The second exam showed slightly lower averages for both sections, particularly 10:30 (83.8 compared to 87 last time; 8:30 section average 86.1 - so both averages were in the B range this time).
IN GENERAL: for many of you, the strategy of answering in whatever order suited you (essays first, for example) seemed to work well. Feel free to answer the final in any order, too!
The multiple choice questions went better overall, interestingly. This is a good thing, so whatever you did this time keep doing it for the final on the multiple choice. MULTIPLE CHOICE ANSWERS ALSO GO IN THE BLUE BOOK. :)
Identification scores were a little lower overall compared to the first exam. Fewer terms were recognized or described as well. This was a content issue - there were few if any deductions for ignoring the 'significance' part of the question, so you are giving complete answers, they just need to be better answers.
Specific ID issues by section:
8:30 - crossover voting is NOT the same as raiding; the book The Selling of the President is about the 1968 election, and although it was not necessary to reference that election, the book makes the argument that image is everything, essentially (this was from B&F chapter 9, right at the start of that chapter); the 1972 Democratic VP controversy centered in part on the initial nominee Thomas Eagleton and his treatment for depression (which was in his past, by the way, not taking place at that time in 1972), but the big lesson is that presidential nominees have to do a better job figuring out the potential liabilities of their VP choices.
10:30 - the legacy of the Prohibition Party consists of much more than passage of Prohibition (which in the end this party had little to do with!); the book The Selling of the President is about the 1968 election, and although it was not necessary to reference that election, the book makes the argument that image is everything, essentially (this was from B&F chapter 9, right at the start of that chapter); the 1972 Democratic VP controversy centered in part on the initial nominee Thomas Eagleton and his treatment for depression (which was in his past, by the way, not taking place at that time in 1972), but the big lesson is that presidential nominees have to do a better job figuring out the potential liabilities of their VP choices; parties influence who gets nominated in several ways, and RECRUITING of candidates was an essential point here.
ESSAYS: essay 1 for both sections was specifically about the NOMINATION PHASE of presidential campaigns; so answers HAD TO discuss the nomination, no discussion of how the Democrat fought the Republican or vice versa. The 10:30 section had the importance of early contests - this means Iowa and New Hampshire, and while there are other things to discuss an A essay (27 points or higher) had to discuss Iowa and NH. Howard Dean, John Kerry, Obama all fit both #1 essays as examples (good and bad).
Essay 2 for 8:30 on third parties was very well answered. They need conditions to be right and these were outlined well (major parties perceived as failing, a big name running for the third party, a new issue, etc.). Essay 2 for 10:30 was about how US Senate challengers could take down an incumbent. Six years gives the incumbent a longer record to be attacked, challengers for Senate seats tend to have higher name recognition and reputation to begin with.
Essay 3 focused on the general election (for 8:30) or the post-primary phase (for 10:30). Post primary phase means from the time the nomination is secured through the party convention - not before, not after. General election phase means from the convention to Election Day, not before. Those who addressed this question and had the right time frame did a great job with the answers.
Tuesday, December 15, 2009
Tuesday, December 08, 2009
Wednesday, November 11, 2009
First exam follow up
This is the long awaited brief overview on the first exam. Generally speaking, this exam was very good for most of the class. Class average was right around 87 (on the line between B and B+).
Overall: the study guide is your friend. Use it not just to learn the information but to consider and learn how the information fits together. Knowing the terms makes you ready for parts I and II and gives you material for the essay questions. Considering how to address the essay themes leads you back to much of the specific knowledge that will be covered in parts I and II.
Multiple choice: the overall class average was much higher compared to last fall's section, although some people suffered mightily in answering these questions. The usual advice for multiple choice pertains here: try to eliminate some of the answer choices, make sure you read the question carefully to know what it's asking, and don't leave any blank!!
Identification: this was a strong section overall. Some problems arise when you simply don't know the term, or misidentify it; partial credit can be given if you say something accurate that relates to the term, but a 0 is also possible (these answers start with 0 points, after all - you have to earn the points by showing what you know). Other problems are more preventable, such as: Answers need to DEFINE the term first; DO NOT ASSUME I know that you know what you are talking about and just write a few sentences about the term. Clearly define the term and then move on to discuss its significance to parties and elections, in other words show that you know how the term is relevant to this class. These answers only need to be one paragraph long (3-4 sentences would suffice in every instance to get the full 8 points).
Essays: This was the strongest section on the exam, with several answers receiving 30 points. Two things were asked for in every essay; providing three gives no advantage, for it also increases the chances of providing wrong information. Moreover, when the question asks for two ideas, two examples, two whatever, I reserve the right not to read past the second one you discuss, so stick to what the question asks.
Overall: the study guide is your friend. Use it not just to learn the information but to consider and learn how the information fits together. Knowing the terms makes you ready for parts I and II and gives you material for the essay questions. Considering how to address the essay themes leads you back to much of the specific knowledge that will be covered in parts I and II.
Multiple choice: the overall class average was much higher compared to last fall's section, although some people suffered mightily in answering these questions. The usual advice for multiple choice pertains here: try to eliminate some of the answer choices, make sure you read the question carefully to know what it's asking, and don't leave any blank!!
Identification: this was a strong section overall. Some problems arise when you simply don't know the term, or misidentify it; partial credit can be given if you say something accurate that relates to the term, but a 0 is also possible (these answers start with 0 points, after all - you have to earn the points by showing what you know). Other problems are more preventable, such as: Answers need to DEFINE the term first; DO NOT ASSUME I know that you know what you are talking about and just write a few sentences about the term. Clearly define the term and then move on to discuss its significance to parties and elections, in other words show that you know how the term is relevant to this class. These answers only need to be one paragraph long (3-4 sentences would suffice in every instance to get the full 8 points).
Essays: This was the strongest section on the exam, with several answers receiving 30 points. Two things were asked for in every essay; providing three gives no advantage, for it also increases the chances of providing wrong information. Moreover, when the question asks for two ideas, two examples, two whatever, I reserve the right not to read past the second one you discuss, so stick to what the question asks.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
