Modern History SEE 1 and 2 marking guide and response

(1)

Modern History SEE marking guide and response

External assessment 2021

(2)

Modern History SEE marking guide and response

External assessment 2021 Queensland Curriculum & Assessment Authority

SEE 1: Section 1 — short response (27 marks)

Assessment objectives

This assessment instrument is used to determine student achievement in the following objectives:

2. devise historical questions and conduct research linked to a topic focused on national experiences in the Modern World

3. analyse evidence from historical sources to show understanding that is linked to a topic focused on national experiences in the Modern World

5. evaluate evidence from historical sources to make judgments linked to a topic focused on national experiences in the Modern World

6. create responses that communicate meaning to suit purpose that is linked to a topic focused on national experiences in the Modern World.

Note: Unit objectives 1 and 4 are not assessed in this section.

SEE 1: Section 2 — essay in response to historical sources (37 marks)

Assessment objectives

1. comprehend terms, concepts and issues linked to a topic focused on national experiences in the Modern World

3 analyse evidence from historical sources to show understanding that is linked to a topic focused on national experiences in the Modern World

4. synthesise evidence from historical sources to form a historical argument that is linked to a topic focused on national experiences in the Modern World

5. evaluate evidence from historical sources to make judgments linked to a topic focused on national experiences in the Modern World

6. create responses that communicate meaning to suit purpose that is linked to a topic focused on national experiences in the Modern World.

Note: Unit objective 2 is not assessed in this section.

(3)

SEE 2 Paper 1: Combination response (26 marks)

Assessment objectives

This section is used to determine student achievement in the following objectives:

2. devise historical questions and conduct research linked to a topic focused on international experiences in the Modern World

4. synthesise evidence from historical sources to form a historical argument that is linked to a topic focused on international experiences in the Modern World

5. evaluate evidence from historical sources to make judgments linked to a topic focused on international experiences in the Modern World

6. create responses that communicate meaning to suit purpose that is linked to a topic focused on international experiences in the Modern World.

Note: Unit objectives 1 and 3 are not assessed in this section.

SEE 2 Paper 2: Short response (60 marks)

Assessment objectives

1. comprehend terms, concepts and issues linked to a topic focused on international experiences in the Modern World

3. analyse evidence from historical sources to show understanding that is linked to a topic focused on international experiences in the Modern World

4. synthesise evidence from historical sources to form a historical argument that is linked to a topic focused on international experiences in the Modern World

5. evaluate evidence from historical sources to make judgments linked to a topic focused on international experiences in the Modern World

6. create responses that communicate meaning to suit purpose that is linked to a topic focused on international experiences in the Modern World.

Note: Unit objective 2 is not assessed in this instrument.

(4)

Purpose

This document consists of a marking guide and a sample response.

The marking guide:

• provides a tool for calibrating external assessment markers to ensure reliability of results

• indicates the correlation, for each question, between mark allocation and qualities at each level of the mark range

• informs schools and students about how marks are matched to qualities in student responses.

The sample response:

• demonstrates the qualities of a high-level response

• has been annotated using the marking guide.

Mark allocation

Where a response does not meet any of the descriptors for a question or a criterion, a mark of ‘0’

will be recorded.

Where no response to a question has been made, a mark of ‘N’ will be recorded.

(5)

SEE 1: Section 1 Marking guide

Criterion: Analysing

Q Sample response The response: M

1 At a time when most young people in Germany were involved in Nazi Party–endorsed youth activities, these youth groups were similar in that they both took actions that rejected Nazi ideals. This rejection extended to the Edelweiss Pirates’ vandalism of public spaces with Nazi slogans (Source 1) and the Swing Youth’s adoption of the attitudes and styles of Germany’s enemies (Source 2).

A key difference between the two groups was how they exercised their opposition. Source 1 indicates that the Edelweiss Pirates were involved in more violent acts, including sabotaging war production (Source 1) whereas the Swing Youth were known for listening to jazz music (Source 2).

A second key difference is in the way members of the two groups presented themselves. The Swing Youth were clearly identifiable by their appearance, dressing in distinctive and ostentatious ways (Source 2).

Source 1 focuses on the actions of the Edelweiss Pirates rather than their appearance, indicating that this was another clear difference between the two groups.

