TA S M A N I A N Ancient Civilisations · T AN Q ONS A TY TA S M A N I A N Ancient Civilisations CE...

TA

SM

AN

IAN

QU

AL

IFIC

AT

ION

S A

UT

HO

RIT

Y

T A S M A N I A N Ancient Civilisations

C E R T I F I C A T E Subject Code: ANC315110 O F E D U C A T I O N 2011 Assessment Report

2011 Assessment Report

WRITTEN EXAMINATION PAPER This year several examiners noted that there seemed to be a decline in the standard of spelling and grammar. In particular, many civilisation-specific names and topic-specific terms were spelled incorrectly. While it may be possible to excuse incorrect spelling generally, it would seem that the correct spelling of terms and names should be an essential part of exam preparation. Interestingly, with the exception of spelling, some examiners reported the majority of candidates were able to demonstrate competence in the mechanics of essay writing, including paragraph structure and grammatical expression, while others deplored a lack of competence in written expression. Terminology was often an issue – wrongly spelled, largely notable by its absence or used only rarely. Better answers were able to provide a range and accuracy in terminology use which greatly enhanced their writing. It was noted that several candidates underlined all names and terms used in lieu of italics. This seems to be a successful strategy for drawing marker attention to a candidate's ability to use terms/names/concepts consistently, accurately and appropriately. Given that this is the second year that prepared notes were not permitted in the examination, it was expected that candidates would be cognizant of the need to address the specifics of the questions. Where candidates did make mention of some elements of the set question this seemed to serve the purpose of focusing candidates' attention on the nuances of questions, thus facilitating an engagement with the topics at a more critical and analytical level (even in the 'C' standard responses). Unfortunately these good responses were counter-balanced by a significant number which largely ignored the question in order to answer one of their own devising: often one which bore a resemblance to questions from previous examination papers. Whilst it is obviously a good idea to write practice essays on topics from previous papers, candidates need to be aware that they must answer the question asked. Use of sources varied greatly, from the effective to a total absence. Several examiners noted that there seemed to have been an improvement in use of sources, but others noted that use of sources in certain questions was poor. When using secondary source quotations or paraphrasing, some candidates simply use the author’s surname as if this is adequate – e.g. ‘ (Bennett, 2005)’. However, as many authors have written multiple texts, it is advisable for candidates to mention (once only) the title of the text from which the quotation/reference was made; after an initial acknowledgment of the title, no further reiteration is needed.

Ancient Civilisations 2

Subject Code: ANC315110


Following are comments from examiners on individual questions for which there were more than 5 responses: Question 1 – Egypt This seems to have been a popular question, with some very pleasing responses. There were however also some very generalised answers which lacked reference to primary source material. Weaker answers offered a very general overview of the nature of tombs for the elite, and left their argument at that, without considering the experience of the great majority of the population. Some stronger candidates focused solely on Egyptian art and produced confident responses. Candidates however consistently were less able with the application of terminology apart from very specific terms associated with technique. As a result their responses seemed to lack some substance. Specific reference to primary source material was lacking. Attention to the use of specific examples is suggested. Many candidates only really answered the first past of the question. Candidates who responded to the three parts of the question were rewarded. In particular candidates were unable to respond to the part of the question that deals with aspects of society and how they may be reflected in aspects of its art and architecture. There were very few responses to this question on Greece or Rome. Question 2 Greece Most candidates attempted all three parts of the question. The answers showed confusion about what ‘literature’ in ancient Greece was. What we have received as literature, such as drama, was seen in performance rather than read by the ancient Greeks. (For candidates who have studied Greek Drama, it may be worth considering answering Question 4 rather than Question 2). There was no mention of Histories or Philosophical works, which certainly are 'literature'. The better candidates recognised the unifying role of the works of literature in creating a sense of a common history, common values and common identity across the divided Greek city-states. Criterion 7 was generally not fulfilled very well. Responses were not improved by the incorrect spelling of names, which failed to impress. Illiad was the norm. Oddyseus and Zues were also present in large numbers. This is generally an easy criterion to meet, but it does take care and attention.




Mostly candidates referred narrowly to Homer, Hesiod and playwrights such as Sophocles as their primary sources for this question. There were very few secondary sources mentioned. Rome In the strongest responses, candidates used the statement to give them a framework to answer each part of the question. They used a variety of primary and secondary sources to strengthen their writing. They understood that the writers examined were using their pieces to comment on social or political concerns of the day and that their work was propaganda. These candidates were able to analyse Classical Literature to gain insight into everyday Roman life. In the weakest essays, candidates struggled to use primary and secondary sources, instead providing a general overview of various themes various authors explored in their writing in ancient Rome. These candidates ignored the first part of the first question, regarding techniques. When comparing Greek and Roman literature, candidates struggled. Most candidates explored literature from one civilisation and then towards the conclusion of the essay they quickly looked at another, possibly simply to add quantity to their essays. These candidates displayed a very surface understanding of Classical Literature. Question 3 Greece This question seems to have been attempted mainly by weaker candidates. The philosophers examined were mainly Socrates and Plato. Occasionally Aristotle was mentioned, but without his connection to Alexander the Great. One of the better candidates mentioned the connection between Socrates and the ‘corrupted’ Alcibiades, which played a part in Socrates’ trial. There was little attempt to use appropriate terminology. Candidates who attempted this question generally didn’t clearly understand philosophy within its cultural context. Some candidates used primary sources to support their arguments, but secondary sources were not used at all. Question 4 – No answers




