GCE EXAMINERS' REPORTS. HISTORY HY1 AS/Advanced

Transcription

1 GCE EXAMINERS' REPORTS HISTORY HY1 AS/Advanced SUMMER 2014

2 Statistical Information This booklet contains summary details for each unit: number entered; maximum mark available; mean mark achieved; grade ranges. N.B. These refer to 'raw marks' used in the initial assessment, rather than to the uniform marks reported when results are issued. Annual Statistical Report The annual Statistical Report (issued in the second half of the Autumn Term) gives overall outcomes of all examinations administered by WJEC.

3 HISTORY - HY1 General Certificate of Education Summer 2014 Advanced Subsidiary Unit Statistics The following statistics include all candidates entered for the unit, whether or not they 'cashed in' for an award. The attention of centres is drawn to the fact that the statistics listed should be viewed strictly within the context of this unit and that differences will undoubtedly occur between one year and the next and also between subjects in the same year. Unit Entry Max Mark Mean Mark HY Grade Ranges Raw UMS A B C D E

4 INTRODUCTION Although these reports tend to be dominated by a focus on areas to improve it is fair to acknowledge the good to very high quality responses seen from the majority of candidates. However, this year all the Principal Examiners reported that there was evidence that some able candidates had been held back in their engagement with the question set by rigidly applying a type of formula that their centres had seemingly prepared for their examination. UNIT HY1 The vast majority of candidates managed the time allowed well and attempted all the required assessments. There were many fine responses from a smaller number of candidates which reflected not only their understanding of the key concepts studied but also their ability to engage with the questions set and to think about what constitutes a valid response during an examination. There was some evidence that some candidates were unable to do more than unload their notes and to rely heavily on formulaic responses which have been taught in class. In Part (a) some candidates were content to write a very generalised explanation, almost a narrative of all they had learned, rather than focus on the exact question set. Candidates are expected to be able to provide a coherent and linked explanation in this sub-question to gain Level 3 marks. Too often the candidates offered a series of factors in isolation from each other rather than attempting to show how one development led to another. A similar trend of listing factors was noted in Part (b) where a number of candidates concluded their largely narrative accounts with a paragraph offering a judgement often simply tagged on. In this section candidates are expected to offer an evaluative judgement based on a consideration of the weight of the factors considered and to develop a response across the whole of the set period. 2

5 PERIOD STUDY 1 ASPECTS OF THE HISTORY OF WALES AND ENGLAND, c Politics, Government and the Crown, c Part (a) proved accessible to the majority of candidates. Wolsey is clearly a major focus for centres and the majority of candidates knew enough about Wolsey to attempt to answer the question set. The majority of answers focused on Wolsey s failure to obtain the divorce as the main reason why he fell from power. The more able candidates did delve deeper to suggest that his failure to obtain the divorce was symptomatic of his diminishing power and influence at Court. Few candidates offered a more meaningful discussion of the impact of faction at Court the majority were aware of Boleyn s opposition but fewer mentioned Norfolk. Those candidates worthy of the top level were able to go further and explain that Wolsey s downfall was, ultimately, the result of punishment under praemunire which led to his arrest for treason. Contrary to what many candidates thought, Wolsey was not executed. In part (b), a significant number of candidates fell back on giving an account of Henry VII s general policies rather than the changes made in the structures of government. The better answers were able to put Henry VII in context, arguing that he was a practitioner of good governance, with astute policies to establish and consolidate his dynasty, rather than a great constitutional innovator. The more able candidates eschewed description in favour of evaluation by comparing and contrasting the government of Henry VII with that under his son Henry VIII. The work of Wolsey and Cromwell was discussed as was their impact on government. Most candidates offered up Cromwell s revolution in government as the most important contribution to changes in government. It was pleasing to see Henry VIII s contribution being recognised by some candidates without his support Cromwell would not have been able to effect a revolution in government. 2. Religious reformation and change, c Part (a), provided the candidates knew what the Elizabethan Church Settlement was, proved accessible to the majority who attempted it. Most were able to offer reasons to explain why it was passed though a number felt compelled to define it by description. In some instances this took up half the answer, the latter half of which alone focused specifically on the question set. A brief definition linked to the motive behind it is worthwhile but candidates must then seek to explain the inter-relationship between the reasons why it was passed. The more able candidates were able to explain that the Settlement was passed to secure Elizabeth s legitimate position as head of state and as head of a largely Protestant Church. It was passed to defuse potential Catholic opposition that might lead to rebellion. Some candidates did well to place it in context by suggesting that it succeeded in pleasing both Catholics and Protestants and thereby avoided the religious wars that tore France apart. Part (b) covered a key topic in this area of study and it proved accessible to the vast majority of candidates. Inevitably there were many who simply unloaded their class notes though the knowledge displayed was often quite impressive. Those candidates who focused on the question set made some notable points worthy of merit: that Edward s reforms provided the template for Elizabeth s Settlement; that Mary s reign meant Elizabeth could not ignore Catholic opinion; that the Marian persecution radicalised the Protestant exiles, who returned in Elizabeth s reign to help set up the Anglican Church. Although nearly all answers showed how the break with Rome made all other developments possible, it was not enough to use this as a kind of trump card in the process of evaluation and judgment. 3

