EXAM DO S AND DON’T S DEVIANCE AND NON- CONFORMITY IN PREMODERN EUROPE

THE EXAM There are 10 general questions ranging across the themes of the module As the exam paper states, you are expected to answer each question with reference to ‘at least two’ deviant groups (I’d suggest two to four, can also allude to others) You must answer two questions in two hours It counts for 50% of your final mark (combined with the long essay) Scripts (and long essays) will be double-marked by two markers

REVISION DO Select 4 or 5 themes / 6 to 8 groups to revise thoroughly Choose topics / groups that are interlinked Dissect short essays and read around them Look through past papers and think through essay plans DON’T Rely on just knowing about 2 themes / 4 groups Forget to think about links between topics Just read through short essays ignoring different angles Forget to consult past papers and essay plan

EXAM TECHNIQUE DO ANSWER THE QUESTION Structure your answer – intro & conclusion Provide supporting evidence – historians’ views, examples Argue a focused but balanced case Think about the broader context Give each answer sufficient time DON’T Rattle off all you know or regurgitate Lose sight of the question Be vague and fail to support with evidence Argue as if there’s only one point of view Be irrelevant or range too far away from topic Leave too little time for the last question

OTHER TIPS Demonstrate breadth of knowledge (of module themes or different countries/case studies) – bonus marks available for the ‘iceberg effect’ here! If asked to address a particular aspect don’t spend too long on other aspects unless they link directly to the question Check your facts – chronology, examples etc Markers are impressed by range and specificity (also check Marking Criteria) Markers prefer legible scripts!

First Class (70+) 1. Persuasive and direct answer to the question, establishing the wider significance of the issues concerned. 2. Comprehensive coverage of the relevant material; accuracy in the details. 3. A direct and coherent argument, well supported by relevant evidence. 4. Critical analysis of relevant concepts, theoretical or historiographical perspectives or methodological issues. 5. Fluent and engaging writing style; persuasive presentation and structuring of arguments. 6. Work which, in addition, displays evidence of creativity, originality, sophistication and freshness of arguments will be awarded marks of 75+ Upper Second (60 – 69) 1. Direct answer to the question, establishing the wider significance of the issues concerned. 2. Adequate coverage of the relevant material, accuracy in the details. 3. Skilful mobilisation of evidence in relation to the argument being presented. 4. Narrative and description taking second place to analysis. 5. Competent manipulation of relevant concepts, theoretical or historiographical perspectives or methodological issues. 6. Fluent writing style; effective presentation and structuring of arguments.