding of what makes sources valuable
• following key terms such as contrast.

Question 3

In better responses, students were able to:

• make a clear judgement about the accuracy of the statement in Source C, ensuring the judgement is logical, sustained and supported throughout the response
• provide detailed evidence of the impact of Hitler’s dictatorship on German society
• use well-structured paragraphs to communicate their understanding.

Areas for students to improve include:

• engaging with central concepts in the source such as ‘transformed’ and ‘thoroughly’
• using a range of evidence to support the judgement such as impacts on workers, women, and youth
• providing detailed and accurate knowledge to support the judgement being made
• using paragraphs to sustain a logical argument.

Question 5 – China 1927–1949

In better responses, students were able to:

• provide a clear evaluation of the effectiveness of various strategies used by the GMD and CCP in resisting Japanese invasions (a)
• demonstrate extensive historical knowledge of the differing strategies across the whole period 1931–45 (a)
• demonstrate an understanding that GMD strategies changed over time, for example, initially in 1931 there was little resistance until the Second United Front, and provide reasons for why the GMD was limited in their military effectiveness (a)
• make well-reasoned, sophisticated and sustained judgements, for example, that the GMD policy of ‘trading space to buy time’ may have deprived the Japanese of vital supplies but was also a strain on the Chinese people and economy or that the GMD’s lack of resistance led to the Chinese people seeing the CCP as the true nationalist party (a)
• clearly identify and provide an explicit evaluation of the main factors that contributed to Communist victory including Mao’s leadership, the CCP’s civilian support base, a disciplined army or the failures of the Guomindang (GMD) Nationalists (b)
• include 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 their defeat and CCP victory or how the CCP used factors to their advantage (b)
• demonstrate extensive historical knowledge using various examples from throughout the time period to explicitly support their argument.

Areas for students to improve include:

• making sustained and supported evaluations throughout the response that are more than generalised descriptive links back to the question. This includes clearly expressing a view on how effective different strategies were in resisting the Japanese (a) and making a judgement as to which were the most significant contributing factors in CCP victory (b)
• demonstrating a comprehensive understanding of issues, for example, not arguing only about CCP strengths but that GMD weaknesses also contributed to CCP victory (b)
• avoiding a long, unstructured narrative about CCP victory that does not contain a judgement as to the significance of factors nor attempt to engage in a line of argument (b)
• ensuring that their responses extend across the specified time period of the question.

Question 8 – Japan 1904–1937

In better responses, students were able to:

• make a sophisticated judgement about the impact of the Great Depression on Japan in the 1930s (a) or the success of Japan’s foreign policy in achieving its aims to 1937 (b)
• engage with factors relevant to the question and provide clear and explicit links to political, social and economic impacts, for example, how these led to the rise of militarism in the 1930s, the instability of party politics, role of the zaibatsu and pressure from the Great Depression leading to a traditionalist and ultranationalist state dominated by the military (a)
• explicitly address the nature of the aims of foreign policy across the time period (b)
• identify and clearly argue about the shift in the ideology of foreign policy and its impact on its success, providing explicit examples to support the response (b)
• provide extensive historical evidence and interpretation to support the response, sustaining their line of argument cohesively and logically (a,b).

Areas for students to improve include:

• avoiding describing the nature of life in Japan during the Great Depression or the rise of militarism (a)
• avoiding describing the nature of Japanese involvement in conflict during the period (a) and (b)
• ensuring that the evidence used is relevant to the question and does not drift into narratives from other syllabus areas without making any clear connection to the impact of the Great Depression or success of achieving aims of foreign policy
• avoiding focusing on a narrow period of time when the question requires an understanding of events up to and including 1937, for example, only referring to events after 1930 which limits the capacity to demonstrate a comprehensive understanding in relation to the question (b)
• avoiding focusing on and describing the period of the Great Depression, when its impact is drawn from the time beforehand and continues after the Great Depression ends (a)
• avoiding describing key events in Japanese foreign policy without making links to the success of achieving its aims (b).

Question 9 – Russia and the Soviet Union 1917–1941

In better responses, students were able to:

• demonstrate a clear understanding of the reasons for the power vacuum and subsequent power struggle that emerged after the death of Lenin, for example, lack of a clear successor, competing visions and ambitious personalities (a)
• provide an explicit evaluation of the importance/impact of each reason, for example, lack of a clear successor to Lenin created division and uncertainty (a)
• clearly identify the differing foreign policy aims 1928–41, for example, Soviet foreign policy shifted away from ideological aims to focus on more pragmatic aims of survival, security and gaining international recognition (b)
• provide an explicit evaluation as to how successfully foreign policy aims were achieved, for example, despite joining the League of Nations to promote collective security, the USSR failed to find Western Allies due to the Allies’ fear of Socialism, further isolating the Soviet Union (b)
• addressing the key word, ‘evaluate’, in their response by and providing a sustained judgement.

