Eoy 2006 lorms

3,357 views

Published on

Northern Ireland SBQ

0 Comments
1 Like
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

No Downloads
Views
Total views
3,357
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
10
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
115
Comments
0
Likes
1
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Eoy 2006 lorms

  1. 1. NAN HUA HIGH SCHOOL END-OF-YEAR EXAMINATION 2006 Subject : Combined Humanities/ Social Studies Paper : 2190/01 Level : Secondary Three Special / Express Date : 03 October 2006 Duration : 1 hour 30 minutes ANSWER SCHEME – LEVELS OF RESPONSE MARKING This paper consists of 12 printed pages. Page 1 of 12
  2. 2. Nan Hua High School End-of-Year Examination 2006 Social Studies 2190/01 Section A (Source-based Case Study) 1(a) Study Source A. What point is the poet trying to make? Explain your answer. [5] L1 Describes source [1-2] Award 1 mark for 1 detail E.g. The source says that many scattered a people’s protest had turned into a trampled placards and blood stained shoes. It is talking about the Bloody Sunday incident. L2 Makes inference, unsupported [3] E.g. The poet is indirectly blaming the British Army for the Bloody Sunday incident. L3 Makes inference, supported [4-5] Award 4 marks for 1 supported inference, and an additional mark for further details/ support, up to a maximum of 5 marks E.g. The poet is indirectly blaming the British Army for the Bloody Sunday incident. The poet says “When brutal voice of law and order, Decided that innocent people, Be murdered fourteen times in one day”. The poet is trying to make the point that it was indeed the British Army who is responsible for the Bloody Sunday incident. The British Army was sent to Northern Ireland to establish peace and order but instead decided that innocent people be murdered. It was almost as if Operation Bloody Sunday was their intended mission. (Award 4 marks only for answers that fully describe and explain the British Army as being cruel or mention that Operation Bloody Sunday was planned. For answers which merely mention that the British Army was cruel/ ruthless/ brutal and merely copy from the source, without really explaining award only L1/3). 4 marks should only be awarded if students show their understanding of the matter that BA were sent there to maintain peace and order but executed the killings, hence ruthless/brutal/cruel. (b) Study Source B and C How different are these sources? Explain your answer. [6] L1 Answers bring out similarity in provenance [1-2] Award 1 mark for 1 similarity and 2 marks for a similarity and 1 difference E.g. Both sources are comments by people who were involved in the Bloody Sunday incident. E.g. Both sources are comments by people who were involved in the Bloody Sunday incident. However, Source B is from a Catholic demonstrator while Source C is from a British Army soldier. L2 Similarity in topic [2] E.g. Both sources are about the Bloody Sunday incident Page 2 of 6
  3. 3. Nan Hua High School End-of-Year Examination 2006 Social Studies 2190/01 L3 Answers that bring out similarity/ differences in content, unsupported [3] Award 3 marks for 1 unsupported similarity/ difference E.g. Both sources are similar as they both show that the Bloody Sunday incident had caused many deaths. E.g. Both sources are different in their portrayal of who is to blame for the Bloody Sunday incident. Source B is blaming the British Army for their actions in Bloody Sunday while Source C is blaming the Catholic demonstrators for their actions that caused Bloody Sunday. L4 Answers that bring out differences / similarity in content, supported [4-5] Award 4 marks for 1 supported similarity/ difference or 2 supported similarity/ difference Award 5 marks for 1 supported similarity AND difference E.g. Both sources state that there were people who died in the Bloody Sunday incident. In Source B, it is mentioned that ‘most of the people who were killed in the incident were so young’ and this can also be seen in Source C when the soldier commented ‘At the end of the day, 14 people had died’. However, there is also a stark difference in the perception of the comments made as each party seem to blame the other for the Bloody Sunday incident. In Source B, it is mentioned that ‘we in no way had offended the soldiers. The area had suddenly turned into a battlefield’. This clearly shows that it was the British Army soldiers who were responsible for the outbreak of the Bloody Sunday incident. However, in Source C, it is mentioned that ‘the Catholics started getting rowdy and attacked us’. This clearly shows that it was indeed the Catholics who started getting rowdy and creating trouble leading to the Bloody Sunday incident and that the soldiers were merely acting in self- defence. The sources differ in terms of who they perceive to have caused the Bloody Sunday incident. L5 Purpose [5-6] Award 6 marks for a well-developed answer E.g. The purpose of the Catholic demonstrator in Source B was to cast the British Army in a negative light to gather public support against the British Army. He was probably trying to convince others that the British Army was responsible for the deaths of the Catholics so that he can seek justice for them. However, the purpose of the British Amy soldier in Source C is to justify the actions of the British Army and deflect criticism of the British Army. This is done so that the British Army, which he is serving in, would not need to bear the full weight/ blame of the Bloody Sunday incident. (c) Study Source D Does this source prove that the British Army were solely responsible for the Bloody Sunday incident? [7] L1 Yes/ No [1] E.g. Yes, it proves / No, it does not prove that the British Army was solely responsible for the Bloody Sunday incident. L2 Answers based on source details/ provenance [2-3] Award 2 marks for reference to 1 detail and 3 marks for a well-explained answer. Page 3 of 6