6 The better answers, having recognised this point, were able to show how, though crucially important, the break with Rome was nevertheless reversible, whereas the dissolution of monasteries and chantries, which had a marked impact on the religious and ecclesiastical landscape, was not. The more able candidates also recognised that the break with Rome did not at first have a significant impact on the people s religion, and that it was Edward s policies which changed the nature of religion and religious worship in England and Wales. 3. Protest, Disorder and Rebellion, c Apart from those candidates who knew little about the Kett rebellion, part (a) was an accessible question. Those candidates who did not confuse this rebellion with any other (there were quite a few) were able to offer reasons to explain why it failed. Their answers ranged from the generic to the specific. The weather may have been a cause but not because it was winter and they had no food and shelter. It was midsummer, it was hot and the encampment on Mousehold Heath had no shelter from the sun and, crucially, no water supply. This might have been one reason why Kett relocated his men to a valley. The majority of candidates offered the relocation from a defensible position to an indefensible one as a primary cause of the rebellion s failure. Poor leadership and organization together with a lack of ambition were points explored by many candidates. It was pleasing to witness the more able candidates suggest that Kett was a good leader, charismatic and able but a poor strategist. The main problem with the area of study assessed in part (b) is that candidates seem determined to discuss (more often describe) each rebellion in turn. The chronological approach can yield results but a thematic approach is better suited to answering this kind of question. Rather than begin with Rhys ap Gruffudd before proceeding list-like to the rebellion of the Northern Earls (via the Pilgrimage of Grace, Western, Kett and Wyatt rebellions), candidates would be better advised to identify those rebellions for which religious grievances were the primary cause of the uprising such as the Pilgrimage of Grace and the Western or Prayer Book rebellion. Thus they might then go on to discuss the other grievances that were responsible for causing rebellion in this period, broadly speaking, economic and social in Kett, political and social in Rhys ap Gruffudd and political in Wyatt and the Northern Earls. The more astute candidates did demonstrate an awareness of the complexity of the issue and the inter-dependent relationship between economic, political and religious grievances factors in each of the rebellions. 4. Social and Economic change in Wales & England, c Very few candidates answered this question. The answers tended to be rather general by defining and describing vagrancy rather than focusing on the question and explaining why vagrancy had become widespread during this period. It is clear from the handful of candidates who answered this that this was not a first choice question. Apart from a general and not very focused description of social trends during the period, the answers to this question lacked the quality and knowledge required to tackle it successfully. 4

7 PERIOD STUDY 2 ASPECTS OF THE HISTORY OF WALES AND ENGLAND, c Politics, Government and the Crown, c Part (a) was answered reasonably well but candidates tended to base their answers on one key factor the King s need to raise money to fund an army. The need to raise revenue was crucial but some candidates did not link this to the Scottish crisis and the Scottish invasion of the north. The King s failure to defeat the Scots in the so-called Bishops Wars was another crucial reason for the recall of Parliament. The threat of invasion was an issue that Charles thought might unite his politicallyconscious people behind him, which is why he thought the recall of Parliament was a good idea. It is important to mention (though few candidates did) that it was not the King s idea but Wentworth s (Earl of Strafford). Few candidates made much of his contribution to the recalling of Parliament though it was a key point worthy of merit. The answers to part (b) fell into two distinct camps: those who focused on Divine Right as the main factor and those, the majority, who virtually ignored it and moved on to discuss other factors. Briefly defining Divine Right is simply not enough to fully engage with this question. The issue needs to be explored and its impact on the relationship between the Crown and Parliament evaluated against the other factors. Divine Right was a belief system used by the King to batter his opponents into submission. There is no doubting his sincere belief in Divine Right but his cynical use of it (or as a minority of perceptive candidates argued - that of his ministers like Wentworth and Laud) is what contributed to the tension with Parliament. The candidates who opted to focus on the other factors produced a one-sided or unbalanced answer. As one might expect, finance was very much to the fore as being mainly responsible for the tension between the Crown and Parliament. It was pleasing to see a number of candidates suggesting that MPs were as guilty as the King in contributing to the tension. Some said they too behaved in an arrogant manner. 2. Regicide, Republic and Restoration of the Monarchy, c This was a popular question but the majority of the answers to part (a) were rather disappointing. Many simply unloaded their class notes in the hope that some parts might be relevant. Surprisingly, apart from the very able, many candidates did not know why the major-generals had been established. It was an experiment designed to strengthen the Republic and consolidate its power. It followed the failure of another experiment that of parliamentary government. Many candidates were happy to describe what they did rather than explain why they did it. Part (b) proved challenging for a number of candidates. They knew enough about the Protectorate to offer a narrative history but many failed to engage with the specific question. Many candidates offered a narrow range of other factors to act as a counter argument to the Protectorate. The Rump and Barebones were discussed as was the rule of the Major Generals but the regicide was curiously absent from the majority of answers. The Instrument of Government was again noticeably absent from the list of other factors as was the collapse of the Republic. 3. The Restoration and the reign of Charles II, c Candidates who answered this question were on the whole ignorant of the reasons why the monarchy was restored in The death of Cromwell was cited as a reason though no attempt was made to discuss this further and explore the interrelationship with the fact that his death was coupled with the growing unpopularity of republicanism. His death hastened an already decline in support for the Republic. 5