Question 5 Greece Generally the question was well prepared, with some excellent answers. However, there were some very strange spellings of names, such as Hurculies and Dementer. Examiners do take the poor spelling of names into consideration – there is no excuse for it at this level after a year of study. Following the thorough preparation of the topic, most candidates also prepared and used the terminology well in their answers to the question. Most candidates demonstrated an extensive knowledge of Greek myths and legends. Candidates used primary and secondary sources to support their arguments very well. Question 6 Greece Better answers referred to a range of secondary sources (not just Bradley) and mentioned how individuals were treated by the historian being discussed (mostly Herodotus). The majority of answers were able to discuss their historian in terms of the social and political context of the times. Question 7 Egypt Better answers to this question appreciated the (limited) opportunities for social mobility in ancient Egypt and made reference to figures such as Ahmose son of Ibana and Ramesses I. Better answers also referred to specific primary sources rather than generalised comments and made an effort to quote modern authors on the subject. Rome Generally, this question was well answered. However, candidates made a number of factual errors and were confused about some concepts. For example, they assumed or implied that all senators were patricians which, of course, was far from the truth and in the late republic patrician members were substantially outnumbered by plebeian senators. Similarly, some candidates assumed that only patricians were wealthy (also inaccurate). While candidates generally provided comprehensive factual information, several failed to address the quotation and/or refer to it in their responses. Some answers were weakened by exceedingly lengthy descriptions of the lifestyles of particular social classes (especially freedmen). Most




candidates ignored the ‘patron-client’ relationship which was a critical part of the social and political fabric of Roman society. Candidates are strongly advised to mention the particular time periods that provide a context for their answers; otherwise, factual inaccuracies are likely to occur since social, political and economic changes affected relationships among the classes over time. Some terminology was misspelt – especially ‘peculium’. There was some confusion over particular terms – e.g. equating the cursus honorum with social class divisions. One serious flaw in responses was a general failure to even mention the substantial part of the citizen population who voted, served in the army and were gainfully employed as farmers and tradesmen, etc.; instead, candidates focused their discussion on freedmen. Few candidates were able to give adequate examples of social advancement, except for a particular example of one freedman. Source usage, references and quotations were not used abundantly; this was a general weakness in responses and, surprisingly, candidates failed to use obvious primary sources such as Cicero, focusing instead on secondary sources. Greece This was a clear question but generally was not answered well. Although candidates demonstrated a basic understanding of daily life in Greece, overall they did not seem to fully comprehend the social structure of Athens/Sparta, how closely a person’s occupation or profession was related to their position in society or if and how they were able to advance their status or social position. A significant amount of the responses were brief and lacked depth. The weakest candidates struggled to use primary and secondary sources to support their writing and it appeared that they were, in fact, completely unprepared for their exam. Some candidates mentioned a few primary sources at the beginning of their essay but failed to use them and, evidently, were not actually familiar with them. On a few occasions, candidates used the word poleis instead of polis. The strongest candidates used primary sources to strengthen their writing. They also used terminology where appropriate. Question 8 Greece With 90 responses, this was the most popular individual question this year. Overall, the standard of essays written about ancient Greek women was impressive. The majority of the candidates who completed this question demonstrated a thorough




understanding of the position of women in ancient Greek society. In the strongest responses, the candidates critically examined the role of women within the historical context. These responses examined a variety of sources to support their arguments. The candidates understood what virtues the ‘ideal’ woman possessed but also understood that not all women conformed to the expectations placed upon them. These candidates were able to give specific examples of the extraordinary women who did, in fact, influence their society. For the most part the elements of this question are quite straight-forward and the majority of candidates were able to demonstrate a breadth of knowledge about women in Ancient Greece. There was a tendency on the part of some candidates to focus their discussion on prostitution in Ancient Greece, thereby neglecting to address the broader notion of the role and position of women in general. In the weaker responses, the candidates judged the position of women by our modern day standards. One candidate opened their essay with, ‘Ancient Greek men saw women as animals’ and continued to emphasise this point throughout the entire essay. Another claimed, ‘How they treated women in ancient Greece was like rubbish.’ These candidates did not understand that women were, in fact, valued in certain spheres of their society. Some candidates struggled with correct spellings of terms and names. At times there was even confusion concerning simple terms, including polis and poleis and symposia and symposium. Most candidates were able to use primary source material to support their discussion. Many referred to the influence of Aspasia of Miletus on Pericles (in Plutarch) and the depiction of women in the works of playwrights and philosophers such as Xenophon and Euripides. More competent candidates engaged with the third part of the question which required an evaluation of the amount of influence women exercised in their society. The most analytical of responses used evidence from primary and secondary sources to come to the conclusion that while there is a dearth of evidence from women themselves, it is possible that within their own spheres, women were able to both directly and indirectly wield significant personal power. These responses incorporated an interpretation of evidence from both primary and secondary sources to support the hypothesis that women possibly had significant 'behind-the-scenes' roles that allowed them indirect access to 'points of power'. Rome Overall, the standard of essays written about ancient Roman women was quite impressive. In the strongest responses, the candidates critically examined the role of women within the historical context. These candidates analysed a variety of both primary and secondary sources to ensure they answered the three questions. They understood what was valued in ancient Roman society and what virtues the ideal woman possessed. Furthermore, they understood that it was dangerous for one to not conform to these expectations, particularly when one was regarded as a role model. They understood how women could influence ancient Roman society and were able to provide specific examples of women who did so.




In the weaker responses, candidates demonstrated that they had only a surface understanding of women’s position in ancient Rome. These candidates were unable to use a variety of primary and secondary sources, were vague at times (for example, one candidate wrote ‘When Augustus passed a law’), and were not able to provide specific examples of what influence women were able to exercise within their society. This was disappointing, particularly because the question was quite simple and direct. At times candidates included a ‘source paragraph’ where they mentioned the available primary (and at times, secondary) sources (they had obviously memorised this paragraph), but then failed to use the sources in their essay, and evidently, were not familiar with them. This was disappointing. Egypt There were some excellent responses to this question in which candidates were able to discuss the concept of equality of male and female roles in Ancient Egypt with precision and authority. Many candidates, however, had difficulty with the notion of equality and were unable to divorce 21st century views from those of the ancient world. The argument they used suggested that, despite an equality in law, women were not equal to men because they couldn't do the same jobs as men, quite ignoring the fact that this worked both ways: the ancient Egyptian concept of equality was of equal status and standing but differences in roles and responsibilities. Too many candidates went on to suggest that women had a very limited range of work opportunities available to them, missing out the fact that women fundamentally had the role of bearing and rearing children as their foremost responsibility. Many candidates saw this as proof of inequality, which suggests a difficulty in distancing themselves from modern values. Weaker answers were vague and tended to generalise – many extolled the greatness of Hatshepsut, for example, without noting that technically she was in fact co-pharaoh with Tuthmosis III, not sole ruler. This doesn't decrease her greatness but it does indicate a glossing over of the details by some candidates. Generally sources were quite well handled, but there were some problems. In discussing women's possible employment avenues, jobs such as brewer and baker were mentioned, based on some grave statuettes from the Old Kingdom. Whist it is possible that the women depicted were professional brewers and bakers, it is more likely that these were depictions of domestic jobs that came with the territory of wife/mother/homemaker. Candidates are advised to treat such primary evidence with caution and not jump to conclusions. Better candidates were able to discuss a range of sources, and extend their responses nicely by offering an analysis in some instances of material used to support their arguments. On the whole the second part of the question seemed to cause some problems for candidates with many choosing to ignore this part of the question, or offering some very simplistic and generalised comments without any reference to scholarly opinion. Terminology and concepts were lacking in this question. Inclusion of literary primary source material is problematic for ancient Egypt but candidates should have been able to include at least a reference to




