<p>I just took the AP World History exam today and thought that it fair and that I did well. Did anyone else take it and what did you think?</p>
<p>MC was much easier than I expected. I checked over my work and I think I got max 4 wrong. FRQs were fair. Had 40 mins left over and took a nap, Overall, it was a great test. </p>
<p>MC was easy, but I got down to 50-50 on quite a few. One FRQ was easy, two were not okay. I pretty much made up facts all the way through. I was hoping for a 5, now I’m lucky if I get a 4.</p>
<p>The MC was so good, and I could have sworn I’d seen some of those questions before on practice tests? The DBQ I thought was also really easy although I think I messed up with the meaning of several documents haha. The other FRQs were a bit tougher but I wasn’t totally lost, and it was definitely something you could at least slightly conjecture. I at least had something of an idea. </p>
<p>I think I have a shot at eeking out a 5, although that depends on my essay scores a lot (a difference of 1 or 2 points could change my score entirely, but there’s always the curve…). </p>
<p>MC was fair, FRQs were easy besides #2 - what the hell was that.</p>
<p>I agree, the MC was wayy easier than expected. The DBQ was good except I think I may have misinterpreted some of the docs like @hadron (like the one about the Japanese and stuff ?). The second essay (CCOT) wasn’t too bad but I did awful on the last essay (C&C). Pretty sure most of my facts were false. Oh well, it was a good test overall. But good job everyone!! Hope we all pass with good scores :)</p>
<p>@catchinginfinity interregional trade question ? I went on and on about the Colombian Exchange !</p>
<p>@vmiller7723 - I MADE THE SAME MISTAKE.</p>
<p>@catchinginfinity it wasnt a mistake. Everyone said after the test that it meant within a region but I asked my history teacher and he said interregional meant between regions so the colombian exchange was fine. If they meant just within Latin America they would have say INTRAregional</p>
<p>Wait how did you guys misinterpret the documents? I thought they were all pretty straightforward. And does anyone know what the curve might look like?</p>
<p>@hvepassion I thought most of the documents were straight forward. I found them difficult to group though and could only find two groups. For FRQ #2 on interregional trade do you know if it meant trade between regions or trade within a region ?</p>
<p>@vmiller7723 intraregional means within the region. Interregional is between two places (ex Latin America and Europe)</p>
<p>For the dbqs, I grouped it into three groups
- Communists using the power of the peasants
- Communists viewed as liberator because they united peasants against Japanese
- Communists inspiring peasants to change status quo </p>
<p>Solid. I put them into one group that showed the rising status and benefits of the peasants due to their importance in the army and one showing the peasant view of the communists as liberators also</p>
<p>Yeah that should work. Which region did you write about for the compare and contrast? I chose Latin America. </p>
<p>Yeah I did too. I talked about colombian exchange and the triangular trade that arose from Africa to Latin America to Europe and the items traded like slaves and cash crops. I thought I did well on that essay but for the third essay I knew a lot about mauryn/gupta but not too much about Byzantine besides that Christianity served as a unifying force. </p>
<p>I think the continuity I put for the Latin America was one that there was persisting European domination and influence the entire time, either in the form of imperialism or colonialism. Otherwise, I talked about how trade was more sustained by African slaves and the Columbia exchange and stuff. We should be fine!</p>
<p>For the third essay, I did Byzantine and Islamic Caliphates (I should’ve done Mauryan/Gupta). I wrote that both were partially religiously tolerant in that the Byzantine persecuted Christians until Edict of Milan, and the Islamic Caliphates persecuted Christians and Jews in the Levant. For difference, I put that the Byzantine Empire was a state that GOVERNED the religion (elected Patriarch and stuff), while the Islamic Caliphate got legitimacy from Islam faith. Ugh I totally forgot that Christianity was a unifying force…and I should’ve talked about the role religion played in laws (Justinian Code, Sharia Law). ■■■.</p>
<p>Yeah I mentioned Edict of Milan and then state religion under Theodosius but forgot about the Patriarch. Either way your answers seem great. Hope we did well.</p>
<p>I said that similarities between Byzantine Empire and Islamic Caliphates were the foreign policy of spreading their religion (E.O. Christianity to Russia, Islam to lots of places), and the leader having religious authority (caesaropapism in Byzantium, and Caliphates being… caliphates). My difference was that Islam played a much greater role in trade than Christianity did, because Muhammad was a merchant. Isn’t that technically right?</p>
<p>yeah that sounds good @batman9. I mentioned that Christianity may have eased class tensions in the Byzantine empire because now upper classes and lower classes had a common ground in Christianity. I didnt know if that was historically correct but I just said it do you think that makes sense?</p>
<p>@Batman9 The question was how the empires used religion to govern. I’m pretty sure the Byzantine Empire actively traded with other regions. But it is true that Islamic faith spread much more quickly because the merchants were Muslim and spread the religion. I liked all of your other points though (especially the foreign policy of spreading religion). Do you think mine (on page 1) looks right?</p>