8 The strict puritanism of the regime was another factor contributing to the growing clamour for the return of a more religiously tolerant monarchy. In part (b) the more able were aware of what the Clarendon Code was and how significant a development it was during this period a system empowering the monarch to determine religious policy and the elimination of religious opposition and radical religious groups. Those candidates who did not know what the Code was were equally challenged in coming up with a relevant set of other factors. The reign of Charles II is clearly not as popular as it once was and nor is it as accessible to those candidates entered for the examination as in previous series. 4. Religion, Radicalism and Dissent, c No candidate attempted to answer this question. PERIOD STUDY 3 ASPECTS OF THE HISTORY OF WALES AND ENGLAND c Parliamentary Reform and Politics, c In part (a) examiners were looking for explanations of the demands for parliamentary reform after As soon as candidates began to give coherent and linked reasons (not just a list) supported by some specific facts Level 3 marks could be given. Where the explanations were sketchy and / or generalised and lacked specific knowledge lower marks were awarded. This was generally answered well with many candidates offering several factors to explain the reasons for the demand for parliamentary reform. The majority of candidates engaged well with outlining the reasons for reform. There were valid references to the defects and inadequacies of the existing system, the growth of radicalism, the personal interest of the Younger Pitt, Christopher Wyvill and the Yorkshire Association, the influence of the American and French revolutions as well as references to the campaign for reform in the 1820s and early 1830s. In part (b) candidates have to make a judgement about the importance of a given factor during the period studied. Clearly it is expected that this given factor is clearly understood and explained in any answer. However, in addition, candidates must evaluate its importance in comparison with other main factors. Evaluation does not mean an extended list of alternatives: it involves making judgements about relative importance and establishing a relevant set of criteria. The higher marks will be given to candidates who can provide quality evaluation, make supported and reasonable judgements, backed up by specific facts on the factors given and chosen. It is vital that in making their analysis candidates are careful to cover the whole period, in this case Level 3 marks would be given for reasonable evaluation of the key factors and alternatives, covering the whole period set and supported by specific facts. Mere listing of alternatives will not gain Level 3 marks; indeed where the evaluation is sparse, the facts generalised and period coverage limited, lower marks will be awarded. The significance of the French Revolution was evaluated in the best answers to (b) with reference to the fear it created in the governing class from the 1790s onwards, the impact upon a credible radical movement, the repressive legislation and policies of the Younger Pitt, the impetus given to parliamentary and radical reform movements over the wider period and its continuing impact upon government policy after the end of the war in The relative importance of the French Revolution should have been evaluated against other factors such as the early parliamentary reform movement, the response of Lord Liverpool s government to the radical challenge, Catholic Emancipation and the Reform crisis Weaker answers failed to look at a range of factors or provided only the sketchiest evaluation of the factors given. 6