Herodotus. There was little to no recognition that social class differentiation probably had a greater practical effect on the quality of lifestyle of women than did gender differences. Question 9 – Greece 2 answers Question 10 Egypt – 1 answer Rome While candidates demonstrated a satisfactory understanding of the Roman family structure nearly all responses were seriously inadequate in their treatment of sources. Indeed, most answers failed to make any references to sources at all; this is difficult to understand, given the abundant references to family and family values, etc. in, for example, Cicero’s many works. Some responses ignored the pivotal role of the pater familias / paterfamilias (often spelt incorrectly as ‘pater familia’ or even ‘patria familia’) in the family’s religious rituals and a number of candidates disregarded ancestor worship which the question clearly required to be addressed. (No candidates mentioned the obvious festival cycle of ancestor worship which included particular annual celebrations of ancestor worship such as the Parentalia and the Lemuria). The Lares and Penates, the guardian of the household, family and larder, were also disregarded by most candidates. It is strongly recommended that candidates familiarise themselves with household religious beliefs and practices, as well as those of the state – this is particularly relevant also in that a pivotal family value in Rome was pietas or devotion to family and state religious duties and practices (including civic responsibilities). Some candidates mentioned this core value among others, but failed to discuss its meaning and importance. Finally, no candidates referred to the Roman gens or clan structure encompassing many families at once; the familial gens was also celebrated in festivals concerned with ancestor worship and was an important aspect of household religious observances at such times. Question 11 Greece Generally this question was undertaken by competent candidates and was well-prepared. Most candidates nominated a place and time in Greek history for the setting of their answer – some candidates examining Sparta and others Athens. Occasionally a very well prepared candidate examined both over a spread of time.




This is a good topic for prepared candidates to display a good command of Greek terminology. There were a few hiccups where candidates did not understand the difference between singulars and plurals and one tried to make the Greek word strategos into strategos’s. The majority of candidates' responses focused on Athens – Solon, Cleisthenes, and Pericles figured prominently. Most candidates demonstrated some understanding of the differences between monarchy, tyranny, oligarchy and democracy. Better responses demonstrated competence in comparing structure, roles and functions of political leadership in Athens and Sparta. The straight-forward nature of the questions allowed the majority of candidates to demonstrate some competence in their responses. Most were able to address the aspect of the question which required them to discuss the roles government played in Ancient Greek society. The few candidates who analysed the ways that leaders came to power and the way they responded in times of crisis, were able to demonstrate skills of critical analysis and synthesis. Criterion 9 was generally well met, but would have been strengthened by referring to the views of contemporary sources such as Plato and Aristotle, as well as a wider range of secondary sources than just Donald Kagan. Many candidates were able to quote (or at least acknowledge as sources) Herodotus and Plutarch as part of their response. Rome Most candidates responded to this question with confidence, answering clearly all parts of the question and describing in depth the nature of Roman government. Many candidates however failed to apply with any depth a range of primary sources. Despite mentioning Cicero, Plutarch or Polybius in a sources paragraph they failed to then go on to extending their argument or critiquing a point by applying a quote from these ancient sources. Application of some modern viewpoints would certainly have enhanced the vast majority of these responses as well. The best responses mentioned the wording of the question in their introductions and conclusion, signposting to the marker that they were indeed responding to the set task and not just generalising over some pre-prepared response. This question is an enormous one and less able candidates struggled in part because of the sheer amount of material that could be included. Many focused on providing a detailed description of the structure of government during the Roman Republic. While this is an important part of any response to this question, better answers went further than just describing the functioning of the assemblies and the cursus honorum, and included discussion of the rise to power of specific individuals. A few better answers tried to take a ‘big picture’ view and analyse the broad causes of the collapse of the Roman Republic in the years following the Gracchi. Surprisingly few, however, made mention of the military threats to Rome and the weakness of the Republican system in addressing these threats – the rise of Marius would make an interesting early case here. The rise of mob violence was also an area few candidates referred to with the likes of Clodius and Milo never rating a mention.