• explains one similarity between the Swing Youth and the Edelweiss Pirates, using evidence from Sources 1 and 2

• explains two differences between the Swing Youth and the Edelweiss Pirates, using evidence from Sources 1 and 2

4

• explains one similarity between the Swing Youth and the Edelweiss Pirates, using evidence from Sources 1 and 2

• explains one difference between the Swing Youth and the Edelweiss Pirates, using evidence from Sources 1 and 2

OR

• explains two differences between the Swing Youth and the Edelweiss Pirates, using evidence from Sources 1 and 2

3

• explains one similarity or one difference between the Swing Youth and the Edelweiss Pirates, using evidence from Sources 1 and 2

2

• identifies a similarity or a difference between the

Swing Youth and the Edelweiss Pirates 1

• does not satisfy any of the descriptors above. 0

(6)

Criterion: Analysing

2 Source 3 shows that the Nazi Party believed youth groups presented a threat to their power. The title of the document, ‘Emergence of “Youth Cliques and Gangs” and the Struggle against Them’, indicates that the Nazi Party believed that action was required to subdue these groups. The source identifies some of the ways that the Nazi Party perceived ‘youth cliques and gangs’ to be exercising their opposition to Nazi ideologies. The actions of the Swing Youth that the Nazi Party deemed as ‘bordering on the criminal- antisocial’ included swing dancing, ‘wearing strikingly casual clothing’ and being ‘fans of English music and dance’. Although these activities could be considered as being unrelated to the political climate of the time, the Nazi Party perceived them to be dangerous as they were in direct opposition to the Nazi’s Party focus on ensuring complete loyalty to the state and Nazi ideals rather than individualism.

• analyses Source 3 to provide a detailed explanation of the Nazi Party’s view of youth groups

• supports the explanation with well-chosen evidence from Source 3

4

• analyses Source 3 to provide an explanation of the Nazi Party’s view of youth groups

• supports the explanation with evidence from Source 3

3

• provides an explanation of the Nazi Party’s view of

youth groups 2

• provides a statement about Source 3 OR

• provides a statement about the Nazi Party’s view of youth groups

1

(7)

Criterion: Evaluating

3 Source 4 can be considered a reliable source as Meyer states he was a member of the Edelweiss Pirates, meaning that he provides a firsthand account of the events that he was involved in. He can outline an example of the types of activities he was involved in — namely, stealing bicycles. However, nearly 50 years have elapsed, meaning it is possible that Meyer may not have accurately recalled the details of events. For example, the excerpt lacks specific details, such as names of places. This means that the statements made in the interview would need to be corroborated by other sources.

• explains a discerning judgment about the extent to which evidence from Source 4 is reliable

• uses relevant evidence from Source 4 to support the judgment

4

• makes a plausible judgment about the extent to which evidence from Source 4 is reliable

• uses relevant evidence from Source 4 to support the judgment

3

• makes a statement about the reliability of Source 4, referring to evidence from the source 2

• makes a statement about the reliability of Source 4 OR

• refers to evidence from Source 4 that is related to reliability

1

(8)

Criterion: Devising and conducting

Q Sample response The response:

4a) Key inquiry question: To what extent did the activities of the Edelweiss Pirates and the Swing Youth clearly demonstrate that they were organised movements that provided serious resistance to Nazi control of Germany?

Sub-questions:

1. Were the activities of the Edelweiss Pirates and the Swing Youth considered a threat to the Nazi Party?

2. Did the Edelweiss Pirates and the Swing Youth exert an anti-Nazi influence on other sections of German society?

Key inquiry question

• presents a nuanced key inquiry question that is relevant to the investigation topic and evidence available in Sources 1–5

3

• presents a basic key inquiry question that is relevant to the investigation topic and evidence available in Sources 1–5

2

• presents a key inquiry question about youth resistance that may not relate to the evidence available in Sources 1–5

1

• does not satisfy any of the descriptors above. 0 Sub-questions

• presents two sub-questions relevant to the key

inquiry question 2

• presents one sub-question relevant to the key

inquiry question 1

(9)

Criterion: Evaluating

Criterion: Creating and communicating

Q Sample response The response:

4b) Source 5 is useful, providing the perspective of a reputable academic in understanding that the Edelweiss Pirates and the Swing Youth were not seen by some in the Nazi state as a serious threat.

