1. What makes a good matric history exam? Rob Siebörger SASHT conference 24 September 2011

2. Constraints The need to increase the popularity of history, which means that A symbols must be attainable, and the pass rate must be acceptable. The difficulty of changing the present examination – inertia. Limits on what can be done in a two hour examination. Difficulties faces by students ‘ language proficiency. The need to come to grips with cognitive demand in history.

3. General aspects Coverage of content Keeping within the prescribed curriculum content topics. Depth Allowance for variation in answers

4. The purpose of essay-type questions Skill: 7. Organise evidence to substantiate an argument, in order to create an original, coherent and balanced piece of historical writing.

5. The purpose of source-based questions The cycle of enquiry: posing/asking questions of the past, collecting sources which learners interpret by extracting, organising, analysing, and evaluating relevant information in order to address the question. Skills: 1. Understand the range of sources of information available for studying the past. 2. Extract and interpret information from a number of sources. 3. Evaluate the usefulness of sources, including reliability, stereotyping and subjectivity. 4. Recognise that there is often more than one perspective of a historical event. 5. Explain why there are different interpretations of historical events and peoples’ actions.

6. An example of a source-based question The homelands In what ways does Source A appear to be one-sided? Quote three examples from Source A that support your answer to Question 1. What clues are there in Source B to suggest that Gineewski [a French journalist] admired Bantustans? Do you think a visiting foreign journalist is in a good position to comment on how well the country is being run? What else would you like to know before you accept Gineiewski’s opinion of the Bantustans?

7. An example of a source-based question continued It might be argued that lack of information is not the reason for Gieiewski’s views on Bantustans. What reasons could have led a person to support the Bantustan policy when he or she was fully informed about it? What evidence is there to suggest that Source C is biased a) in favour of Bantustans and b) against Bantustans? What evidence is there to suggest that Source C is biased a) in favour of Buthelezi and b) against Buthelezi? In what ways is Source C a useful source to people reading it in 2011? (From Siebörger, Weldon and Hinton (1996) What is Evidence? p.29)