Egypt Candidates’ responses were sharply focused on this question. However, while nearly all responses addressed the role of the king/pharaoh competently, few of them showed any detailed understanding of the structure of Egyptian government; for example, there was a poor grasp of the division of the government administration into the palace, military, civilian and the religious domains. A number of responses dwelt on the vizier’s importance but ignored other key officials. Again, candidates need to be specific about historical context in order to avoid inaccuracies (for example, the claim that the vizierate was hereditary is valid only for certain periods, e.g. for Dynasty 13, and part of the 18th Dynasty, but not for all of the New Kingdom period when the merit principle was frequently applied in appointments to this office by a number of pharaohs). Some candidates were unduly pre-occupied in their responses with the importance of ma’at and the king’s role as upholder of ma’at while ignoring some of the obvious sources on this role including politically and religiously significant throne names employing ma’at as part of the king’s throne name (e.g. Nebmaatre, Usermaatre, etc.); similarly, monumental inscriptions emphasising the warrior role (e.g. Ramesses III’s claim ‘I was the valiant Montu’ inscribed on his mortuary temple at Medinet Habu) can be used to support this discussion. Question 12 Greece Candidates’ responses to this question seemed to fall into two categories. Firstly, there were responses which covered Sparta, Athens and Troy and these were often weak, sometimes relying on descriptions of famous battles (e.g. Thermopylae, Salamis) or on military tactics; while knowledge of these aspects is commendable such a focus is irrelevant to the question and candidates are advised to focus on what is being asked – in this case, an analysis of military and foreign policy. These responses were often ‘thin’ on substance, lacked terminology and lacked adequate support from primary and secondary sources; a large number of essays were scarcely two pages in length. A second category of response, however, was much stronger; here, many candidates focused on the key differences between Sparta and Athens. Some were extremely adept at highlighting how social, geographic and other factors accounted for differences in the military cultures and foreign policy of both of these city-states – these candidates achieved excellent results. They were also able to correctly employ an impressively wide range of Greek terminology in context and to make very good use of source material. A number of candidates completely ignored that part of the question which referred to the problem of bias in the sources.

There were also numerous spelling errors, not only in terminology but also in general. Some candidates employed inappropriate, casual or informal language and register.




There was clear temptation for some candidates to dwell on the romance of the battle of Thermopylae at the expense of really answering the question. Rome 2 Scripts. Question 13 (Law, Crime and Punishment) – only one answer Question 14 (Trade and Economy) – no answers Question 15 Rome Answers reflected a strong knowledge of the material relevant to this question. Many candidates, however, substituted an overview of the sources for an introduction. While providing an overview of source material is to be commended to candidates, it is important that candidates realise that this in itself is insufficient for criterion 9: they must be able to make use of the sources mentioned in the body of their essay in order to support the arguments and points of view being presented. While a range of primary sources was provided in the answers, few candidates referred to or quoted secondary works. Candidates are reminded that Criterion 9 demands ‘an ability to analyse critically a variety of primary and secondary sources.’ Candidates aspiring to high end results need to show some familiarity with the body of historical opinion around the subject. Egypt This question was complex and quite difficult. There were some good answers but several weak answers. There seemed to be some confusion over the nature of Egyptian religion. Several answers referred to there being two religions in ancient Egypt, the state religion followed by the pharaoh and the priests and the religion of the common people. Whilst it is true that there were different emphases in the religious observances of the common people and of the elite, they were still part of the same religion; too many candidates overstated the differences to the point of implying that they were different religions. In general terms answers were weak on primary sources and in particular any analysis of sources. Greece The first part of the question was answered satisfactorily by most candidates, but there was some uncertainty about the influence of government on religion and the importance of state




festivals. However the relationship between State and private religious observances was clearly understood by most. Most candidates were able to demonstrate an understanding of the nature of the relationship between deities and humans, and most were able to discuss several aspects of the relationship between government and religion in Ancient Greece. It was the part of the question that required candidates to compare and contrast the surviving primary sources for state and private religious worship that candidates found challenging. The better responses were able to engage primary evidence from sources such as Hesiod's Theogony and The Homeric Hymns to develop a considered and articulate response to each part of the question. Question 16 Greece only 2 answers Egypt This was a very popular question (82 responses) and, not surprisingly perhaps, it elicited a wide range in the quality of responses. Some candidates managed the issues of death and the afterlife in Ancient Egypt with a broad understanding supported by careful use of the primary sources available; weaker candidates made no attempt to put source material (such as the contents of the tomb of Tutankhamun) into any sort of context at all, resorting to vague generalisations and, in particular, applying modern points of view on the nature of the soul and the afterlife. Many candidates made an attempt to discuss democratisation in answer to the first part of the question, but there was enormous confusion about whether the concepts from the Old Kingdom of what the king faced in the afterlife still were maintained in the great new democratised afterlife of the New Kingdom. Consequently many candidates had pharaoh facing Osiris in the Hall of Judgement and insisted that the tomb of Tutankhamun contained evidence of this. The inherently different nature of royal tombs (not just pharaoh's: the tombs of the sons of Ramesses II, for example, fit the pharaonic mould) and tombs of the rest of the population in the New Kingdom was largely ignored. The Osiris myth featured prominently, as it should in a discussion of changing attitudes over time, but there is no need to retell the myth as narrative at length: many candidates spent a large part of their essay retelling the story in detail when their time could better have been used on other topics. Planning seemed to be an unknown concept for many candidates. There is any amount of terminology available for this question, both in the original language and in English, and many candidates were able to use terminology to good effect. Others used little and, even when they did, often misspelled it, in English. There was considerable confusion about the five elements that make up the non-corporeal whole person: ka, ba, akh,




ren, shwt. The confusion for many candidates stemmed from when to apply the word 'soul' – is it the ka, the ba, the akh, or all five? While some texts still use the word 'soul' in attempting to explain these concepts, most recent texts do not, because the 'soul' in a modern context is not comparable to the equivalent concepts in Ancient Egypt. Candidates are strongly encouraged to use terms such as 'life force' and 'personality' rather than 'soul', just to avoid confusion. One would think that, by the end of a year studying Ancient Egypt, candidates would be able to spell terms such as pharaoh correctly. Such is not always the case. And why the ‘tombs of diseased (sic) nobles’ should bear such particular mention so often is a bit of a mystery. Criterion 9 was undoubtedly the worst handled criterion in responses to this question. A large number of candidates made no mention of sources at all and not even the word ‘source’ appeared in many essays. Candidates seem to be uncomfortable with discussing sources that are not literary: even those that discussed sources often either bemoaned the lack of literary sources, or complained that sources showed bias or were for propaganda purposes. While such points would be very important in a discussion of, say, political issues, it is a bit harder to make them relevant in a discussion of primary evidence from inside tombs which was not intended to be seen by mortal eyes. There could be such an argument, if it were to be based around the concept of heka making blatant lies into the truth, but no such discussion appeared. In fact heka barely got a mention, and yet it is of fundamental importance in interpreting the art and contents of tombs. Question 17 (Science and Technology) – no answers Question 18 (Medicine and Health) Egypt – 2 responses, Greece 3 responses. EXTERNALLY ASSESSED FOLIO Independent Study As always, the Independent Studies revealed a wide range of competence in both writing and research. Overall, examiners generally felt there was a slight decrease in the standard of work presented since last year, although that very much depended on which personality had been chosen. Some personalities seem to have been chosen by weaker candidates because they were perceived to be easier to research and understand, when in fact what the responses revealed was a lack of understanding of the chosen personality, whereas some of the more supposedly difficult personalities were possibly chosen by better candidates who saw the lack of source material as a challenge. Perhaps the most disappointing aspect of the Independent Studies was the lack of care taken in their preparation: too many candidates don't seem to have proof read their work, nor checked the spelling of terminology. To an extent one can understand these deficiencies in an exam situation, but they are not acceptable in what is supposed to be polished work.




