HY2
ISSUES ARISING FROM
THE EXAMINATION
MAY 2013
HY2 ISSUES FROM THE 2013 EXAMINATION
The specification, the
revised specimen
assessment materials
and the Examiner’s
Report are available on
the history pages of the
WJEC website at
www.wjec.co.uk
HY2 ISSUES FROM THE 2013 EXAMINATION
In addition, the WJEC secure website contains
examination review material for HY2 including
candidates’ scripts and examiner comments on the
selected scripts.
HY2 ISSUES FROM THE 2013 EXAMINATION
The new style of examination of HY2 was
creditably attempted by the majority of
candidates with evidence, in the better
responses, of candidates being very
knowledgeable and able to use their history
evaluation skills to engage meaningfully with
the key issues and the presented evidential
material in relation to the questions set.
HY2 ISSUES FROM THE 2013 EXAMINATION
Although there were many responses which
offered valid source evaluation comments it
must also be mentioned that, as in the older
HY2 examination, there is room for
improvement in developing meaningful
source evaluation responses in context.
HY2 ISSUES FROM THE 2013 EXAMINATION
The Examiners, in general terms, felt that
where there was a weakness it was because
many candidates relied too heavily on
formulaic, mechanistic consideration of the
content of the sources without engaging
meaningfully with the issues outlined in the
attributions.
HY2 ISSUES FROM THE 2013 EXAMINATION
The Examiners also felt that where there was
a weakness it was because many candidates
were unable to develop responses setting the
sources in the context of when they were
produced and in the context of the set
enquiry, the question set.
HY2 ISSUES FROM THE 2013 EXAMINATION
The Examiners were also
disappointed that many
candidates relied too heavily on
narrative accounts featuring either
copying or comprehension of the
sources (or displays of own
knowledge) rather than focussing
on the source evaluation
comments which this paper
demands.
HY2 ISSUES FROM THE 2013 EXAMINATION
One issue which affected a
minority of candidates was the
timing of the responses. Most
of the candidates were able to
offer full answers to all four of the
sub – questions but some
candidates did not address all
questions thoroughly. This was
mainly because they spent too
much time on the first two subquestions.
HY2 ISSUES FROM THE 2013 EXAMINATION
Where there were concerns on specific papers
about one or more of the four sub – questions the
Principal Examiners have highlighted such issues
in the Examiner’s Report from which the extracts
in red, that follow, have been taken.
HY2 ISSUES FROM THE 2013 EXAMINATION
Sub-question (a) expects definition of an historical
term or phrase which is used in one of the sources.
This question requires that candidates provide an
explanation set in the historical context in which it
was produced.
Candidates will therefore need to make use of the
attribution of the source to understand what the
author meant by the term / phrase in the context in
which it was produced.
HY2 ISSUES FROM THE 2013 EXAMINATION
Sub-question (a): candidates should explain, in its
historical context, a term or phrase used by an author.
The Examiner’s were concerned that some
candidates were content to explain what they
thought the author meant by the selected
phrase just by reference to the content of the
source and using their own knowledge.
That type of response will fail to gain a Level
2 mark.
HY2 ISSUES FROM THE 2013 EXAMINATION
Candidates should be encouraged to discuss why
a particular author at a particular moment of time
would use a certain phrase.
To prevent poisonous false doctrine and bad examples from being spread all over
Christendom, and so that the art of printing books might be used only towards good ends,
we, after mature and long deliberations, order and command by this edict that henceforth,
under penalty of confiscation of goods and property, no book dealer, printer, or anybody
else mention the Holy Scriptures or their interpretation without having first received the
consent of the clerk of the city and the consent of the Faculty of Theology of the University,
which will approve those books and writings with their seal.
[An extract from The Edict of Worms, published by Emperor Charles V in 1521]
(a) What does the author of Source A mean by the phrase ‘poisonous false doctrine and bad
examples’? [8]
In your answer you are advised to discuss the content and authorship of the source and to use
your own knowledge.