9 2. Popular Protest, c In part (a) examiners were looking for reasons why the Anti-Corn Law League was successful in achieving its aim. As soon as candidates began to give coherent and linked reasons (not just a list) supported by some specific facts Level 3 marks could be given. Where the explanations were sketchy and / or generalised and lacked specific knowledge lower marks were awarded. This was a popular question and was generally well answered. Most candidates were able to explain the League s precise and limited objective and its well organised focus on realising it, its strong financial support, the growing influence of free trade ideas and its electoral triumphs in The best responses saw a link between the League and Peel s response to the Irish famine and the potential for civil disorder if repeal had failed. In part (b) candidates had to make a judgement about the importance of a given factor during the period studied. Clearly it is expected that this given factor is clearly understood and explained in any answer. However, in addition, candidates must evaluate its importance in comparison with other main factors. Evaluation does not mean an extended list of alternatives: it involves making judgements about relative importance and establishing a relevant set of criteria. The higher marks will be given to candidates who can provide quality evaluation, make supported and reasonable judgements, backed up by specific facts on the factors given and chosen. It is vital that in making their analysis candidates are careful to cover the whole period, in this case Level 3 marks would be given for reasonable evaluation of the key factors and alternatives, covering the whole period set and supported by specific facts. Mere listing of alternatives will not gain Level 3 marks; indeed where the evaluation is sparse, the facts generalised and period coverage limited, lower marks will be awarded. Answers to part (b) suffered from a failure to distinguish between agricultural discontent and other forms such as urban, industrial or political. The better answers were able to analyse the widespread agricultural protests in England in and their impact upon the government, the influence of the swing riots on poor law reform and the breakdown of law and order in West Wales The relative importance of other factors needed assessment such as the Merthyr rising, the trade union movement, Chartism, the Anti-Corn Law League and the Anti- Poor Law movement. 3. The Campaigns for Social Reform, c There were very few responses to this question. In part (a) examiners were looking for reasons why factories were reformed. As soon as candidates began to give coherent and linked reasons (not just a list) supported by some specific facts Level 3 marks could be given. Where the explanations were sketchy and / or generalised and lacked specific knowledge lower marks were awarded. Better answers were able to provide an explanation based on the failure of previous factory legislation, humanitarian concerns, short time committees, the evangelicals influence, the Select Committee on factory reform and individual contributions from Fielden, Sadler and Shaftesbury In part (b) candidates have to make a judgement about the importance of a given factor during the period studied. Clearly it is expected that this given factor is clearly understood and explained in any answer. However, in addition, candidates must evaluate its importance in comparison with other main factors. 7

10 Evaluation does not mean an extended list of alternatives: it involves making judgements about relative importance and establishing a relevant set of criteria. The higher marks will be given to candidates who can provide quality evaluation, make supported and reasonable judgements, backed up by specific facts on the factors given and chosen. It is vital that in making their analysis candidates are careful to cover the whole period, in this case Level 3 marks would be given for reasonable evaluation of the key factors and alternatives, covering the whole period set and supported by specific facts. Mere listing of alternatives will not gain Level 3 marks; indeed where the evaluation is sparse, the facts generalised and period coverage limited, lower marks will be awarded. The key factor in part (b) was the work of Edwin Chadwick. It was anticipated that candidates would focus on the Poor law Report, the impact of the Report on Sanitary Conditions 1842, Chadwick s influence upon key legislation in 1834 and 1848 and his continuing involvement in poor law and public health administration. The relative importance of other factors such as Royal Commissions and government reports, pressure groups and campaigns, highly motivated individual reformers, general concerns about the condition of the towns and political motives should have been evaluated. 4. Foreign Policy c In part (a) examiners were looking for explanations of Britain s defeat of France by As soon as candidates began to give coherent and linked reasons (not just a list) supported by some specific facts Level 3 marks could be given. Where the explanations were sketchy and / or generalised and lacked specific knowledge lower marks were awarded. This was generally well answered and many candidates were able to explain factors such as Britain s growing financial and economic strength, the subsidies to coalition partners, the supremacy of the Royal Navy, the importance of the Peninsular campaigns, French strategic mistakes and the leadership qualities of Nelson and Wellington. In part (b) candidates have to make a judgement about the importance of a given factor during the period studied. Clearly it is expected that this given factor is clearly understood and explained in any answer. However, in addition, candidates must evaluate its importance in comparison with other main factors. Evaluation does not mean an extended list of alternatives: it involves making judgements about relative importance and establishing a relevant set of criteria. The higher marks will be given to candidates who can provide quality evaluation, make supported and reasonable judgements, backed up by specific facts on the factors given and chosen. It is vital that in making their analysis candidates are careful to cover the whole period, in this case, Level 3 marks would be given for reasonable evaluation of the key factors and alternatives, covering the whole period set and supported by specific facts. Mere listing of alternatives will not gain Level 3 marks; indeed where the evaluation is sparse, the facts generalised and period coverage limited, lower marks will be awarded. There were some very strong responses to the (b) question. The influence of the balance of power concept was generally evaluated well with good discussions of the danger of Europe being dominated by one power, the critical importance of the low countries, the balance of power in the Middle East and in south east Europe, the demise of France, the threat from Russia and the issue of the Spanish colonies. The relative importance of other factors including the wars against France , the Congress of Vienna, the Eastern Question, trade and commercial interests and the growth of liberal and nationalist movements in Europe were assessed. Examiners noticed a tailing off of coverage in the 1830s. 8

