HISTORY A. Y218/01 International Relations Summer 2017 examination series A LEVEL. Exemplar Candidate Work. H505 For first teaching in 2015

Transcription

1 Qualification Accredited Oxford Cambridge and RSA A LEVEL HISTORY A H505 For first teaching in 2015 Y218/01 International Relations Summer 2017 examination series Version 1

2 Contents Introduction 3 Question 1a: Level 4-6 mark answer 4 Commentary 5 Question 1b: Level 4-11 mark answer 6 Commentary 9 Question 1a: Level 4-5 mark answer 10 Commentary 12 Question 1b: Level 3-9 mark answer 13 Commentary 17 Question 1a: Level 6-10 mark answer 18 Commentary 22 Question 1b: Level 6-18 mark answer 23 Commentary 34 2

3 Introduction These exemplar answers have been chosen from the summer 2017 examination series. OCR is open to a wide variety of approaches and all answers are considered on their merits. These exemplars, therefore, should not be seen as the only way to answer questions but do illustrate how the mark scheme has been applied. Please always refer to the specification ( org.uk/images/ specification-accredited-a-levelgce-history-a-h505.pdf ) for full details of the assessment for this qualification. These exemplar answers should also be read in conjunction with the sample assessment materials and the June 2017 Examiners Report to Centres available on the OCR website qualifications/. The question paper, mark scheme and any resource booklet(s) will be available on the OCR website from summer Until then, they are available on OCR Interchange (school exams officers will have a login for this). It is important to note that approaches to question setting and marking will remain consistent. At the same time OCR reviews all its qualifications annually and may make small adjustments to improve the performance of its assessments. We will let you know of any substantive changes. 3

4 Question 1(a) Which of the following made the outbreak of World War II more likely in the period 1929 to 1939? (i) (ii) The appeasement policies of Britain and France. Relations between Russia and the rest of Europe. Explain your answer with reference to both (i) and (ii). [10] Level 4 answer 6 marks 4

5 Examiner commentary The candidate explores both factors with reference to the outbreak of World War II. The appeasement policies of Britain and France are explained more fully, the candidate clearly understands how appeasement encouraged Hitler to develop his confidence and that Chamberlain s perceived weakness resulted in such bold moves as Anschluss. Relations between Russia and the rest of Europe are also understood but these are not explained in as much depth, with reference to causing the outbreak of WWII. AS a consequence, the final judgement has some merit but is limited by the lack of development of the second factor. Moreover, one can also highlight that there is certainly more detail to explore regarding appreasement, for example, the confidence that the Munich Agreement gave Hitler in the invasion of Poland. Such omissions demonstrate a lack of accurate and detailed knowledge of both factors, hence L4 using relevant knowledge is more appropriate. 5

6 Question 1(b) The Alliance System between the Great Powers was the most important cause of the First World War. How far do you agree? [20] Level 4 answer 11 marks 6

7 7

8 8

9 Examiner commentary The introduction begins with a promising focus on the question, a clear statement; the alliance system was the major cause of World War I. However, the precision of this statement is somewhat diluted as the argument seems to suggest imperialism and militarism caused the alliance system and are perhaps therefore more significant. there is an argument but not a well-developed line of reasoning. The lack of accurate and detailed knowledge and this lack of developed reasoning prevented the response reaching Level 5. However, the candidate is definitely credited for the general address of the question shown. The argument relating to the named factor, the alliance system, is a little narrative in parts, it would do better to clearly state the alliances instead of assuming that the reader knows the established groups. However, there is explanation of how alliances were linked to trouble in the Balkans and the situation thereafter. The problem is a communicative issue, the candidate tries to justify the significance of the alliances but then alludes to other factors. Thus, the first argument is akin to the introduction, it is not always decisive and therefore lacks conviction. Militarism, as a cause of tension and conflict, is fairly explained however, its relative significance when compared against the alliance system is not developed or particularly convincing. Again, imperialism is explained as a cause of World War I. As before, the analysis of this factor is a little simplistic, forcing France to defend Russia, etc. The candidate never moves beyond an explained list of a few factors with some relevant knowledge. This is exemplified by the summative conclusion that does little to move beyond the introductory premise or convince the reader of the qualitative nature of the factors considered. Thus, 9

10 Question 1(a) Which of the following made the outbreak of World War II more likely in the period 1929 to 1939? (i) (ii) The appeasement policies of Britain and France. Relations between Russia and the rest of Europe. Explain your answer with reference to both (i) and (ii). [10] Level 4 answer 5 marks 10

11 11

12 Examiner commentary The response is quite lengthy. Appeasement is dealt with effectively enough and there is an appreciation of how events in Japan impacted upon events in Europe. The response also contains some relevant and accurate knowledge relating to appeasement. However, the coverage of relations between Russia and the rest of Europe, the second factor, is limited. The response does not explain how relations actually caused war, it is illustrative and lacks precision. As a result the response s consideration of the factors relates to Level 4, with one of the two being only partial. This is a useful example to demonstrate how quantity and illustration is not going to attain higher marks. Precise and relevant knowledge that addresses both factors, within the demands of the question is required. 12

13 Question 1(b) The Alliance System between the Great Powers was the most important cause of the First World War. How far do you agree? [20] Level 3 answer 9 marks 13