HY2 ISSUES FROM THE 2013 EXAMINATION
That will usually mean being able to understand
what was happening at the time, the context in
which the source was produced, and the purpose /
audience of the author – which demands a focus
on the attribution.
[An extract from The Edict of
Worms, published by Emperor
Charles V in 1521]
HY2 ISSUES FROM THE 2013 EXAMINATION
Mere copying / comprehension of the content or
the attribution will not be well rewarded: the date,
origin and purpose of the source in context has to
be the focus of the candidate’s response.
As one of the Principal Examiners commented:
HY2 ISSUES FROM THE 2013 EXAMINATION
[Some candidates were…] able to explain
that ‘the people under the ancien régime’
refers to the unjust tax system which
exempted the privileged First and Second
Estates from direct taxation leaving the
burden to fall on the Third Estate. Fewer
candidates were able to explain that the
caption accompanied a satirical print drawn
by a radical in the year of the Revolution to
advocate social and political reform.
[A contemporary radical print showing the people of the Third Estate
bearing the financial burden of taxation during the ancien regime. The
caption translates as ‘The people under the ancien regime’ (c. 1789]
HY2 ISSUES FROM THE 2013 EXAMINATION
Sub-question (b) expects explanation of the
importance or significance of an historical event
or development.
Candidates will need to analyse and evaluate the
content and authorship of the two named sources
and also use their own knowledge in their answer to
this question. The candidates will need to focus on
the attributions of the sources and undertake to
provide a full explanation of the importance or of the
significance of the named issue in relation to the
historical enquiry set.
HY2 ISSUES FROM THE 2013 EXAMINATION
Sub-question (b): candidates should consider and
come to a judgment on the importance or significance
of an historical development using the two sources
provided and their own knowledge.
The Examiners noted that a few candidates were
unable to develop fuller responses using the
sources in context and many did not focus on the
exact question set especially on the key concept of
the “significance” or “importance” of the event set.
For example:
HY2 ISSUES FROM THE 2013 EXAMINATION
Source A
The Uxbridge Peace Propositions of 1644 included a radical set of proposals for
the reform of the Anglican Church. It advocated the abolition of bishops and the
Book of Common Prayer and the issuing of a Directory of Worship based on
Presbyterian ideas. It was too radical for the King, who rejected it out of hand, thus
ending any hopes of a negotiated end to the Civil War.
[M. Walzer, an academic historian and specialist in seventeenth-century English
radicalism, writing in a specialist textbook, The Revolution of the Saints (1965)]
Source B
It is a truth conceived by God that all men are created equal and that Englishmen
are naturally free. That state of freedom extends to free speech, fair trial and
equitable justice, and the right to vote in parliamentary elections for all men over
the age of 21. No one man should have the power of life and death over another.
[John Lilburne, a parliamentary soldier and leader of the radical Leveller
Movement, writing in a political pamphlet, England’s Birthright Justified (1645)]
(b) How significant were radical groups in the development of the Civil War? [16]
Explain your answer analysing and evaluating the content and authorship of
Sources A and B and using your own knowledge.
HY2 ISSUES FROM THE 2013 EXAMINATION
A few candidates were content to discuss the specific set issue simply in terms
of what they knew of the period which is not sufficient for Level 2 marks.
Some tried to justify their judgement by copying supporting extracts from the
sources which, at best, would gain less than half marks.
The Examiners noted that there was a tendency amongst a minority to ignore the
sources and focus on the “events” with narrative accounts of what happened.
One examiner commented:
Most candidates were able to use the content of the sources to explain
something about regional unemployment in Britain. Too many did this in a
mechanistic way, giving too little focus on what the sources had to say about ‘the
significance of regional unemployment. Too many responses were trawling the
content and then mechanically discussing the authorship.
Needless to say failure to focus the source evaluation comments on the
attributions of the sources will restrict such responses to low marks at Level 1.
