I'll post a sample FRQ here about comparative government and politics almost every week day until May 6. They're for practice, since that one of the best ways of preparing for the exam.
I will post 3 sets of FRQs like the ones you'll see on the AP Exam. Each set will consist of 5 "short answer concept" questions, 1 "conceptual analysis" question, and 2 "country context" questions.
You can subscribe to these questions using the RSS feed (the little broadcast icon in the address bar), and you'll see them in your news reader when I post them.
You can submit an answer using the "Questions" e-mail link at the What You Need to Know web site. (Look in the lower, right-hand section of that page.)
If you submit the earliest best answer, I'll post your answer (without your name) and a critique here a week after the question was posted. It will be in the "Comments" section for that question.
Here's Question No. 6 (It's a Conceptual Analysis question.):
•Describe, in general, the role of an ideology in supporting the legitimacy of a political system
•Explain how a religious belief system can be more powerful than a political philosophy in supporting the legitimacy of a political system
•Explain how an ideology can support legitimacy of a political system when it accepts dissent from the ideology
(See pp. 41, 55-57, 69-73, 86-88, 96-98, 104-109, 127-130, and 142-146 in What You Need to Know.)
Don't neglect the What You Need to Know Facebook pages
Showing posts with label legitimacy. Show all posts
Showing posts with label legitimacy. Show all posts
Monday, April 11, 2011
Thursday, March 26, 2009
Question No. 8 (26 March 2009)
I'll post a sample FRQ here about comparative government and politics almost every week day until May 1. They're for practice, since that one of the best ways of preparing for the exam.
You can subscribe to these questions using the RSS feed (the little orange icon in the address bar), and you'll see them in your news reader when I post them.
You can submit an answer using the "Questions" e-mail link at the What You Need to Know web site. (Look in the lower, right-hand section of that page.)
If you submit the earliest best answer, I'll post your answer (without your name) and a critique here a week after the question was posted. It will be in the "Comments" section for that question.
No prizes this year. But, I'll add your school's web address to the list of "Worthwhile Links" on the left side of the blog, IF you send it to me.
Here's Question No. 8:
A. What is an advantage the long history of the British regime gives to elected leaders in the government of the UK? (1 point)
B. What is an advantage the short history of the Nigerian regime gives to the elected leaders in the government of Nigeria? (1 point)
C. Which of the advantages you identified offers more political power to the elected leaders? Why? (2 points)
(See pages 51-53 and 107-109 in What You Need to Know.)
You can subscribe to these questions using the RSS feed (the little orange icon in the address bar), and you'll see them in your news reader when I post them.
You can submit an answer using the "Questions" e-mail link at the What You Need to Know web site. (Look in the lower, right-hand section of that page.)
If you submit the earliest best answer, I'll post your answer (without your name) and a critique here a week after the question was posted. It will be in the "Comments" section for that question.
No prizes this year. But, I'll add your school's web address to the list of "Worthwhile Links" on the left side of the blog, IF you send it to me.
Here's Question No. 8:
A. What is an advantage the long history of the British regime gives to elected leaders in the government of the UK? (1 point)B. What is an advantage the short history of the Nigerian regime gives to the elected leaders in the government of Nigeria? (1 point)
C. Which of the advantages you identified offers more political power to the elected leaders? Why? (2 points)
(See pages 51-53 and 107-109 in What You Need to Know.)
Wednesday, April 2, 2008
Question No. 23 (2 April)
Each weekday between now and May 1, I'll post a question about comparative government and politics.
You submit an answer to the "Questions" e-mail link at the What You Need to Know web site.
If you submit the earliest best answer, I'll publish your answer here a week after the question was posted.
And you'll win a pair What You Need to Know number two pencils to help you fill in the exam's multiple choice answer sheet. One of the pencils will have all the multiple choice answers on it and the other will display King Arthur's memorable line from Monty Python and the Holy Grail, "You don't vote for kings!"
(You can also win a pair of WYNTK pencils by posing a question that gets used here.)
Here's Question No. 23:
What are two ways a regime may earn legitimacy?
