Shamelessly stolen from a friend's Facebook post. Who said education hasn't been dumbed down? And which three would you choose?
QuoteUniversity of London
General Certificate of Education
Summer 1968
Special Paper
History
Three Hours
Answer THREE Questions
1. 'The custodian of the social memory.' Consider this definition of the historian
2. Is a dictator necessarily a tyrant?
3. How would you justify the selection of Runnymede as a site for the British memorial to President Kennedy?
4. 'Saxon, Norman and Dane are we.' Discuss the contribution of each to the English race
5. Examine the case for and against televising proceedings in Parliament.
6. Illustrate the value to the historian of either court records or place names
7. Contrast the civilizations of Greece and Rome
8. Why did the ascetic ideal appeal so strongly to medieval man?
9. 'Fashion is transient, craftsmanship is permanent.' Discuss
10. What should be the functions of a trade union in present-day Britain?
Having said that, the modern equivalent looks pretty daunting to me. But then I know nothing about history!
QuoteExplain why Clemenceau wanted the Treaty of Versailles to be so harsh on Germany.
Explain why the Weimar republic faced opposition between 1919 and 1923.
Explain why women were an important part of Hitler's plans for German.
Explain why Hitler wanted to take over Czechoslovakia.
Explain why the Soviet Union blockaded Berlin in 1948.
Explain why the USA became involved in Vietnam.
Quote from: Brazen on July 15, 2011, 04:39:49 AM
Having said that, the modern equivalent looks pretty daunting to me. But then I know nothing about history!
QuoteExplain why Clemenceau wanted the Treaty of Versailles to be so harsh on Germany.
Explain why the Weimar republic faced opposition between 1919 and 1923.
Explain why women were an important part of Hitler's plans for German.
Explain why Hitler wanted to take over Czechoslovakia.
Explain why the Soviet Union blockaded Berlin in 1948.
Explain why the USA became involved in Vietnam.
Those I can somewhat explain, but the ones in the first post is very much harder, for me at least.
Is this real?
It doesn't seem so much like history to me, more like philosophy or the like. Totally not what I thought old history exams were like- I thought they placed a heavy focus on forcing people to remember exact dates?
Modern GCSEs are quite crappy, too much focus on nattering about the validity of sources rather than the actual history. Modern A-Levels though (yeah, yeah its for 16 year olds not 18 year olds) tend to be much better, they ask clear historical questions, not broad abstract ones.
I don't know what an ascetic ideal is :(
Quote from: Tyr on July 15, 2011, 05:38:54 AM
Is this real?
It doesn't seem so much like history to me, more like philosophy or the like. Totally not what I thought old history exams were like- I thought they placed a heavy focus on forcing people to remember exact dates?
Modern GCSEs are quite crappy, too much focus on nattering about the validity of sources rather than the actual history. Modern A-Levels though (yeah, yeah its for 16 year olds not 18 year olds) tend to be much better, they ask clear historical questions, not broad abstract ones.
Remembering exact dates is exactly what history exams are not. Pretty much in every exam I see, you have to analyze things rather than spout off chronologies.
QuoteUniversity of London
General Certificate of Education
Summer 1968
Special Paper
History
Didn't know 16 year olds were going to a University for a certificate in 1968.
"Special paper"? Seems a bit much for a 16 year old.
There were a number of examination boards for the old GCEs. These boards were usually part of a university. Eg Oxford examioners, Cambridge examiners, the joint matriculation board.
They set the syllabus and examinations and issued the certificates.
I should also add that, unlike GCSEs, GCEs were only taken by more able pupils..........perhaps a third to a half of the total. The paper is also a "special paper", probably taken by exceptional history students who were going to walk the standard GCE.
Quote10. What should be the functions of a trade union in present-day Britain?
To which I can see several Languishites saying ..."Nothing, not since Thatcher. na na na na na"
Quote from: Josephus on July 15, 2011, 07:14:38 AM
To which I can see several Languishites saying ..."Nothing, not since Thatcher. na na na na na"
Why only since?
Quote from: Brazen on July 15, 2011, 04:24:27 AM
Shamelessly stolen from a friend's Facebook post. Who said education hasn't been dumbed down? And which three would you choose?
Those are doable. Especially since I would have had a class recently where alot of those ideas were discussed right? I would probably choose 5, 7, and 8 if I was given this test today without any preparation.
Quote from: Grey Fox on July 15, 2011, 05:48:43 AM
I don't know what an ascetic ideal is :(
The notion that people should deprive themselves of good things in order to please god. More or less.
Quote from: Malthus on July 15, 2011, 08:23:26 AM
Quote from: Grey Fox on July 15, 2011, 05:48:43 AM
I don't know what an ascetic ideal is :(
The notion that people should deprive themselves of good things in order to please god. More or less.
History, my ass!
Quote7. Contrast the civilizations of Greece and Rome
Fags and according to the movie
Caligula, fisting.
Quote from: Grey Fox on July 15, 2011, 08:28:14 AM
Quote from: Malthus on July 15, 2011, 08:23:26 AM
Quote from: Grey Fox on July 15, 2011, 05:48:43 AM
I don't know what an ascetic ideal is :(
The notion that people should deprive themselves of good things in order to please god. More or less.
History, my ass!
Oddly enough, those two were not among the good things that medieval monks would have deprived themselves. :D
Quote from: Ed Anger on July 15, 2011, 08:29:45 AM
Quote7. Contrast the civilizations of Greece and Rome
Fags and according to the movie Caligula, fisting.
