<p>can you pm me?</p>
<p>Considering I took the AP Euro course last year, essentially refreshed the night before with the princeton Review cram book, and kind of blew this test off, it turned out not that bad. On the MC I left 10 out of 80 blank. On the DBQ I grouped them into Supportive, Reform from Within, and Total Revolution. Did FR #3 (the lesser of the three evils, I BS’ed the whole thing) and #7 (because I know a ton about the two). Overall a doable exam compared to Spanish Language and Calculus AB, harder than US Gov.</p>
<p>Zhangm94, I had your exact groupings.</p>
<p>^Ugh yeah, I had almost the same groupings (Democratic Party, Nazis/Social Democrats, Writers/Novelists, and Women) for the DBQ… I hope I don’t fail too bad. I did pretty good with the number of groupings, use of docs, and POV though.</p>
<p>Wait… what was the actual reason for instability? I put that it was because of competing political parties… that was the basis of my essay… lol</p>
<p>Is there anything wrong with putting documents in the intro paragraph? I had a small group of 2 documents in there.</p>
<p>BTW, 1000th post!!! yeahh!!! I win!!!</p>
<p>^Nope, I don’t think so and congrats.</p>
<p>@ralec, yep that was one of my reason</p>
<p>Only one of your reasons? For my DBQ essay, it was my ONLY reason… I had 3 paragraphs, one for each party.</p>
<p>^That was also my main reason, lol.</p>
<p>alec i pmed you my other reasons</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Yeah, my brother is saying the same.</p>
<p>I focused on the specific instability and motivation of the documents for my groups. Would this be okay if I explained myself well? I did 6 POV and used all 11 documents. I didn’t think the test was that bad, but a 5 might be stretching it.</p>
<p>RAlec114, The actual reason for instability was because the Weimar Republic was burdened with the War Guilt Clause of the Treaty of Versailles and pretty much had to pay full reparations to the Allies… but the many opposing political parties played a role as well, I mentioned that</p>
<p>does anyone remember the conqestor question?</p>
<p>Dear Collge Board,
The MC wasn’t so bad. I only omited like 3 and i did ok on them.</p>
<p>What the f*k? You have to be kidding me. I studied my dam ass off for that test. Your dbq’s have barely any bias, the topic was stupid. But, i probably got a 5ish on that. Next time you give the FRQ, atleast make it something worth while. Did you want your graders to read BS’ed tests? Thats what i totally did. i’ll reallly tried in that class. My heart was set on a 4-5. I did excellent on the MC, but common, the darn essays.
I ran out of dam time. I ended out doing an outline on essay 7. Seriouly… and outline. No full sentences. please make the apush test better. Im so disappointed.
I feel like i let all of my hard work to to waste.</p>
<p>I’m confused. Why is everyone here talking about “groupings of documents” and point of view/bias? I basically wrote a 5 paragraph essay with an introduction, 3 supporting paragraphs with a different reason for each paragraph with documents and a good deal of outside knowledge to back them up for each paragraph, and a conclusion. I used quite a bit of outside information, but used 6 documents. Is it bad that I only used so little documents, but a great deal of outside knowledge? Will I still be able to receive a score that includes the extended core requirements?</p>
<p>You need a minimum of 6 documents used correctly and grouped correctly. On top of that, you need to analyze point of view in at least three, and establish at least three different groups of the documents with at least two documents each. On top of that, you need a <b> specific </b> thesis.</p>
<p>This qualifies you for the expanded core, where you get points for more than three groups, more than three POV analyses, more specific theses, exploring nuances in documents (idk what that means either), and bringing in relevant outside information.</p>
<p>If you didn’t analyze any point of view, that pretty much guarantees you won’t get above a 5/9 on the DBQ.</p>
<p>Is it okay that I did not use parties for the groups?</p>
<p>@zzxjoanw3 really bad idea…</p>