T
A S
M A
N I
A N
S E C O N D A R Y
HS833
Australian History
A S S E S S M E N T
B O A R D
2002 External Examination Report
General Comments
75 candidates sat for the examination. Answers were of varying standard. Candidates generally showed an
awareness of the issues, but were often unsuccessful in addressing specific criteria. Some had difficulty
providing a formal structure for their essays. A few candidates undermined their apparent ability by making
sweeping general statements without providing factual detail in support. Brief quotations or phrases from
individual historians also served as useful examples of evidence as did well-placed quotes of historians' opinions.
In Section C the treatment of documents was generally of a high order.
Section A
Question 1
19 candidates attempted this question. In most cases English expression was of a high standard and candidates
scored well on Criterion 6. Some responses lacked a depth of understanding and there was a definite need for
more content to be included.
Most candidates did well on half the question – the half which said simply: “Outline the main features of
traditional Aboriginal society.” Most handled this straightforward section well and consequently scored well on
Criterion 3 (Recall of relevant factual information).
Unfortunately the other part of the question asked that these features be discussed with reference to the
above statement (a statement about aboriginal ingenuity, flexibility and capability of reshaping their
economic and social life). With rare exceptions this aspect of the question was either totally ignored or treated in
a single concluding sentence as an afterthought.
Better answers attempted to show how various aspects of life indicated the adaptability of Aborigines – to a
variety of climates, soil types, flora and fauna etc., and explained how all of these meant that Aborigines in
Australia had demonstrated the capacity to cope with the shock of the new. The realisation of the importance of
trade, the appreciation of new objects that were useful to them and their linguistic versatility were just some of
the characteristics of Aboriginal society that allowed them to be flexible and adaptable in the face of change.
Those who used such features of Aboriginal society and lifestyle as examples of their adaptability were likely to
score well on Criterion 5 (Use of evidence). Because using the evidence in this way mostly meant that a wellstructured argument had been developed, such answers generally also scored well on Criterion 6
(Communication).
Question 2
10 candidates attempted this question which called for an analysis of the nature of Aboriginal resistance in the
nineteenth and early twentieth centuries and the reasons for its failure. Less impressive answers tended to make
sweeping and unsubstantiated claims about the nature and causes of Black/White conflict.
Better answers gave detailed and accurate information about the struggles of Aboriginal people to retain their
land. Those who could also cite references scored well on this question. References to Plomley, Robinson,
Melville, Governor Arthur, Lyndall Ryan and Henry Reynolds were made with excellent effect.
Tasmanian Secondary Assessment Board
2002 External Examination Report
HS833
2
Australian History
Question 3
8 candidates answered this question which called for an examination of the issues involved in relations between
Aborigines and settlers and the ensuing conflict. References to specific incidents either in Tasmania or on the
mainland needed to be made, but too often such examples were lacking.
In a number of cases basic dates such as the settlement of VDL were confused; sometimes those who could not
recall the name of the VDL governor invented it – Governor Phillip sometimes earned a mention! Overall the
standard of essays was fair and the command of relevant knowledge excellent.
Question 4
4 candidates answered this question which called for an examination of (i) events and (ii) issues in Australian
history that have shaped the national identity. Some candidates resorted to colloquialisms as part of their essay
technique; some made sweeping assertions about national character without referring to any relevant sources for
their claims.
Better answers referred to The Bulletin and The Heidelberg School as major perpetrators of the Bush Legend.
One very refreshing approach challenged the whole concept of a single national identity, credibly showing how
significant groups (such as Aborigines, especially those removed from kith and kin) were unable to feel a
connection with any kind of national identity.
Question 5
9 candidates answered this question, which asked candidates to explain how attitudes to racial issues had changed
and how these changing attitudes had in turn transformed national identity. Some answers were rather vague, but
better answers shared certain common features:
•
•
•
they explained how the concept of national identity was constructed from previous notions of racial purity
(White Australia Policy) and transformed into a more multicultural image
they saw complexities in these new attitudes and recognised that government legislation is not enough to
remove racial discrimination
they quoted changes in policy, landmark decisions, significant reports and relevant legislation.
Some answers were marred by the use of personal pronouns, as in “we could see we needed to change”.
Question 6
25 candidates answered this question. Candidates needed firstly to outline the characteristics of the Legend and
then say whether or not either of the Bush or Anzac Legends was still relevant. Better answers gave some
indication of the role of The Bulletin, The Heidelberg School, Paterson, Lawson, Ashmead Bartlett and CEW
Bean as perpetrators of the legends. Such answers also gave some indication of the values these men promoted –
mateship (in a White Australia), egalitarianism, resourcefulness, larrikinism and of course the supposedly
universal bush skills.
Most also dealt with the limitations of the legend in terms of its exclusion of women, Aborigines and non-white
migrants. The failure of the legends to accommodate the realities of urbanisation and multiculturalism was also
noted.
More impressive answers argued that nowadays the legend was little more than nostalgia for a past that may
never have existed, but is nevertheless skilfully used in film and advertising. The increasing attendance of youth
at Anzac Day ceremonies was seen as evidence of the need many feel for some kind of war mythology.
Tasmanian Secondary Assessment Board
2002 External Examination Report
HS833
3
Australian History
Section B
Question 7
42 candidates attempted this question. Few answered it well, because most did not read the question carefully.
The core of the question asked what Labor did to assist ‘the new working-class in Australia’s suburbs’, but that
part of the sentence was ignored as the majority of answers launched into an account of everything Labor did.