Areas for students to improve include:

• avoiding simply describing what happened in the power struggle or why Stalin was successful (a) or narrating different events in Soviet foreign policy (b)
• clearly identifying the aims of Soviet foreign policy and providing an explicit evaluation of how successful Stalin/the Soviet Union was in achieving them (b)
• ensuring that responses cover the relevant time period from 1928 to 1941 (b), avoiding irrelevant examples and ensuring the response covers the entirety of the time period in the question
• providing accurate historical evidence to support the ideas or concepts being covered as opposed to describing events and policies without specific examples, such as not providing specific treaties to support their point (b)
• linking the context of domestic economic policies to foreign policy aims, for example, in pursuing Socialism in One Country, rather than focussing too much on the domestic economic policies themselves (b)
• using relevant historical information to form, and elaborate on, a well-reasoned response to the question
• remaining question-focused and not simply describing events or providing generalisations
• using strong topic sentences that make a clear judgement and make explicit reference back to the question.

Question 10 – USA 1919–1941

In better responses, students were able to:

• clearly identify the relevant social tensions and their impact, for example, the Scopes Trial or deepening rural/urban divide as a consequence of religious fundamentalism or the Chicago Race Riots or Red Summer as a result of racism (a)
• provide a clear evaluation by making a judgement as to how social tensions in the United States had an impact on society (a) or the foreign policy consequences of domestic events within the period 1919–1941 (b)
• demonstrate a comprehensive understanding of which events within America’s domestic sphere influenced foreign relations, for example, the impact of economic crises, public desire for isolationism and escalating conservatism within the United States directly impacted the strategic direction of foreign policy in the period 1919–1941 (b).

Areas for students to improve include:

• ensuring that the detail and evidence used to support the response is relevant to the question rather than narrating other syllabus areas, for example, the impact on groups, without connecting to the terms of the question (a)
• ensuring that evidence is not confused across other elements of the Modern History course, for example, referring to events within the Civil Rights movement, which falls outside of the relevant time period (a)
• acknowledging the time period in the question and ensuring that a breadth of detail and examples are provided without concentrating solely on one decade (b)
• making a clear judgement that is reflected in the response, rather than simply repeating the wording of the question or providing a definition of social tensions (a) or foreign policy (b)
• avoid using quotations without context or discussion.

Question 11 – Iran 1945–1989

In better responses, students were able to:

• demonstrate an understanding of cause and consequence to support the the argument, for example, that the White Revolution, while appearing to support the suggestion that the Shah was modernising society, isolated and drove some sectors of Iran towards supporting Khomeini or fixating on the concept of Gharbzadegi (plagued by/influenced by the West) (a)
• make a clear and well-articulated judgement that reflects the significant elements of the question. For example, arguing that Iranian-Western relations changed throughout the period of 1953–1989 due to factors such as the escalation of conflict with Iraq, the Embassy Hostage Crisis and the transition to an Islamic Republic (b)
• support a judgement with interpretation of relevant evidence that reflects an understanding of the interplay between cause and consequence in history (a) and (b)
• engage with a broad range of ideas and concepts to demonstrate a comprehensive understanding of the question, for example, recognising that Iranian-Western relations shift over time in response to both internal and external factors (b).

Areas for students to improve include:

• avoiding constructing a story of sensationalised events which relies on emotive language, for example, discussing the hostage crisis as a narrative rather than a point to support the shift in Iranian-Western relations (b)
• using specific and explicit evidence, including dates, events and appropriate historical terms, to support the response
• understanding the scope of the question in reference to the time period and ensuring that the evidence used falls within the time period.