Caligula was released after 1968, IIRC. Couldn't be included as reference in their history exam of '68.
Quote from: Brazen on July 15, 2011, 04:24:27 AM
QuoteUniversity of London
1. 'The custodian of the social memory.' Consider this definition of the historian
2. Is a dictator necessarily a tyrant?
3. How would you justify the selection of Runnymede as a site for the British memorial to President Kennedy?
4. 'Saxon, Norman and Dane are we.' Discuss the contribution of each to the English race
5. Examine the case for and against televising proceedings in Parliament.
6. Illustrate the value to the historian of either court records or place names
7. Contrast the civilizations of Greece and Rome
8. Why did the ascetic ideal appeal so strongly to medieval man?
9. 'Fashion is transient, craftsmanship is permanent.' Discuss
10. What should be the functions of a trade union in present-day Britain?
Of these 10, I think I have something to say about 2 and 5. I don't know much about 1, 6, 9 and 10, but I think I can score better than zero on these. I know absolutely nothing about 3, 4, 7 and 8.
Quote from: viper37 on July 15, 2011, 09:33:12 AM
Quote from: Ed Anger on July 15, 2011, 08:29:45 AM
Quote7. Contrast the civilizations of Greece and Rome
Fags and according to the movie Caligula, fisting.
Caligula was released after 1968, IIRC. Couldn't be included as reference in their history exam of '68.
I time travel.
My power glove lets me.
<----
Quote from: Ed Anger on July 15, 2011, 09:45:59 AM
I time travel.
My power glove lets me.
<----
Then you have the only working Power Glove ever made, because the rest is so bad, it wouldn't even allow me to play the damn games.
Quote from: Brazen on July 15, 2011, 04:39:49 AM
Having said that, the modern equivalent looks pretty daunting to me. But then I know nothing about history!
QuoteExplain why Clemenceau wanted the Treaty of Versailles to be so harsh on Germany.
Explain why the Weimar republic faced opposition between 1919 and 1923.
Explain why women were an important part of Hitler's plans for German.
Explain why Hitler wanted to take over Czechoslovakia.
Explain why the Soviet Union blockaded Berlin in 1948.
Explain why the USA became involved in Vietnam.
It's because you know nothing about history, I agree with you. Most here can answer all of them - except maybe Tim. :console:
1. Because France lost so many of its boys and its infrastructure on the Western front that they never, ever, ever wanted to face a dangerous Germany again... and press into their teutonic faces like sore winners, not necessarily in that order.
2. Because it signed the Versailles Treaty and the German people were sore losers as well, even when starving and later using buckets to transport the millions of Reichmark needed to pay for their bread and coal.
3. To make pure Aryan babies like machines and take care of the hearth back home while their husbands murdered Bolsheviks and Jews for the Vaterland.
4. Because he wanted Czechoslovakia, piece by piece if needed, and because his chummies Neville, Benito, and Edouard told him he could if he shows himself reasonable in not eating the whole cake, but just a little piece of cake. Adolf didn't listen, so gulp gulp.
5. To kick the capitalist occupiers out of their Berlin sectors, so Stalin could have it all three years after having sent waves of armed peasants die by the tens of thousands in its alleyways to finally overtake it.
6. Because they didn't want the South Vietnamese to catch political rabies and take a liking to it enough to infect the rest of their neighbors like rabid zombies. Because we all know what it could lead to in Laos and "Pol-potoria", but that would be hindsight and teleologism.
I just wonder what wass Hitler's Plan for German.
Quote from: Grey Fox on July 15, 2011, 10:13:27 AM
I just wonder what wass Hitler's Plan for German.
More umlauts.
9 and 10 are commie classes
Quote from: Grey Fox on July 15, 2011, 10:13:27 AM
I just wonder what wass Hitler's Plan for German.
To have her name changed to Herman.
Quote from: Drakken on July 15, 2011, 10:07:05 AM
4. Because he wanted Czechoslovakia, piece by piece if needed, and because his chummies Neville, Benito, and Edouard told him he could if he shows himself reasonable in not eating the whole cake, but just a little piece of cake. Adolf didn't listen, so gulp gulp.
He wanted to take over it because he wanted it? :huh:
Quote from: garbon on July 15, 2011, 12:32:06 PM
He wanted to take over it because he wanted it? :huh:
Yeah. I count annexation without regard for law, treaties, and the opinion of the international community as "because I want it."
Quote from: Grey Fox on July 15, 2011, 08:28:14 AM
Quote from: Malthus on July 15, 2011, 08:23:26 AM
Quote from: Grey Fox on July 15, 2011, 05:48:43 AM
I don't know what an ascetic ideal is :(
The notion that people should deprive themselves of good things in order to please god. More or less.
History, my ass!
?
Think flagellation scene in Seventh Seal.
GF thinks there was no religion in history. Blame the godless commie Canadian education system.
Quote from: Drakken on July 15, 2011, 12:34:36 PM
Quote from: garbon on July 15, 2011, 12:32:06 PM
He wanted to take over it because he wanted it? :huh:
Yeah. I count annexation without regard for law, treaties, and the opinion of the international community as "because I want it."
My point was that you didn't answer the question.
Quote from: Valmy on July 15, 2011, 12:37:57 PM
GF thinks there was no religion in history. Blame the godless commie Canadian education system.
Curé Labelle disagress with you!
I'm just saying it's more a philosophycal question more then an history question.
Quote from: Brazen on July 15, 2011, 04:24:27 AM1. 'The custodian of the social memory.' Consider this definition of the historian
I will consider it. Unfortunately, you have neither asked a question nor directed a response, so any thoughts I have on the subject would seem inappropriate here.
