'Either/Or' Explanation

   

Judging Importance:

This is a question where it is essential to demonstrate that you have FACTUAL KNOWLEDGE.

 

Look at the question – it will ask you ‘which of two’ had the most effect.  

(e.g. Which event (U2 or Berlin Wall) had most effect on the relationship between the superpowers?)

You must start by getting your head around what ‘thing-being affected’ you are talking about (i.e. the relationship between the superpowers) – your answer MUST be directed to writing about how much that issue was affected by the two events (U2 and Berlin Wall).

 

This, therefore, is the question where (usually) you demonstrate how well you have learned (or able to think up) what RESULTS/EFFECTS/IMPORTANCE certain events had.

  

  

The key here is at level 2/3:

  

•         Are you able to say WHAT those results were – you will get 3 or 4.

•         Are you able to say WHY those results were important – you will get 4 or 5

•         Are you able to WEIGH those results, saying which were the most important AND WHY – you can get 6+.

 

  

MARKSCHEME: How marks are allocated for this question

Target: Analysis and explanation of events leading to consequence (AO 6.2)

 

 

Level 1: Simple descriptive statements based on own knowledge

e.g. Germany lost a lot of land and wanted it back/ Germany was blamed for the war and had to pay

 

1-2

Levels 2 - 3: Beginning to develop argument

At this point the examiners put together levels 2 and 3 and operate very complicated markscheme based on three levels of answer:

1. describes WHAT was said/happened (e.g. lists territory take from Germany)

2. explains WHY this angered Germans (e.g. humiliation, couldn’t afford etc.)

3. assesses HOW MUCH this angered Germans (e.g. led to economic ruin causing anger).

The marks are awarded according to the best kevel you achieve on either side:

§         Describes one = 3

§         Describes  both = 4

§         Explains one, describes the other = 4

§         Explains both = 5

§         Assesses one, explains the other = 6

§         Assesses both = 7

The criterion for L3 reads: ‘a selective and structured account covering both bullet points, focussed on the question and establishing some argument’.

 

3-8

Level 4: Balanced, well-argued answer, focussed on the question

Assesses both parts in depth and successfully compares the effects of the two, coming to a reasoned judgement.

9-10

  

 

Thus, to do this question:

1.   Talk about the first suggestion – talk about its results, and why they were important, and how important they were.   Put in as much factual knowledge as you have about this.

2.   Talk about the second suggestion – talk about its results, and why they were important, and how important they were.   Put in as much factual knowledge as you have about this.

3.   Finish with a conclusion deciding which was more important, and explaining why.

 

 

  

Cool Sentence Starters:

 

1.       Another effect of … was …

 

2.       This was [very/ slightly/ less] important because …

 

3.       Much more significant was…

  

  

Examples

(in the following examples, you can see the points which were ticked ü by the examiner, and - if you mouseover the maroon 'Mark ' at the end of each example - you can see what level and mark the answer got and why)

  

Task

All the following answers are actual answers by pupils in the 2005 examination.

  1. For each, study them with a friend and - using the markscheme - work out what mark you would have given the answer and why.   Then mouseover the maroon 'Mark ' at the end of the question and see what it actually got and why.

  2. When you think you have got the measure of 'what makes a good answer', try one of the two 'exam practice' questions at the end for yourself.   Show it to your teacher (or your friend) and discuss what level and mark your attempt would have got.

      

    The KEY to this question is: 'Have I assessed HOW MUCH?'.

 

 

EXAMPLE QUESTION

   

(a)   Which part of the Treaty of Versailles caused more anger in Germany:

o       the loss of territory in Europe

o       war guilt and reparations

          You must refer to both part when explaining your answer.                                            (15 marks)

   

Plan: loss of territory – made Germany slightly weaker – angered people because they felt threatened.

War guilt – Germany was forced to accept the blame for the war – even though they thought it wasn’t their fault.

Reparations – forced to pay money they couldn’t afford – became poorer country.