Identify a country that relies on each of those methods and explain briefly how it relies on that source of legitimacy (i.e. name two countries, one for each method).
You submit an answer to the "Questions" e-mail link at the What You Need to Know web site.
If you submit the earliest best answer, I'll publish your answer here a week after the question was posted.
And you'll win a pair What You Need to Know number two pencils to help you fill in the exam's multiple choice answer sheet. One of the pencils will have all the multiple choice answers on it and the other will display King Arthur's memorable line from Monty Python and the Holy Grail, "You don't vote for kings!"
(You can also win a pair of WYNTK pencils by posing a question that gets used here.)
Here's Question No. 23:
What are two ways a regime may earn legitimacy?
Identify a country that relies on each of those methods and explain briefly how it relies on that source of legitimacy (i.e. name two countries, one for each method).
Saturday, March 22, 2008
Answer No. 2
Answer No. 2:
Here's the first best answer I've received for Question #2.
Question 2 was:
How did the current Russian constitution get approved?
Did that approval process contribute to the legitimacy of the constitution? Why or why not?.
Anonymous' answer is:
"According to my source, wikipedia, it says that the current constitution was drafted in a referendum on December 12 1993, after the previous president dissolved the last Constitution. in this referendum all the registered voters, or 54.8% of the population participated in the referendum. Of those,54.5% voted for adoption of the Constitution. So i believe that this makes it valid constitution, and therefore legitimate one because of the legal voting population it was approved by the majority of Russia."
This would be a two point question.
A point would be awarded for correctly identifying a referendum for the way the constitution was approved.
A point would be awarded for a factually correct and logical explanation of why this process would or would not contribute to the legitimacy of this new constitution.
Acceptable reasons for the process contributing to the legitimacy of the constitution would be:
• approval by a majority of voters
• demonstrable, widespread dissatisfaction with the old constitution or regime
• demonstrable, widespread approval of the leader who caused the constitution to be written
Acceptable reasons for the process to detract from the legitimacy of the constitution would be:
• lack of public or representative involvement in the constitution-writing process
• small margin of the approval vote by less than an overwhelming percentage of eligible voters
• demonstrable lack of public knowledge about the innovations in the new constitution
• rapidity of constitution writing and the lack of widespread public discussion about the proposed regime change
Some of those reasons require more explanation than others.
Anonymous' answer would earn both points.
However, there are some questionable things in the answer that might have caused problems.
• Wikipedia should not be cited as the only source. The reliability of Wikipedia is very questionable. That doesn't cause a problem with this answer because sources were not requested by the question. Most FRQs do not request the citation of sources and it's not necessary to do so unless you are asked.
• The constitution wasn't "drafted" by the referendum. The referendum approved a constitution that had been drafted (i.e. written).
• It's unclear to whom "previous president" refers. In another case, that reference might have been important.
• Validity is not necessarily identical to legitimacy.
These kinds of minor "errors" are common in the responses that exam readers see. Exams are written under the pressure of test taking and the clock. Most of the time mistakes like this are of no consequence. But you should, if you have the time, proofread your answers. Sometimes, carelessness can cost you points.
Anonymous has won two pairs of WYNTK pencils.
Here's the first best answer I've received for Question #2.
Question 2 was:
How did the current Russian constitution get approved?
Did that approval process contribute to the legitimacy of the constitution? Why or why not?.
Anonymous' answer is:
"According to my source, wikipedia, it says that the current constitution was drafted in a referendum on December 12 1993, after the previous president dissolved the last Constitution. in this referendum all the registered voters, or 54.8% of the population participated in the referendum. Of those,54.5% voted for adoption of the Constitution. So i believe that this makes it valid constitution, and therefore legitimate one because of the legal voting population it was approved by the majority of Russia."
This would be a two point question.
A point would be awarded for correctly identifying a referendum for the way the constitution was approved.
A point would be awarded for a factually correct and logical explanation of why this process would or would not contribute to the legitimacy of this new constitution.
