題目拆解
參考答案(中文版)
(a) 你認為資料E漫畫的主要信息是甚麼？試參考資料E，解釋你的答案。（3分）
考生表現
表現良好。題目要求考生指出資料E漫畫的主要信息。大部分考生能夠將焦點集中於法國，指出漫畫的一個合理信息，並作出合理解釋。
評分準則
* 有效答案1分，有效解釋2分
信息：
例：
- 法國是一個自私的國家。
解釋：
例：
- 戰爭期間，法國尋求其他國家的協助；戰事過後，法國拒絕和在平會議上討論這些國家所提出的提議。
參考答案
資料E漫畫的主要信息是諷刺法國於一戰後只顧自己利益，漠視歐洲整體發展。
漫畫內容關戰前戰後法國對列強的態度轉變 — 於「當年」，法國指加入戰爭是「『我們』的事」，要求「英、美、意」等國往「前線」出發，同心協力抵抗侵略。然而，於戰後當列強拿著「想法」、「建議」和「提示」等前往「和平」的大門時，卻遭法國拒諸門外，並指出戰後「和平」及國際秩序的安排乃「『我』的事」，阻止列強參與其中。
可見，資料批評法國於戰後態度的轉變，只顧為己國利益，忽視歐洲整體發展，實為漫畫的主要信息。
(b) 根據資料F作者而言，指出一般人對第一次世界大戰影響婦女地位的一項誤解。（3分）
考生表現
表現良好。大部分考生能夠參考資料F指出一般人對第一次世界大戰影響婦女地位的一項誤解。表現最差的考生胡亂抄錄資料內容，未能選取有關「一般人對第一次世界大戰影響婦女地位的誤解」的內容。
評分準則
* 有效答案1分，有效解釋2分
誤解：
例：
- 婦女地位在第一次世界大戰後出現明顯改善
解釋：
例：
- 很多國家直至第二次世界大戰結束前都沒有給予婦女投票權。
- 在家中和職場而言，婦女地位沒有甚麼改變。
參考答案
資料F指出一般人對第一次世界大戰於婦女地位提升存有誤解。
雖然資料F指出婦女「在戰爭中作出重大的貢獻」，於第一次世界大戰裡扮演重要的角色，因此「戰後歐洲大部份地區」都重視改善婦女的政治社會權益，讓「婦女獲得投票權」，從而提升她們的政治地位，顯示一戰提高女性地位。
然而，資料F的著作指出上述乃一般人的誤解，因為「女權運動」其實在「天主教區薄弱得多」，所以並非所有歐洲婦女於第一次世界大戰後獲得投票權，舉例資料指出傳統天文教國家「法國」直至「1944年才將投票權擴展至婦女」，其次還有「意大利」（1946年）、羅馬尼亞和南斯拉夫（1946年）等，反映一般人對一戰提升女性地位存有誤解。
(c) 第一次世界大戰有否使歐洲變得更好？試參考資料E及F，並就你對歐洲直至1929年的發展所知，解釋你的答案。（7分）
考生表現
表現平平。題目要求考生參考資料E及F，並就其對歐洲直至1929年的發展所知，討論第一次世界大戰有否使歐洲變得更好。只有表現只出色的考生能夠集中討論關鍵詞「歐洲變得更好」，並能有效運用兩項資料及其個人所知。表現一般的答卷討論大戰如何影響歐洲的發展，對關鍵詞「變得更好」的處理不足。部分表現稍遜的考生忽略了題目中「變得更好」和「直至1929年」等關鍵詞，僅僅默寫關於極權主義崛起和第二次世界大戰起因等預先準備好的答案。
評分準則
L1 答案含混，未能有效運用資料及個人所知。 [最多2分]
L2 欠缺均衡，僅能有效運用資料或個人所知。 [最多4分]
L3 答案合理且均衡，能有效運用資料及個人所知。 [最多7分]
變得更好：
例：
- 婦女對第一次世界大戰的貢獻得到肯定。（資料F）
- 歐洲達致和平，1920年代列國沒有出現重大衝突。（個人所知）
沒有變得更好：
例：
- 大戰後，列國遭受貧困、意識形態紛爭之苦。（資料E）
- 歐洲過度依賴美國，使自己在經濟衰退面前不堪一擊。（個人所知）
參考答案
題目所言小程度成立。
雖然資料E 的漫畫家指出第一次世界大戰發生前列強主張以武力的手段來解決問題，如漫畫中的英國、法國和美國等都武裝起來，並正往戰場出發。然而，漫畫家指出「今日」是「和平」的，如列強提出「建議」、「想法」等方式處理衝突，以防戰爭再度爆發破壞和平，實為歐洲變得更好。