 

1.   Both the loss of territory in Europe and the war guilt and reparations angered Germany a lot.   Germany was made a much smaller country by losing territory such as Alsace-Lorraine and the Sudetenland.   Also, Germany wasn’t allowed troops into the Rhineland.üL2D   Losing so much territory would have affected German’s pride and would have made them feel threatened by surrounding countries, in particular, France, because much of their land had been lost to them and now France had the larger army making them a large threat to the German people.

            On the other hand being forced to accept the blame for the war and paying large amounts of money in reparations would have also affected the German people.  Germany was already a smaller country doe to losing land to surrounding countries including France, so having to pay reparations to them as well, would have caused even more anger.üL2D   Furthermore, accepting the blame for something that they didn’t feel was their fault would have made feelings in Germany even worse.üL2E

            Overall, in my opinion the war guilt and reparations would have angered the German people more than the loss of territory.   Having to pay money they couldn’t afford to pay and accepting the blame for the war would have made the situation worse.   This in conjunction with the loss of land would have upset Germany even more.

   Mark

   

Loss of territory – for - couldn’t defend itself and weren’t actually taken over. Against – lost

War guilt & reparations – for – didn’t think they were to blame, starving children

Against –

Conclude – judgement – war guilt (fact), as it triggered off the rest

 

2.   The Germans were extremely angry with the terms of the treaty.   One main part was that they lost land in Europe.   This annoyed them as not only did they have give away territory which they had conquered and therefore been able to take over but the ToV made them lose a lot of land which was helpful industrially and for farming.   They lost everything that they had fought for in the past years by sacrificing lives, which got them furious about the treaty.üL2E   It was unfair and meant that they couldn’t defend themselves.   However, they didn’t lose some of them permanently like the Saar which wasn’t too harsh.  

            The war guilt & reparations caused most anger however, because firstly they didn’t think they were entirely to blame and the other countries were ‘bullying’ and crippling them.üL2E The reparations made them think they were trying to starve their children who were all innocent!   On the other hand it was paid in instalments and not taken straight away like the land was.

            In conclusion I think the reparations and war guilt played a bigger part in causing anger because all the other parts were triggered off by the war guilt as it was all a part of punishment.   Also I know for a fact that German were most angered by Clause 231 because they didn’t think they had lost and now they were being blamed and accused!

   Mark

   

*ToV = loss of territory – Germany became poorer industrial land lost (Saars) and agricultural land too (West Prussia) contrary to self-determination – small and weak against larger countries = humiliation

*ToV = war guilt “such a confession in my mouth would be a lie” unfair; clause 231, reparations – starving children, forced to pay caused hyperinflation (March 1921)

 

3.   I can see that there are many events caused by the Treaty of Versailles, which had inflicted anger towards the Germans, which later on caused World War 2.   One of these principles which caused great anger was the loss of territory in Europe.   After losing industrial land which was the Saar coal mines as well as agricultural land (West Prussia),üL2D Germany became poorer and gave Germans every right to be angryüL2E not only this but, because of the loss of territory Germany became weaker and smaller (contrary to self-determination) causing great humiliation to the once proud Germany, and again causing great anger.  

        On the other hand war guilt was unfair; one German soldier said before signing the ToV: “such a confession in my mouth would be a lie”.   The fact that that they had been placed the blame and it was not their fault caused more anger.üL2D   However, reparations also did the same, the Germane believed that allies were trying to starve their children and only started paying when the allies invaded (March 1921) the brutal consequences were that hyperinflation was caused.üL2A   Overall the part of the ToV which caused most anger in Germany would have been the loss of territory which caused poverty and humiliation which WWI reminded them of.   The reparations on the other hand was called off in July 1932.

