AP: How to Write a Continuity/Change-Over-Time

In our final installment for the AP World essays, today's topic is the Continuity/Change-Over-Time essay. A CCOT is different from a C+C; instead of showing similarities and differences between two subjects, this type of essay will have you show how two or three subjects were similar, but either continued in one way or changed in another. Basically, it's a more sophisticated C+C that requires a lot more thinking. You'll have to not only compare two subjects together, but also show how one society began to change while another remained the same in the same era. Don't worry, though; this time I have examples!

To plan out this essay, you have to look at the question. For our case today, it is this: How did the societies of Europe and Asia, specifically China and India, continue to be the same and change during the Post-Classical era? The question is already setting you up for success here; it's giving you three places (Europe, China, and India) and having you compare and contrast between how their societies grew or stagnated. Historically, Europe and India had many similar systems of government in this era (eras are important!), while China changed vastly and became quite different from the two. By knowing this from studying, you can now craft a decent thesis as well as some context sentences:

"The society of Europe in the Post-Classical Era had many similarities and differences compared to the societies of Asia, specifically in China and India.  Europe and China had few shared traits in the way their societies functioned during this time period.  India, however, had many policies and systems of government at the same time that they occurred in Europe.  While Europe and India continued to have similar governments and economic problems, China changed and developed a strict centralized government and gained social equality in the Post-Classical Era."

Did you see how I used what I already knew about Europe and Asia and wove it into context? This can help set up your claim, and provides info to the testers that you know what you're talking about.

Let's start with the COT part of the essay. I already mentioned first in my thesis that Europe's government, along with India's, continued to have problems while China's government changed and flourished. I can combine the differences with Europe and China and similarities with Europe and India into two paragraphs, effectively making my essay only three paragraphs long.

With Europe and China's differences, I'll need to start with an opening sentence: "The governing system of Europe was much different from the government established in China." I can now go from here to include evidence to such differences. I'll only include one example here, but I recommend yu use as many as you can possibly remember (like 5). Here's the example:

"Europe is described by Bentley as having 'built a decentralized society as they sought to protect their lands and maintain public order during a period of weak central authority and periodic invasions from outside (their continent)'.”

While in the exam you cannot use textbooks to help you with evidence, your sentence should already sort of sound like this. You then follow with a conclusion sentence:

"This shows that Europe was more focused on keeping invaders out and retaining land, and was not able to have a stronger unified government, instead relying on multiple leaders to enforce laws."

You then rebuff with the statement on China, with evidence and conclusion:

"This is not the case in China, which Bentley states was 'brought under centralized rule (by Yang Jian)…the Tang and Song dynasties organized Chinese society so efficiently that China became a center of exceptional agricultural and industrial production.'  China was so completely unified and organized that they became a production superpower during the Post-Classical Era, a far cry from the situation in Europe."

This is then followed by reasoning, as you need to also explain why Europe and China were so different even though they were connected by the Silk Road:

"The reason for these different centralized and decentralized governments probably is due to China not being under pressure from invaders during this time period, allowing them to focus more on organizing the state, while Europe was more focused on keeping order during invasions than organizing central rule."

With that, you move on to the next piece of evidence, and so on, until you run out of ideas. You can then conclude the paragraph with a assessment of your claim: "Thus, Europe had a much different governing system compared to that of China’s during this turbulent Post-Classical Era."

The same goes for Europe and India. You'll have an opening sentence ("Europe and India were very similar in the way their governments and history occurred."), a statement for why they are similar/continued they way they did ("Both Europe and India had a significant early Empire fall due to invaders."), evidence, and then a reasoning for why this is. Go through around the same amount of evidence, and then conclude the essay with a reiteration of your claim. You don't need a concluding statement for the whole paper, but you can if you wish.

With that, you're probably wondering why C+C is different from CCOT. Well, they really aren't. The College Board just want you to be able to understand how some societies were very similar at the same time while others were always changing. The set up of the essay is also much different. But if you practice long enough, you'll be able to write a CCOT in no time!