Question 12 – Conflict in Indochina 1954–1979

In better responses, students were able to:

• provide a judgement, for example, reasons or conditions as to why there was conflict in Vietnam from 1954, rather than an explanation or description of events leading to the conflict (a)
• demonstrate an extensive understanding of the content by linking geopolitical factors and ideological influences to the rise of the conflict, with clear references to the period immediately following 1954. For example, analysing how events and conflict from 1954 preceded the escalation of conflict in the region would reflect a more sophisticated argument than beginning the response with the US escalation in 1964. Some students covered factors that led to conflict such as Vietnamese nationalism, the US policy of Containment or the impact of Diem on South Vietnam (a)
• make a judgement based on why the anti-war movements emerged in response to the war in Vietnam, rather than describing or narrating the actions of various anti-war movements. For example, structuring the argument to demonstrate the reasons for the emergence of the anti-war movements, rather than their impact (b)
• clearly articulate reasons for the emergence of the anti-war movements. For example, providing military, economic, social and political reasons for this emergence in the USA and/or Australia (b).

Areas for students to improve include:

• avoiding historical recounts about the course of the war in Vietnam (a) or anti-war movements (b) using narrative or descriptive language
• directly and consistently linking points back to the question based on the judgement in their argument
• developing a clear structure that addresses the question throughout the response that emphasise the cause and effect in their reasoning for why there was conflict in Vietnam (a) or why anti-war movements emerged in response to the war in Vietnam (b)
• structuring points logically in a thematic or chronological way to communicate the reasons 'why.'

Question 13 – Conflict in the Pacific 1937–1951

In better responses, students were able to:

• demonstrate extensive understanding and well-reasoned judgement of the issues in the Pacific from 1937, particularly those involving imperialism and nationalism, and how competing imperial interests led to tension, rather than providing a narrative of the events leading up to Pearl Harbor (a)
• demonstrate extensive understanding and well-reasoned judgement of the reasons why the A-bomb was used by the US, rather than providing a recount of the bombs being dropped (b)
• show clear cause and effect between the policies and actions, for example, how the Greater East Asia Co-Prosperity Sphere and the signing of the Tripartite Pact from Japan, led to actions like Japan’s expansion into Indochina and the Dutch East Indies and the bombing of Pearl Harbor (a)
• demonstrate extensive knowledge and understanding of the various reasons for using the A-bomb, for example, to end the war, to save US lives and to demonstrate strength (b).

Areas for students to improve include:

• focusing on an argument that can be sustained throughout their response without providing a description of the Pearl Harbor bombing or a narrative recount of the course of the war (a), or without describing the event of the A-bombs being used or the aftermath (b)
• making more reasoned judgements about cause and effect
• integrating a greater level of knowledge and evidence to support their judgement
• understanding the starting date in the question and ensuring they write their response accordingly.

Question 14 – Conflict in Europe 1935–1945

In better responses, students were able to:

• provide a well-reasoned and sustained judgement of why the conflict in Europe escalated from 1935, based on an extensive understanding of Nazi foreign policy and the growth of European tensions as a cause of conflict for example, aggressive foreign policy of Nazis, policy of appeasement, collapse of collective security (a)
• provide a well-reasoned and sustained assessment of why Germany’s campaign in Russia ultimately failed, considering how these aspects interrelated and connected to broader factors or events in other theatres of the conflict (b)
• develop a clear structure that addresses the reasons why the conflict escalated (a) and/or the campaign in Russia failed (b) that is both logical and cohesive
• use a range of extensive, accurate and relevant historical knowledge and understanding to supportthe judgement.

Areas for students to improve include:

• ensuring evidence used is relevant to the question and topic, avoiding confusing content from the ‘Power and Authority’ topic that is not relevant to the question (a)
• making a clear judgement of reasons why the conflict escalated (a) or the campaign in Russia failed (b) that is explicitly stated, avoiding a descriptive or narrative response, for example, narrating the events of Operation Barbarossa or the Battle of Stalingrad (b)
• using evidence that is detailed, accurate and relevant to the argument made in the response, clearly linking this evidence to the chosen question (a,b).

Question 15 – The Cold War 1945–1991

In better responses, students were able to:

• demonstrate an extensive understanding of the deeper issues, for example, conflicting ideological and geopolitical ambitions, that led to the events which contributed to the emerging conflict between the superpowers (a)
• demonstrate an extensive understanding of the reasons for Detente and how these connected not only to Detente, but other factors which also contributed to Detente (b)
• provide a broad range of specific examples that support their judgement of why conflict emerged between the superpowers (a) and why there was a shift to Detente (b)
• provide a well-structured, logical and cohesive response that allows the reader to follow lines of argument clearly.

Areas for students to improve include:

• ensuring the evidence provided is accurate and used to support the argument or explanation, rather than just having the evidence standalone beside assertions without being directly linked with phrases like, ‘this is evident in’ or ‘demonstrated through’
• taking a clear position in response to the question and sustaining this position throughout the entire response.