   Mark

   

4.   The Treaty of Versailles caused much anger in Germany.   Some people may argue that the loss of territory in Europe caused most outrage as it divided many families.   As well as the heartache and isolation this caused, it also damaged the patriotic feelings many Germans heldüL2E for their now-humiliated country.   Another way, it caused more outrage was that Germany lost one tenth of its land, including industrial areas needed for survival.üL2D   This badly damaged the German economy, causing poverty, hunger and frustration – causing far more outrage than war guilt.üL2A  

            One the other hand, it could be said that war guilt and reparations caused most damage and anger.üL2D   War guilt hurt the Germans in 2 ways.   Firstly, the humiliation of being blamed for the war led to anger and resentment of clause 231.üL2E   Secondly, most Germans felt that they were not responsible for the war anyway, and, as one Count said, ‘such a confession in my mouth would be a lie’.   This frustration led to anger again.   Reparations also damaged the German economy, spiralling then into poverty and resentment.üL2A

            Overall I think that both of these terms of the Treaty of Versailles were equally important in the anger of the German people.   The treaty, as a whole, and combinations of terms caused the anger.

   Mark

   

  

  

   

EXAMPLE QUESTIONS TO TRY

    

2005

Which of the following events was the greater success in Hitler’s foreign policy:

•   The re-militarisation of the Rhineland in 1936;

•   The occupation of the Sudetenland in 1938?

You must refer to both events when explaining your answer..                                             (10 marks)  

 

Which event had the greater effect on the relationship between the USA and USSR:

•   The U2 incident in 1960;

•   The building of the Berlin Wall in 1961?

You must refer to both events when explaining your answer.                                             (10 marks)  

  

  

2004

Which was the bigger threat to European peace in the 1930s:

•   The re-militarisation of the Rhineland in 1936;

•   The Nazi-Soviet Pact 1939?

You must refer to both events when explaining your answer..                                             (10 marks)  

 

Which was more important as a reason for the rivalry between the USA and the USSR during the years 1945 to 1949:

•   Soviet expansion into east and Central Europe;

•   The Truman Doctrine an the Marshall Plan?

You must refer to both events when explaining your answer..                                             (10 marks)  

 

Which was the greater threat to world peace in the early 1960s:

•   The building of the Berlin Wall 1961;

•   The Cuban missiles crisis 1962?

You must refer to both events when explaining your answer..                                             (10 marks)  

  

  

    


Answer a          Level: L2D & L2E          Mark: 4
Remember that this is about which factor caused more anger

•   The first paragraph on loss of territory describes what territory was lost - L2D

•    The second sentence was maybe unlucky not to get an L2E - it explains the effects of the loss of territory BUT it doesn't explain why it made the Germans angry - it says it hurt their pride and made them feel threatened.   Maybe this is why the examiner didn't credit it

•   The second paragraph starts by describing war guilt and reparations - L2D.  

•   Then it explains why it caused 'more anger'/ 'even worse' - i.e. she is answering the questions at L2E.

•   Loss of territory at L2D and war-guilt/reparations at L2E = 4 marks.

•   This answer is shallow on facts, and even gets one wrong (which?).  

Answer b          Level: L2E & L2E          Mark: 5
•  
This essay clearly explains first why loss of territory, then why war-guilt and reparations, made the German furious - two paragraphs at L2E.

•   Note that the attempt to argue 'for' and 'against' in both paragraphs doesn't really come off - the examiner simply didn't notice.  

•   Loss of territory at L2E and war-guilt/reparations at L2E = 5 marks

Answer c          Level: L2E & L2A          Mark: 6

•   The first paragraph first describes what land was lost (L2D), and then very clearly why it angered the Germans (L2E).

•   The mention of hyperinflation gets to L2A.   This might seem very lucky (it is hardly an assessment for HOW MUCH reparations angered the Germans, but the examiner has credited her with assessing the EFFECTS of reparations.

•   Loss of territory at L2E and war-guilt/reparations at L2A = 6 marks.

Answer d          Level: L2A & L2A          Mark: 7

•   The first paragraph describes what land was lost (L2D), explains why it 'outraged' the Germans (L2E), then makes a (very simple!) assessment of HOW MUCH it angered them ('poverty, hunger and frustration - causing far more outrage than war guilt' - L2A).

•   The first paragraph states that war-guilt and reparations caused damage and anger (L2D), explains why it 'led to anger and resentment' (L2E), then assesses the effects of reparations on German anger ('damaged the German economy, spiralling it into poverty and resentment').

•   Loss of territory at L2A and war-guilt/reparations at L2A = 7 marks.