11 PERIOD STUDY 4 ASPECTS OF THE HISTORY OF WALES AND ENGLAND, c Wales and England in transition, c This question was attempted by all the candidates seen. The question required candidates to focus on a linked explanation as to why there was a General Strike in Many candidates simply did not know. Most candidates were able to discuss some long term issues involving the general decline of the staple industries but very few could discuss the short term issues e.g. the Sankey report, militancy of the Union and A J Cook, attitude of Baldwin and the fracas with the Daily Mail. As it was, most candidates discussed the general decline during the war, the gold standard and a general unhappiness with living and working conditions. Much more focus is needed as this is an important event considering its scale and effect on British society. In Part (b), the candidates were asked to consider to what extent war made the greatest impact on the lives of the people of Wales and England To fully answer the question set therefore candidates would have to evaluate the changes brought about by various factors and their subsequent impact across the period These factors could include the Liberal reforms, the social surveys of booth and rowntree, the impact of the decline of the staple industries, economic decline in general, the General Strike and industrial relations. The majority of candidates could discuss the impact of war, and bring in other factors that also impacted on the lives of the people of Wales and England The majority of these candidates were placed within the boundaries of Level 2 as the tendency to mechanistically present a whole host of other important factors continues. These are mostly rote learned. Typically there was a paragraph about the influence of the main factor, then a paragraph about the influence of another factor, then another couple of factors and then, and only then, a short paragraph about which was the most influential. Evaluating the factors against each other gains Level 3 marks because the candidates are answering the question set - the greatest impact in this case. This time many answers were seen that based their arguments on conjecture. This cannot be rewarded. Sentences such as If it wasn t for the work of Booth and Rowntree, the Liberals would never have introduced reforms, or If it wasn t for the war Britain s economy would have improved cannot be accepted as credible historical debate. 2. British foreign policy, c This question was answered by a few of the candidates. The question required candidates to focus on a linked explanation as to why there were tensions between Britain and Germany before Many candidates continued to regard the Ententes as alliances with an anti-german slant which simply is not true. Despite German support for the Boers Britain was promoting the idea of a German alliance between 1899 and 1901 but tensions soon grew due to various factors e.g. German naval expansion, the aggressive attitude of Wilhelm II, Germany s desire to undermine the Entente, issues involving Turkey and Morocco, the crisis in Agadir, and of course the Balkan crisis which escalated into full blown war. Most candidates were able to list some of these reasons and some were able to provide a linked explanation using a chronological mechanism to explain how the tension progressed into war. 9

12 In Part (b), candidates were asked to consider whether the fear of Russia was the most important influence on British foreign policy To fully answer the question set therefore candidates would have to evaluate the importance of the influence of the fear of Russia against other important influences e.g. the fear of Germany, the desire to protect the Empire or economic considerations, the desire to avoid war, the search for collective security or appeasement. Candidates that attempted this question did tend to discuss the importance of the fear of Russia in a yes it was / no it wasn t type of approach while trawling through the period. Although there was some period coverage there was little by way of evaluation and the period received scant attention The majority of candidates were placed within the boundaries of Level 2 as the tendency to mechanistically present a whole host of other influential factors continued. These were mostly rote learned. Typically there was a paragraph about the influence of the main factor, then a paragraph about the influence of another factor, then another couple of factors and then, and only then, a short paragraph about which was the most important influence. Level 2, listing, with little, if any, evaluation. 3. Party Politics, c This question was answered by very few candidates. Most candidates were able to list a few general reasons why the House of Lords was reformed in Most were able to make some reference to the need for greater democracy and the transference of power from an unelected chamber to a democratically elected chamber. Conservative dominance of the House of Lords featured heavily but this only came into play because of the attitude of Balfour who believed the Unionist party should govern whether in power or opposition. Lloyd George s People s Budget of 1909 provided the stimulus for a financial issue which spiralled into a constitutional issue. Too many candidates told the story rather than answered the question of why the reform happened. The issue of land taxes as well as other taxes angered the rich landowners and it was also Lloyd George s wish to pay for a programme of costly social and defensive reforms which he strongly believed were necessary. The Lord s use of their veto departed from established practice and the failure of the Constitutional Conference and the Home Rule issue also played a significant role. In Part (b), the candidates were asked to consider whether the formation of coalition governments was the most important development in British party politics from In this question, more than any other, candidates tended to skip over the main factor and provide a list of other factors which were important in party politics in the period. Little attempt was made by many candidates to address coalition governments in any way, shape or form. This could have meant the coalitions of , or even the National Governments of 1931 onwards. Considering that coalitions were in power in some shape or form for about 16 years this was quite a feat. Candidates that failed to discuss the main factor, because it may not have been taught, but still discussed other significant developments could only access mid-level 2 marks. Those candidates that accessed the higher marks did so because they discussed factors that covered the period and evaluated them in order to provide a judgement on the question of most important e.g. Liberal dominance and decline, rise of Labour, extension of the franchise or the rise of extremist parties. 10