  4. 4. Nan Hua High School End-of-Year Examination 2006 Social Studies 2190/01 E.g. It does prove that the British Army were solely responsible for the Bloody Sunday incident. It shows a British soldier manhandling a Catholic demonstrator. This action of the British soldier could have sparked the Bloody Sunday incident. The fact that the British soldier manhandled the Catholic demonstrator shows that the British Army were neither sensitive nor professional in handling the Catholic demonstrator. OR shows picture not taken at face value. E.g. This picture cannot be prove that the British Army is not reliable as the picture does not show things that might have happened before the picture was taken, for example, the Catholic demonstrator could have also misbehaved or provoked the situation. L3 Answers based on typicality [4] Award 4 marks for answers showing evidence of extent of generalisation E.g. No, this source does not prove that the British Army is solely responsible for the Bloody Sunday incident. This is only one picture that shows a British Army soldier manhandling a Catholic demonstrator. It does not represent the entire British Army and cannot be taken as proof to show that all British Army soldiers manhandled Catholic demonstrators and that they are to be held responsible for the Bloody Sunday incident. Moreover, perhaps the demonstrator could also have been misbehaving and the British soldier may have been merely controlling the situation and been portrayed negatively. L4 Disagrees OR agrees, substantiated with cross- reference to other sources [5-7] Award 5 marks for cross-reference to one other source/ contextual knowledge Award 6 marks for any additional detail/ contextual knowledge & cross-reference to two other sources (either 2 Yes or 2 No or 1 Yes & 1 No) E.g. Yes, I agree that the picture proves that the British Army is solely responsible for the Bloody Sunday incident. Source A also mentions that “When brutal voice of law and order, Decided that innocent people, Be murdered fourteen times in one day”. The poet is trying to make the point that it was indeed the British Army who is responsible for the Bloody Sunday incident. The British Army was sent to Northern Ireland to establish peace and order but instead decided that innocent people be murdered. This further supports that indeed the British Army were solely responsible for the Bloody Sunday incident as they were the ones who ill-treated the Catholic demonstrators and sparked the events that were to follow in Bloody Sunday. E.g. No, I disagree that this picture proves that the British Army were solely responsible for the Bloody Sunday incident as Source C proves that the Catholic demonstrators were also responsible as they had turned violent against the British Army and caused the British Army to react merely in self- defence “the Catholics started getting rowdy and attacked us”. This picture could perhaps then show the British Army soldier merely trying to control the Catholic demonstrator in order to get the situation under control. This is further supported in Source E “shots had been fired at the soldiers before they started the firing that led to the casualties” and hence was merely acting in self-defence and thus cannot be held solely responsible for the Bloody Sunday incident. (d) Study Source E. Page 4 of 6
  5. 5. Nan Hua High School End-of-Year Examination 2006 Social Studies 2190/01 How useful is this source in helping you to understand the role played by the British Army in the Bloody Sunday incidents? [7] L1 Answers based on source type/ provenance [1] E.g. Yes, it is useful as it is a comment on the Widgery Report which is a British report. L2 Typicality [2] E.g. No, it is not useful as it is only one report on the Bloody Sunday incident. It does not justify or help us in fully understanding the role played by the British Army in the Bloody Sunday incident. In order to understand the magnitude of an incident like the Bloody Sunday, we certainly need more than one report. This report is only one piece of information on the Bloody Sunday incident and does not represent the full picture of the British Army’s involvement in the Bloody Sunday incident. L3 Answers based on source content [3] E.g. Yes, it is useful as it is Lord Widgery’s comment on the Bloody Sunday incident and also it is a British report on the Bloody Sunday incident. It is useful as it gives an insight into the Bloody Sunday incident and helps us understand the role played by the British Army. It is mentioned that “the soldiers acted as they did because they thought their standing orders justified it”. It is useful as it helps us to understand that the British Army was merely acting in self defence and thus cannot be fully blamed for the Bloody Sunday incident. L4 Detects bias [4] E.g. No, it is not useful as it could be a biased report and it may not be objective as it is given by Lord Widgery who is a British who was appointed to investigate the events of the Bloody Sunday incident. It is definitely biased as he would side with the British Army. The source may be biased as it is reported by a British and he may be looking to portray the British Army as acting in self defence. L5 Usefulness tested by cross-reference / background information [5-7] Award 5 marks for a Yes/No answer; 6 marks for a well-developed answer and 7 marks for additional details. E.g. Yes, it is useful as the source tells people that “shots had been fired at the soldiers before they started the firing that led to the casualties”. Thus, the report is useful in further helping us understand the role played by the British Army in the Bloody Sunday incident, showing us that they were merely acting in self defence. This is further supported in Source C when it is mentioned “while trying to control the march, the Catholics started getting rowdy and attacked us” which clearly shows that the British Army indeed were acting in self defence. Perhaps, we need other witnesses’ reports or perspectives from the Catholics as well to fully understand the British Army’s involvement in the Bloody Sunday incident. E.g. No, it is not useful. The source is limited in showing exactly what the British Army soldiers had done in the Bloody Sunday incident as can be seen in Source D the British Army manhandling a Catholic demonstrator, which could have in turn sparked the Bloody Sunday incident. The source is also limited as it does not provide any perspective from the Catholics or Protestants at the scene. Moreover, in the source it is mentioned that “there was a strong suspicion” but there is no concrete proof given in the Page 5 of 6
  6. 6. Nan Hua High School End-of-Year Examination 2006 Social Studies 2190/01 source that would be useful to us in fully understanding the role played by the British Army in the Bloody Sunday incident. Page 6 of 6

×