The inability of candidates to see their personality within the broader context of the times they lived in was also of concern, and their was a general disinclination to try to assess the motives and actions of some of the personalities in their own context rather than judge them from a 21st century perspective. This ability to distance one's self from the subject matter and judge it on its own terms is an important skill for historians, but many of the candidates clearly didn't possess it. Weakest of all was, as ever, the use of sources: the ability to interpret primary sources (or even to mention them in some extreme cases) and the inability to analyse secondary sources in terms of their usefulness for the point being made, was cause for concern. Having said that, there were many fine responses in which candidates revealed they had been able to engage with their personality, place them in the context of their own time and place, and draw informed deductions from the source material available. Such candidates' work is a pleasure for examiners to read and they and their teachers are to be congratulated. There were some problems noted in terms of the 'mechanics' of presenting these studies: some were too long or too short, some had abbreviated personal statements and elongated studies, some contained no word count, or stapled the pages in the wrong order, or failed to number the pages correctly. Some failed to footnote or reference correctly. Candidates need to check that the Guidelines for presentation have been properly observed. The Personal Statement was often badly misused. Its purpose is to allow candidates to reflect in a personal way on the process they have gone through in researching and writing their Independent Study and thus it should be closely linked to the personality involved. It should include matters such as the type and range of available sources, the usefulness of those sources, the question of bias in sources, and any difficulties in assessing the personality's historical context. Overall it should reflect on how the candidate's response to the chosen personality developed during the research process. It should reflect on the learning process that the candidate has gone through. It should not include extraneous matters such as losing material because research had not been backed-up or missing some preparation time due to illness. The focus should be on the candidate's response to the chosen personality, not the mechanics of preparing the Study. Following are a selection of comments from different examiners on each of the criteria which were assessed. As you will observe, the comments differ markedly at times, depending on the 'batch' of personalities being assessed: Criterion 6: • Some candidates were able to present their project and analysis of research in a logical

manner, demonstrating their intelligent interpretation of some very complex and diverse information. These candidates also were able to contrast and compare a wide range of sources. This was an A standard. These candidates were few and far between.

• The great majority of candidates did attempt to organise and classify their information from a smaller range of sources and were able to demonstrate some reasoning behind




their choice. This was a C standard. A few weaker candidates did not attempt to use information other than from a limited selection of websites, and then failed to acknowledge this as a flaw in the personal statement section of their project.

• Most candidates were able to demonstrate their understanding of issues associated with the individual of their study; however, the ability to use the language and methodology of critical and analytical scholarship was not evident in the majority of papers.

• Candidates showed an improved understanding of the nature of the folio and its requirements and generally, the standard of the studies was high. Most candidates were able to draw valid conclusions about individuals based upon their historical context, actions and motivation

• Personal statements were sometimes too short and some candidates have still used them as an opportunity to mention irrelevant matters such as computer problems. A few candidates adopted very casual, informal colloquial language, e.g. ’With all these great resources…I had hit the mother load [sic]’); or referred to irrelevant matters such as childhood experiences that sparked their interest in ancient civilisations, etc. Some candidates referred to having been ill, one stating that he/she had been ‘hit with illness’. Overall personal statements tended to be too short and rarely took the opportunity to provide a personal perspective on the process of researching and writing about the personality chosen.

Criterion 7: • It was difficult to evaluate this criterion as for certain individuals, the potential use of

terminology was more limiting than for others (.e.g. Messalina compared to Cicero). Nevertheless, some candidates, conscious of the requirements of this criterion, did their best to find terms whose use was therefore somewhat gratuitous rather than purposeful.

• This was generally an area of some concern; surely it is not too much to expect candidates to have a basic understanding of terminology and relevant concepts. Particularly by this stage of the year, candidates should be capable of demonstrating their understanding of basic concepts and terminology to convey meaning.

• Some weaker candidates failed to include any appropriate terminology, notably some Egyptian reports.

• Stronger candidates were able to proficiently integrate concepts and terms consistently through the entirety of the project.

• Clearly the choice of civilisation has an impact on the candidate’s application of this requirement.

• The ability to demonstrate proficiency in this criterion seemed to be dependent upon the individual studied.

Criterion 8: • To adequately meet the requirements of this criterion, candidates should be instructed

to select a range of information from a diversity of sources. Then to use this information to arrive at some conclusion about a significant aspect or aspects of the




civilisation under investigation. Some candidates did this in a most impressive manner and were then able to describe logically their conclusion. Some weaker candidates chose to use information that was less than relevant and therefore missed the point intended entirely.

• On the whole, candidates were adept at demonstrating their understanding of significant aspects of the civilisation of which their individual was a part. Responses generally contained much relevant and accurate detail to provide a context for the individuals studied.

• Most candidates were able to display a good knowledge and understanding of the factual material for each individual. However, the absence of sufficient information about Messalina was problematic, with some candidates focusing (perhaps understandably) on the salacious aspects of her activities in the palace. Coverage of Tiberius’ reign often ignored aspects of his administration and events after his retirement to Capri.