14 14

15 15

16 16

17 Examiner commentary The introduction clearly argues that the alliance system was not the most significant factor in the outbreak of war. However, a range of other more important causes are outlined. It would be useful to state which of the factors was the most significant at this point in the response. The paragraph on the alliance system does not fully explain how the alliances caused World War I, this is largely due to a lack of specific knowledge. It is a vague and generalised approach. This approach continues within the paragraph on militarism. Yes, the Schlieffen Plan is mentioned but alongside little else of accuracy, and more importantly little in the way of explaining how militarism caused World War I, and the relative significance of the alliances to this factor. The response is illustrative in places, e.g. regarding the arms race, and also inaccurate, the naval arms race did not result in direct conflict between Britain and Germany during the build up of dreadnoughts. The remaining sections continue to illustrate some of the events in the build up to war but again, this is relayed in a descriptive fashion with little developed reasoning as to why war occurred, and little to convince what factor was more significant, or why a particular factor was long term or short term in nature. Such essays are common for a causation question. Candidates will have learnt a list of reasons for the outbreak of World War I. The evidence here lacks depth and has not been marshalled to address the specific question and develop sophisticated links between events, or specific lines of developed reasoning. 17

18 Question 1(a) Which of the following made the outbreak of World War II more likely in the period 1929 to 1939? (i) (ii) The appeasement policies of Britain and France. Relations between Russia and the rest of Europe. Explain your answer with reference to both (i) and (ii). [10] Level 6 answer 10 marks 18

19 19

20 20

21 21

22 Examiner commentary The candidate starts well by providing a clear and simple viewpoint, i.e. one factor, in this case relations between Russia and the rest of Europe, is the most important cause of World War II of the two factors featured. The first argument explores appeasement. The response is accurate and measured; it clearly explains how appeasement made war more likely by using clear links to the question and accurate knowledge. The second factor is argued effectively in places. There are some unqualified or poorly phrased aspects, e.g. the Spanish Civil War causing Germany and Russia to befriend one another, however there is also much of relevance, for example, the Nazi-Soviet Pact neutralising opposition to the invasion of Poland. This is a good example of how candidates are awarded for accurate development and not unfairly punished for a lack of precision. The conclusion provides a clear and developed judgement that enabled this response to access Level 6. The conclusion clearly compares both factors and convincingly explains why relations between Russia and the rest of Europe made war more likely without simply summarising what has already been stated. The argument has developed and is sustained throughout the response. 22

23 Question 1(b) The Alliance System between the Great Powers was the most important cause of the First World War. How far do you agree? [20] Level 6 answer 18 marks 23

24 24

25 25

26 26

27 27

28 28

29 29

30 30

31 31

32 32

33 33

34 Examiner commentary The introduction outlines a range of factors and clearly states which factor is the most significant in causing the outbreak of World War I. The first argument relays why tension in the the Balkans was a key cause of conflict but then skilfully links this argument to the named factor, alliances. The two factors are evaluated and the response justifies why the alliance system takes greater responsibility as a cause for war. Other factors are explored, militarism, imperialism, etc. These are assessed with reference to the outbreak of war and then linked back and related to the argument that the alliance system was a more significant factor in causing World War I. This creates a sustained argument, there are clear links between the alliance system and other causes, and the response communicates these links clearly and at relevant points throughout the essay. Overall, the argument is focused, relevant and sustained. The response is a good example of effective essay-writing. In order to access the top level of Level 6 and attain full marks the response is required to analyse accurate and detailed knowledge throughout. In some sections there was a lack of precise terms, where a greater use of third tier, or subject-specific vocabularly relevant to the question would have facilitated it as a response to a history question, and demonstrated the use of accurate and detailed knowledge throughout.. 34

35 The small print We d like to know your view on the resources we produce. By clicking on the Like or Dislike button you can help us to ensure that our resources work for you. When the template pops up please add additional comments if you wish and then just click Send. Thank you. Whether you already offer OCR qualifications, are new to OCR, or are considering switching from your current provider/awarding organisation, you can request more information by completing the Expression of Interest form which can be found here: OCR Resources: the small print OCR s resources are provided to support the delivery of OCR qualifications, but in no way constitute an endorsed teaching method that is required by OCR. Whilst every effort is made to ensure the accuracy of the content, OCR cannot be held responsible for any errors or omissions within these resources. We update our resources on a regular basis, so please check the OCR website to ensure you have the most up to date version. This resource may be freely copied and distributed, as long as the OCR logo and this small print remain intact and OCR is acknowledged as the originator of this work. OCR acknowledges the use of the following content: Square down and Square up: alexwhite/shutterstock.com Please get in touch if you want to discuss the accessibility of resources we offer to support delivery of our qualifications: resources.feedback@ocr.org.uk Looking for a resource? There is now a quick and easy search tool to help find free resources for your qualification: OCR Customer Contact Centre General qualifications Telephone Facsimile general.qualifications@ocr.org.uk OCR is part of Cambridge Assessment, a department of the University of Cambridge. For staff training purposes and as part of our quality assurance programme your call may be recorded or monitored. Oxford Cambridge and RSA Examinations is a Company Limited by Guarantee. Registered in England. Registered office 1 Hills Road, Cambridge CB1 2EU. Registered company number OCR is an exempt charity.