<p>…yeah my mc score has been upsetting me. i got a 47/50… I figured to be safe i should raise that up to at least like a 53.</p>
<p>by the way, this was on the 08 audit</p>
<p>yeah, I took one, and I got only 38 out of 70 right 
I’m going to fail <em>sob</em></p>
<p>Took the 2002 MC today, got a 41/70 raw, but I skipped all of the ones I wasn’t sure about. I would have gone up to at least a 50 had I not skipped so many. Still, Sparknotes says I’m at the level of a 3, but their diagnostic was extremely difficult.</p>
<p>the sparknotes I took said I had a 4, which was a huge difference from the PR 38/70 (32 raw) What would the PR around translate to, a 2? Which do you think is more accurate?</p>
<p>The Sparknotes is abnormally hard compared to the 2002 practice exam and my teacher’s in-class tests, which have all been assortments of random questions from CB-released material. To me, that PR score seems destined for a 3, but I’ve never seen PR as being incredibly accurate. Plus, the essays provide lots of room to rack up points. Don’t condemn yourself yet. People seem to forget that there are a lot of unmotivated kids (who didn’t study!) taking these exams. This especially holds true for AP World. We on CC represent the minority - the group that knows their stuff.</p>
<p>^ hmmm, that’s interesting, i thought the sparknotes was easier, and thought the PR practice test was extremely difficult. I guess I should take a “real” released test to get the most accurate prediction.</p>
<p>Well, some of the Sparknotes questions were ridiculous. For example, the one involving Judaism’s expansion to China…come on.</p>
<p>If you can get your hands on a copy of Ethel Wood’s AP World review book, it has three very accurate practice exams, along with 35 multiple choice questions and a full set of essays for every unit.</p>
<p>^thanks for the rec, but I think I can’t handle any more study books, I haven’t even fully finished PR yet :(, and I still have the sparknotes power pack to look through. </p>
<p>I can’t believe how close the test is! I’m so behind I need to study for like a zillion more hours. </p>
<p>Grr. I don’t know how to write essays, my MC isn’t great…<em>sigh</em>…I want a 5 really badly though, but at this point, probably not happening.</p>
<p>Do we need to know a lot of specifics, or is it just sufficient to memorize PR?</p>
<p>I have absolutely no idea. If I were you, I would be sure to know each civilization or dynasty’s political structure, trade routes/exports/imports, religious affilitation/conflict, and women’s rights. Knowing that will satisfy every FRQ and quite a few MCs.</p>
<p>I heard it from talking to juniors, and they absolutely swear by PR. But for some reason, I feel like it’s not enough, and what particulary annoys me is that there aren’t enough dates in PR (plus I have an extremely old copy without the timelines). I have real trouble remembering both really specific, out-of-the-way things (such as ruler’s names), and also relating all the interactions and developments between cultures in certain time periods. </p>
<p>For example, if in a FRQ, you asked me to compare political structures in Europe (specifically England, and France), comapared to Japan, in the 1200-1750 I would have a hard time of it…</p>
<p>basically all of the top of my head:</p>
<p>England- Magna Carta limited power of king, enacted Parliament. (not exactly sure when this was)
-King Henry VII broke away from Catholic Church
-Elizabeth golden age; strong monarchy
-James I united Scotland and England.
Then I have some vague recollection of closet Catholic ruler and glorious Revolution, William and Mary = strong Parliament, Anglican and weak monarchy</p>
<p>France:
-fought off England in Hundred Years War
-Bourbon dynasty strong
-Louis (something X?) Sun King extremely powerful, didn’t even summon Estates General, over taxed
-leading to French Revolution</p>
<p>Japan:
uhh?
-something similar to European feudalism?
-isolationist?
-shogunate?</p>
<p>Don’t even ask me about China, or anything else. I have absolutely no idea…I am really sketchy in what I do know, and seriously doubt I will be able to write a good FRQ. </p>
<p>Then I have all this random stuff floating around my head…that I think were around the same time period, Ottoman? Ivan in Russia? </p>
<p>I have no idea, I really have trouble connecting the dots and relating civilizations…I don’t know if I can get everything straight by the test.</p>
<p>The Magna Carta was around the 1200s. Lous XVI’s destructive economic policy was the immediate cause of the French Revolution. Japan’s Heian dynasty was its golden age, while the Tokugawa Shogunate reunified Japan and brought the island to its highest level of isolationism ever.</p>
<p>Now, for the essay you provided, you need to stress the differences between absolutism and parliamentary monarchy. You need to stress that both had similar styles of feudalism. You need to hit up the example of alternating attendance in the Tokugawa Shogunate, and you need to mention that the emperor had almost no power in Japan during that time period - he simply had ceremonial power. You can mention that both aristocracies composed an elite social minority.</p>
<p>^ what really is the difference between absolutism and parliament? Just that the one there is a strong monarchy, the other is a strong law-making body?