-Pharaoh Noh-Tyep

Historical Review: The Poisonwood Bible

Today's review is over a personal favorite of mine, Barbara Kingsolver's The Poisonwood Bible. This book takes place in colonial/independent Congo, and follows the stories of four girls as they adapt to the tension-filled atmosphere of Africa. This book is amazing in how the girls all become a part of Africa, and looks deep into the US' involvement in the containment of communism and whether or not it was morally right. At the end, I'll guarantee you'll feel bad for being an American. I know I was. Enjoy!

DISCLAIMER: You know by now.

I considered myself a good Christian. While I went to church on Sundays sparingly, I did a lot in my community for the name of Christ. I tried donating and volunteering, and not swearing quite as much. I never thought to convert any of my friends or family because I respected their opinions. But this book has opened my eyes to what forcing religion on other people actually does not only to them, but also to your own family, with dire consequences. The Poisonwood Bible, the chronicles of a mother and her four daughters as they live in the Congo during its Belgian occupation and the reigns of Lumumba and Mobutu (spanning from 1959-1990), not only challenges the deep-seeded morals of religion, but also the morals of the United States and its “democratic” dealings with the country of Congo/Zaire from independence to dictatorship.

I found that every character in this story seems to be searching for their own redemption in the Congo, whether they admit it or not. As it goes, not one of them gets it. This shocked me, as I’ve never read a story where not one, but almost all of the main characters never got to their goals of life. But I also learned that Africa is not a forgiving land. The people are different and strange, the grounds hard to tend, and the customs almost as far from Christianity as you can get. I felt almost frustrated myself reading, time and time again, how the Prices were ostracized and cast out, but then remembered the almost evil desire in Nathan Price’s mission to convert Africa against their will to a religion they didn’t understand. As the Prices fall further and further from the light, the dealings in Congo seem to mirror their efforts. Even with independence, the Congolese become enslaved again. The daughters all complain at length about their shortcomings, and they all seem to be indifferent to what is going on around them. Do they know that Congo is not the US? Do they know that their mission is hopeless? The themes of loss, regret, and growth go hand in hand in this book; where a loss is regretted, the characters grow a little. It only takes a big loss for the Prices to completely evolve, a loss which, I will admit, shocked me. Kingsolver’s own time in the Congo shows through here, and I feel that the personal experience definitely helps give the story ethos, and her diction/palindromes are exquisite.

A book very similar to Poisonwood is The Ransom of Mercy Carter, a story hundreds of years and miles away from the Prices. It focuses on the kidnapping of the title character and her life in an Indian tribe in colonial America, but is essentially the same story: she experiences losses and regrets similar to the Prices, but in the end makes her own growth to stay where she calls home. The only difference is that Mercy has a happy ending, while the Price’s is bittersweet. Still, The Poisonwood Bible has affected me on both a political and spiritual level. I don’t think I can ever give Communion again without thinking of the Congo, and at the end of the day, I think that’s exactly what Barbara Kingsolver wanted.

I would definitely recommend this book if you're learning about Africa! It really shows how bloody and violent the US' choices ended up being. Also, try switching from Congo to Zaire and back within 40 years; it's not fun.

-Pharaoh Noh-Tyep

AP: How to Write a Compare/Contrast

Yet another one of the three essays you must know how to write for the AP World History Exam is the Compare/Contrast essay. In this format, you must take two ideologies (for instance, economic policies in Asia and Europe in the 1400s) and not only compare them, but also explain with examples how they are also different. Like always, you won't know the subject of the essays when you go into the Exam; at this point, you'll have to rely on your knowledge of the subjects alone. It won't be easy to remember all of the info you need, but if you have a clear head and a good idea about what you want to write, you'll be able to get a 7 or above no problem.

To begin, I'll come up with a C+C question (no example this time; my bad): Compare and contrast the governing policies of the Ming Dynasty and Qing Dynasty in China from the 1600s-1800s. It's not perfect, but it resembles a C+C essay I did in class during my own AP World stint. Before you even begin writing, make a Venn diagram off to the side of the paper. The testing people allot about 10 minutes to plan your essay, so use this time to think, not panic. Consider the following thoughts:

• What made the Ming and Qing dynasties similar?
• How were they different?
• What were their styles of government?
• Did the Qing and Ming interact in any way?
• What were events that compared/contrasted between these years?

