HEY! I am going to tell everyone what an AP reader has told me what they (as in ALL AP readers are looking for). </p>
*You MUST has an introduction with a proper thesis.
*At least two (could be one but prompts usually has more than one thing to address) body paragraphs
*Conclusion is not required, but it could help since FRQs are holistic. On DBQs they do NOT really make a difference, as in it will not keep you from getting a 9 on it.</p>
so conclusions DO make a difference on the FRQs? O____O</p>
…poo x.x</p>
</p>
The omission of a conclusion shouldn’t make a difference unless you didn’t have a thesis in your introduction. In that case, you’d want to put your thesis in the conclusion. </p>
Nonetheless, having a conclusion is part of a well-rounded essay. Remember, expanded core points are subjective - one grader may choose to give you expanded core points while another one may not. </p>
Additionally, the College Board only provides graders a list of possible things a student can do to merit more points.</p>
Having a conclusion isn’t specifically listed as one of the things you can do to merit more points, but it can be. As previously stated, expanded core points are highly subjective and can be given for various reasons, including but not limited to the ones on the generic grading rubric. Note the use of the word “examples.” </p>
I really hope this helps calm your worries. I wouldn’t sweat not having a conclusion. </p>
Grading rubric below</p>
[URL=<a href=“http://min.us/llcwG4][IMG]http://i.min.us/jlcwG4.png[/IMG][/URL”>http://min.us/llcwG4]
[/URL</a>]</p>
For free response I did #2 (factors contributing to centralization of Spain and division of Italy) and #7 (unification of western Europe after WWII).</p>
I haven’t heard of many people doing #2. I kind of surprised myself with that one because I wouldn’t expect to have known so much but I just started brainstorming and the info was flowing out!</p>
I was a little disappointed in myself on #7 though because I had literally written two essays in the few weeks before the exam on that topic and yet I still had some trouble coming up with examples. It was decent but not really excellent, I think.</p>
For anyone who did #7, what countries did you use?</p>
I used Thatcher’s conservative government, and Adanauer’s German Federal Republic.</p>
I don’t see how Thatcher contributed to intergration. Especially Thatcher, who was opposed proposals from the European Community (EC) to centralized decision making for Western European nations. She’s a modern conservative, for goodness sake. </p>
Adenauer, sure. West Germany, Italy, France, and the Benelux countries were part of the ECSC which evoled into the EEC. </p>
Thatcher - can’t think of anything :(. </p>
Please enlighten me. </p>
</p>
Well, for economic intergration, I discussed Thatcher in particular, since she dealth with inflation and economic stagnation, or the popular term, “stagflation,” and I did discuss how she opposed the Euro in parantheses at some point. I might have screwed up, I guess, but I did write well to back up my statement.</p>
To be honest, it seemed quite simple. I enjoyed the class, and I guess the old “you’ll do best in things you like” comes into play. All the kids who enjoyed the class were very happy.</p>
I used West Germany, Italy, France, and the Benelux (that’s right, look it up!) countries (they were the initial 6 of the European Coal and Steel Community). </p>
I also mentioned how Great Britain joining the European Economic Community (EEC) in the 1970s. That makes 7 Western European countries. </p>
While the question only asked for 2 specific questions, I gave 7 in all ;). </p>
</p>
I throughly enjoyed my European history course, thanks to my teacher, who has a great sense of humor and the well-written text we used for class (Western Civ. by Spielvogel). My course in World History last year also helped me in European history this year - I was better prepared for the rigors of an AP history course. </p>
I have no doubts that I scored a 5 on the AP, and even if I don’t, I still learned a ton about European history. Now, I can read about current events without any trouble at comprehension. It’s so heartening to see a Time magazine piece reference Maggie Thatcher and for you to know who Maggie was and what she did. </p>
Last year though, my AP World History course was painful. The teacher didn’t teach. The teacher didn’t answer questions - the standard response was “go look in your book, boy.” We “learned” by watching videos and doing coloring activities. I consistently bombed the unit tests. </p>
On a slightly more positive note though, the way my World History teacher “taught” did force us to read. If we didn’t read, the repercussions were Ds and Fs on tests as the activities we did in class in no way prepared me for the unit tests. By the middle of the year, I realized that I had to begin reading if I was to a) pass her class and b) pass the AP. </p>
I ended up passing the class and scoring a 5 on the AP World exam. The work ethic (no, I’m not Protestant ;)) carried over from World to Euro this year and Euro has been a breeze. I made As all 4 quarters with minimal effort and in no doubt passed the AP, if not with a 5. </p>
</p>
I did England and France. Didn’t they just ask for two countries?</p>
I’m not sure if they count England as a country…</p>
Especially since they said “nation.” England is not a nation.</p>
How is England not a country? Do you mean GB is the country?</p>
If I recall correctly from my Geography Bee days, England is never a sufficient answer for The United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland. The safest thing to say on the test is to say UK.</p>
^This is what I meant.</p>
I thought the DBQ was relatively easy, considering we spent time on Elizabeth.
I did number 4 and 6. I wish 6 and 7 were placed differently though :D.
The MC was quite easy, but I can’t remember anything.</p>
They’ve said England before in terms of GB and people were given points for it, so that’s the least of my worries.</p>
Hey guys-</p>
I’m taking Euro as a class next year, and I was wondering what was the best review/prep book.</p>
I am looking at either:
Modern European History by Birdsall Viault
Or
Princeton Review</p>
any help?</p>
The best review/prep books are 5 Steps to a 5 and REA Crash Course. With Crash Course, you’ll be one with the M/C section. 5 Steps to a 5 will help you a bit more on the essays. </p>
If you rely on Crash Course alone, you may come up short with information for the essays :o. </p>
The best help for the essays was rereading the entire coursebook and paying attention to the lectures in class. </p>
Modern European History is very long and detailed and I didn’t bother reading it. The Princeton Review was a decent book. I’d still purchase it and use it, if only for the 2 practice tests in the back. </p>
</p>
![http://min.us/llcwG4][IMG]http://i.min.us/jlcwG4.png[/IMG][/URL](http://min.us/llcwG4%5D%5BIMG%5Dhttp://i.min.us/jlcwG4.png%5B/IMG%5D%5B/URL){kind=link}