Question 17 – The Arab-Israeli Conflict 1948–1996

In better responses, students were able to:

• demonstrate a comprehensive understanding of why the Arab-Israeli conflict emerged from 1948, especially with regards to the deeper issues, for example, unrealised national aspirations of the Palestinians and the ongoing issue of refugees and resentment, which emerged from the earlier period of the conflict (a)
• demonstrate a comprehensive understanding of why Israel invaded Lebanon in 1978 and 1982 by linking this invasion to pre-existing factors and events and identifying the deeper issues which drove these events, for example, the existence of refugees from prior conflicts and the presence of the PLO in Lebanon after 1970 (b)
• use evidence to supportthe arguments as to why Israel invaded Lebanon (b) and why the conflict emerged from 1948 (a), rather than simply provide relevant events alongside an assertion.

Areas for students to improve include:

• ensuring that historical knowledge is accurate and relevant, both in terms of key facts and significance
• ensuring that a clear position is taken and that the argument is supported by specific and relevant examples
• ensuring there is a breadth of examples and evidence used to support the argument from across the entire period relevant or stipulated in the question.

Question 19(a) – The Cultural Revolution to Tiananmen Square 1966–1989

In better responses students were able to:

• provide accurate and specific reasons for the removal of Deng from politics, focussing on the different ideological understandings, the struggle for power between Mao and Deng, the influence of the context, for example, the Cultural Revolution and/or the failures of the Great Leap Forward
• answer the question using specific historical details, either concepts or the names of people involved or events
• remain within the scope of the question.

Areas for students to improve include:

• making sure all information presented is relevant to the question
• providing specific rather than generalised historical knowledge within the response
• writing in a concise way to address the question, rather than providing tangential information.

Question 19(b) – The Cultural Revolution to Tiananmen Square 1966–1989

In better responses students were able to:

• answer the question by discussing a range of ways in which Chinese Society was impacted by the Cultural Revolution, for example, the destruction of the four olds, the renewal of culture, disruption to society, rise of violence by the Red Guards, impacts on education and disruption of the economy remain within the scope of the question in terms of the time period of the Cultural Revolution (1966–1976)
• communicate in a logical and ordered way about a range of impacts of the Cultural Revolution
• make valid and integrated references to the source connecting to their discussion of the impacts of the Cultural Revolution.

Areas for students to improve include:

• ensuring all information presented is relevant to the question
• providing specific rather than generalised historical knowledge in the response
• using the source to support their discussion, rather than describing what it shows or analysing its value.

Question 19(c) – The Cultural Revolution to Tiananmen Square 1966–1989

In better responses students were able to:

• make a sustained judgement about the success of Deng Xiaoping's reforms in China
• make an insightful judgement about the extent of the success of Deng Xiaoping's reforms in China, not just state the degree of success but provide reasons to support the judgement about how successful he was
• provide a wide range of relevant, detailed and accurate historical information to support the judgement, for example, referencing the modernisation of the economy, the lack of a 5th modernisation, democracy, de-collectivisation, opening up China, the Special Economic Zones, or Deng’s pragmatism.

Areas for students to improve include:

• making a judgement which is sustained throughout the response
• providing clear reasons for the judgement, rather than just making statements
• remaining within the scope of the question rather than addressing the reforms of other leaders, for example, Mao Zedong or Zhou Enlai, or other time periods, for example, the Great Leap Forward.

Question 20(a) – Civil Rights in the USA 1945–1968

In better responses students were able to:

• accurately identify the actions of the KKK in its opposition to civil rights movements and individuals, including lynchings, intimidation, and scare tactics, for example, physical intimidation and bombings
• describe a range of ideas rather than focusing on a single point or detail
• support their responses with specific knowledge about the KKK, such as individuals or events, including its opposition to desegregation, particularly in significant cases like Brown v. Board of Education in 1954.

Areas for students to improve include:

• remaining within the scope of the question and avoiding unnecessary details, for example, the origins of the KKK
• avoiding simplistic narratives and reliance on recounts
• ensuring dates and names are accurate.

Question 20(b) – Civil Rights in the USA 1945–1968

In better responses students were able to:

• engage in a discussion that did not require judgement but moved through different examples of Martin Luther King Jr’s career, emphasising key words in the question, especially efforts and achieving change. This approach allowed responses to explore King's significant contributions and the limitations of change
• make effective use of the provided source, going beyond a brief reference to incorporating it as support for ideas.