Acceptable reasons for the process contributing to the legitimacy of the constitution would be:
• approval by a majority of voters
• demonstrable, widespread dissatisfaction with the old constitution or regime
• demonstrable, widespread approval of the leader who caused the constitution to be written
Acceptable reasons for the process to detract from the legitimacy of the constitution would be:
• lack of public or representative involvement in the constitution-writing process
• small margin of the approval vote by less than an overwhelming percentage of eligible voters
• demonstrable lack of public knowledge about the innovations in the new constitution
• rapidity of constitution writing and the lack of widespread public discussion about the proposed regime change
Some of those reasons require more explanation than others.
Anonymous' answer would earn both points.
However, there are some questionable things in the answer that might have caused problems.
• Wikipedia should not be cited as the only source. The reliability of Wikipedia is very questionable. That doesn't cause a problem with this answer because sources were not requested by the question. Most FRQs do not request the citation of sources and it's not necessary to do so unless you are asked.
• The constitution wasn't "drafted" by the referendum. The referendum approved a constitution that had been drafted (i.e. written).
• It's unclear to whom "previous president" refers. In another case, that reference might have been important.
• Validity is not necessarily identical to legitimacy.
These kinds of minor "errors" are common in the responses that exam readers see. Exams are written under the pressure of test taking and the clock. Most of the time mistakes like this are of no consequence. But you should, if you have the time, proofread your answers. Sometimes, carelessness can cost you points.
Anonymous has won two pairs of WYNTK pencils.
Answer No. 12
Answer No. 12:
Here's the first best answer I've received for Question #12. I am posting it a bit earlier than promised since this is the first answer submitted, and it's a good one.
Question 12 was:
Since Putin's reforms in the past three years seem to be reducing the choices available to voters, what has he done to promote legitimacy of the Russian regime and his government?
Anonymous' answer is:
"I think, that although Putin has narrowed the number of choices on the ballot, he still gave the facade of legitimacy by holding elections
"and
"since Putin has a good control of the media in Russia. he also will be able to influence public opinion though the media. which, for the most part, would show him in a good light and having a good impact on the country of Russia and most likely never have anything negative that he has done, which would also give him legitimacy in the light of the people of Russia."
This would be a two-point question.
My rubric lists the following "things" that could be done to promote the legitimacy of the Russian regime and Putin's government while he was reducing the role of representation (there might be other good answers, but unlike the committees who write rubrics for the exam questions, I'm working alone on this):
• holding apparently competitive elections
• acting nationalistically
• improving standards of living
• maintaining stability and law and order
• demonstrating the power of the government
• acting powerfully in the international sphere
• promoting the appearance of effective government
• organizing public support (like United Russia or Nashi)
There could be several examples for some of those items.
Any one would earn a point. Two examples are necessary to earn both possible points.
Anonymous' example would earn both points.
Two things to remember:
• The first sentence of Anonymous' answer is important because the rubrics used for the AP exams often require that kind of introduction (although there are no points awarded for it).
• If you're unsure if one of your examples is appropriate, list a third one (or a fourth or a fifth). Just don't spend too much time on your effort because you need time for the other 7 questions on the FRQ section of the exam. On the AP exam there's no penalty for having more than enough right answers and there's no penalty for having an incorrect response. Your answer begins the grading process by being worth zero (0) points. It will earn points for including appropriate information or logic that are on the graders' rubric. You won't earn extra credit for more right answers than required. For instance, there's no way to get more than 2 points for this question.
Here's the first best answer I've received for Question #12. I am posting it a bit earlier than promised since this is the first answer submitted, and it's a good one.
Question 12 was:
Since Putin's reforms in the past three years seem to be reducing the choices available to voters, what has he done to promote legitimacy of the Russian regime and his government?
Anonymous' answer is:
"I think, that although Putin has narrowed the number of choices on the ballot, he still gave the facade of legitimacy by holding elections
"and
"since Putin has a good control of the media in Russia. he also will be able to influence public opinion though the media. which, for the most part, would show him in a good light and having a good impact on the country of Russia and most likely never have anything negative that he has done, which would also give him legitimacy in the light of the people of Russia."
This would be a two-point question.