How the workers benefited from the recognition of China was not explained, any more than how land rights for
Aborigines in the Northern Territory were shown to benefit city workers.
Most answers dealt with social changes in areas such as Medibank (and other aspects of health services),
education, wages, equal pay for women, improved childcare facilities, better sewerage facilities in cities,
improved urban transport etc. The fact that many of these were often seen as a substitute for higher wages for
families was seldom understood but would have made better sense of attempts to explain the impact of inflation.
The worst feature of attempts to explain the impact of inflation was the simple explanation that increased oil
prices were a significant contributor. Only one candidate bothered to explain that this hurt many of the working
people who had supported Whitlam because it meant a fourfold increase in petrol prices within a year and, more
than any other issue, convinced many former supporters that the government was inept at managing the
economy.
In terms of Whitlam’s political downfall, it was of course necessary to provide at least some of the detail of the
‘scandals’ and ‘affairs’ which undermined faith in the government. However two better answers explained that
there were two aspects to Whitlam’s downfall. The first was the fact that Labor never controlled the Senate and
met with obstruction in the Senate just because it was a Labor government; connected to this was the fact that,
had Labor controlled the Senate in 1975, any number of scandals would not have led to its downfall.
However the second was that for a variety of reasons (including for many the fact that a government had to be
pretty suspect before an impartial judge like the Governor-General would dismiss it), once an election was called
in 1975 Labor was so unpopular that it had little chance of winning. One very good answer argued that this was
so much so that even had Whitlam called the election himself and not been sacked he would have still been
defeated.
Better answers returned to the argument with the opinion that Labor’s legislative programme was relevant to its
downfall only in the sense that many policies were very costly, and that rightly or wrongly many saw this as
“irresponsible” at a time when budget restraint was called for. The programme did not bring about the election
in 1975, but helped to explain why once it was called many former supporters deserted Labor.
Question 8
1 candidate only attempted this question.
Question 9
26 candidates answered this question. First of all it required an analysis of the reasons the Vietnam War proved
to be one of the most divisive issues in twentieth century Australia. Secondly it required an account of why the
opposition to it was so much greater than opposition to Australian participation in World War Two or the
Korean War.
Better answers did not confuse details of ANZUS and SEATO, explained the increased questioning of the
Domino Theory and explained that controversy centered on the issue of the Vietnam War as a civil war. The
role of uncensored TV news coverage in raising awareness about the war was also treated well, as was the
contribution of the random nature of the “birthday ballot” to increasing anger at the injustice of conscription.
The role of movements such as SOS, DRM (Draft Register’s Movement) and YCAC were mentioned as was the
significance of the Moratorium movement. Finally contrasts were made with the public’s acceptance of
conscription during World War Two and the Korean War.
Tasmanian Secondary Assessment Board
2002 External Examination Report
HS833
4
Australian History
Question 10
4 candidates answered this question, which called for a discussion of changes to equal rights legislation and the
impact of those changes on women in the twentieth century. Better answers referred to such legislation as
female suffrage, the Harvester Judgment, Widows’ Pensions, the Maternity Allowance (‘Baby Bonus’) Act,
Child Endowment Legislation, Supporting Mothers’ Benefits, the Equal Opportunity Commission, the Family
Law Act, Equal Pay for Equal Work, the Sex Discrimination Act and the Affirmative Action Act.
There was no adequate treatment of the conservative criticism of Affirmative Action and Family Law legislation;
namely, that they served to undermine the sanctity of marriage and the family as institutions. It is not necessary
to agree with this view, but the analysis which simply overlooks it is incomplete.
Question 11
No candidates answered this question.
Section C
Most candidates showed the ability to analyse and comment upon documents in an informed manner. The
cartoon presented some problems; only one candidate noted that Peter Reith was carrying a telephone, which
probably had something to do with whatever point was being made (else there was no point including it). Most
thought the ‘pigs’ analogy was a little unfair to politicians, and failed to notice the metaphor about the ‘pigs’
being ‘at the trough’. In explaining how historians might use such a cartoon, better answers explained that the
cartoon could only really be interpreted once the historical context was known. The best answers also made the
point that the cartoon was very exaggerated, but explained that cartoons rely on exaggeration for humorous
effect.
A number of candidates misread the word ‘unreliable’ as ‘reliable’ (f). Better answers argued that documents were
generally more reliable when they supplied statistics to support their claims – “61% of the 3000 surveyed” rather
than “Australians”.
A pleasing feature of some candidates’ papers was the way in which they had allocated their time; noting that
questions (b), (d) and (f) were worth more than other questions and that they were the analytical questions
assessing Criterion 10, candidates dealt with them first and at length. In most cases they completed all answers
anyway, but they had at least shown sound time management skills. Failure to answer all parts of the question
ensured that too little time remained to give an adequate demonstration of skills.
Many candidates had difficulty citing evidence from the documents in support of their arguments, and chose
instead to just say what they thought the document meant. Such an exercise in comprehension is not a
demonstration of the ability to use evidence from within the sources, which is what this exercise requires.
All correspondence should be addressed to:
Tasmanian Secondary Assessment Board
PO Box 147, Sandy Bay 7006
Ph: (03) 6233 6364 Fax: (03) 6224 0175
Email: [email protected]
Internet: http://www.tassab.tased.edu.au
Tasmanian Secondary Assessment Board
2002 External Examination Report