Ok. I am gonna blog about how to win in History.

Ok. Before i do that, some people will think that i'm egotistical and because i'm doing this, they will assume that i think i'm all that.

Look. I give these kinda things a lot of thought ok and besides, its just my take on how to win in history. For all you know, Vern, Elijah, Sherrie chong or some dude from RJ may have a totally different approach. Whatever. Mine works for me.



Before this, we gotta ask ourselves. What are we studying? Is it History? Well yea it is, 1972 Moro Muslim rebellion in Philippines, 1990 Union Treaty, 1997 AFC. These are all historical events yea? But really, besides learning historical content which any old idiot can do without a teacher, we are essentially learning skills. That is what H2 History is all about. If I were the MOE (in which i wish i weren't), i would rename H2 history, H2 analytical skills using historical content as a medium. We really arent studying history guys. We are studying skills. In fact, the only reason why we use history as a meduim for learning its skills is because of how contentious certain things are. Try arguing about how oxygen isnt O2.

Let me give you an example.
Defficiency in White blood cells is the main cause for Cancer (whatever i dont even know what the cause for cancer is. ) If we use science as a medium for practicing skills, there wont be shit to weigh. Its either yes or no. Thus, History.





So. The most important thing EVER. Is to answer the question.

Its amazing how 18 yearolds, myself included, can totally miss the point of answering the question.



Lets start with an example. An example of answering the question without the use of history at all.



Q : Walking to the store 4 blocks away from your house is better than driving to it. Discuss.


Answer 1 : Walking to the store is better because you get to excercise which makes you healthy.



Answer 2 : Driving to the store is better because you save time.



Answer 3 : Walking to the store is better because you get to excercise which makes you healthy. This is better than driving because while sitting in the car you dont get any excercise. Thus, walking is better than driving as walking enables you to keep fit whereas driving doesnt.



Answer 4 : Driving to the store is better than walking because driving allows you to save time. In contrast, when one walks, one loses the time possibly saved by driving. Therefore, driving is better than walking because driving saves more time than walking, allowing a person to use the time saved to be spent on other productive activities.



OK. Honestly speaking, most people are still giving answers 1 and 2 in their essays. Its not like they purposely do that but with 45 minutes, its tough to come out with decent stuff. Frankly speaking, in my opinion (not Ms Teo's , Rajoo's or even Ms Narindar's), apart from shitty content, this is the reason why people dont even get above 12.



Yet, Answers 3 and 4 are both "correct" answers in my opinion, but definitely not the best. After clearing this basic requirement, one has to define certain keywords. In this case, the keyword, "better". Better for the environment, body, whatever. Only after you define "better" can we select an "appropriate" answer. In this case, depending on how you set your criteria, Answer 3 may be right or wrong. Same goes for answer 4.



Now. Lets take things to an even higher level. This one is for people who want to score an A. Sadly, while i am explaining my theory behind this, I have never actually scored an A in a real essay before. The closest being a 16.5 on an essay and a 19 on a formative essay.

So lets say you define "better" as saving time. In that case, answer 4 would be appropriate.

But then, seriously. Get back to what i mentioned earlier. History isnt the study of history. Its the study of skills. Since its the study of skills and they are testing ones understanding on skills, you can show them that by changing your definition of "better", Answer 3 can be right too! Yes. Within the same essay, you demonstrate the possibilities of 2 right answers.

How does one come to a conclusion then?

Well, one possible resolution would be that Walking IS better than Driving, although that can change depending on the criteria. Why? Because while driving saves time, Walking allows for excercise and the saving of the environment since no gas is used. Also, although time is saved while driving, since the store is only 4 blocks away, the amount of time saved isnt extravagantly significant. Therefore, It is possible to argue that while both viewpoints may hold depending on criteria, Walking is essentially a more plausible argument.



Ok. Next tip.
Selective content.

You cant spam content. Sadly, even if you're a content genius, having 45 mins only, (assuming you have normal writing speed) and the nature of the subject being more skill that content focused, one would not have the time to dish out all the known content. Therefore, be selective.
However, dont fall into the No content pithole where you wont be able to answer or argue about anything.



Yea. History is tough i know. But really, my biggest advice would be to know some content and arguments, followed by a simple answering of the question.

Ok i'm done. I haven't proofread this so if there are mistakes here and there, forgive me.
Oh Btw. Dont just read this and go away, for my sake, if you've read all the above and you're a history student, leave a comment telling me what you think.