Using these, you can fill in info on the Venn diagram that relates of dissents from each other. Try to keep like info together so your thoughts don't get cluttered into a mess. Next, you can write a thesis statement. Remember, you can change this at any time; just direct the reader to what you want to be your thesis and they'll be able to understand. Here's an example thesis, which comes after at least two contest sentences:

"The Ming and Qing dynasties both governed with an iron fist over the Chinese people, although the Ming became lazier as time continued on while the Qing became more militarized and strict in the late 19th century."

This is not a very good thesis, as I am completely pulling it out of my ass, but for this example it'll work (check out "How to Write a Thesis" if you want to learn better). As you can see, the similarity between the Ming and Qing was that they were strict with their citizenry, while the Ming became lazy and the Qing grew more powerful. The bolded portions are the paragraphs you'll have to write to prove your thesis as logic based; that's why you don't load it up with info or you're backing yourself into a wall.

As far as paragraphs go, you'll need to bring forward evidence to support your claim as well as statements dedicated to connecting your thoughts together. In the strict paragraph, I'd consider 10 pieces of evidence (5 for Ming and Qing equally) and 5 statements proving how they compare and support your claim. The contrast paragraphs would have more evidence for one topic (at least 7 for both) and explain how it makes the two different in government. In the final paragraph, you can have a concluding sentence that rewrites your thesis and shows how your essay just proved it.

As always, it's important to study up on all of the eras of history. In exams like this, the testers don't care if you don't know the subject well enough; that just makes your exam easier to grade. If you follow these instructions for the Compare/Contrast paper, I promise that you'll have a good enough essay for you to get a high score. However, if in doubt, ask a teacher for help.

-Pharaoh Noh-Tyep

Historical Review: Unbroken

Yes, another book review, this time over Laura Hillenbrand's Unbroken; the tragic story of Louis Zamperini and his experiences in WWII and beyond. This is a great novel to have your students read during their WWII unit; it truly shows the lengths to which soldiers fought to survive and how the views of all countries involved got tangled up in a mess of a war. It also provides great foresight into the conflicts that the world has today; a little bit of history repeating itself, no? Without further ado, I give you the review.

DISCLAIMER: Also made for a language arts class. I apologize again.

Both of my grandfathers were veterans. My paternal grandpa, Larry, served quite luckily between Korea and Vietnam; my maternal, Stu, was drafted for the latter. Larry always loved talking about his time in the service, mostly about all of the people he met and planes he worked on as a mechanic in the Air Force. Stu never spoke once of Vietnam, and I found out through my mother that he was a medic in the Army stationed in Saigon. I found it funny that Stu never wanted to talk about his experience in the war, yet Larry was an open book. With age and experience, I learned why. But even Stu’s experience in America’s bloodiest war is eclipsed by Louis Zamperini’s trials and tribulations in the book Unbroken. To be on top of the world, only to be shot down, left afloat for weeks and beaten to near-death is something only a psychopathic masochist would envision as a story; Zamperini lived it. His story is exceptionally conveyed with Hillenbrand’s tone and diction, as well as several subtle changes in mood/plot that honestly made this book one of the most surprising I’d read since The Kite Runner.

            Hillenbrand’s writing was, hands down, why I loved this book. Here we have a story of a WWII POW who had an exceptionally interesting life on top of all of his wartime experiences. He was no Patton or MacArthur, just a regular old soldier. If given to any author, Zamperini’s story could have been ruined with too much suspense or bad choices in dialogue. Hillenbrand, however, is the master of both tone and diction. When writing about Louie’s early life at home, there is an often wistfulness in the writing, as if we were truly reading a memory. When the book switches to Louie’s time running, the tone matches with that of a tension-filled challenge; the words build suspense and leave the audience breathless by the end of his race. Louie’s time in the service and the internment camps set forth a tone of melancholy, as these men deal with life changing (or life ending) situations and face a foe worse than the Devil. I honestly enjoyed how fluidly Hillenbrand’s writing changes to fit with the chapter, and her jumps to the future and back are well done; normally, I hate books that do this. Her lack of all tantalization also helps out when reading Unbroken, as I always knew what happened to a character and wasn’t disappointed in being proven wrong (I swear I thought Phil was going to die at least 3 times). From a funny/nostalgic beginning to a mournful middle to a bittersweet end, Hillenbrand’s tone and diction really helped carry this novel to its finest.