Criterion 9: • This year, candidates excelled on the sources criterion, showing that they had been

thorough in their research and that they had made abundant use of not only primary sources but also secondary source textbooks rather than internet resources (as has been the trend in recent years). This is a promising development. Some candidates showed a particular strength in this area when discussing Messalina, making astute comments about the nature of bias among ancient writers. Some candidates continued arguments in footnotes. Others forgot to mention page numbers from texts they had referenced.

• It would seem that a reliance upon internet sources meant that many candidates did not engage with primary sources. Consequently, many candidates who chose to do their Study on Plato did not use the words of Plato himself as part of their study.

• Some candidates demonstrated their organisational skills and application to the task by providing a wide and diverse range of evidence from a collection of primary and secondary sources, undoubtedly understanding that by dealing with a range of complex evidence they would further demonstrate their sound understanding. They also indicated that they understood the difference between information potentially based on speculation and those primary sources with origins in reliable contexts.

• Some candidates only used websites, • A few candidates made no attempt to use footnote referencing. They did not do well on

this criterion. • A few relied heavily, sometimes exclusively, on web-sites, but fortunately these were

few and far in between. • Many candidates did not sort their reference list into the suggested categories. These

candidates should be directed to the TQA Guidelines.




Criterion 10: • This criterion gave candidates the opportunity to demonstrate the development of their

own historical observations in relation to the context of the society and the individual under study. Candidates who achieved an ‘A’ standard were able to offer a very sophisticated analysis of the individual under study: for example, some exceptional candidates who chose Cleisthenes. These candidates clearly understood how Athenian society had been shaped by the movement toward democracy, providing specific dates and understanding of different locations and evidence relating to important changes over time.

• Overall, I thought the standard of responses was very good in my sample. There were weaknesses, however, which were peculiar to particular historical individuals. For example:

• Ahmose: Candidates badly underplayed (or did not mention) the significance of Ahmose’s temple endowments to Amun which set a strong precedent for his successors and led to the financial demise of the royal treasury in the latter part of the New Kingdom. One candidate used the personal statement to relate a detailed historical background on Ahmose (about the Hyksos) without even mentioning the pharaoh himself. (Not to mention that this goes against the ostensible purpose of the personal statement as described in the TQA Guidelines).

• Ramesses I and Tawosret studies were effective, as were those on Vergil. • Tiberius: Some candidates completely disregarded Livia’s role in Tiberius’ career. • Livia: Candidates tended to disregard the broader imperial regime, with some

candidates failing to consider Livia’s role after the death of Augustus. Some candidates did not even mention her son Tiberius and her plans for his succession. Accounts of her background were effective, although a few candidates gave undue emphasis to the role and status of women in Rome or they made Livia into a paragon of female independence and feminism.

• Messalina: This character posed difficulties for many candidates. The lack of information on Messalina and the obvious bias of the sources led to some rather implausible views about her attributes; for example, a few candidates were given to being highly critical of the male sources and, thus, to counteract these views, absolved her of some of her allegedly immoral actions, as if ‘saving her children’ was sufficient justification for her licentiousness.

• Messalina’s motives and the influences upon her were not dealt with effectively. The greatest weakness of all was a common tendency to ignore the impact of Caligula on Messalina who, as a young girl, must have witnessed not only the emperor’s reign of terror but also his use of fear as a weapon to control others (including her future husband and emperor, Claudius) – something that must have left a lasting impression upon her, along with the rest of the court intrigues, especially those involving Livia, Agrippina the Younger, etc., and the short lifespans of many members of the imperial court. In terms of her impact on society, candidates definitely underplayed the importance of Messalina’s ruinous assault upon the image and dignitas of the role of empress.

Tasmanian Qualification Authority – Written Paper Marking Tool

Page 1 of 4

ANCIENT CIVILISATIONS (ANC315110) – 2011 (subject to refinement)

A+ A A- B+ B B- C+ C C- D+ D D-

Cri

teri

on 6

– A

naly

se a

nd e

valu

ate

issu

es a

nd in

form

atio

n explain relevant information in a logical way, provide sound justification for its selection and thoroughly assess its worth issues and information are communicated clearly, effectively and logically; argument is well supported; evidence is clearly evaluated;

explain relevant information in a logical way, clearly justify its selection and assess its worth information is used to justify point of view; assesses the value of information used; communication is effective, logical and avoids confusion or ambiguity;

explain relevant information in a logical way, clearly justify its selection and attempt to assess its worth information and issues are clearly communicated; written expression and/or essay structure is logical; information presented is relevant to the question; directly answers the question; issues relevant to the question are clearly identified;

Candidate’s answer does not answer the set question and may: be very short – one page or less; rely on incorrect information; fail to refer to material relevant to the question;

demonstrate thorough understanding of a broad range of issues, examine differing viewpoints and exhibit comprehensive understanding of the implications conclusions are strongly supported by the information and evidence presented; acknowledges and is able to evaluate differing interpretations of the issues and evidence;

demonstrate thorough understanding of a range of issues, discuss differing viewpoints and exhibit sound understanding of the implications can draw clear conclusions; demonstrates a clear knowledge and understanding of relevant issues; can identify and attempt to evaluate differing viewpoints; can identify the relevance to the question of information and evidence;

demonstrate sound understanding of a range of issues, discuss differing viewpoints and exhibit some understanding of the implications attempts to draw a clear conclusion from the information and evidence; establishes a point of view on the question; states the relevance of information to the question; is aware of alternative interpretations of the evidence and issues;

classify, categorise and organise detailed information from a wide range of diverse sources into logical patterns or points of view articulates ideas and information clearly in writing; sustains a logical argument with complex and sophisticated use of information and evidence;

classify and organise detailed information from different sources into logical patterns or points of view uses a variety of sources as evidence to support the answer to the question; responds in a clear and logical fashion; written expression clearly states the point of view and avoids ambiguity and confusion;

classify and organise some detailed information from a range of sources into logical patterns or points of view structures written response in a logical way; effective communication through written expression; recognises the varying importance of different pieces of information and/or evidence in answering he question;

interpret complex and subtle information relevant to an issue and attribute appropriate weight to it in opposing or affirming evidence. Chooses precise information and evidence to support the point being argued; Can evaluate the value of information and evidence chosen in a complex and sophisticated way; Written communication skills are of a high order;

interpret information as opposing or affirming evidence. Is able to evaluate effectively information and evidence and use it to support the argument; Clearly and accurately identifies sources of information; Can see both sides of the argument;

cite and clarify information as opposing or affirming evidence in discussing an issue. Clearly identifies sources of evidence used; Clearly states why chosen information and evidence supports the point of view; Chooses information and evidence appropriate to the argument;

