Writing the event help  Coursework Writing the event help 

Questions In the context of Germany 1819 to 1945, to what extent was Anti- Semitism during the years of Nazi Rule (1933-45) an anomaly? In the content of _______, to what extent was the career of Martin Luther King the most important factor in the progression of Black Civil Rights? In the context of 1890 to 2000, to what extent did African American women help progress in the Black Civil Rights Movement? To what extent did the Supreme Court play a significant role in furthering Black Civil Rights in America in the years _____ to _____?

Last years grade boundaries ( /40) (they will probably be higher this year) C - 25 D - 21 E - 17

How to structure your event POINT – In your first sentence, make it obvious which event you are writing about, and state your judgement/opinion on that event (in relation to your question). EVIDENCE – Bring in detailed evidence of the event. At this point it is easy to word vomit all you know about an event. ONLY mention the details that you are going to analyse, and use to prove that your point is correct. EXPLAIN – What does the evidence you have mentioned demonstrate? This could be change/continuity, or causation/consequence or significance. LINK – link this explanation back to your question. What does this information suggest the answer to the question is? Might do this a couple of times (see A* answer)

Examples The next few slides are examples of coursework paragraphs and the grades they got. I have tried to ensure that they got this grade in A01 specifically. However… A01 is particularly hard to convey in one paragraph 100 year coverage can not be demonstrated in these paragraphs Overall structure cannot be demonstrated It is often the case that judgements are made at the end of themes

Example 1 – A* Clear point made (HepHep) with a judgement (significant) The Hep-hep riots of 1819 are the first significant example of violence towards the Jews in this time period. They they were a series of violent attacks on Jews and there properties starting in the city of Würzburg, spreading as far as Denmark and Poland. Although the rioting spread quickly among the Bavarian towns and villages, a major point of interest is the lack of violence in Prussia which was by far the largest Germanic state. This indicates that attitude towards the Jews varied wildly throughout Germany. The original rioting lasted for two or three days, leading to the death of two people, but was ultimately put down by he military preventing any more deaths. This indicates two things. One, the number of deaths indicates that they were consequential, as opposed to intentional. Second, whilst the Hep-Hep riots were severe in the sense that they required government intervention, that the government itself did not actively support the violence. There are also several examples of vocal opposition to the rioting including a case in Heidelberg where two professors and their students prevented any violence and made citizens arrest. Historian Amos Elon however argues that "townspeople generally remained passive bystanders". Elon's interpretation ignores the key fact he relates to earlier in his book that Prussia was not beset by violence, this evidence suggests that while in the rioting area people were indeed bystanders, in the bulk of what would become Germany the attitude was far less anti-Semitic since violence never broke out. Detailed evidence on HepHep Analysis – what the evidence shows about the scale of the anti-Semitic violence during HepHep Detailed evidence on HepHep Analysis – what the evidence shows about the scale of the anti-Semitic violence during HepHep Detailed evidence on HepHep Historian’s view and evaluation (not convincing)

Example 2 – A Point made with a judgement (event not made clear at this point) In Nazi Germany there was too a change in laws, however this change showed a move towards Anti-Semitism, and this showing the Nazi’s to be an anomaly. At the annual rally in Nuremburg 1935, many anti-Semitic laws were set in place to enforce Nazi ideology. Such as, they were not allowed citizenship or relations with ‘German or related blood’. This was a massive increase in radical anti-Semitism and a huge step backwards from the progress made towards Jewish rights before Nazi rule. These changes show the Nazi’s to be a huge anomaly, not the German people as it was the Government which changed the law, not the people. These disagrees with Goldhagen’s that the German people anti-Semitism was not an anomaly in Nazi rule, as no correlation between the German people and anti-Semitic laws can be made. However, what can be made is a link between the Nazi party and the laws, thus making the Nazi party the anomaly. Relevant evidence on Nuremburg – could be more detailed Analysis – particular focus on the idea of change (deterioration). Historian’s view is evaluated (view of Goldhagen has been given earlier, hence the lack of description of his view) Judgement that links to the question.

Example 3 – B Clear point made (Atlanta Women) with a judgement While successful at the time, the aggressive activism of black Atlantans from 1880 to 1910 did not necessarily result in lasting, positive social change. This activism was met with violence from white people in Atlanta and while they were already common practice, the amount of lynchings increased in the area. It did, however show the importance of group effort and unity when fighting for equality through both men and women participating in a strike just a generation after their liberation. It also shows the importance of women when fighting for civil rights because it was women who started resisting in 1881 and them who planned the strike, meaning that they key to the protest. It can be argued that they were not the only factors which led to the advancement of African-Americans in Atlanta because it can be said that hostility and racial violence against African Americans in Atlanta increased in direct proportion to black progress. Evidence on the consequences, but not Analysis – what the evidence shows about the scale of the anti-Semitic violence during HepHep

Example 5 – E One specific piece of evidence on Nazi laws There was a lot of laws in the 1930s that banned Jews from doing things such as a Law on Midwives bans all Jews from the occupation. This was another law that hindered professions of Jews in Germany, and was put into place on 21st December 1938. This was another law that the Nazi’s enforced, the German government during the Weimar and the Kaisers, they did not ban Jews from the profession. There was other laws similar to this that was put into place under the Nazis, the Nazis that banned Jews from jobs and privileges, such as been auctioneers, gun merchants and going to health spas, these were all in the middle/later 1930s there all show discrimination towards the Jews under Nazi reign. Vague assertion (hint at continuity in Nazi Germany) More information, that is accurate and relevant, but not well chosen (misses Nuremburg laws!) Vague assertion (not linked to the question because there is no mention of the German people)

Possible Historians Martin Luther King Supreme Court Women Anti-Semitism August Meier Clayborne Carson Kevern Verney Taylor Branch Geoffrey Hodgson Possibly interpretations that focus on other leaders e.g. A Philip Randolph L Goldstone A Graham Davis M Tushnet James T Patterson Belinda Robnett Bernice McNair Barnett Any traditional interpretations arguing that famous civil rights leaders such as King are the most important factor. (e.g. Meier and Godfrey Hodgson) Daniel Goldhagen Christopher Browning Amos Elon Ian Kershaw