What was the different effects they had on Britain and France? I know that France started to decline around 18th century, due to overspending and overreaching their hand in the Spanish war of succession. Was this mostly caused by the monarchy?
For Britain, they started emerging as a real power after France declined, and became the 1st to industrialize. Is this mostly because they had a parliamentary government, or something entirely else?
Did their governments have a huge impact on their developing?</p>
<p>It’s really crucial to know all the rises in world powers in Europe, and the causes and effects, right? </p>
<p>Thanks for explaining:) You sound like you’re going to get a 5 no problem.</p>
<p>Absolutism was a single ruler with, well, absolute rule. Parliamentary monarchy had a king and/or queen with reduced rights. The lawmaking body had the most power, thus representing people’s rights.</p>
<p>Yes, in the 18th century, Louis XVI and Marie Antionette were lavish consumers and pretty much screwed up the economy. For that (and other reasons, which I will not get into), peasants broke away from the Estates General and created the National Assembly. They then stormed the Bastille. At first, Louis XVI remained monarch, but he was given the reduced powers of a parliamentary monarch. Privileges of the first and second estates were done away with, land owned by the church was nationalized, and the third estate was given greater representation. However, the new regime was too middle-of-the-road for most, and Maximilien Robespierre’s Jacobin party assumed dictatorial powers, serving as a radical leftist party. Their Reign of Terror quashed all dissent and executed all treason in France. In 1794, there was a *coup d’</p>
<p>^if that was just off the top of your head, I’m pretty sure you’ll get a 5. Remember, you only have to do better than the majority, not get a perfect score.</p>
<p>thanks for the tip on the map, I’m going to try it!</p>
<p>I had to look up the fact that the National Assembly was created before Bastille Day, but yeah, that was off the top of my head. (I just love the French Revolution, hahaha.) And again, I really don’t know about getting a 5. I’ll be satisfied with any passing grade. I suck at the multiple choice section, and I got a 4 on the only other AP I’ve taken so far - AP Human Geography as a freshman last year.</p>
<p>I toook another PR practice today, and got a 51/70…does anyone know what that would translate roughly to?</p>
<p>Oh and a question about PR:
It focuses on some stuff, and almost ignores other things (such as Persia, aboriginals in Hawaii and Australia, certain leaders/thinkers, specific dates, etc.) Does that mean it’s not going to be covered on the AP test, or it’s not as important? What about all the details it doesn’t cover? Should I be referring back to the textbook every minute, or just trust in PR?</p>
<p>Oh and does the AP test include battles?</p>
<p>Good luck from someone who got a 5 last year. :)</p>
<p>^ Wow, did you study a lot? Do you think PR is good enough, or do we need more review? Any tips?</p>
<p>I used PR, but I didn’t do a lot of prepping since my AP World class overkilled for the test (50 question multiple choice test every week, outlines, etc). I can’t really offer anything helpful beyond the obvious. For the essays, sound convincing even if you don’t know what you’re talking about. Use key terms and evidence (Japanese nationalism, Edict of Nantes, spread of Islam to Indian Ocean region through trade). Write a detailed thesis: “While the armistice and following peace treaties did end the war in favor of the Entente powers, it was undermined by the general failure of the conference, the fake promises of self-determination to various nationalist groups such as the Arabs, and the exclusion of the Bolshevik leaders of Soviet Russia and Germany in the peace process.”</p>
<p>chocobok, there weren’t any questions about specific battles on last year’s MC. BTW, I suspect you guys are probably going to get stuff about WWII since there wasn’t even a single mention of it last year. The non-DBQ essays are always about general topics and regions (Western Europe, China, India, Middle East, Africa, British Empire). The test stays away from US history unrelated to global history so no Hawaii. MC about ancient history is almost always general, while MC about recent stuff can be more specific.</p>