General Chatter (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter Mazxoxo
- Start date
hornbydragonfan
New Member
- Joined
- Jul 27, 2006
- Messages
- 4
- Gender
- Female
- HSC
- 2006
Re: History Extension...
I was always fooked for this dumb subject.
I havent even studied, I'm just resigned to my fate
Dont make the mistake that if you like or are good at ancient or modern history - that you will like or be good at extension.:mad1: Its the worst subject ever.
I shall look at the paper and "GWA?!"
Its bull.
I was always fooked for this dumb subject.
I havent even studied, I'm just resigned to my fate
Dont make the mistake that if you like or are good at ancient or modern history - that you will like or be good at extension.:mad1: Its the worst subject ever.
I shall look at the paper and "GWA?!"
Its bull.
mrbrownone
New Member
- Joined
- Feb 26, 2006
- Messages
- 10
- Gender
- Undisclosed
- HSC
- N/A
It's over! atleast for me >_>
That was a noice test...not tooooo bullshit p_o
what do you guys think?
And I get to party now ^_^
That was a noice test...not tooooo bullshit p_o
what do you guys think?
And I get to party now ^_^
beststreet
Member
Re: It's over! atleast for me >_>
source 1 was fucked and i didnt feel confident about my JFK essay structure. so i dont really know how i went
source 1 was fucked and i didnt feel confident about my JFK essay structure. so i dont really know how i went
wow, possibly the easiest thing ive done
the questions were straight forward. question one they told u that it was about aims and purposes u didnt even have to extract it from the source, which made it easier, and the source was straightforward. the second question was the most broad thing i have ever seen, so u could pretty much talk about any historical debate and get away with it. for those who are asking what fish has to do with anything, ever heard of a metaphor?? ill let those people ponder on this for a moment....
the questions were straight forward. question one they told u that it was about aims and purposes u didnt even have to extract it from the source, which made it easier, and the source was straightforward. the second question was the most broad thing i have ever seen, so u could pretty much talk about any historical debate and get away with it. for those who are asking what fish has to do with anything, ever heard of a metaphor?? ill let those people ponder on this for a moment....
coldasice
Banned
- Joined
- Oct 10, 2006
- Messages
- 56
- Gender
- Female
- HSC
- 2006
Re: wow, possibly the easiest thing ive done
wow, then go show off about it. go on, make a new thread.
wow, then go show off about it. go on, make a new thread.
raiders771
Member
- Joined
- Sep 13, 2005
- Messages
- 63
- Gender
- Undisclosed
- HSC
- 2006
Re: It's over! atleast for me >_>
yeh i never studied opened a page for history extension and i found it alright... managed to write 12 pages for the 1st question and 8 for the next cant believe for the amount of effort i put in i wrote that much
yeh i never studied opened a page for history extension and i found it alright... managed to write 12 pages for the 1st question and 8 for the next cant believe for the amount of effort i put in i wrote that much
Re: wow, possibly the easiest thing ive done
ur sir, are a knob. the biggest discriminating in history extension is your ability to include and incorporate the source. if you dont use it, and the fact you're boasting about it, means you're in trouble
ur sir, are a knob. the biggest discriminating in history extension is your ability to include and incorporate the source. if you dont use it, and the fact you're boasting about it, means you're in trouble
Re: wow, possibly the easiest thing ive done
woah man your so skilled... YOU PICKED UP ON THE METAPHOR!! i cant believe it... i sat in the exam room thinking about the kinds of fish i should mention...
(cos your so smart maybe you picked up on the sarcasm)
i will certainly let you ponder this for a moment...
ROFL!!rjharley said:
woah man your so skilled... YOU PICKED UP ON THE METAPHOR!! i cant believe it... i sat in the exam room thinking about the kinds of fish i should mention...
(cos your so smart maybe you picked up on the sarcasm)
i will certainly let you ponder this for a moment...
Re: wow, possibly the easiest thing ive done
It is defiantly unanimous.