            A book I could relate to Unbroken is The 5 People You Meet in Heaven by Mitch Albom. In both books, the main characters deal with their inner demons and come out on top in the end, albeit one is only doing so after he has died. I would also say that Unbroken is much better written, but both books have qualities that I enjoy (Albom’s character development in particular). Before reading this book, I thought I had an idea from my grandparents how war truly is. After Unbroken, I don’t know if I’ll ever see it the same again. Private Texas was right; war is hell, but Louis Zamperini went through worse and came out the other side unscathed. Thanks to Hillenbrand’s tone and diction, I’ll be rereading this book for years to come.

Definitely have your class read this book if you want them to cry. I know I did.

-Pharaoh Noh-Tyep

AP: Writing a DBQ

Historical Review: Beloved

In this post, I'm going to be delving into the depths of historical fiction! While it may not be quite as accurate if, say, the book was nonfiction, depending on the writer the books can be very accurate when teaching about a certain era in history. Today's book will be Toni Morrison's classic Beloved, a tale of former slaves yearning to escape their inner demons. (I will admit, I did not enjoy the book, but I loved the post-Civil War era that Morrison chose).

DISCLAIMER: This was originally written for a language arts class. Sorry if it gets a little dense.

It’s not often that I’ll dislike a book involving history. I especially enjoy stories set in the early days of the US, when the wilderness was wild and the people were larger than life; they speak a character to me that I feel has been lost by modern principles in all of their cybernetic glory. That said, I could not bring myself to enjoy the book Beloved. It had everything I could love in a novel: a post-Civil War story involving former slaves being haunted by their past in the form of a lustrous poltergeist; at least three subjects rolled into one book. But no matter how often I scrutinized the tone, diction, and imagery of Toni Morrison’s award-winning “masterpiece”, I just couldn’t see it. I couldn’t see why I was supposed to care for any of the characters at all, and got extremely caught up in Morrison’s attempt to glamorize her own writing with dense descriptions and not-so-subtle allusions. For all intents and purposes, I was just plain bored.

                The problem for me began with the characters themselves. Almost instantly upon opening the first chapter, I had at least seven people thrust upon me with so much fast development that I was re-tracing my steps to see who was related to who by page 15. The novel’s focus on the widowed Sethe and her daughter Denver, and Sethe’s fellow slave-turned-lover John D, almost seems stretched too thin. Because of this, I felt no connection to any of them by the end of the first chapter, and this ended up being a major problem when Morrison tried getting me to play sympathetic. The tone of regret and remorse is also just poured on way too thick, and it made me nervous that the sadness I would feel for Sethe and her years of torture at her plantation and her possessed home would be misplaced (as I found out, it was). The point I’m trying to make here is that it just seems faked; as if the characters are in a bad play and trying their hardest to emote but just can’t do it right. The character of John D was also a thorn in my side for much of the novel, mostly because his mood swings involving his love/hate for Sethe detract from the main message of the author. A message which, for the life of me, I still don’t know.

                But I could forgive all of this, if it wasn’t for Morrison’s writing style. In short, I hate it. In length, it reads like an edgy teenager decided to research about the Civil War, became obsessed with ghosts, and then tried replacing every simple noun with the most outrageous synonym imaginable (with a few f-words and n-words thrown into the mix) without even trying to form a sentence that conveyed realism. Granted, Morrison is an honored author, and I am a lowly English student, but if a student can see through the boring allusions of the book to grasp what little plot exists and still can’t find the purpose, then perhaps the student is not the right audience for such advanced writing. Even such imagery as Sethe’s “tree” (scars retained from the whippings at Sweet Home plantation) is so forced that I felt like I was being spoon-fed a metaphor every two paragraphs. Hell, even the name “Sweet Home” for a plantation is so blatantly a symbol that I laughed when I first read of its existence. I did not laugh at the baby’s name.