Rather, they carried out ‘silly childish pranks’ and were ‘anti-political’ (Source 5). However, according to Peukert, some people in the Nazi Party did believe these groups were part of a ‘large-scale conspiracy’.

Source 3 is useful in providing insight into how the Nazi state perceived the Swing Youth, as the source is part of a report from the government’s own Ministry of Justice. The report shows that the government saw the Swing Youth as behaving in ways that could be considered political resistance.

However, as with Source 5, the actions described might not be seen as serious resistance.

For Source 5

• evaluates the usefulness of Source 5 by explaining in detail how the evidence addresses the key inquiry question

2

• evaluates the usefulness of Source 5 by explaining how the evidence addresses the key inquiry question

1

• does not satisfy any of the descriptors above. 0 For a second source from Sources 1–4

• evaluates the usefulness of a second source by explaining in detail how the evidence addresses the key inquiry question

2

• evaluates the usefulness of a second source by explaining how the evidence addresses the key inquiry question

1

• does not satisfy any of the descriptors above. 0 Communication of the response

• organises paragraph/s purposefully to convey

ideas related to the key inquiry question 2

• conveys ideas related to the key inquiry question

in paragraph/s 1

(10)

Criterion: Devising and conducting

4c) Further research needs to include the perspective of members of the Swing Youth to determine if they viewed themselves as a political group.

Another way research could be more complete would be to identify how widespread membership of the Edelweiss Pirates and the Swing Youth was.

The sources suggest membership grew during the war years but the lack of statistics means it is difficult to know if the groups were a serious threat to the Nazis.

• identifies two relevant ways further research could be used

• explains why further research is required in these two areas, with reference to what was not available in the selection of sources provided

4

• identifies two relevant ways further research could be used

• provides an explanation of why further research is required in one area

3

• identifies two ways further research could be

used 2

• identifies a way further research could be used 1

(11)

SEE 1: Section 2 Marking guide

Extended response — Question 5 (37 marks)

The response: M The response: M

Comprehending — use of terms Comprehending issues

• aptly uses relevant terms from the sources placed in historical context 3 • demonstrates an informed understanding of historical issues related to the

question 3

• uses relevant terms from the sources placed in historical context 2 • demonstrates an understanding of historical issues related to the question 2

• uses relevant terms from the sources 1 ^• refers to ideas relevant to the question 1

• does not satisfy any of the descriptors above. 0 • does not satisfy any of the descriptors above. 0

SEE 1: Section 2 Marking guide

Extended response — Question 5 (37 marks)

SEE 1: Section 2 Marking guide

Extended response — Question 5 (37 marks)

(12)

The response: M

Analysing

• provides detailed and discerning explanations of relevant features of evidence from a range of sources, including reference to different perspectives

6

• provides detailed explanations of relevant features of evidence from a

range of sources 5

• provides explanations of relevant features of evidence from a range of

sources 4

• describes relevant features of evidence from sources 3

• identifies features of evidence from sources 2

• identifies a feature of evidence from a source 1

(13)

The response: M The response: M

Evaluating — usefulness Evaluating — reliability

• makes discerning judgments about the extent to which evidence from

sources is useful 4 • makes discerning judgments about the extent to which evidence from

sources is reliable 4

• makes judgments about the extent to which evidence from sources is

useful 3 • makes judgments about the extent to which evidence from sources is

reliable 3

• makes a judgment about the extent to which evidence from a source is

useful 2 • makes a judgment about the extent to which evidence from a source is

reliable 2

• makes statements about the extent to which evidence from sources is

useful 1 • makes statements about the extent to which evidence from sources is

reliable 1

• does not satisfy any of the descriptors above. 0 ^• does not satisfy any of the descriptors above. 0

The response: M

Evaluating — corroboration

• explains how evidence from sources corroborates 2

• identifies a point of corroboration 1

(14)

The response: M

Synthesising

• develops a sophisticated historical argument that responds to the question fully 5

• develops a valid historical argument that responds to the question 4

• develops a basic historical argument that responds to the question 3

• presents a superficial historical argument 2

• makes statements related to the question 1

(15)

The response: M Synthesising

• skilfully combines well-chosen evidence from a range of sources in the stimulus to develop the historical argument 5

• combines relevant evidence from a range of sources in the stimulus to develop the historical argument 4

• combines relevant evidence from 3 of the sources to develop the historical argument 3