Seriously though, I thought it was pretty alright, do I go and make a knobby post about it, No. There's no need to make yourself feel better by putting others down, afterall it would be pretty ammusing to read an entire essay about Carr and fish! (I'd give them marks for originality lol)
It is defiantly unanimous.
Seriously though, I thought it was pretty alright, do I go and make a knobby post about it, No. There's no need to make yourself feel better by putting others down, afterall it would be pretty ammusing to read an entire essay about Carr and fish! (I'd give them marks for originality lol)
timobr0
Ευθήμιος
Re: It's over! atleast for me >_>
nice carlos....i still have 1 more exammrbrownone said:
luscious-llama
Ára bátur
- Joined
- Nov 5, 2004
- Messages
- 1,064
- Gender
- Undisclosed
- HSC
- N/A
Re: wow, possibly the easiest thing ive done
Rewrite some Lines?
Do you want to spend some time?
If your hands are open like mine
Underneath a setting sun
Your hands are open like a child’s
Like mine
Do you want another try?rjharley said:
Rewrite some Lines?
Do you want to spend some time?
If your hands are open like mine
Underneath a setting sun
Your hands are open like a child’s
Like mine
Re: wow, possibly the easiest thing ive done
calling it the easiest thing ever lil bit of overstatement. thought it was ok. could only squeeze in one paragraph of jenkins ...not sure if i therefore contrasted enough, ah well. 2nd part was alright, just talked bout selective usuage of facts n evidence and wat evers convienent to historian. all in all - alright exam
calling it the easiest thing ever lil bit of overstatement. thought it was ok. could only squeeze in one paragraph of jenkins
...not sure if i therefore contrasted enough, ah well. 2nd part was alright, just talked bout selective usuage of facts n evidence and wat evers convienent to historian. all in all - alright exam
hopeles5ly
Take Me Higher.
Re: wow, possibly the easiest thing ive done
Anyone, willing to post up the paper?
Anyone, willing to post up the paper?
Re: It's over! atleast for me >_>
source 1 was tough, i couldnt pick up on her main purpose in mass detail...i tried to engage in the idea of empiricism through her quote as an objective analysis with history as a science...hope this works. section 2 wasnt too bad. i didnt find the fish metaphor to ambiguous but in saying that i didnt make as many good points as i probably should have... are you supposed to engage in the source in section 2 as much as you are in section 1?
source 1 was tough, i couldnt pick up on her main purpose in mass detail...i tried to engage in the idea of empiricism through her quote as an objective analysis with history as a science...hope this works. section 2 wasnt too bad. i didnt find the fish metaphor to ambiguous but in saying that i didnt make as many good points as i probably should have... are you supposed to engage in the source in section 2 as much as you are in section 1?
hotChoklat
Member
- Joined
- Nov 5, 2005
- Messages
- 29
- Gender
- Male
- HSC
- 2006
Re: wow, possibly the easiest thing ive done
i hope i did the right thing by sayin she had a view of history's purpose as being empirical but oath did that have to be the worst name to have to refer to...clendillen, clendellen...wtf?!? i give up
i hope i did the right thing by sayin she had a view of history's purpose as being empirical but oath did that have to be the worst name to have to refer to...clendillen, clendellen...wtf?!? i give up
Re: It's over! atleast for me >_>
i'm done suckers.
it was better than 04 (section 1) but i have to say that might be the most discriminating section 2 thus far because of the multiple nuances (i.e. people say subjectivity when COME ON its more about how facts aren't "historical facts" until the historian uses them or that there is a "prcoess of attrition" before the past is recorded as facts - its in what is history? pg 12-13).
also section 1 i said the woman was a socialist can that be inferred :/ ?
i'm done suckers.
it was better than 04 (section 1) but i have to say that might be the most discriminating section 2 thus far because of the multiple nuances (i.e. people say subjectivity when COME ON its more about how facts aren't "historical facts" until the historian uses them or that there is a "prcoess of attrition" before the past is recorded as facts - its in what is history? pg 12-13).
also section 1 i said the woman was a socialist can that be inferred :/ ?