Quote2. Is a dictator necessarily a tyrant?
Since the words refer to two completely separate types of leader from two separate peoples and forms of government, I suspect the answer to be "no."
Quote3. How would you justify the selection of Runnymede as a site for the British memorial to President Kennedy?
I refuse to believe that's a name of a real place. It sounds disgusting.
Quote4. 'Saxon, Norman and Dane are we.' Discuss the contribution of each to the English race
They had sex with Celts.
Quote5. Examine the case for and against televising proceedings in Parliament.
For: why the fuck wouldn't you? Against: it's insanely boring.
Quote6. Illustrate the value to the historian of either court records or place names
You want me to draw you a picture? Might as well, since describing something so obvious would be a complete waste of both our times.
Quote7. Contrast the civilizations of Greece and Rome
Weak disunited slave-driven shithole versus a powerful, united, but ultimately corrupt slave-driven shithole.
Quote8. Why did the ascetic ideal appeal so strongly to medieval man?
In a nutshell, medieval man was stupid. And the prospect of sex with the average medieval woman was, perhaps, unappetizing.
Quote9. 'Fashion is transient, craftsmanship is permanent.' Discuss
This is a profoundly vapid request that insults us both.
Quote10. What should be the functions of a trade union in present-day Britain?
To obtain higher salaries for educators, of course.
You talk big Ide, but we all know that your answer to all points would be a passionate pro-Stalin rant.
But seriously, only about five of those questions are remotely acceptable as history exam questions, and only about three are interesting.
Is there a non-cliched way to answer either 1 or 2, for example? Actually, given this is 1968, Brain may be closer to the truth than he realizes, since it looks well-designed as a method to weed out communists. "Well, there was Lenin..."
What's the cliched way of answering #2?
I don't even know what #1 means.
Quote from: Drakken on July 15, 2011, 10:06:05 AM
Quote from: Ed Anger on July 15, 2011, 09:45:59 AM
I time travel.
My power glove lets me.
<----
Then you have the only working Power Glove ever made, because the rest is so bad, it wouldn't even allow me to play the damn games.
The customer service rep in the video game section at my local Best Buy wears his Power Glove in the store on Saturdays. That makes him: Subject Matter Expert.
Quote from: Ideologue on July 15, 2011, 03:20:16 PM
Is there a non-cliched way to answer either 1 or 2, for example? Actually, given this is 1968, Brain may be closer to the truth than he realizes, since it looks well-designed as a method to weed out communists. "Well, there was Lenin..."
Lots of Plato and Aristotle, toss in some Shakespeare for flavor.
Quote from: Admiral Yi on July 15, 2011, 06:46:36 PM
What's the cliched way of answering #2?
I don't even know what #1 means.
Absolute power always corrupts absolutely, removal of rule of law is an evil in itself, etc.
Quote from: Drakken on July 15, 2011, 10:07:05 AM
Quote from: Brazen on July 15, 2011, 04:39:49 AM
Having said that, the modern equivalent looks pretty daunting to me. But then I know nothing about history!
QuoteExplain why Clemenceau wanted the Treaty of Versailles to be so harsh on Germany.
Explain why the Weimar republic faced opposition between 1919 and 1923.
Explain why women were an important part of Hitler's plans for German.
Explain why Hitler wanted to take over Czechoslovakia.
Explain why the Soviet Union blockaded Berlin in 1948.
Explain why the USA became involved in Vietnam.
It's because you know nothing about history, I agree with you. Most here can answer all of them - except maybe Tim. :console:
I must have imagined my History degree. :rolleyes:
I don't remember the specific reason Berlin was blockaded, nor the specific reasoning behind the occupation of Czechoslovakia, and don't know shit about the early Weimar Republic.
Quote from: Ideologue on July 15, 2011, 11:30:46 PM
I don't remember the specific reason Berlin was blockaded, nor the specific reasoning behind the occupation of Czechoslovakia, and don't know shit about the early Weimar Republic.
Sex, drugs, and jazz. :smoke:
Quote from: Ideologue on July 15, 2011, 11:30:46 PM
I don't remember the specific reason Berlin was blockaded, nor the specific reasoning behind the occupation of Czechoslovakia,
In response to the merging of the American & British occupation zones and plans to form W. Germany.
The annexation of the Sudetenland and Bohemia which was a traditionally German land in Hitler's view.
Good book on the Berlin blockade is The Candy Bombers. Author describes the airlift as America's greatest moment and I might be inclined to agree.
Quote from: garbon on July 15, 2011, 01:01:13 PM
My point was that you didn't answer the question.
He didn't answer any of the questions. I don't think his responses were meant as anything but humor.
I hope not, anyway.
Quote from: Brazen on July 15, 2011, 04:39:49 AM
Having said that, the modern equivalent looks pretty daunting to me. But then I know nothing about history!
QuoteExplain why Clemenceau wanted the Treaty of Versailles to be so harsh on Germany.
Explain why the Weimar republic faced opposition between 1919 and 1923.
Explain why women were an important part of Hitler's plans for German.
Explain why Hitler wanted to take over Czechoslovakia.
Explain why the Soviet Union blockaded Berlin in 1948.
Explain why the USA became involved in Vietnam.
The 1968 questions were much better-written. Interesting that the people who took the 1968 test were so crap at creating the 2011 test. It is clear that the 1968 test, well-written as it was, weeded out the wrong people.