HY2 ISSUES FROM THE 2013 EXAMINATION
Candidates should be encouraged to analyse the content and authorship of the
two named sources and also use their own knowledge in their answer to this
question. That will usually mean being able to focus on the attributions of the
sources and undertake to evaluate the importance / significance of the named
issue in relation to the particular historical enquiry set. One of the Examiners
makes this point (see sources on next slide):
Candidates must use the content, attribution and context of the sources to
reach a judgement on the importance of the Kansas-Nebraska bill. It is also
expected that candidates will use their own knowledge of the period to
demonstrate understanding of the importance of this bill. The sources reveal
Senator Douglas’s ill-judged attempt to provide a solution to the vexed
problems of slavery on the new territories. The Kansas-Nebraska bill
heightened sectional tensions, providing evidence of an early civil war in
miniature in Kansas. Source A is an exercise in self-justification by the main
protagonist of the bill whereas Source B is an impassioned anti-slavery poster.
HY2 ISSUES FROM THE 2013 EXAMINATION
Source A
The bill provides, in words as specific
as our language affords, that the act is
NOT to legislate slavery into any
Territory or State. It does not introduce
slavery, does not revive it, does not
establish it. The great principle of selfgovernment is declared in this bill to be
the rule of action as a final settlement
of the slavery agitation.
[Senator Stephen Douglas, explaining
the aim of his Kansas-Nebraska bill, in
a letter to the editor of a newspaper,
The Concord Register (16 February
1854)]
Source B
[An anti-slavery broadsheet advertising
a free state convention in Kansas
(September 1855)]
HY2 ISSUES FROM THE 2013 EXAMINATION
Sub-question (c) expects candidates to give a
supported and valid judgement on a particular
interpretation.
They will be expected to use the content and
authorship of two nominated sources and their
own knowledge to discuss and come to a valid
judgement regarding this interpretation. The
candidates should be able to bring their
knowledge of other interpretations into their
answer.
HY2 ISSUES FROM THE 2013 EXAMINATION
Sub-question (c): candidates should consider and
come to a judgment on the validity of a given
interpretation in relation to the two selected sources
and their own knowledge of other possible
interpretations.
Examiners noted that the majority of candidates
were able to use the nominated sources to discuss
the validity of the given interpretation in terms of
what the sources had to say – the content of the two
sources.
HY2 ISSUES FROM THE 2013 EXAMINATION
Examiners noted some candidates tried to show how
each of the sources may have supported or
contradicted the given interpretation. This is what
one of the Examiners meant by the report that
Candidates needed to focus on how and why different
interpretations have been formed. A minority
discussed the extent of support or contradiction
between the two sources' views, rather than whether
they agreed with the interpretation in the question; this
tended to limit those candidates to low Level 2.
HY2 ISSUES FROM THE 2013 EXAMINATION
Some candidates were able to use the attributions
to discuss the given interpretation but most were
restricted to mechanical comments on reliability or
usefulness. A number of candidates failed to
develop source evaluation comments based on the
attributions provided to the two selected sources in
relation to how and why the interpretation may have
been formed. This point is made by the Examiner
who wrote:
HY2 ISSUES FROM THE 2013 EXAMINATION
Most candidates were able to use the sources’
content to discuss the interpretation that financial
problems were responsible for the outbreak of the
French Revolution in 1789. This was linked to their
knowledge of the debt crisis caused by military
spending and an inefficient tax system. Many
candidates hinted at alternative interpretations such
as Louis XVI’s weak leadership (as suggested by
Source D), the rise of the bourgeoisie or the
influence of the Enlightenment. Discussion of the
attributions, however, tended to be rather simplistic
and mechanical.
HY2 ISSUES FROM THE 2013 EXAMINATION
Candidates should be encouraged to analyse and
evaluate the content and authorship of the two
named sources and also use their own knowledge
in their answer to this question. That will usually
mean being able to use the content and attribution
of both sources to provide convincing source
evaluation while discussing and coming to a valid
judgement on how the issue has been interpreted
in different ways rather than just displaying
knowledge of the event. The point was made by
one Examiner who notes:
.