Areas for students to improve include:

• avoiding a focus solely on the biographical details of King’s career as this limits the scope for an in-depth discussion
• consistently adhering to the question and topic, avoiding extended general statements or narratives.

Question 20(c) – Civil Rights in the USA 1945–1968

In better responses students were able to:

• make clear and well-supported judgements consistently throughout the response
• keep responses within the scope of the question, providing specific historical details, for example, legislative progress, boycotts, sit-ins, strikes, and marches.

Areas for students to improve include:

• providing well chosen examples rather than focusing on just one or two
• answering the specific question rather than relying on responses to similar questions from previous years. For example, only contrasting the methods of Martin Luther King and Malcolm X.

Question 22(a) – The Nuclear Age 1945–2011

In better responses students were able to:

• provide explicit historical detail about the development of the Manhattan Project, for example, dates, locations, individuals or events.

Areas for students to improve include:

• keeping the response within the scope of the question, rather than identifying the origin and purpose of the Manhattan Project and then identifying the result of creating the first successful Atom Bomb
• being concise and focusing on describing key details rather than providing a narrative of the events associated with the Manhattan Project.

Question 22(b) – The Nuclear Age 1945–2011

In better responses students were able to:

• provide a clear discussion of the nature of the US and Soviet Union nuclear testing between 1945 and 1989
• support the discussion with specific and accurate historical detail from across the time period
• provide a balanced discussion of the nature of nuclear testing for both the US and the Soviet Union
• adhere to the scope of the question, focusing on the nature of nuclear testing
• integrate the source provided to support their discussion.

Areas for students to improve include:

• focusing on the key words and scope of the question rather than the physical effects on civilians of nuclear testing
• providing a range of accurate historical information that covers more of the time period (1945–1989) of nuclear testing in the US and the Soviet Union
• making explicit reference to the source, for example, ‘Source H emphasises …’
• integrating the source provided throughout the response rather than simply restating information within the source.

Question 22(c) – The Nuclear Age 1945–2011

In better responses students were able to:

• present a reasoned and logical judgement and sustain this throughout the response
• use explicit, accurate and detailed historical knowledge to support the judgement throughout the response.

Areas for students to improve include:

• presenting a clear and sustained judgement rather than narration
• responding to the scope of the question and the time period, 1960–2011.

Question 23(a) – Apartheid in South Africa 1960–1994

In better responses students were able to:

• address the impact of apartheid on urban communities, showing a distinction between rural and urban communities
• demonstrate an understanding of the meaning of the words, ‘impact’ and ‘urban communities’
• discuss different examples of the impacts, such as legislative, economic, social and cultural impacts
• refer to specific examples from the use of passbooks, differences in pay and other differences between communities in South Africa.

Areas for students to improve include:

• avoiding using the Bantustans at the sole focus of the answer
• providing more than generalisations about the everyday life of black South Africans
• providing specific and concise information rather than elaborate narratives. For example, when referencing urban communities, clearly showing the differences between communities in South Africa with regard to the use of facilities, travel and employment.

Question 23(b) – Apartheid in South Africa 1960–1994

In better responses students were able to:

• address the international response to South African policies from 1960–1994
• explain the different responses to economic sanctions, boycotts, cultural and sports boycotts and diplomatic isolation
• explain the relationship between Source I and how the international community responded to South Africa
• make connections between South Africa and the impact that the international responses had on the country
• provide clear examples such as the United Nations General Assembly passing resolutions condemning apartheid and calling for member states to impose sanctions, or the International Olympic Committee barring South African teams from participating in global competitions.

Areas for students to improve include:

• demonstrating an accurate understanding of the international responses to South African policies
• incorporating the source and details of different responses to South Africa
• making explicit reference to where the source has been used, for example, stating, ‘In Source I …’
• providing clear explanations and supporting ideas with accurate historical detail consistently throughout the response.

Question 23(c) – Apartheid in South Africa 1960–1994

In better responses students were able to:

• make balanced, reasoned and logical judgements that are clearly sustained throughout the response
• use knowledge of the different types of resistances that were occurring in South Africa to support their response
• discuss how the different types of resistances could either be successful or unsuccessful
• use specific examples of mass mobilisation protests from the Sharpeville massacre and Soweto Uprising and the actions from the ANC, PAN and the Black Consciousness Movement.

Areas for students to improve include:

• presenting a clear judgement and sustaining this throughout the response rather than lapsing into a narration of the content
• supporting their judgements with the use of accurate and relevant historical detail which relates to all parts of the question
• selectively integrating the source throughout the response rather than simply restating information within the source.