13 4. Role and status of women, c This question was answered by many candidates. Most candidates were able to explain in general terms why the Suffragette movement gained support by referencing the publicity they gained. Most of the support came from upper and middle class women who also supplied the cash which gave the movement the firm foundations required for any success. They gained support because many women felt that progress was too slow and that militancy would throw the issue into the public eye. The heavy handed response of the authorities also gained them sympathy and support as did the leadership of the Pankhursts. Their main source of support came from the attitude of the Liberal party. Whilst standing for social reform, justice and morality they were showing none of it in their heavy handed response and demeaning attitude towards women s issues, which again played into the hands of the suffragettes. Their decision to stop campaigning at the beginning of the war and support of the war effort enhanced the movements reputation. In part (b) the candidates were asked to consider whether the First World War was the most influential factor in changing attitudes towards role and status of women To fully answer the question set therefore candidates would have to evaluate the influence of the First World War against a range of other factors such as the influence of the Suffragette/Suffragist movement, notable individuals, changing attitudes during the 1920s, developments in education and voting rights. The majority of candidates were able to discuss the role of women during the war in some detail but more focus is needed on evaluating the question set rather than providing a list of influences over the period. The majority of candidates were placed within the boundaries of Level 2 as the tendency to mechanistically present a whole host of other influential factors continued. These are mostly rote learned. Typically there was a paragraph about the influence of the main factor, then a paragraph about the influence of another factor, then another couple of factors and then, and only then, a short paragraph about which was the most influential. Candidates at Level 3 engaged with the issue of the most influential factor and were well rewarded. 11

14 PERIOD STUDY 5 ASPECTS OF THE HISTORY OF EUROPE, c The threat to Europe from the Ottoman Empire, c This question was the least popular on the paper with only a small number of candidates attempting it. However, all the candidates with varying degrees of success gained good marks on part (a). They were clearly aware that the Ottomans were a threat to the Hapsburgs and were able to explain why this was so. The candidates who were awarded at Level 2 tended to lose focus on the Hapsburgs and discuss Europe in general. Few mentioned Charles V s brother in law, the king of Hungary, though most were aware that Hungary had fallen to the Turks. Few mentioned the navy or the control of the sea. Those who did were rewarded. The only weakness in the answers was the tendency to drift and list. Better answers were comprehensive and had sustained coverage. The answers to part (b) were quite mixed. It proved challenging for most candidates inasmuch as some thought the military strength of the Ottomans did not include the navy whilst those who did were unsure how it fitted into the question given their knowledge of Lepanto. This was a disaster for the Ottomans so it was a weakness rather than strength? The overriding theme here was the descriptive approach to the question with little or no evaluation of the question many did not focus on expansion but preferred instead to discuss battles and progress of conquest. Only the better responses referred to the administrative structure of the Empire supporting expansion. There was greater emphasis on the role and weaknesses of the European powers than the mark scheme allowed but this was taken into account to reward those candidates who linked it to the question. 2. Martin Luther and the German Reformation, In part (a), some candidates were able to give a reasonable explanation of the reasons why there was a demand for reform of the Catholic Church. They discussed that there was an historical debate on the abuses of the abuses and corrupt practices of the Catholic Church and that this reform was encouraged by the debate instigated by Renaissance thinking and the Humanists. Also Germany appeared to be ripe for change and there was social, economic and political desire for change displayed in this area. The Catholic Church was also slow in its dealing with corrupt practices such as pluralism, nepotism and simony. Because of this there was an increasing demand for action by the established Church. However, there was a tendency, by some candidates, not to engage with the wording of the question. They did not engage with demand for and thus their focus was different from that set by the question. Some listed some reasons, some drifted into a narrative on Martin Luther and displayed an inability to use their knowledge to answer the question set and consequently, once again, these answers remain at a lower level of response. Better responses answered the question set and used a linkage mechanism such as chronology, political, economic, religious, cultural and social reasons to explain why there was a demand for reform of the Catholic Church. Better answers to part (b) were very well done by some candidates who did not find it difficult to evaluate whether the printing press was mainly responsible for the development of the German Reformation. They engaged with the question and were able to analyse and evaluate in a sustained and convincing way. However, less candidates than in previous sessions of this paper chose to answer this question and although some discussed many relevant issues, equally there were candidates whose answers were vague and simplistic. Better answers were able to 12