HY2 ISSUES FROM THE 2013 EXAMINATION
Often the use of additional knowledge to support
arguments was impressive although the quality of
source evaluation was often disappointing and far
less convincing. Sometimes this amounted to
little more than mechanistic references to the work
of an academic historian who had studied the topic
or the diary of a member of the anti-Nazi
resistance. Candidates must ensure that through
rigorous source evaluation in context that they are
able to make a judgement about the validity of the
interpretation.
HY2 ISSUES FROM THE 2013 EXAMINATION
Sub-question (d) expects evaluation of the utility of
three nominated sources in the context of the indepth study. Candidates are expected to
demonstrate their ability to analyse and evaluate the
nominated sources demonstrating source evaluation
skills. There should be consideration of issues such
as reliability, bias, purpose and validity, as
appropriate, when considering the utility of these
sources. There should also be consideration of the
limitations of the nominated sources in the wider
context of the in-depth study.
HY2 ISSUES FROM THE 2013 EXAMINATION
Sub-question (d): candidates should consider and
come to a judgment on the utility of three selected
sources in understanding the depth study studied.
Some candidates offered responses to this question
by commenting on just the content of the three
sources (sometimes copying the attributions) and
were restricted to low marks as a result. There is
really no excuse for comprehension of the sources
only at this over-arching question.
HY2 ISSUES FROM THE 2013 EXAMINATION
Many candidates adopted a formulaic and
mechanistic approach of offering comments first on
the strengths and then the limitations of the content
of the sources followed by a second set of
comments on the strengths and limitations of the
attributions.
HY2 ISSUES FROM THE 2013 EXAMINATION
Many, indeed most, candidates adopted another
general approach seen was to comment on the
strengths and limitations of the three selected
sources and then add a short essay on other
developments during the period which were omitted
from the sources.
This approach generally gains about half the
available marks.
HY2 ISSUES FROM THE 2013 EXAMINATION
Many candidates were unable to develop an overall
assessment of the sources and to deploy their
contextual knowledge and understanding of the
whole topic which hindered performance. Too
often candidates only evaluated the nominated
sources within the context of the limited key issues
which are raised within the sources. What is
needed is a fuller evaluation of the utility of the three
selected sources and clear, contextual reference to
the whole topic in an integrated rather than
segregated manner. One examiner stressed the
point: .
HY2 ISSUES FROM THE 2013 EXAMINATION
The trend for candidates to persist in dealing with
the selected sources in isolation continued into this
round of examinations.
Candidates must focus upon producing balanced
responses to the collection as a whole which meet
the demands of the assessment criteria in full in
order to access marks at Level 3.
HY2 ISSUES FROM THE 2013 EXAMINATION
Candidates should be encouraged to analyse and
evaluate the content and authorship of the three
selected sources in their historical context and also use
their own knowledge in their answer to this question.
That will usually mean being able to provide convincing
source evaluation in the context of their authorship and
coming to a valid judgement on their utility. To judge
utility, there should be consideration of the content and
the authorship of the nominated sources to discuss
reliability, bias, purpose and validity, as appropriate.
This should be integrated into the developments which
took place throughout the depth study.
HY2 ISSUES FROM THE 2013 EXAMINATION
Candidates at Part (d) should attempt to identify the
main characteristic / development in the presented
sources (usually there will be three) and use these to
consider the relevant context. For example if a source
is on “Youth” in Nazi Germany they should be able to
discuss the wider theme of social developments set in
the context of changes during the Nazi Regime.
Another source may give them access to economic
issues which they could link to economic and political
development over the period. The third source may
allow them to focus on opposition which they could link
to the organisation of the Nazi state.
HY2 ISSUES FROM THE 2013 EXAMINATION
Candidates are not expected to simply list all
(or as many as they can) of the omissions
but they are expected to engage with the
content and authorship of the sources in the
context of the wider developments during the
depth study. They need to use their source
evaluation skills to show the strengths and
limitations of the three sources in
understanding the changing developments in
the context of the depth study period.