Understanding Standards: Advanced Higher Event History

Aims of the day To support teachers, lecturers and assessors in their understanding of national standards by: reviewing candidate evidence discussing this evidence and associated Marking Instructions with colleagues asking questions and seeking clarification about national standards

Advanced Higher: History Uptake doubled Results steady

Marks distribution Exam paper Exam paper Essays 2 @ 25 50 marks 2001–2015 Exam paper Essays 2 @ 25 50 marks Sources 12+12+16 40 marks Dissertation 50 marks 2016 Exam paper Essays 2 @ 25 50 marks Sources 12+12+16 40 marks Dissertation 50 marks

Process quality assurance Making the paper Selection of exemplars Central Marking Training Seeded papers Standardisation

Dissertation Response in 4000 words to an issue Use a range of sources to analyse, evaluate and synthesise Approved titles updated every year 10% tolerance on word limit before a penalty is applied

Dissertation – Key to consistency of approach: The generic grades sheet (GRID) The generic descriptor GRID has been very successful in encouraging positive marking and marking across the spectrum of grades. This should inform your grading, but not all elements have equal weighting Introduction and conclusions – C Pass descriptor DEGREE OF ANALYSIS – A++ Pass descriptor THOROUGHNESS – bibliography may help

Introduction and conclusions have distinct boxes Grade Marker’s Comments Comments (Standardised)   Introduction- clarity of structure and argumentation Structure – Conclusions Degree of THOROUGHNESS (depth and breadth) Relevance of information Degree of ANALYSIS and EVALUATION Consideration of Historical sources/interpretation Overall accuracy of approach, primary source Additional comments (including word count) On the Ex Supp, the ANALYSIS/EVALUATION and THOROUGHNESS are highlighted and are given greater prominence. They will have a greater weighting, but will not solely give the grade but are significant drivers Introduction and conclusions have distinct boxes Relevance of information and approach Overall structure, word count, clarity of argumentation

Penalties for candidates Big improvement helped by the new rubric on the cover sheet, plus the instruction to put the word count on each page If they sign for more than 4400 there is a penalty of 10% – NOT a sliding scale Footnotes issue No penalties for lack of page count, or word count or bibliography, but it may make you check more carefully before awarding the mark

Question Paper – Essays

Sources Three stems Three processes Same skill set applied

Marking of Source questions Selection of relevant quote and adding of explanation which relates to the question 1 Addition of recall (WCD) which relates to the question and therefore enhances the explanation 2 Adding development of the recall information which relates to the question 3

Sources: Scale of rewarding – How much for one mark? A developed point? A relevant historian with the view? [a list of historians doesn’t get extra marks!] Same historian used twice gets credit, if accurately on a different point

Value of conclusion to source question? As we noticed over the past years… A lot merely summarise [at length] what has already been said. The conclusions are worth no marks in themselves. But can give the judgement necessary to answer the question Conclusions can help give a holistic extra mark [ie showing that the sum is greater than the parts].

Writing… Provenance How useful is the source in terms of provenance? Significance/importance of author, in relation to the question Significance of date, in relation to the question Significance of the context in which the source was created (directly link to answering the question)

‘Evaluate the usefulness’ questions Provenance comments and marks may not all be at the start of the answer. Insights may be later on in the piece, especially in discussion of attitudes/tone of source.

Historians viewpoints (2 marks ) Include historians viewpoints to back up either the point of view of source or to show other points of view (ie to show bias of source). If you include more than two points of historiography you will be awarded extra marks under recall. This is a good way to gain marks!! But they MUST As long as they are valid….avoid ‘fig leaf’ approach.

‘How fully….’ 3 marks awarded for source interpretation (analysis) 7 marks awarded for recall and wider contextual development 2 marks awarded for historians views Suggested time 25mins

The Two Source Question 16 marks allocated Not the same as a comparison question at Higher Purpose of the question is to test knowledge of the interpretations of a broad theme Suggested time 35mins

Mark allocation Source interpretation (analysis) – 6 marks in total, 3 marks for each source Recall/ Wider Contextual Development – 8 marks Historians views– 2 marks

Symbols for source marking I interpretation P provenance WCD context [recall, developing answer] H historians/historiography Also variations WCD/H or P/WCD Often overlap [‘Evaluate the usefulness’ question might require you to ‘manoeuvre’ the marks, with historians’ views counted as context]

WWW.sqa.org.uk│0303 333 0330