15 offer that the printing press made Luther s ideas and works readily available and produced them cheaply and in large numbers for rapid dissemination throughout Germany. Some also noted that it encouraged publication in the vernacular and it negated the need to have a priest as intermediate, adding further impetus to the development of reform. Many of these candidates were also able to evaluate this against other factors which could be considered to have varying degrees of responsibility for the development of religious reform in Germany. These included support from the princes, cities and the peasants of Germany, the influence of economic, social and political grievances and the reaction of Charles V and the Papacy to events in this part of Europe. However there were some whose answers were very formulaic, some did not evaluate one factor against others but merely assessed the main factor and then listed alternatives with a bolt on rote conclusion. Also, once again, there was evidence that some candidates were held back from achieving the highest level by being constrained by a prepared mechanical approach which made no attempt to consider ranking factors in their evaluation of their contribution to the development of the German Reformation. 3. France, Part (a) produced answers which were amongst some of the best on this paper but also some of the weakest. Where this question was answered well candidates concentrated on Hapsburg-Valois rivalry exclusively in Italy and were well able to give a linked explanation, mainly using chronology but also using warfare or politics and in some cases finance as linkage. Better answers identified valid reasons why there was rivalry between Francis I and Charles V in this area of Europe and discussed the tensions over the control of the Duchy of Milan and the fear of encirclement of the French by the control of the Hapsburgs. This was intensified with the election of Charles V as Holy Roman Emperor in 1519 and the capture of Francis I and internment in Spain after the Battle of Pavia in Weaker responses listed reasons. There were also examples of candidates who could not select historical knowledge which related to Italy and preferred to illustrate their response from all aspects of the rivalry in this period between these two dynasties. These answers tended to be a narrative downloading of prepared notes rather that a selection of relevant material to answer the question set. In part (b) most candidates made a reasonable attempt at a discussion of the Renaissance culture as a significant influence on France in the period and considered a range of other factors which could be classed as issues for France in this period such as, Hapsburg-Valois rivalry, religion, finance, social change and changes in government. It was hoped that candidates would have evaluated the significance of Francis I s expenditure on architecture and the arts, the status that this brought him as a Renaissance prince, his development of a lavish court, the development of such factors as libraries and the accommodation of artists. However, there were candidates whose response was less of a focus on the question set and more of a desire to unload classroom notes on the Renaissance and bolt on an evaluation at the end. These answers were mechanical and sadly this year there were several candidates who wanted to write in the present tense. 4. Spain in the reign of Charles V, This question was very popular with most centres choosing to answer it. Unfortunately there were a large minority of candidates who found part (a) challenging as it asked an obvious and very legitimate straight-forward question but one which has not appeared before in an external examination. 13

16 This highlights the over-reliance on recalling prepared notes and a reluctance to engage with the question that has been set. As a result many forgot to link the factors as a development and merely listed them. Also sadly there was evidence of limitations on historical knowledge but there was evidence from some centres of candidates displaying their own detailed and accurate knowledge of the topic gained from wider reading. These answers were focused, thoughtful and well informed. There were some candidates who were able to offer a reasonable variety of reasons why the Spanish were able to conquer the New World in the reign of Charles V and these included the fact that they had superior weapons, especially gunpowder and horses, the bravado of the Conquistadores, the financial support of Charles, the limitations of the Aztec Empire, the logistic ability of the Spanish at this time to travel to and service the New World, the failures within the Inca resistance and the religious support, encouragement and blessing to Spain from the Catholic Church in their endeavours in the Americas. Linkage could have been achieved through chronology, finance or religion. The best answers to part (b) did try to engage with the question in an evaluative tone throughout. However, most answers found it difficult to discuss the main issue and there were many instances of largely ignoring the main issue in the question which was Charles V s role as Holy Roman Emperor and a consideration of how significantly this impacted on Spain in the period Better answers again engaged with the wording of the exact question set. They focused on significant, impact and Charles role as Holy Roman Emperor. This included an evaluation of the significance of his early absence from Spain on the election and the Diet of Worms. It included the time, energy and cost of Charles role, the fractured relationship that resulted between Spain and the Papacy as a result of Charles holding this role and his endeavour to take on the mantle of Defender of Christendom and how significantly that impacted on Spain. Consideration of rivalry with France, as a result of Charles acquiring the role of emperor, rather than Francis I, might also have been included here. These better answers than went on to evaluate this main factor against other factors which could how been considered to have a significant impact on Spain in this period such as colonial administration and resources, financial problems, political and social problems within Spain, the Ottomans and Renaissance culture. However, this question also produced some of the weakest responses on this paper. Many did not focus on the significance of factors, there was much narrative, the present tense was used throughout and there were several instances of candidates merely unloading their classroom notes on Charles V with little or no attempt to engage with the question set. There was also much listing of other factors which might be considered as significant developments in a mechanistic way. PERIOD STUDY 6 ASPECTS OF THE HISTORY OF EUROPE, c Russia during the reign of Peter the Great, This question was attempted by 75% of the candidates entered for the examination. In part (a) they were asked to explain why the Battle of Poltava was important for Russia. Most candidates were familiar with the battle noting it as a crucial event in the Great Northern War. Some weaker candidates avoided the battle and simply gave a potted account of the war. Not only did the battle dent Swedish military power it also helped mark the emergence of Russia as great European power. 14

