Sbq skills lesson are you surprised
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×
 

Sbq skills lesson are you surprised

on

  • 2,822 views

Having reviewed the SB questions over the last few years, I have noticed a new form of question emerging. The "are you surprised" question tests the students' ability at identifying contradictions and ...

Having reviewed the SB questions over the last few years, I have noticed a new form of question emerging. The "are you surprised" question tests the students' ability at identifying contradictions and expressing these contrasts coherently in an answer. These slides are an attempt at helping students approach this question confidently.

Statistics

Views

Total Views
2,822
Views on SlideShare
2,822
Embed Views
0

Actions

Likes
0
Downloads
24
Comments
0

0 Embeds 0

No embeds

Accessibility

Upload Details

Uploaded via as Microsoft PowerPoint

Usage Rights

© All Rights Reserved

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Processing…
Post Comment
Edit your comment

Sbq skills lesson are you surprised Sbq skills lesson are you surprised Presentation Transcript

  • The “Are you surprised?” Question
  •  By the end of the lesson, you would be able to:  Appreciate the features of this question  Understand the approach to answering a question  Practice answering a question in class
  •  This question has surfaced occasionally in source- based questions in the last two years.  This question is basically testing the ability to:  compare and contrast the sources and  …Analyse sources to see if there are contradictions  It is like a combo question
  • Source B – From a magazine article written in 1928 by Simon Vereschak, who was in prison with Stalin in 1908 Source C – From a book written by a historian in 1983 When you looked at his primitive brow and small head, it seemed that, were you to break it open, it would reveal the entire works of Marx. Marxism was his element, and in it he was invincible. Once he had made up his mind on a subject, nothing could shake him. He made a tremendous impression upon young, politically inexperienced party members, and had the reputation of being a second Lenin. Many Bolsheviks would have been surprised to find Stalin ranked as Trotsky’s equal in political stature. Stalin had none of the attributes that the Bolsheviks normally associated with outstanding leadership. He was not a charismatic figure, a fine orator, or a distinguished Marxist like Lenin or Trotsky. He was not a war hero, an upstanding son of the working class, or even an intellectual. He was a good backroom politician, an expert on the internal working of the party, but a man without personal distinction. Does Source C make you surprised about what Source B says about Stalin? Explain your answer.
  •  Since Source C generally gives a different and opposing view of Stalin when compared to Source B, Source C does make me surprised about what Source B is saying about Stalin.
  •  Source B is of the view that Stalin was a staunch supporter of Marxism. This is evident as Simon Vereschak says, “…when you looked at his primitive brow and small head, it seemed that, were you to break it open, it would reveal the entire works of Marx. Marxism was his element and in it he was invincible…” This is opposed by Source C as the historian claims, “… that Stalin had none of the attributes that the Bolsheviks normally associated with outstanding leadership. He was not a…distinguished Marxist like Lenin or Trotsky. I am surprised by this as the Historian in Source C does not see Stalin as a staunch believer of Marxism like Lenin.
  •  In addition, Source B implies that Stalin was a charismatic leader. This is evident as the source claims that Stalin made a “…tremendous impression upon young, inexperienced party members, and had a reputation of being a second Lenin…” Source C has a contradictory view as the historian claims that Stalin “…was not a charismatic leader”. This was surprising.
  •  Based on the above differences, it is clear that Source B portrays Stalin as an effective leader like Lenin. Vereschak is of the view that Stalin, “…had the reputation of being a second Lenin…” Unlike Source B, Source C regards Stalin as an unsuitable leader, “…without personal distinction…” The historian is of the view that Stalin was not a “…distinguished Marxist like Lenin…” Since Source C contradicts all the views raised by Source B, I am surprised by what Source B says about Stalin.
  •  Start by reading the two sources – to get information about potential inferences (similarities + differences)  Next check both sources to see if there are similarities / differences.  If similarities are > than differences = “Not surprised” as more reasons that show that sources are not contradictory.  If differences are > than similarities = “I am surprised” as more contradictory statements.