Criterion Two What does it take to get an A?

Criterion Two is sometimes the hardest criterion for students. It is the criterion which asks students not only to use sources and tell us what they mean, but to make judgements about their reliability, usefulness and accuracy. In order to do well in History, you will need to become better at higher order thinking about the value of information in sources, about patterns of evidence and possible motivations of the author in saying what they say. Consider the criteria descriptors below for Criterion 2. Teachers will mark your work by considering the extent to which your work best reflects the criterion descriptors of standard A work, standard B work or standard C work. Hopefully, you will do sufficient to get at least a standard C. Anything less than a C is considered unsatisfactory and a failing grade.

CRITERIA Critical Processes: Interpretation, analysis and decision-making

A
Uses a diverse range of sources / data to: Comprehend and apply explicit and implicit meanings Identify and analyse implicit and explicit patterns of historical information, and categorise evidence Corroborate primary and secondary sources, creating strong support for key arguments Evaluates the relevance, representativeness, likely accuracy and likely reliability of sources

B
Uses sources / data to: Comprehend explicit and some implicit meanings Identify and analyse explicit patterns of historical information and allocate information to categories Support key arguments with relevant and appropriate evidence Evaluates the likely relevance, accuracy or reliability of sources

C
Generally uses sources / data to: Comprehend most explicit meanings Identify simple and familiar concepts, values, and motives that are explicit Analyse to identify obvious historical themes and patterns Support key arguments with mostly relevant evidence Detect bias in sources

1. Now that you have had an opportunity to read the Criterion Two descriptors above, highlight any words that you dont understand. Discuss these in groups and then as a class. 2. What are the key differences between the A and B range descriptors? 3. What are the key differences between the B and C range descriptors? 4. Do you know what grade you received for Criterion 2 last year? What was it? 5. What are you aiming for this year and what are you going to do, in order to work towards this goal? 6. Consider the sample responses below. Which Criterion 2 standard do they best match with?

Source Four: A German Cartoon, published in a German Newspaper in 1919

Q In what way is source 4 a valuable source for a historian?

Evaluating Sample Answers

Consider the answers below. What grade would you give them for Criterion Two and why? Rank them in order of strongest response to weakest response.

Sample One
Source 4 is valuable because it is a primary source.

Sample Two
Source 4 is valuable because it is a primary source and shows the allies as monsters who have come up with a bad peace.

Sample Three
Source 4 is valuable because it shows a hatred for the treaty of Versailles.

Sample Four
Source 4, a primary source published in a German newspaper in 1919, is particularly valuable in highlighting the dominant attitudes of German people against the Treaty of Versailles. Because it is published in a newspaper, one might expect it to have a wide audience as newspaper circulation is quite broad. Though the cartoon is clearly biased against the peace makers, depicting them as greedy ogres / monsters who look sub-human, it nevertheless is useful in giving historians an insight into how many Germans viewed both the terms of peace and those at the Versailles conference.

Sample Five
Source 4, a primary source published in a German newspaper in 1919, is of some value to a historian. Though a historian would need to be aware of the reality that cartoonists are often one-sided in their portrayal of events, attempting to illicit a strong emotional or political response, cartoonists also offer valuable information about particular moods and attitudes affecting people at a particular point of time. This source, because it is published in a newspaper in Germany, can be assumed to reflect that attitudes of many German people to the Versailles treaty. It clearly is negative towards the treaty because it depicts those who wrote it as monster like and subhuman. This is indicated by the semi naked, ogre like face of one of the characters, and the grotesque facial features that they all possess. In addition, the hands are exaggerated and monster-like. One of the figures appears to be wearing a crown and a toga suggestive of the fact that this particular leader is hell-bent on empire building and Germanys expense. Though the historian would acknowledge the biased nature of some of these ideas, and the fact that it doesnt consider pro-ally perspectives, it is nevertheless useful in helping the historian understand how many Germans perceived the peace makers.