Interesting viewpoint, but I think the 42 year gap is too big, if someone sat that GCE at 16 and went onto an academic career, I don't think they'd still be setting examination question aged 58 years, indeed from what I know of academics in examination boards, they could well have already retired.
Quote from: mongers on July 16, 2011, 10:15:21 AM
Interesting viewpoint, but I think the 42 year gap is too big, if someone sat that GCE at 16 and went onto an academic career, I don't think they'd still be setting examination question aged 58 years, indeed from what I know of academics in examination boards, they could well have already retired.
Actually, people in their mid-50s to mid-60s are exactly the people deciding what the questions will be. And few academics can afford to retire before age 58, though that may be changing.
Actually I was thinking of my cousin who's just retired from a UK examination board at under 60 years old.
Quote from: grumbler on July 16, 2011, 09:00:16 AM
Quote from: Brazen on July 15, 2011, 04:39:49 AM
Having said that, the modern equivalent looks pretty daunting to me. But then I know nothing about history!
QuoteExplain why Clemenceau wanted the Treaty of Versailles to be so harsh on Germany.
Explain why the Weimar republic faced opposition between 1919 and 1923.
Explain why women were an important part of Hitler's plans for German.
Explain why Hitler wanted to take over Czechoslovakia.
Explain why the Soviet Union blockaded Berlin in 1948.
Explain why the USA became involved in Vietnam.
The 1968 questions were much better-written.
Really? How? Some of them are okay, despite my glibness (as asinine a question as it is, I can see the value in discussing how historians are mnemonic janitors), but three of them aren't even history questions and seem like excuses for teenagers to exposit their political views at length, which can't possibly be anything but the most tedious thing in the world. A couple others appear to be extremely dull and unimportant, such as the one about the JFK memorial. (I've never considered it crucial to know what specific field the Magna Carta was signed in.)
Can anyone explain the Runnymede/JFK one to me? Don't get that one at all either.
Quote from: Admiral Yi on July 16, 2011, 02:52:39 PM
Can anyone explain the Runnymede/JFK one to me? Don't get that one at all either.
My best guess is that it's a memorial park, and they had space. The RAF has about as much to do with the Magna Carta as JFK.
I can see some attenuated connections--the RAF preserved the British way of life by extinguishing it on a grand scale elsewhere, and JFK probably didn't hate the idea of freedom and responsible government. But honestly, I think it's just an open space near London but outside it, that is convenient and vaguely meaningful for them to put historical monuments in.
That said, maybe there's an elaborate rationale behind why they build exactly what they do in Runnymede and high school students were taught about it in detail. I dunno.
maybe they just wanted to make sure people knew what runnymede was, knowing what the magna carta was and its ultimate connection to the united states? they could have probably used any u.s. president, but chose jfk because he had recently died. maybe
Ide, I don't think the problem is the questions, I think it is just that you don't know the answers. :P
Explain the overarching theme of the Magna Carta being seen as a foundation of democratic rights and ultimately a more inclusive society with constitutional government. The text of the Magna Carta is very limited, and came about during the First Baron's War (or maybe the second, idk) to limit the rights of the king in relation to the nobility. Eventually it wasn't even accepted by the king, who declared it invalid with the approval of the pope. But in time the nobility forced the kings to abide by it. In the English Civil War, it became an important symbol for the parliamentary forces, etc. and the drive to parliamentary dominance. Bring in some topics of Catholic emancipation, the chartists and the reform bill. Tie in how it is also considered a foundation document in the US (who inherited english legal traditions) and how Kennedy as a Irish Catholic president of the united states who helped push through civil rights is a modern example of the tradition that started with the magna carta. Then possibly pull in some symbolism on the UK, of honoring an Irish Catholic American at a sort of sacred English site, as a sign of conciliation with Ireland.
Quote from: LaCroix on July 16, 2011, 03:07:38 PM
maybe they just wanted to make sure people knew what runnymede was, knowing what the magna carta was and its ultimate connection to the united states? they could have probably used any u.s. president, but chose jfk because he had recently died. maybe
That's what I'm saying--it's not important to know what Runnymede is, anymore than it's important to know what the Appomattox Court House is. It's vital to know what occurred there, it's nice to know the geographic location of the event, but being able to place it on a map is not crucial to a high school education.
Then again, I retract what I said in part, because I think I'm missing the point. I think you're right, it's supposed to be a springboard to blather about the importance of the Magna Carta for several pages. But the question is vague in that regard, and poorly written to get that meaning across. Here's a better-worded effort to express the question "why is the Magna Carta important?": "why is the Magna Carta important"?
Quote from: mongers on July 16, 2011, 02:11:31 PM
Actually I was thinking of my cousin who's just retired from a UK examination board at under 60 years old.
Not sure what "retire" means, here. He worked for the board full-time and now has a pension that he lives off of? That is what "retire" means to me. If he simply stopped working for them, he resigned.
Quote from: alfred russel on July 16, 2011, 03:18:04 PM
Ide, I don't think the problem is the questions, I think it is just that you don't know the answers. :P
I know what the Magna Carta is. :lol:
QuoteExplain the overarching theme of the Magna Carta being seen as a foundation of democratic rights and ultimately a more inclusive society with constitutional government. The text of the Magna Carta is very limited, and came about during the First Baron's War (or maybe the second, idk) to limit the rights of the king in relation to the nobility. Eventually it wasn't even accepted by the king, who declared it invalid with the approval of the pope. But in time the nobility forced the kings to abide by it. In the English Civil War, it became an important symbol for the parliamentary forces, etc. and the drive to parliamentary dominance. Bring in some topics of Catholic emancipation, the chartists and the reform bill. Tie in how it is also considered a foundation document in the US (who inherited english legal traditions) and how Kennedy as a Irish Catholic president of the united states who helped push through civil rights is a modern example of the tradition that started with the magna carta. Then possibly pull in some symbolism on the UK, of honoring an Irish Catholic American at a sort of sacred English site, as a sign of conciliation with Ireland.
