AES 2E HY EOY 2021 LORMS v1

HISTORY/LS/2E/EOY/2021 Subject: Lower Sec History Level / Stream: Secondary 2 Express + 2 NA (SBB) Day / Date: 11 October 2021 [1140-1250] MARKING SCHEME Section A: Source-Based Question (20 Marks) Case Study 1: Merger between Singapore and Malaya Level Question and Level Descriptor Marks 1(a) Study Source A. What can you infer about merger from Source A ? Explain your answer , using details from the source. [5] L1 Description of source/ Lifting from source Example The source shows Tunku Abdul Rahman and Lee Kuan Yew shaking hands. 1 L2 Valid inferences, unsupported. Award 2 marks for one valid inference. Award 3 marks for two valid inferences. I can infer that merger would bring about ple nty of benefits for both Malay a and Singapore. [P] OR/AND I can infer that the people in Malaya and Singapore supported merger. [P] 2 – 3 L3 Valid inferences, supported. Award 4 marks for one valid inference, supported. Award 5 marks for two valid inferences, supported. I can infer that merger would bring about plenty of benefits for both Malaya and Singapore. [P] The evidence shows three banners with the words, “communal harmony”, “Malayan loyalty” and “national language”. [Ev] This means that merger was beneficial for both Malaya and Singapore because it will result in Singapore and Malaya being united and will enjoy harmony and experience many advantages between the different races and people. [Ex] OR/AND I can infer that the people in Malaya and Singapore supported merger. [P] The evidence shows Tunku and Lee Kuan Yew shaking hands, with the people of Singapore and Malaya smiling and rallying behind them. [Ev] This means that the people in Malaya and Singapore supported merger because people in both Malaya and Singapore treated the news of merger as good news and had a positive outlook on the eventual success of the merger. [Ex] 4 – 5 Assumption English School End of Year Examinations 2021

HISTORY/LS/2E/EOY/2021 2 Level Question and Level Descriptor Marks 1(b) Study Sources B and C. In what ways are Sources B and C similar? Explain your answer. [5] L1 Comparison based on source type/ provenance Example Sources B and C are similar as both are written sources. Sources B and C are similar in talking about the merger between Malaya and Singapore. (Description of source) 1 L2 Similarity based on content, unsupported. Award 2 marks for one similarity in content, unsupported. Award 3 marks for two similarities in content, unsupported. Example Sources B and C are similar in talking about the communist threat faced by Singapore. [BOC] OR/AND Sources B and C are similar in talking about supporting the merger due to its advantages. [BOC] 2 – 3 L3 Similarity based on content, supported. Award 4 marks for one similarity in content, supported. Award 5 marks for two similarities in content, supported. Example Sources B and C are similar in talking about the communist threat faced by Singapore. The evidence from Source B is “ Communist activities had increased greatly over the years. This was worrying for the PAP” [Ev] This means that Singapore was facing the communist threat at that point of time because the government was still trying to find ways to control the Communists. [Ex] The evidence from Source C is “While Singapore was under the British, there was no threat of open action by the Communists which might endanger the peace of Malaya . But with an independent Singapore, anything could happen. ” [Ev] This means that Singapore was facing the communist threat at that point of time because the British colonial master was the one who previously kept the stability in Singapore. Once Singapore achieved independence, their peace may be affected by the Communists , hence, making them feel unsafe. [Ex] OR/AND Sources B and C are similar in talking about supporting the merger due to its advantages. The evidence from Source B is “It was felt that merger with the larger Malaya would provide political stability for Singapore to attract needed investment.” [Ev] This means that merger would bring about advantages because it would provide Singapore with the security that they need to ensure that their economy would remain competitive and appealing. [Ex] The evidence from Source C is “ Our economy demands merger and so do the people of Malaya and Singapore. ” [Ev] This means that merger would bring about advantages because it would help to sustain the economy which made the people believe in supporting the merger between Malaya and Singapore. [Ex] 4 – 5

HISTORY/LS/2E/EOY/2021 3 Level Question and Level Descriptor Marks 2(a) Study Source A. What is the message of Source A ? Explain your answer, using details from the source. [4] L1 Descriptive/ Lifting/ Paraphrasing The source depicts PAP winning the 1964 elections, followed by a clash between Singaporeans and Malaysians that led to bloodshed. 1 L2 Valid inference(s) based on content. Award 2 marks for inference, unsupported. Award 3 marks for inference, supported. Example I can infer that the racial riot affected the harmony and peace among the different races in Singapore. [P] This evidence shows how the racial riots led to “blood” and “deaths” among the people. [Ev] This means that the racial riot affected the harmony and peace among the different races in Singapore because the people were killed during the process and it took away their peace and safety in the country. [Ex] OR I can infer that the racial riot was very violent. [P] This evidence shows how the two different races were attacking one another while bringing weapons meant to hurt and injure the other. [Ev] This means that the racial riot was very violent because the people caused injuries on others with intention of harming and killing during the riots. [Ex] 2 – 3 L3 Main message identified. Award 3 marks for message, unsupported. Award 4 marks for message, supported. The message of the source is that the 1964 racial riots were caused by PAP’s victory in the Federal Elections . [M] The source shows PAP winning the 1964 elections, followed by a clash between the Chinese and Malays that led to bloodshed. [Ev] This means that the 1964 racial riots were caused by PAP’s victory in the Federal Elections because the Malays disapproved of the PAP so much that they were willing to resort to violence to express their unhappiness at PAP’s win, leading to the 1964 racial riots. [Ex] 3 – 4

HISTORY/LS/2E/EOY/2021 4 Level Question and Level Descriptor Marks 2(b) Study Source B. Why did the UMNO leader make this speech? Explain your answer. [6] L1 Answers based on provenance/ Description Example The UMNO leader made this speech because it was about hinting on the separation between Singapore and Malaysia. (Answers based on provenance) 1 L2 Reason based on context, explained (because of what was going on at the time) Example The UMNO leader made this speech to show that the Malays under PAP/Leadership were unfairly treated/oppressed/disadvantaged/discriminated. The UMNO leader made this speech to show that the Malays ’ welfare were not taken care of by the PAP/ Lee Kuan Yew’s leadership. 2 L3 Reason (Inference) based on content, supported Example The UMNO leader made this speech to show that the Malays under the PAP’s leadership were unfairly treated / oppressed / disadvantaged / discriminated. [M] The evidence is “ Does the Singapore Government realize there are many more unemployed Malays than jobless Chinese though the Chinese form the majority of the population in Singapore? Regarding housing for Malays, traditionally they do not like to live in flats. ” [Ev] This means that the Malays under the PAP’s leadership were unfairly treated / oppressed / disadvantaged /