DSE Revision: Paper 2 Essays

§Text Passage

1Summary 重點摘要

Paper 2 essays carry 40% of HKDSE History: in 1½ hours candidates answer any two of seven questions that test logical argumentation. The keys to marks are the three elements of question analysis, body paragraphs pairing arguments with historical examples, and a clearly stated stance in the introduction and conclusion.

2Vocabulary cards Vocabulary

3Step by step Steps

1. Step 1: Master the assessment framework and key figures of Paper 2Paper 2 carries 40 per cent of the subject, lasts 1½ hours and offers seven essay questions, of which candidates attempt any two. Together with Paper 1 (data-based questions, 60 per cent, two hours, all compulsory), the two papers make up the entire public examination, because school-based assessment was abolished from 2018. For example, if you choose the questions on Japan's relations with Asian countries and on major post-war conflicts and peace-making, each allows only about 45 minutes, so you must plan an outline before writing. Remember three sets of figures — two out of seven, 40 per cent, 90 minutes — because the whole strategy of choosing and timing flows from them.
2. Step 2: Three elements of question analysis — time span, region, command wordStart every essay by circling three elements: the time span (for example, 'between 1945 and 1991'), the region (for example, 'Asian countries' or 'the Middle East') and the command word (for example, 'to what extent do you agree'). Together they draw the boundary of the answer, and missing any one risks going off-topic. For example, a question on Japan's relations with Asian countries after 1945 leaves no room for lengthy treatment of the Twenty-one Demands of 1915 or the invasion of China from 1931 to 1945: these pre-war facts belong to the background, while the weight of the answer must fall on post-war reparations, diplomatic normalisation and economic cooperation.
3. Step 3: Identify the three common types of command wordThe command word dictates the mode of answering, and three types dominate Paper 2. 'To what extent do you agree' is a question of degree: take a clear position — to a large extent, or only to some extent — and argue both sides. 'Compare' questions require point-by-point contrast on the same criteria: comparing the divisions of Germany and the Korean Peninsula, for instance, can proceed along foreign intervention, the economic gap and the will for unification. 'Turning point' questions (for example, 'was the end of the Cold War a turning point in international relations?') require a picture of before and after before judging change and continuity. Misreading the command word is the commonest cause of lost marks, so read every word carefully.
4. Step 4: Write a strong introduction — context, stance, previewThe introduction does three things: one or two sentences of background, one sentence stating an explicit stance, and one or two sentences previewing the line of argument. Take Japan's relations with Asian countries: first the background (the Second World War shattered Japan's ties with its neighbours), then the stance (to a large extent, relations after 1945 were dominated by cooperation), then the preview (economic aid and trade formed the mainstream, while political trust was troubled by the history dispute). From the introduction alone the marker can grasp the direction of the whole essay; a vague opening such as 'both sides have their merits' almost certainly drags down the marks for argument.
5. Step 5: The body-paragraph trio — point, example, elaborationEach body paragraph follows the trio: open with a topic sentence capturing the central point; support it with a concrete example containing dates, actors and events; close by explaining the causal link between the example and the point, answering why the example supports the argument. For example: the topic sentence reads 'after the war Japan rebuilt relations with its neighbours through economic aid'; the example notes that Japan signed war-reparation agreements with Burma, the Philippines and Indonesia from 1954, later provided loans and technology through official development assistance, and saw trade with China expand rapidly after the 1972 normalisation; the elaboration explains how economic cooperation created shared interests and made cooperation the axis of the relationship.
6. Step 6: Handle the counter-argument — concede first, then refuteA high-scoring answer must face the opposing view in two moves: first concede, acknowledging that the other side has a basis with its own examples; then refute, showing why your stance still holds. For example, when arguing that Japan's relations with Asian countries were 'cooperation-dominated', the concession admits that the whitewashing of aggression in Japanese history textbooks and officials' visits to the Yasukuni Shrine repeatedly provoked protests from China and South Korea and strained diplomacy. The refutation then points out that such frictions were periodic and never reversed the axis of economic cooperation, so the judgement of cooperation-dominated still stands. With both concession and refutation, the argument becomes full and three-dimensional.
7. Step 7: The conclusion — restate the stance, give an overall assessmentThe conclusion does only two things: restate the stance expressed in the introduction so that the essay stays consistent, and give an overall assessment, such as the conditions or limits under which the stance holds. For the cooperation-dominated question, the conclusion may read: overall, between 1945 and 2000 Japan's relations with Asian countries were dominated to a large extent by cooperation, with reparations, aid, trade and investment forming the axis, though disputes over historical memory damaged political trust and limited the depth of cooperation. Never introduce new arguments or examples in the conclusion; doing so only exposes a flawed structure and makes the marker doubt the planning of the whole essay.
8. Step 8: Timed drills and building a bank of examplesExamination strategy is built through regular practice: within about 45 minutes per question, spend 5 on analysing the question and drafting the outline, 35 on writing and 5 on checking dates and typos, and at the start skim all seven questions to lock in the two you can handle best. For revision, organise example cards under Themes A and B, each listing the date, actors, event and the arguments it can support: a card on the 1967 Six-Day War, for instance, can serve both questions on the causes of Middle East conflicts and questions on territorial disputes. For example, drill Paper 2 questions from the past three to five years under timed conditions and check each attempt against the marking criteria, and the examination hall will feel familiar.

5Worked example Example

6Common mistakes Mistakes

7Quick check Quick check

8Recap Recap

• Paper 2 carries 40%, lasts 1½ hours and requires any two of seven essays; SBA was abolished from 2018
• Theme A (3)(ii) (Japan's relations with Asian countries) and Theme B (4)(iii) b (other major conflicts and peace-making) are examined only in Paper 2
• Three elements of question analysis: time span, region and command word — examples outside the period serve only as background
• Essay structure: state the stance in the introduction, body paragraphs of point + example + elaboration, concede then refute the opposing view, and restate the stance in the conclusion
• About 45 minutes per question (5 to plan, 35 to write, 5 to check); common command words are 'to what extent', 'compare' and 'turning point'