Yeah, that's probably a good outline answer.
Quote from: Ideologue on July 16, 2011, 03:22:00 PMThen again, I retract what I said in part, because I think I'm missing the point. I think you're right, it's supposed to be a springboard to blather about the importance of the Magna Carta for several pages. But the question is vague in that regard, and poorly written to get that meaning across. Here's a better-worded effort to express the question "why is the Magna Carta important?": "why is the Magna Carta important"?
i'm not sure how important "runnymede" is to the british historian student, but couldn't it be an american equivalent asking the importance of gettysburg to ending slavery? sure, it's the civil war that matters most, but the question is testing not just a basic knowledge on the civil war (magna carta) but also whether the student can identify what they mean through using runnymede. a student who does not know what gettysburg is, even if they know what the civil war is, on a history exam, has failed is their point i'd assume
Quote from: Ideologue on July 16, 2011, 03:22:00 PM
Quote from: LaCroix on July 16, 2011, 03:07:38 PM
maybe they just wanted to make sure people knew what runnymede was, knowing what the magna carta was and its ultimate connection to the united states? they could have probably used any u.s. president, but chose jfk because he had recently died. maybe
That's what I'm saying--it's not important to know what Runnymede is, anymore than it's important to know what the Appomattox Court House is. It's vital to know what occurred there, it's nice to know the geographic location of the event, but being able to place it on a map is not crucial to a high school education.
Then again, I retract what I said in part, because I think I'm missing the point. I think you're right, it's supposed to be a springboard to blather about the importance of the Magna Carta for several pages. But the question is vague in that regard, and poorly written to get that meaning across. Here's a better-worded effort to express the question "why is the Magna Carta important?": "why is the Magna Carta important"?
I think it is implied that the objective of the student in answering the question is to demonstrate an understanding of historical facts and some critical thinking skills to analyze them. I think the original question gives the student a better opportunity to do that, while your question is going to invite the student to just recite what was heard in a lecture or read in the textbook (why the Magna Carta is important is usually mentioned). Maybe this is a generational thing--and questions today are just more direct.
Quote from: LaCroix on July 16, 2011, 03:27:54 PM
Quote from: Ideologue on July 16, 2011, 03:22:00 PMThen again, I retract what I said in part, because I think I'm missing the point. I think you're right, it's supposed to be a springboard to blather about the importance of the Magna Carta for several pages. But the question is vague in that regard, and poorly written to get that meaning across. Here's a better-worded effort to express the question "why is the Magna Carta important?": "why is the Magna Carta important"?
i'm not sure how important "runnymede" is to the british historian student, but couldn't it be an american equivalent ask the importance of gettysburg to ending slavery? sure, it's the civil war that matters most, but the question is testing not just a basic knowledge on the civil war (magna carta) but also whether the student can identify what they mean through using runnymede. a student who does not know what gettysburg is, even if they know what the civil war is, on a history exam, has failed is their point i'd assume
I dunno. Gettysburg is slightly different, since, as a battle, its geographic location takes on an important dimension, whereas John could have met with the noblemen anywhere.
I wouldn't fail somebody if they forgot where Caesar was assassinated, or aboard what ship the Japanese signed the surrender instrument in 1945. The locations of these events are not negligible, but their spatial location is less important than that of, say, the Kursk Salient.
I would fail everyone. I've never had any power in my life might as well make the most of my 15 minutes of it.
Quote from: Ideologue on July 16, 2011, 02:48:18 PM
Really? How? Some of them are okay, despite my glibness (as asinine a question as it is, I can see the value in discussing how historians are mnemonic janitors), but three of them aren't even history questions and seem like excuses for teenagers to exposit their political views at length, which can't possibly be anything but the most tedious thing in the world. A couple others appear to be extremely dull and unimportant, such as the one about the JFK memorial. (I've never considered it crucial to know what specific field the Magna Carta was signed in.)
They are better because they are open-ended and don't seem to be seeking the regurgitation of predigested pap. Face it: we, as historians,
don't know why Hitler wanted to take over Czechoslovakia; in fact, his reasons almost certainly changed over time. So how are we going to judge the answers of students when we don't know the answer ourselves? I suspect that we are going to look to see if the students mention the Three Reasons Hitler Wanted To Take Over Czechoslovakia from p. 561 of the textbook.
The one about JFK and Runneymede is brilliant.
Exactly.
What's the sound of one hand fapping?
Quote from: Ideologue on July 16, 2011, 03:35:39 PM
Quote from: LaCroix on July 16, 2011, 03:27:54 PM
Quote from: Ideologue on July 16, 2011, 03:22:00 PMThen again, I retract what I said in part, because I think I'm missing the point. I think you're right, it's supposed to be a springboard to blather about the importance of the Magna Carta for several pages. But the question is vague in that regard, and poorly written to get that meaning across. Here's a better-worded effort to express the question "why is the Magna Carta important?": "why is the Magna Carta important"?
i'm not sure how important "runnymede" is to the british historian student, but couldn't it be an american equivalent ask the importance of gettysburg to ending slavery? sure, it's the civil war that matters most, but the question is testing not just a basic knowledge on the civil war (magna carta) but also whether the student can identify what they mean through using runnymede. a student who does not know what gettysburg is, even if they know what the civil war is, on a history exam, has failed is their point i'd assume
I dunno. Gettysburg is slightly different, since, as a battle, its geographic location takes on an important dimension, whereas John could have met with the noblemen anywhere.