• refers to relevant evidence from 2 of the sources to answer the question 2

• refers to evidence from 1 of the sources 1

(16)

The response: M

Creating

• conveys ideas related to the hypothesis succinctly, purposefully and fluently, using all of the features of an essay in response to historical sources 5

• conveys ideas related to the hypothesis purposefully, using most features of an essay in response to historical sources 4

• conveys ideas related to the hypothesis in paragraphs, using some features of an essay in response to historical sources 3

• conveys ideas related to the question, in a paragraph 2

• conveys ideas related to the question, in sentences 1

(17)

Q Sample response The response: M

1a) Key inquiry question: In its initial stages, to what extent did the ANZUS Treaty signify a significant shift in Australia’s foreign policy?

• presents a nuanced key inquiry question that is relevant to the investigation topic and evidence available in Sources 1–6

2

• presents a key inquiry question that is relevant to the investigation topic and evidence available in Sources 1–6

1

1b) Sub-questions:

1. What were the key features of Australia’s foreign policy before signing the ANZUS Treaty?

2. What were the most significant changes that occurred in Australian and US relations?

• presents 2 sub-questions relevant to the key inquiry question

2

• presents 1 sub-question relevant to the key inquiry question

1

SEE 2: Paper 1

Combination response

(18)

Modern History SEE marking guide and response External assessment 2021

Queensland Curriculum & Assessment Authority

2 Source 1, as an excerpt from the ANZUS Treaty, shows the nature of the alliance between Australia and the USA. To determine how much the treaty represented a foreign policy shift, it must be established what the treaty involved. It is clear from Source 1 that a formal alliance was established to provide armed forces if either was ‘threatened’ in the Pacific.

• explains how evidence from Source 1 or Source 2 could be used to develop a historical argument based on the key inquiry question

• supports response with details of the relevant considerations and evidence from the source

3

• explains how evidence from Source 1 or Source 2 could be used to develop a historical argument based on the key inquiry question

2

• makes a statement linking Source 1 or Source 2 to the key inquiry question

1

(19)

3 Source 4 could be used to develop a historical argument about whether the alliance represented a truly significant shift in Australian foreign policy as it addresses the historical context, the events of World War II, that led to Australia seeking an alliance with the US. The shift from a reliance on Britain for military support to a reliance on America is particularly highlighted. This source was written by an Australian historian, providing an academic perspective from 1964, the height of the Cold War.

• explains how evidence from Source 3, 4 or 5 could be used to develop a historical argument based on the key inquiry question

• supports response with details of the relevant considerations and evidence from the source

3

• explains how evidence from Source 3, 4 or 5 could be used to develop a historical argument based on the key inquiry question

2

• makes a statement linking Source 3, 4 or 5 to the key inquiry question

1

(20)

Section 2: Extended response

Q The response: M

Historical argument

4 • develops a valid historical argument that responds directly to the key inquiry question 3

• develops a basic historical argument that responds to the key inquiry question 2

• makes a superficial historical argument by making valid statement/s related to the key inquiry question

1

Combination of evidence

4 • skilfully combines evidence from three sources to develop the historical argument 4

• skilfully combines evidence from two sources to develop the historical argument

• refers to evidence from a third source

3

• combines evidence from three sources to develop the historical argument 2

• combines evidence from two sources to develop the historical argument 1

Evaluating

4 • explains discerning judgments about the extent to which evidence from three sources used is useful and/or reliable

4

• makes judgments about the extent to which evidence from the three sources used is useful and/or reliable

3

• makes a judgment about the extent to which evidence from a source used is useful and/or reliable

2

• makes a statement about the usefulness or reliability of evidence from a source used 1

(21)

Q The response: M Corroboration

4 • explains the extent to which evidence from sources corroborates 2

• makes a statement about how evidence from sources corroborates 1

Creating and communicating

4 • conveys ideas related to the key inquiry question succinctly, purposefully and fluently, acknowledging sources used

3

• conveys ideas related to the key inquiry question purposefully, acknowledging sources used

2

• conveys ideas related to the question 1

(22)

Q The response: M

1 Difference 1

• identifies a valid difference in how the GOSV was described in relation to Australian involvement in the Vietnam War

• provides a plausible explanation using evidence from Sources 1 and 2

3

• provides a plausible explanation using evidence from Source 1 or 2

2

• refers to evidence from Source 1 or 2

1

Difference 2

• identifies another valid difference in how the GOSV was described in relation to Australian involvement in the Vietnam War