Source Nine: Excerpts from The Economic Consequences of the Peace by John Maynard Keynes, 1919 ed., pp. 4-7, 29-45, 226-231. The treaty includes no provisions for the economic rehabilitation of Europe -- nothing to make the defeated Central empires into good neighbours, nothing to stabilize the new states of Europe, nothing to reclaim Russia; nor does it promote in any way a compact of economic solidarity amongst the Allies themselves; no arrangement was reached at Paris for restoring the disordered finances of France and Italy, or to adjust the systems of the Old World and the New. The Council of Four paid no attention to these issues, being preoccupied with others -- Clemenceau to crush the economic life of his enemy, Lloyd George to do a deal and bring home something which would pass muster for a week, the President to do nothing that was not just and right. It is an extraordinary fact that the fundamental economic problem of a Europe starving and disintegrating before their eyes, was the one question in which it was impossible to arouse the interest of the Four. Reparation was their main excursion into the economic field, and they settled it as a problem of theology, of politics, of electoral chicane, from every point of view except that of the economic future of the states whose destiny they were handling.... In a very short time, therefore, Germany will not be in a position to give bread and work to her numerous millions of inhabitants, who are prevented from earning their livelihood by navigation and trade.... "We do not know, and indeed we doubt," the Report concludes, "whether the delegates of the Allied and Associated Powers realize the inevitable consequences which will take place if Germany, an industrial state, very thickly populated, closely bound up with the economic system of the world, and under the necessity of importing enormous quantities of raw material and foodstuffs, suddenly finds herself pushed back to the phase of her development which corresponds to her economic condition and the numbers of her population as they were half a century ago. Those who sign this treaty will sign the death sentence of many millions of German men, women, and children."

John Maynard Keynes (properly pronounced "canes") is widely held to be the most influential economist of the Twentieth Century, and his theories are still given great consideration in the governments of Australia, Britain, Canada, parts of Europe, and of course in the United States. After several years in civil service for the British Government, he was assigned to represent the British Treasury Department at the Paris Peace Conference of 1919, helping to negotiate the international settlements which ended the First World War. He resigned from this position in disgust on 5 June 1919, before the treaty was signed, and first came to public prominence with his outspoken denunciation of the economic terms in the resulting Treaty of Versailles

How valuable is source 9 as an insight into the successes and failures of the Paris Peace Conference?

Evaluating Sample Responses

Consider the answers below. What grade would you give them for Criterion Two and why? Rank them in order of strongest response to weakest response.
Sample One
Source 9 is highly reliable as it was written by John Maynard Keynes who was a British diplomat working as a representative of the British during the end of World War One and represented the British Treasury department at the Paris Peace Conference. Keynes is highly critical of the Treaty, particularly in relation to its short-sightedness. As an insider, Keynes would have had first-hand knowledge not only of British negotiations in relation to the peace, but of the positions of other western countries. He was therefore able to see and testify to what was going on.

Sample Two
Source 9 is a primary source and so is very valuable. Keynes is basically telling us that the British got it wrong and were hell bent on revenge.

Sample Three
Source 9 is not very valuable because Keynes is biased he clearly thinks the Treaty was a negative thing and so therefore, a historian would need to use his work carefully as he doesnt allow for other views.

Sample Four
Source 9 is of significant value to a historian. Because Keynes was a British insider who represented the British Treasury Department during the Paris Peace Conference of 1919, he offers an invaluable firsthand perspective about what drove British and allied thinking. As an experienced economist (the most influential of the 20th century) and diplomat who clearly had the trust of the British government, he can be considered an expert whose opinion and observations carry weight. Keynes is in a unique position therefore, to provide a historian with information both about the motives of the British and about the economic impact of the Treaty. Specifically, he sees the treaty as short-sighted and failing to address issues related to rebuilding Europe economically. For Keynes, it was this short-sightedness that would lead to economic decay and create very difficult conditions particularly for the Germans who would would not be in a position to give bread and milk to her numerous millions of inhabitants. Keynes, who was in the employ of the British and therefore had a vested interest to side with them, instead paints them as lacking in foresight and compassion, almost inhuman in their failure to recognise that the treaty would sign the death sentence of many millions of Germans. Therefore, he is a very valuable source as to the negative impact of the Versailles agreement, but offers no perspective about its successes (presumably his view is that it is wholly negative).

Sample Five
The peace treaty is not good according to Keynes, who was a British economist. He is a primary source.