I wouldn't fail somebody if they forgot where Caesar was assassinated, or aboard what ship the Japanese signed the surrender instrument in 1945.
I'd agree, except the student only had answer 3 of the 10 questions. If the student forgot what Runneymede was and still chose that question, the student is probably better off going to a trade school or working in a coal mine. :P
Quote from: alfred russel on July 16, 2011, 03:30:23 PM
Quote from: Ideologue on July 16, 2011, 03:22:00 PM
Quote from: LaCroix on July 16, 2011, 03:07:38 PM
maybe they just wanted to make sure people knew what runnymede was, knowing what the magna carta was and its ultimate connection to the united states? they could have probably used any u.s. president, but chose jfk because he had recently died. maybe
That's what I'm saying--it's not important to know what Runnymede is, anymore than it's important to know what the Appomattox Court House is. It's vital to know what occurred there, it's nice to know the geographic location of the event, but being able to place it on a map is not crucial to a high school education.
Then again, I retract what I said in part, because I think I'm missing the point. I think you're right, it's supposed to be a springboard to blather about the importance of the Magna Carta for several pages. But the question is vague in that regard, and poorly written to get that meaning across. Here's a better-worded effort to express the question "why is the Magna Carta important?": "why is the Magna Carta important"?
I think it is implied that the objective of the student in answering the question is to demonstrate an understanding of historical facts and some critical thinking skills to analyze them. I think the original question gives the student a better opportunity to do that, while your question is going to invite the student to just recite what was heard in a lecture or read in the textbook (why the Magna Carta is important is usually mentioned). Maybe this is a generational thing--and questions today are just more direct.
Fair enough. I do prefer direct questions.
Fwiw, I did think the part about Kennedy being a Catholic was a nice touch. :)
QuoteI'd agree, except the student only had answer 3 of the 10 questions. If the student forgot what Runneymede was and still chose that question, the student is probably better off going to a trade school or working in a coal mine. :P
Well, yeah. :lol:
You could always write about whether Parliament should be televised instead. (Cons... it might cost some infinitesimal amount of money? :hmm: )
Quote from: Ideologue on July 16, 2011, 03:35:39 PMI dunno. Gettysburg is slightly different, since, as a battle, its geographic location takes on an important dimension, whereas John could have met with the noblemen anywhere.
I wouldn't fail somebody if they forgot where Caesar was assassinated, or aboard what ship the Japanese signed the surrender instrument in 1945. The locations of these events are not negligible, but their spatial location is less important than that of, say, the Kursk Salient.
johnny boy met them at runnymede, and so the two are forever connected. you're right, i should have used a better analogy; i just threw something out to explain the point that you seem to have got
Quote from: Ideologue on July 16, 2011, 03:22:00 PM
That's what I'm saying--it's not important to know what Runnymede is, anymore than it's important to know what the Appomattox Court House is. It's vital to know what occurred there, it's nice to know the geographic location of the event, but being able to place it on a map is not crucial to a high school education.
As AR said, you just don't get the question. I think his approach was certainly a possible one; you could also do Runneymede and JFK as symbols that don't match the reality; you could compare the Magna Carta to the Voting Rights Acts and show their affects on the politics of two countries; you could even take the opposite position and say why you couldn't justify Runneymede as a memorial for JFK.
QuoteThen again, I retract what I said in part, because I think I'm missing the point. I think you're right, it's supposed to be a springboard to blather about the importance of the Magna Carta for several pages. But the question is vague in that regard, and poorly written to get that meaning across. Here's a better-worded effort to express the question "why is the Magna Carta important?": "why is the Magna Carta important"?
:lol: Thank god you don't write exam questions! There wouldn't be a student left awake 20 minutes into your exams.
Quote from: alfred russel on July 16, 2011, 03:40:18 PM
If the student forgot what Runneymede was and still chose that question, the student is probably better off going to a trade school or working in a coal mine. :P
:lol:
Quote from: Ideologue on July 16, 2011, 03:44:05 PM
Fair enough. I do prefer direct questions.
Maybe that's why you are a lawyer and not a historian. :P
Quote:lol: Thank god you don't write exam questions! There wouldn't be a student left awake 20 minutes into your exams.
"Discuss the impact of the long-range heavy bomber on the Allied war effort. Bear in mind that any answer amounting to 'negative impact' is grounds for an automatic fail." :P
ide, does this mean i shouldn't respond to the other part of your post? :P
Quote from: The Brain on July 16, 2011, 03:39:53 PM
Exactly.
What's the sound of one hand fapping?
This question is reminiscent of traditional Buddhist philosophical riddles, such as "What is the sound of one hand clapping?" or "If a tree falls in a forest and no one is around to hear it, does it make a sound?"
In the Zen tradition, these questions are often pondered for extended periods of time through meditation after being presented by a master. The meditation is frequently done with the body placed into seated into a certain form, such as the lotus position. The Zen master will inquire as to the progress in solving the riddle presented. The Zen master will determine if the progress is sufficient, or if the riddle requires further contemplation. Certain riddles may be contemplated for a period of years.