My rubric lists the following "things" that could be done to promote the legitimacy of the Russian regime and Putin's government while he was reducing the role of representation (there might be other good answers, but unlike the committees who write rubrics for the exam questions, I'm working alone on this):
• holding apparently competitive elections
• acting nationalistically
• improving standards of living
• maintaining stability and law and order
• demonstrating the power of the government
• acting powerfully in the international sphere
• promoting the appearance of effective government
• organizing public support (like United Russia or Nashi)
There could be several examples for some of those items.
Any one would earn a point. Two examples are necessary to earn both possible points.
Anonymous' example would earn both points.
Two things to remember:
• The first sentence of Anonymous' answer is important because the rubrics used for the AP exams often require that kind of introduction (although there are no points awarded for it).
• If you're unsure if one of your examples is appropriate, list a third one (or a fourth or a fifth). Just don't spend too much time on your effort because you need time for the other 7 questions on the FRQ section of the exam. On the AP exam there's no penalty for having more than enough right answers and there's no penalty for having an incorrect response. Your answer begins the grading process by being worth zero (0) points. It will earn points for including appropriate information or logic that are on the graders' rubric. You won't earn extra credit for more right answers than required. For instance, there's no way to get more than 2 points for this question.
Tuesday, March 18, 2008
Question #12 (18 March)
Each weekday between now and May 1, I'll post a question about comparative government and politics.
You submit an answer to the "Questions" e-mail link at the What You Need to Know web site.
If you submit the earliest best answer, I'll publish your answer here a week after the question was posted.
And you'll win a pair of What You Need to Know number two pencils to help you fill in the exam's multiple choice answer sheet. One of the pencils will have all the multiple choice answers on it and the other will display King Arthur's memorable line from Monty Python and the Holy Grail, "You don't vote for kings!"
(You can also win a pair of WYNTK pencils by posing a question that gets used here.)
Here's Question No. 12:
Since Putin's reforms in the past three years seem to be reducing the choices available to voters, what has he done to promote legitimacy of the Russian regime and his government?
You submit an answer to the "Questions" e-mail link at the What You Need to Know web site.
If you submit the earliest best answer, I'll publish your answer here a week after the question was posted.
And you'll win a pair of What You Need to Know number two pencils to help you fill in the exam's multiple choice answer sheet. One of the pencils will have all the multiple choice answers on it and the other will display King Arthur's memorable line from Monty Python and the Holy Grail, "You don't vote for kings!"
(You can also win a pair of WYNTK pencils by posing a question that gets used here.)
Here's Question No. 12:
Since Putin's reforms in the past three years seem to be reducing the choices available to voters, what has he done to promote legitimacy of the Russian regime and his government?
Tuesday, March 4, 2008
Question #2 (4 March)
Each weekday between now and May 1, I'll post a question about comparative government and politics.
You submit an answer to the "Questions" e-mail link at the What You Need to Know web site.
[That's http://apcomparativegov.com in case the link doesn't work for you.]
If you submit the earliest best answer, I'll publish your answer here a week after the question was posted.
And you'll win a pair of What You Need to Know number two pencils to help you fill in the exam's multiple choice answer sheet. One of the pencils will have all the multiple choice answers on it and the other will display King Arthur's memorable line from Monty Python and the Holy Grail, "You don't vote for kings!"
(You can also win a pair of WYNTK pencils by posing a question that gets used here.)
Here's Question No. 2:
How did the current Russian constitution get approved?
Did that approval process contribute to the legitimacy of the constitution? Why or why not?
You submit an answer to the "Questions" e-mail link at the What You Need to Know web site.
[That's http://apcomparativegov.com in case the link doesn't work for you.]
If you submit the earliest best answer, I'll publish your answer here a week after the question was posted.
And you'll win a pair of What You Need to Know number two pencils to help you fill in the exam's multiple choice answer sheet. One of the pencils will have all the multiple choice answers on it and the other will display King Arthur's memorable line from Monty Python and the Holy Grail, "You don't vote for kings!"
(You can also win a pair of WYNTK pencils by posing a question that gets used here.)
Here's Question No. 2:How did the current Russian constitution get approved?
Did that approval process contribute to the legitimacy of the constitution? Why or why not?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