17 In part (b), candidates were asked to consider the extent to which Peter the Great s reform of the Russian church was the most significant feature of his reign. While clearly this was a very important policy linked with modernising the state and challenging a potential rival source of authority it should be viewed within the context of a range of other policies, most notably his foreign policy which saw real and significant territorial gains for the state. The policy of westernisation linked to the defeat of Sweden saw the emergence of Russia as a very significant power. That this was achieved with improved armed forces should also figure in any discussion and analysis. Candidates are reminded of the need to focus on the question and to provide a credible explanation. 2. Prussia during the reign of Frederick the Great, All candidates answered this question which asked them to explain why Frederick the Great reformed the legal system in Prussia. There were a number of good responses to part (a) which sought to tie in his reform of the legal system with enlightenment ideas and the need to streamline the administrative system in order to facilitate economic s development. Weaker candidates continued to offload their class notes in an unstructured and wholly irrelevant way without any contextual overview. In part (b), candidates were asked to consider the extent to which changes in the Prussian economy economic reform were the most significant development of Frederick the Great s reign. While some candidates wrote narrative accounts often in great detail of his economic reforms, others challenged the view with some conviction. Good arguments were presented for considering his military reforms and foreign policy and the way he deftly steered his country towards enhancing its status as a major and much feared European power largely through retaining her military gains. 3. The Hapsburg Empire during the reigns of Charles VI and Maria Theresa, % of candidates answered this question which of the four produced the highest mean mark. Part (a) asked for an explanation of why Charles VI faced problems with the issue of succession. There were some good accounts of his dynastic problems and the rules allowing for succession to the throne. Some of these were very balanced and showed good insight. Abler candidates noted the need to prevent any plotting among the constituent parts of the Empire. The responses to part (b) were generally good. Candidates were asked to consider to what extent the domestic reforms of Maria Theresa were the most significant development in the Hapsburg empire during the period Some candidates saw the question as an opportunity to provide a narrative account of Maria Theresa s domestic reforms, often in great detail, without weighting them against other potentially more significant factors such as her foreign policy and the determination to recover Silesia with any likely ally. Balanced answers considered a range of alternatives in a fully integrated way. 4. International Relations, c This question was attempted by very few candidates. The requirement in part (a) was for candidates to explain why the Seven Years War broke out. They were expected cover a wide range of events including colonial tensions in North America and issues relating to the Diplomatic Revolution. Narrative content with the absence of explanation tended to prevail. Candidates for the second part of the question were asked to consider to what extent the war of Austrian Succession had the most significant impact on international relations in the period Among the factors they needed to consider were the growing power of Britain particularly after the Treaty of Utrecht and the ambitions of Prussia. Other influences which could be cited to counter-balance this might be disputes over succession, economic factors, and territorial aggression. 15

18 1. Europe, c PERIOD STUDY 7 ASPECTS OF THE HISTORY OF EUROPE, c In part (a) candidates were expected to consider why the Vienna Settlement caused tensions in Europe. Most candidates were able to access marks within Level 2 by providing at least a basic explanation of why there were tensions. However, what failed to materialise was an understanding of the inter-relationship between the various causes of tension. Most candidates wrote in general terms about the effects of the Treaty of Vienna but few candidates are confident enough to examine the individual terms of the Vienna Settlement, and to consider why these may have led to tensions in post-war Europe. Most wrote in terms of nationalist principles and the principle of legitimacy, or the maintenance or order and the suppression of revolutions. The lack of detailed knowledge of the key issues remains the problem in this question. In part (b) candidates tended to spend far too much time on the other factors which influenced Europe in the period. The candidates were less secure in their evaluation of the maintenance of autocratic government. Few candidates were able to discuss at length the impact of political conservatism and its effects upon liberal and nationalist movements. Metternich rarely received any attention or the notion of turning the clock back. The Congress System received the usual excessive treatment in relation to other factors as did the fear of revolution. However, only rarely did candidates produce convincing evaluations of the key factor in relation to these other influences at work. Once again it was clear that many candidates were still working on the premise that the Eastern Question still formed part of the specification for this topic area. Centres are advised to reflect upon the contents of the specification for each topic area because the Eastern Question is now addressed in Unit Italy, c The answers to this question were far more promising in this round of examinations. This was the most popular question with the highest mean mark. The better responses to part (a) were able to draw upon a range of reasons why France became involved in Italian affairs after 1858, but there was often little attempt to consider the inter-relationship between the factors and in what way one may have led to another. Most candidates were able to consider the ambitions of Napoleon and his support for the nationalist cause, although often the role of Orsini was overlooked. There was often too much concentration on the earlier period with the Plombieres agreement and the war of 1859 mainly featuring. Linked explanations were rare. In part (b) the evaluation of the role of Garibaldi was usually done very well with sound factual support and secure evaluation. However, his role as an adventurer and patriot was often missed and most evaluations began in What usually followed were rather routine profiles of the role of some of the other interested individuals usually Cavour and Mazzini, or Victor Emmanuel. Little attempt was made to weigh up the contribution of other factors against the contribution of Garibaldi. Overall, the quality of response was better although the majority of candidates accessed marks within the boundaries of Level 2 or low Level 3. 16