Zen Buddhism developed in the Far East and flourished in the period following the Warring States Period in China. With the reduction in violence within China, and the subsequent increase in trade and population, there was a surplus of men that in previous times had entered military service. Zen Buddhism was patronized by the Chinese government so that these men would spend their lives contemplating unanswerable riddles rather than formenting violence. This contemplation had the further benefit of preventing their reproduction. This is not unlike the effect of modern day video games, such as World of Warcraft.
The question "what is the sound of one hand fapping" has altered the traditional riddle to incorporate a reference to masturbation. This altered riddle was posted on a message board that arose from modern day video games, and is a symptom of the sexual frustration of their patrons.
Quote from: LaCroix on July 16, 2011, 04:04:25 PM
ide, does this mean i shouldn't respond to the other part of your post? :P
Yeah, I don't think I was putting that very well.
Quote from: Ideologue on July 16, 2011, 03:59:57 PM
"Discuss the impact of the long-range heavy bomber on the Allied war effort. Bear in mind that any answer amounting to 'negative impact' is grounds for an automatic fail." :P
A better question (though the qualifier destroys its historical validity).
The problem with questions like "what was the importance of the Magna Carta?" is that they are what teachers (and a lot of students) call "mind reading questions." Every kid is reading it as "what do I (Prof Ide) think was the importance of the Magna Carta?" and so their cogitations are not about the Magna Carta, but about Prof Ide. It is very hard to get away from mind-reading questions, but absolutely necessary.
Quote from: grumbler on July 16, 2011, 03:24:28 PM
Quote from: mongers on July 16, 2011, 02:11:31 PM
Actually I was thinking of my cousin who's just retired from a UK examination board at under 60 years old.
Not sure what "retire" means, here. He worked for the board full-time and now has a pension that he lives off of? That is what "retire" means to me. If he simply stopped working for them, he resigned.
[gR..]
If in doubt, question the definition of a word.
[/gR..]
I'll ask
her what was the general age range of the people who set examinations.
There is an hour for each question in the special paper; the expectation would be for an essay of 1000 - 1500 words for each answer. A good mark would require a good essay. Any bloody fool could have a stab at answering the questions badly, to answer them well strikes me as being a significant challenge.
Quote from: mongers on July 16, 2011, 04:42:04 PM
I'll ask her what was the general age range of the people who set examinations.
[/mongers]
I don't have a point, so I will just make an ass out of myself by pretending that I don't know that the default pronoun in English is the male one[/mongers]
While you are at it, ask her if she considers herself to have retired, or merely resigned.
Quote from: grumbler on July 16, 2011, 05:43:08 PM
Quote from: mongers on July 16, 2011, 04:42:04 PM
I'll ask her what was the general age range of the people who set examinations.
[/mongers]
I don't have a point, so I will just make an ass out of myself by pretending that I don't know that the default pronoun in English is the male one
[/mongers]
While you are at it, ask her if she considers herself to have retired, or merely resigned.
Excellent, further typical gRumbler tactics, attack the man rather than the ball. :)
Quote from: Richard Hakluyt on July 16, 2011, 05:39:59 PM
There is an hour for each question in the special paper; the expectation would be for an essay of 1000 - 1500 words for each answer. A good mark would require a good essay. Any bloody fool could have a stab at answering the questions badly, to answer them well strikes me as being a significant challenge.
We don't know what the marking criteria are, but I would bet they are not unlike those for AP history exams that I teach:
(1) Complete, clear, and relevant thesis
(2) Topic sentences that support the thesis
(3) Specific accurate details that support the arguments in the topic sentences (with some attention paid to the reliability of the sources of that information)
(4) Analysis the demonstrates the applicability of the details and examples
(5) A conclusion that reiterates the thesis, summarizes the evidence, and uses an exit strategy that mirrors the introductory strategy
Plus bonuses for exceptional use of language, more complex thesis statements or introductory strategies, or more details than the minimum, and the like.
Quote from: mongers on July 16, 2011, 05:45:52 PM
Excellent, further typical gRumbler tactics, attack the man rather than the ball. :)
:lmfao: Aw, is the baby gonna cry when his own tactics are used against him?
MoNgErS, if you don't want the discussion to go into the gutter, don't go there yourself. I don't start these mOnGeRs-like exchanges, but I'll go down that path if you insist. You will lose in any battle of wits, as always, but the peanut gallery will get some amusement and popcorn sales will skyrocket.
Quote from: grumbler on July 16, 2011, 05:59:52 PM
Quote from: mongers on July 16, 2011, 05:45:52 PM
Excellent, further typical gRumbler tactics, attack the man rather than the ball. :)
:lmfao: Aw, is the baby gonna cry when his own tactics are used against him?
MoNgErS, if you don't want the discussion to go into the gutter, don't go there yourself. I don't start these mOnGeRs-like exchanges, but I'll go down that path if you insist. You will lose in any battle of wits, as always, but the peanut gallery will get some amusement and popcorn sales will skyrocket.
Do carry on, you amuse me and no doubt others here, by the way the odd capitalisation is a tactic I recall you were first to start on this forum.
Quote from: grumbler on July 16, 2011, 05:43:08 PM
Quote from: mongers on July 16, 2011, 04:42:04 PM
I'll ask her what was the general age range of the people who set examinations.
[/mongers]
I don't have a point, so I will just make an ass out of myself by pretending that I don't know that the default pronoun in English is the male one
[/mongers]
In ten years, it'll be "they." This is as it should be.
Quote from: Ideologue on July 16, 2011, 06:53:02 PMIn ten years, it'll be "they." This is as it should be.
:bleeding:
in 9th grade they told us to use "him or her", and i was all fuck
that
:bleeding: is right. Plural pronouns for individuals are awful.