Ancient Civilisations – Written Paper Marking Tool

Page 2 of 4

A+ A A- B+ B B- C+ C C- D+ D D-

Cri

teri

on 7

- D

emon

stra

te a

n un

ders

tand

ing

of re

leva

nt c

once

pts a

nd te

rmin

olog

y critically select relevant concepts and terms to clarify ideas and convey appropriate meaning terminology should be extensively and accurately used to support the answer to the question; terminology should be in the original language where appropriate, and should be spelled correctly; concepts should be chosen for their relevance and discussed in a sophisticated manner; candidates should demonstrate a well-developed critical faculty in choosing and discussing concepts;

select relevant concepts and terms to convey appropriate meaning is able to identify relevant concepts and use them to provide a response to the question; is able to choose relevant terminology to support a response to the question; concepts are clearly explained and used to justify their place in the argument; terminology is correctly spelled;

select relevant concepts and terms in an attempt to convey appropriate meaning attempts to identify concepts relevant to the question being answered; attempts to choose some terminology that supports the answer to the question; terminology is mostly spelled correctly, whether in English or the original language; the amount of terminology used, whether in English or the original language, will vary according to the topic and the civilisation being discussed, but there should always be some attempt to use appropriate terminology;

Candidate’s answer may: be irrelevant to the question; demonstrate no use of terminology pertinent to the question; use terminology which is inappropriate to the question; present no indication or understanding of concepts relevant to the question; be short (one page or less); contain no relevant concepts or terminology

accurately define and explain a broad range of relevant concepts and terms concepts being referred to are defined and used in a sophisticated manner; terminology use will be constant and, where possible, in the original language; both concepts and terminology should be used in a sophisticated manner so as to enhance the response to the question; according to the question, both concepts and terminology used should demonstrate the candidate has a wide ranging and/or detailed appreciation of the civilisation/topic being discussed

define and explain relevant concepts and terms the meaning of chosen terminology should be evident from the context of the writing; terminology should be accurately spelled; concepts should be explained and/or defined clearly, and should be appropriate to the question;

define relevant concepts and terms concepts being discussed should be explained clearly and defined accurately; terminology should be appropriately chosen and explained and mostly spelled correctly;

consistently apply relevant concepts and terms to the topics studied. Terminology and concepts chosen are consistently relevant, usually in the original language (where appropriate), and used in a sophisticated manner to enhance the argument

usually apply relevant concepts and terms to the topics studied. Both terminology and concepts are not just appropriate to the civilisation but are mostly directly relevant to the topic being discussed;

generally apply relevant concepts and terms to the topics studied. Terminology chosen is relevant to the civilisation being discussed and is generally relevant to the topic being discussed; Concepts chosen are relevant to the question;

Notes: where possible terminology should be in the original language, but this will vary according to the topic and civilisation being discussed; terminology should best be chosen for its value in explaining concepts for which there is no appropriate or comparable expression in English (e.g. ma’at or ka in Egyptian, cursus honorum or mos maiorum in Latin, hubris or tyrannos in Greek, etc.); terminology which does not positively enhance the argument may be of lesser or even no value for assessment: simply indiscriminately scattering terms like confetti without purpose or direction is useless.


Page 3 of 4

A+ A A- B+ B B- C+ C C- D+ D D-

Cri

teri

on 8

- D

emon

stra

te k

now

ledg

e an

d un

ders

tand

ing

of si

gnifi

cant

asp

ects

of a

n an

cien

t civ

ilisa

tion demonstrate extensive knowledge

and comprehensive understanding of a significant aspect of an ancient civilisation knowledge and understanding of the chosen civilisation are detailed and scholarly; information is precisely chosen to develop a detailed and sophisticated response to the issues raised in the question; identifies specific issues within the broader context of the chosen civilisation with care, precision and sophisticated comprehension; reveals a sophisticated appreciation and understanding of the chosen civilisation;

demonstrate detailed knowledge and clear understanding of a significant aspect of an ancient civilisation understands issues in the question in the context of the chosen civilisation; information presented is precise and detailed; information is directly pertinent to all issues raised in the question; indicates a thorough understanding of the significance of the issues within the broader context of the civilisation under discussion;

demonstrate sound knowledge and clear understanding of a significant aspect of an ancient civilisation information presented is generally accurate; presents information which indicates an understanding of the chosen civilisation; may be able to compare and contrast chosen civilisation with others; identifies issues in the question and discusses them in relation to the chosen civilisation; demonstrates a general knowledge of the chosen civilisation and a specific knowledge of issues raised in the question;

Candidate’s answer may: be very short (one page or less); be irrelevant to the question; fail to address any issues in the question; fail to present any significant information about the chosen civilisation; fail to indicate any response to the question that distinguishes the chosen civilisation from any other;

recall relevant and detailed information from a wide range of sources information is carefully chosen to enhance a response to the issues raised in the question; a wide variety of primary and secondary sources is used to support the response; answer reveals a sophisticated understanding and appreciation of the role of sources in responding to issues relating to the chosen civilisation;

recall relevant information from a range of sources information presented is accurate and pertinent to the issues raised in the question; information comes from several primary and secondary sources; answer reveals an appreciation of issues raised in the question within the broader context of the civilisation;

recall relevant information at a basic level from a range of sources information presented is basically accurate; answer relies on more than one primary or secondary source; answer reveals an understanding of the value of primary and secondary sources in mounting an argument; sources chosen are valid and pertinent;

consistently select relevant and accurate information to form a logical and reasoned response all information presented is accurate and enhances the argument; all sources referred to are clearly and accurately understood and used to reinforce the point of view; the response is written at a sophisticated level, presenting a clear line of argument, reinforced with accurate information and precise use of a wide variety of sources;

select information, usually relevant and accurate, to form a considered response can respond in a logical and considered manner; can choose information to support that logical response; information is accurate and extensive; sources are accurately used and interpreted;

select information, usually relevant, to form a response presents information which is basically accurate in response to the question; answer reveals the ability to use information to support the argument;

use relevant and accurate information to reach valid, logical and reasoned conclusions. Answer reveals a sophisticated ability to argue logically; Answer uses accurate and pertinent information at all times; Sources are used accurately, with understanding of their context, and in order to enhance a sophisticated response to the question.

