Olevel History

Only available on StudyMode
  • Download(s) : 194
  • Published : November 15, 2012
Open Document
Text Preview
2059 Pakistan Studies June 2009

PAKISTAN STUDIES
Paper 2059/01 History and Culture of Pakistan

General Comments The entry was comparable to June 2008, as was the standard of work. Almost every candidate answered three questions with few rubric errors. Time appeared to have been well used; few were unable to complete their final answer. Examiners were again pleased that many candidates produced some very good responses that were relevant and focused, attempting to address the questions as set with an appropriate length of answer. The depth of knowledge of such answers was very good. However, explanations continue to let candidates down especially where they are knowledgeable about topics. This can be best exemplified with Question 4(c) where the overwhelming number of answers was narrative in format. The other aspect which raises concern are the number of candidates who produced descriptive or generalised answers which contained much unnecessary or irrelevant detail that did not answer the question. Nevertheless, there were also a pleasing number of candidates who attempted to produce a judgement at the end of their part (c) answers. This has not been so evident in previous years. This was an excellent and refreshing approach to such questions, and one that Centres should encourage strongly. Comments on Individual Questions The most popular questions answered this year appeared to be 1, 2 and 3. Question 1 This was a very popular question that saw some very high scoring marks. Part (a) was quite well answered, with most gaining 3 or 4 marks. Part (b) caused few problems as most candidates were able to explain why the East India Company got involved in the sub-continent. As a result many candidates scored a Level 3 mark, often reaching the maximum allowable. In (c), the question focused on the ways in which Urdu and regional languages have been successfully promoted since 1947. The crucial point of the question was the way in which they were promoted rather than a description of each – most candidates were knowledgeable about all of these languages but fewer could successfully explain how they were promoted. However, having said that, most were able to address the question scoring well into Level 3 or 4 if they dealt with both regional languages and Urdu. For others, however, a narrative approach confined their answer to, at best, a Level 2 mark. Question 2 This was also a popular question, which caused candidates few problems. Most candidates scored 2 or 3 marks in (a). In (b), the question focused on the reasons why the British were successful in increasing its control of some parts of the sub-continent. For those candidates who had been well prepared for the examination this caused few problems for them and many answers from these candidates were accurate and relevant scoring a good mark within Level 3. Part (c) was generally very well answered by most who were knowledgeable about Sir Syed Ahmad Khan. Candidates were required to explain his contributions to the cause of the Muslims which included the development of a western education system. Again the crucial part of the question hinged on explaining his contributions rather than describing his career. A mere description of this could result in only a Level 2 mark. However, most were able to explain his contributions and a Level 4 mark was achieved where candidates were able to explain his contributions through education and other aspects of his work, such as religion and politics. Question 3 Again this was a popular question. Part (a) usually attracted 2 or 3 marks. In (b), the question required candidates to explain why the Muslim League was established in 1906. Again this was a well known topic

1

© UCLES 2009

2059 Pakistan Studies June 2009

and few candidates had many problems scoring a Level 3 mark. However for some lengthy answers that went back to the foundation of the Congress party were unnecessary and little or no credit for such detail was...
tracking img