I've noticed a lot of publications have been mixing in some female pronouns when the gender is unknown, and I do that too. The rule to use masculine is certainly fading. If I'm writing something official, I'll refer to both: "him or her."
Quote from: alfred russel on July 16, 2011, 11:08:03 PM
:bleeding: is right. Plural pronouns for individuals are awful.
Yeah, like "you." ;)
QuoteI've noticed a lot of publications have been mixing in some female pronouns when the gender is unknown, and I do that too. The rule to use masculine is certainly fading. If I'm writing something official, I'll refer to both: "him or her."
That's far worse, really overly complicated, and the use of "she" by itself calls attention to itself, and some readers will stop and think there's a specific referent, interrupting their train of thought. So, since we need a gender neutral pronoun, and the only one that isn't alien and unnatural ("thon") is "they."
My law school text authors think they're being really clever and progressive by occasionally using "she" as an anonymous pronoun, but they're not, they're a pack of linguistic paleoconservatives who have not realized that the language has
already changed. "They" is used widely in everyday speech and written communications, and increasingly in official or formal settings.
A little lexical shift never hurt anyone,
grandpa. :P
I use "she" on occasion as the generic pronoun, but try to indicate that it's generic in earlier parts of the text. For example:
"When the reader comes across a pronoun, she may think it refers to a specific person rather than to a general person unless she sees something to indicate otherwise."
Alternately, you could write to minimize the use of generic pronouns. For example:
"Poor use of pronouns runs the risk of confusing the reader as to whether the text refers to a general person or someone specific."
Quote from: grumbler on July 16, 2011, 05:55:51 PM
Quote from: Richard Hakluyt on July 16, 2011, 05:39:59 PM
There is an hour for each question in the special paper; the expectation would be for an essay of 1000 - 1500 words for each answer. A good mark would require a good essay. Any bloody fool could have a stab at answering the questions badly, to answer them well strikes me as being a significant challenge.
We don't know what the marking criteria are, but I would bet they are not unlike those for AP history exams that I teach:
(1) Complete, clear, and relevant thesis
(2) Topic sentences that support the thesis
(3) Specific accurate details that support the arguments in the topic sentences (with some attention paid to the reliability of the sources of that information)
(4) Analysis the demonstrates the applicability of the details and examples
(5) A conclusion that reiterates the thesis, summarizes the evidence, and uses an exit strategy that mirrors the introductory strategy
Plus bonuses for exceptional use of language, more complex thesis statements or introductory strategies, or more details than the minimum, and the like.
That must be the standard, cause that's how I was taught to write. As you see, I ignore them here.
Quote from: alfred russel on July 16, 2011, 04:09:39 PM
Quote from: The Brain on July 16, 2011, 03:39:53 PM
Exactly.
What's the sound of one hand fapping?
This question is reminiscent of traditional Buddhist philosophical riddles, such as "What is the sound of one hand clapping?" or "If a tree falls in a forest and no one is around to hear it, does it make a sound?"
In the Zen tradition, these questions are often pondered for extended periods of time through meditation after being presented by a master. The meditation is frequently done with the body placed into seated into a certain form, such as the lotus position. The Zen master will inquire as to the progress in solving the riddle presented. The Zen master will determine if the progress is sufficient, or if the riddle requires further contemplation. Certain riddles may be contemplated for a period of years.
Zen Buddhism developed in the Far East and flourished in the period following the Warring States Period in China. With the reduction in violence within China, and the subsequent increase in trade and population, there was a surplus of men that in previous times had entered military service. Zen Buddhism was patronized by the Chinese government so that these men would spend their lives contemplating unanswerable riddles rather than formenting violence. This contemplation had the further benefit of preventing their reproduction. This is not unlike the effect of modern day video games, such as World of Warcraft.
The question "what is the sound of one hand fapping" has altered the traditional riddle to incorporate a reference to masturbation. This altered riddle was posted on a message board that arose from modern day video games, and is a symptom of the sexual frustration of their patrons.
I never masturbate. It's a legitimate question.
Quote from: grumbler on July 16, 2011, 08:58:00 AM
Quote from: garbon on July 15, 2011, 01:01:13 PM
My point was that you didn't answer the question.
He didn't answer any of the questions. I don't think his responses were meant as anything but humor.
I hope not, anyway.
We've got a winner.
Quote from: Admiral Yi on July 16, 2011, 02:52:39 PM
Can anyone explain the Runnymede/JFK one to me? Don't get that one at all either.
Easy. The connection is through the Magna Carta and the development of the notions of political freedom as requiring constitutional guarantees.
The thesis might be something like 'the selection of Runnymede is supremely appropriate for the proposed memorial to JFK because it represents symbolically the origin of the shared anglo-american tradition of constitutional guarantees of freedom, a tradition which JFK exemplified' or somesuch.
iirc JFK actually name checked Magna Carta in one of his major speeches ?
Quote from: mongers on July 18, 2011, 09:51:56 AM
iirc JFK actually name checked Magna Carta in one of his major speeches ?
In his inaugural address. Though I suspect that the exam-writer is looking for something more thematic than that.
Quote from: Malthus on July 18, 2011, 10:00:34 AM
Quote from: mongers on July 18, 2011, 09:51:56 AM
iirc JFK actually name checked Magna Carta in one of his major speeches ?
In his inaugural address. Though I suspect that the exam-writer is looking for something more thematic than that.
Well I googled and there's a JFK monument at Runnymede, not that I remember seeing it as a child, I'd guess that it was monument was 'topical' when the paper was writing in 67/68 ?