I’m taking APUSH on friday, and all the multiple choice prep I’ve done has been great (easily 5 range). However, my essays are a huge weakness, and have hurt me both in my APUS class at school and will probably hurt me on this exam.</p>
I’m trying to get content knowledge down, but as far as structure, is there any kind of formula / advice you guys can offer to help me out? I’m usually not a bad writer, but my history essays have been particularly lackluster, and I’m worried they will prevent me from getting a 5 on the exam.</p>
Thanks!</p>
This is how my teacher told us to set up our essays:
<a href=“https://wiki.friscoisd.org/users/howardg/weblog/69374/attachments/41358/THEBO.doc[/url]”>https://wiki.friscoisd.org/users/howardg/weblog/69374/attachments/41358/THEBO.doc</a></p>
In the thesis you want to mention the three ideas you’ll talk about in the paragraphs (or two, if you’re going to do two paragraphs, which is fine). Also he said that the highest scoring essays usually have a “complex” thesis that are two-sided. For example if the question says “to what extent was the Election of 1800 a ‘Revolution’”, a one sided thesis would be something like:</p>
The Election of 1800 is undoubtedly a revolution because it did _<strong><em>, _</em></strong><em>, and _</em>__.</p>
And then you would have three paragraphs talking about each reason why it was a revolution.</p>
While a better thesis would be something like:</p>
Although the Election of 1800 was somewhat revolutionary in the fact that it ____<strong><em>, it was not a true revolution since it </em></strong> and ______. </p>
So then you would have one paragraph explaining why it was a revolution, and two explaining why it wasn’t. It’s kind of like qualifying in an english essay instead of straight up defending or challenging.</p>
Thanks! I would be hard pressed to think of two arguments for why the revolution of 1800 wasnt a revolution, but it seems like a good structure.</p>
I guess I could say: it’s a revolution because it proves the party system works; however, underlying sectional tension continues - nullification crisis and the divide over states’ rights and popular sovereignty? But thats a bit too far in the future, and might be seen as ignoring the question…</p>
I actually attempted to write one in 15 mins (i type fast so I wanted it to reflect my writing time).</p>
How is:</p>
The election of 1800 was, at that point, the ugliest in American history. Despite this, the election of Thomas Jefferson and Aaron Burr in 1800 has long been regarded as a revolution the revolution of 1800. Although it was undoubtedly a revolution in American politics, it failed to satisfy the Democratic-Republicans in their yearning for an agrarian economic structure.
The election of 1800 was a milestone in American history, as the founding fathers fear of factions was disproven by a peaceful transition from one political party to another. The founding fathers had long feared the formation of factions; in George Washingtons farewell speech, he warned the country against the formation of factions. Some founding fathers, such as Alexander Hamilton and John Adams, believed strongly in the creation of factions; they believed that the American political system could withstand a change in power because of the separation of powers that had been instituted in the constitution. This separation of powers allowed for checks-and-balances, which prevented any monarchical regimes from amending the constitution and leaving the United States political system in a position where it would not be properly suited to handle the creation of factions. It is important to note that even in this revolutionary election, the Republican party won the state of New York through the use of political machines. However, the election of 1800 proved that even though the election was bitter and hard-fought, a peaceful transfer of power was possible in the United States.
While the election of 1800 would serve as a validating political precedent, it did not serve as the economic revolution that Democratic-Republicans were expecting. Thomas Jefferson and his party had campaigned on an agrarian platform. They believed that the ideal future of the United States was one dominated by the yeoman farmer. Furthermore, they believed the bulwark of democracy lay in the foundation of a strong agrarian society. Yet, with the election of Thomas Jefferson, the economy of the United States stayed, in large part, the same. While Thomas Jefferson attempted to enlarge the country through the acquisition of land through the Louisiana Purchase, this land went largely unsettled until the 1830s, and even then, the majority of western farmers were unable to become economically viable, and most had to move back East. Thomas Jefferson tried to decrease federal spending and decrease the size of the government; however, because of strenuous foreign affairs, such as Barbary piracy, he was soon forced to increase the size of the United States army and navy. Thomas Jefferson was elected on the notion that he would provide the farmers of America with an increasingly agrarian economy; however, during his Presidency, the course of the nation was set towards large government and industrialization.</p>
I generally do all of my history essays the way my AP European History teacher taught me. First, you need to identify the key action words of the essay question and basically pin down what the question is asking. Next, you need to divide your response into three paragraphs, each with a distinct aspect of history assigned to it. These aspects are known by the acronym PRICES (Political, Religious, Intellectual, Cultural, Economic, and Social). </p>
Your first paragraph should be a Bullet Paragraph, with the first sentence with a broad statement, the second sentence a more specific sentence and finally your thesis. Your thesis should look something like this: “The progressive movement created a new environment for a welfare/entitlement state and impacted the economic, social, and political future of the country,” with each of your history aspects listed.</p>
Then you should write a paragraph for each historical aspect and finish with a conclusion that ties the essay together to a main critical idea. Additionally, you should discuss the lasting impact of the question’s response in your conclusion. You should ideally have time for the conclusion, but when short on time don’t be afraid to skip it and move on to the next response.</p>