                To be quite honest, I haven’t read a book quite like this, nor would I choose to. If I had to compare it, it seems more in line with the filth that is A Separate Peace by John Knowles. Both novels take place historically (Knowles’ in WWII), and involve characters that deal with regret and anger at how life has given them the short end of the stick. The difference, however, is I chose to read Beloved, and even with all of its faults I could at least see development of a coherent story. The names Gene and Finny still haunt my nightmares to this day. So yes, I did not like Toni Morrison’s attempt at a historical novel, mostly due to her writing. Among the red badges and soldier’s hearts, it doesn’t capture the image of the Civil War and all of its aftermath; rather, it focuses too much on sending a message to those living almost a century after it.

So, in the end, while the book has a colorful setting in the post-Civil War society, I would NOT recommend you have your students read this. Unless, of course, you want them to read about a lot of sex.

-Pharaoh Noh-Tyep

History and Religion: Adhering to Conflicting Views

It always happens in at least one class. When you get to a touchy subject, there will always be that one student whose religion disagrees with whatever you're teaching. Sometimes, the student will not care; they'll absorb and learn the info, but disregard it based on faith (or, if you get a REALLY good student, they'll be open to differing opinions and may change their mind). But many times, the student will take it upon themselves to be their class' "savior": outbursts over your material being wrong, refusal to compromise, threats of civil suit, etc. While usually condensed to science courses, religious arguments are often found in history class. Many find the idea of Abraham basing the Jewish god Yahweh on a Persian god sacrilegious; many Christians will agree. The mere mention of Muhammad having child brides can send an Islamic student over the edge.
What I'm trying to get at is that teaching about history can be tough when it involves religious figures that are still quite popular. Students may have been told from a young age that this is what they believe in, and anything trying to "disprove" it should be met with scorn and denouncement. But there is a way you can teach about religious history without being called a pagan. It only takes Understanding, Compromise, and Education to break through to those who need to learn the material, but refuse to.

Understanding

The point of teaching history is to give your students a full picture of what came before them so they can better prepare for the future. When a student refuses to actively participate in learning about something they disagree with, it can be frustrating for teachers to understand why a student would get so worked up over something. As a personal experience, one of my fellow classmates refused to learn about evolution in Biology because they believed in Creationism. I'm a Christian myself, and I had been fed the Creationist view, but I rejected it because it didn't make sense to me. However, I could understand that the student most likely didn't want to experience their whole belief being brought into question, or didn't want to realize that they themselves didn't believe it. If teachers can come to the understanding that some students don't want to lose their whole faith in one day, then the process of their teaching can continue unabated. In these situations, either let the kid go or figure out a compromise where they can learn about the subject in a way suited to their beliefs.

Compromise

Let's say you and your student have come to an understanding between faith and history. Now it is time to find a common ground where you as a teacher will not upset the student and where the student will respect the material they are given. A lot of people seem to think that only the student's views are affected in situations like this. It's often hard for them to see that the teacher's whole lesson rides on the participation of the class and for them to see that there exists more than one opinion on a subject. They learned all of these things in college, where they spent years refining their craft, and are now teaching it to as many people as possible so we don't enter another Dark Age. To compromise religious views and historical understandings, a compromise from both parties needs to occur. The student could only participate in material that is irrelevant to their religion and then leave the room when it becomes too touchy. The teacher could structure their lessons to avoid saying certain things when the student in question is present that would upset them. While it's never fun to have to bow over to make sure students learn something, at least they're learning. But the best way to go about a compromise is with education on all differing views involved.

Education

Even with compromise and understanding, it's your classroom. Just teach about all of the conflicting viewpoints WITHOUT any pandering opinions. Don't imply that one side is more right than the other, or that one side is very flawed; if you can keep it very neutral, everyone will benefit. The war between faith and fact will never be over, so it's in the best interests of everyone to just teach as much as you can about Abraham, Jesus, and Muhammad. If you and your students can have a professional level of involvement, you shouldn't have a problem with conflicting views.

Religion is a slippery slope. History, however, shouldn't have to slide backwards every time it tries getting over it. With Understanding, Compromise, and Education, you can adhere to all of your students without having to worry about a lawsuit. Just be careful about what you say.

-Pharaoh Noh-Tyep