3

2

1

SEE 2: Paper 2 Short response

Criterion: Analysing

(23)

Criterion: Comprehending

1 • aptly uses relevant terms from Source 1 and/or Source 2 placed in historical context 2

• uses relevant terms from Source 1 and/or Source 2 placed in historical context 1

(24)

Criterion: Analysing

2 Similarity

• identifies a valid similarity regarding the origins of the NSS

3

2

1

Difference

• identifies a valid difference regarding the origins of the NSS

3

2

1

(25)

Criterion: Comprehending

2 • aptly uses relevant terms from Source 3 and/or Source 4 placed in historical context 2

(26)

Criterion: Evaluating

Q The response: M The response: M

3 The Canberra Times (Source 5) — usefulness Photograph (Source 6) — usefulness

• makes a judgment about the usefulness of evidence from Source 5 that is

−plausible

−explained with the discerning use of 2 considerations from the source

3 • makes a judgment about the usefulness of evidence from Source 6 that is

−plausible

3

−plausible

−explained with the discerning use of 1 consideration from the source

−plausible

2

−plausible

−referring to consideration/s

−plausible

1

(27)

Q The response: M The response: M 3 The Canberra Times (Source 5) — reliability Photograph (Source 6) — reliability

• makes a judgment about the reliability of evidence from Source 5 that is

−plausible

3 • makes a judgment about the reliability of evidence from Source 6 that is

−plausible

3

−plausible

2

−plausible

1

(28)

Criterion: Comprehending

3 Understanding of the phrase ‘All the way with LBJ’

• demonstrates an informed understanding of what ‘All the way with LBJ’ indicated about Australia’s

relationship with the USA during the Vietnam War 3

• demonstrates a basic understanding of what ‘All the way with LBJ’ indicated about Australia’s

relationship with the USA during the Vietnam War 2

• refers to the relationship between Australia and the USA during the 1960s 1

Use of terms

• aptly uses relevant terms from Source 5 and/or Source 6 placed in historical context 2

• does not satisfy any of the descriptors above 0

(29)

Criterion: Creating and communicating

3 • organises paragraph/s purposefully to succinctly and fluently convey ideas relating to the question 3

• organises paragraph/s to convey ideas relating to the question 2

(30)

Criterion: Synthesising

4 Historical argument

• develops a sophisticated historical argument that responds to the question fully 6

• develops a valid historical argument that responds to the question 5

• develops a basic historical argument that responds to the question 4

• develops a superficial historical argument 3

• makes statements related to the question 2

• makes a statement related to the question 1

Combination of evidence from sources

• skilfully combines relevant evidence from all 4 of the sources provided to develop the historical

argument 6

• skilfully combines relevant evidence from 3 of the sources provided to develop the historical argument 5

• combines relevant evidence from all 4 of the sources provided to develop the historical argument 4

• combines relevant evidence from 3 of the sources provided to develop the historical argument 3

• combines relevant evidence from 2 of the sources provided to develop the historical argument 2

• refers to relevant evidence from a nominated source when making a statement/s 1

(31)

Criterion: Evaluating

4 • makes a plausible judgment about the extent to which the evidence from 2 of the sources provided

corroborates a point being made in the historical argument 3

• makes statements about the extent to which the evidence from 2 of the sources provided

• makes a statement about the extent to which the evidence from 2 of the sources provided

Criterion: Comprehending

4 Understanding of the aims of civic action

• demonstrates an informed understanding of the aims of civic action 4

• demonstrates a basic understanding of the aims of civic action 3

• refers to the aims of civic action 2

• refers to an aim of civic action 1

Use of terms

• aptly uses relevant terms from Sources 7, 8, 9 and/or 10 placed in historical context 2

• uses relevant terms from Sources 7, 8, 9 and/or 10 placed in historical context 1

(32)

Criterion: Creating and communicating

4 • organises paragraph/s purposefully to succinctly and fluently convey ideas

relating to the question, acknowledging sources used 3

• organises paragraph/s to convey ideas relating to the question,

acknowledging sources used 2

(33)

Licence: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0 | Copyright notice: www.qcaa.qld.edu.au/copyright — lists the full terms and conditions, which specify certain exceptions to the licence. | Attribution: © State of Queensland (QCAA) 2021