use relevant and accurate information to reach valid and considered conclusions. Can choose information in order to enhance a logical argument; Information chosen is valid, pertinent to the question, and generally well understood; Information is accurate; Information chosen reveals a solid and specific appreciation of the chosen civilisation;

use relevant information to reach valid conclusions. The response is generally structured so as to present a logically argued response to the question; Information presented is mostly relevant and sound; Information chosen reveals a broad understanding the chosen civilisation;


Page 4 of 4

A+ A A- B+ B B- C+ C C- D+ D D-

Cri

teri

on 9

- Dem

onst

rate

an

abili

ty to

ana

lyse

crit

ical

ly a

var

iety

of p

rimar

y an

d se

cond

ary

sour

ces demonstrate a comprehensive

understanding of the range of available evidence from a variety of primary and secondary sources can analyse the usefulness and reliability of sources referred to in answering the question; refers to a wide range of both primary and secondary sources; can make extensive use of quotations from appropriate sources;

demonstrate a sound understanding of the range of available evidence from a variety of primary and secondary sources can evaluate the differing merits as evidence of primary and secondary sources; takes issues of reliability of sources into account in answering the question; makes reference to a range of both primary and secondary sources; can evaluate the reliability of sources; can directly and accurately quote from relevant sources to some extent;

demonstrate an awareness of the range of available evidence from a variety of primary and secondary sources can distinguish the difference between primary and secondary sources; is aware of the range of both primary and secondary sources available for the topic in question; makes limited use of evidence form sources to support the argument/viewpoint on the topic; is aware of issues of reliability of sources;

Candidate’s answer may: be very short (one page or less); be irrelevant to the question; fail to address any issues in the question; fail to refer to any significant sources; fail to identify the difference between primary and secondary sources;

demonstrate a comprehensive understanding of complexities* in evidence can analyse and evaluate complexities in evidence and apply them to aid in a sophisticated argument in favour of a point of view on the question; is able to deal with questions of bias in evidence in a sophisticated and scholarly manner;

demonstrate an understanding of complexities* in evidence is able to refer specifically to complexities in evidence and analyse their usefulness in answering the question; takes bias in sources into account in using evidence from those sources;

demonstrate a basic awareness of complexities* in evidence can identify complexities in evidence from significant primary and/or secondary sources; is aware of the significance of potential bias in chosen sources;

demonstrate a sound understanding of how a world view shapes primary evidence is able to take the world view of a source into account in evaluating that source’s effectiveness as evidence;

demonstrate an understanding of how a world view shapes primary evidence can place the chosen source into the context of a world view and can analyse the usefulness or otherwise of that source;

demonstrate a basic understanding of how a world view shapes primary evidence sees that historical or social context has an effect on the reliability or usefulness of sources;

distinguish fact from opinion in a wide variety of sources can analyse the usefulness of sources of varying reliability in a sophisticated and scholarly manner;

distinguish fact from opinion in a range of sources can identify the effectiveness as evidence of sources of varying veracity;

distinguish fact from opinion in some sources is aware that a given source may have recorded material which is anecdotal or otherwise unverifiable; can take the verifiability or otherwise of source material into account in using it as evidence;

demonstrate a comprehensive understanding that the origins of evidence and the context in which it was created can affect reliability is able to place a wide range of sources into the context of a world view prevalent at their time of writing or recording; can analyse the effectiveness of a wide range of sources as reliable or otherwise useable evidence;

demonstrate an understanding that the origins of evidence and the context in which it was created can affect reliability can identify the different purposes of sources from varying periods or civilisations;

demonstrate a basic understanding that the origins of evidence and the context in which it was created can affect reliability is aware that prevailing attitudes or other variables such as political view point can affect the reliability of a given source; can assert an opinion on the reliability or otherwise of a given source;

demonstrate an ability to provide a critical analysis and evaluation of sources. Can critically evaluate a range of sources; Can use a wide range of sources appropriately as evidence according to their reliability, context, bias or other complexities;

demonstrate an ability to provide a sound analysis and evaluation of sources. Demonstrates a clear understanding of the differing merits of a variety of sources and their usefulness in various circumstances;

demonstrate an ability to provide a basic analysis and evaluation of sources. States an opinion as to the reliability of a chosen source; Can make a basic evaluation of the reliability or value of a given source;

Notes: * Complexities in evidence will include bias, contradiction, anachronism, gaps in evidence and propaganda.

TASMANIAN QUALIFICATIONS AUTHORITY

ANC3 15 I 10 Ancient Civilisations

ASSES SMENT PANEL REPORT

Award Distribution

Student Distribution (SA or better)

EA HA CA SA Total

This year e% (2e) L2% (40) 4L% (L37',) 38% (L27\ 333

Last year Ls% (44) 13% (38) 38% (110) 33% (94) 286

Last year (allexaminedsubjects)

LL% 20% 39% 30%

Previous 5 years L2% 14% 42% 33%

Previous 5 years(all examinedsubjects)

LL% L9% 40% 30%

Male Female Year 11 Year 12

This year 3s% (LL7\ 6s% (2L6\ 36% (LzL\ 64% (2L2',)

Last year 38% (108) 62% (178) 31% (90) 69% (L96)

Previous 5 years 40% 60% 32% 68%

Date post:	06-Apr-2020
Category:	Documents
Upload:	others
View:	2 times
Download:	0 times

TA S M A N I A N Ancient Civilisations · T AN Q ONS A TY TA S M A N I A N Ancient Civilisations CE...

Documents