而且，資料F 指出因「人們承認婦女」在第一次世界大戰中付出了「重大的貢獻」，因而於戰後「在婦女投票權一事上改變了態度」，決心下放權力予婦女，結果「戰後歐洲大部份地區的婦女獲得投票權」，社會地位更趨平等，確實為歐洲變得更好。
就我所知，一戰前國際社會鮮有仲裁機構處理衝突，但戰後列強成立國際聯盟（1920）維持和平，國聯內設秘書處、國際法庭和會員大會，並以譴責、經濟制裁和軍事行動等方法維持國際穩定。通過國際集體安全機制合作解決分歧，以促進列強彼此之間關係，確實讓歐洲變得更好。
而且，美國總統威爾遜因應第一次世界大戰由不同民族衝突所導致而於巴黎和會（1919）中提出「和平十四點」，主張以「民族自決」的原則立國，結果不同新興國家如捷克、波蘭、立陶宛等相繼成立，減低日後因民族問題而發生衝突的可能性，確實使歐洲變得更好。
然而，在較大程度上第一次世界大戰卻未能使歐洲變好。
漫畫家在資料E 指出「當年」（意即第一次世界大戰前）所發生的衝突乃「我們的事」，並將交付於國際社會仲裁；然而「今日」（意即第一次世界大戰後）的紛爭乃不過是「我的事」，並關上大門拒絕列強間的「想法」、「建議」和「提示」，衝突變得尖銳化，未能為歐洲帶來更好。
同時，資料F 雖然指出婦女地位於第一次世界大戰後有所提升。然而，資料F 卻指出婦女地位提升只不過是局限地區，「女權運動在歐洲的天主教地區薄弱得多」，舉例「法國」、「意大利」和「比利時」等分別到「1944年」、「1946年」和「1948年」方「才將投票權擴展至婦女」，戰後婦女地位未有於歐洲得到全面提升，故未為歐洲帶來更好。
就我所知，雖然上文指列強於戰後成立國際聯盟維持國際穩定，但因為國聯缺乏大國（如美國）參與，再加上決議機制存有漏洞。所以，維持和平的成效受阻，例如意大利於1924入侵阜姆、1928年宣布成為阿爾巴爾亞保護國等行動都未能及時調整。因此，一戰未能有讓歐洲變得更好。
而且，一戰後召開的巴黎和會（1919）未能妥善處理戰後問題，如意大利未能取得阜姆等地，結果意人對列強深感不滿，並促成墨索里尼上台（1922）。隨後，法西斯意大利入侵阜姆破壞地區穩定（1924），戰火於戰後再起，反映一戰未能讓歐洲變得更好。
最後，因第一次世界大戰而成立的新興民族國家的經濟和軍事力量薄弱，容易成為侵略者的目標，如德國先後於1939 年吞併捷克全境和波蘭，為第二次世界大戰揭開序幕。這正反映第一次世界大戰不但沒有確立國際新秩序，反而埋下另一場大戰爆發的伏線，故未能為歐洲帶來更好的狀況。
總括而言，雖然列強於一戰後試圖改善國際氣氛阻止衝突再起，例如成立國際聯盟、提升婦女地位等。然而，上述行動均「雷聲大但雨點小」，不但未能取得成效，反而導致二戰爆發。因此，題目所言小程度成立。
參考答案(英文版)
(a) What, in your opinion, was the main message of the cartoon in Source E? Explain your answer with reference to Source E. (3 marks)
Candidates’ Performance
Performance was good. This question required candidates to identify the main message of the cartoon in Source E. most candidates were able to focus on France and identify a valid message from the cartoon, with sound justification.
Marking Schemes
* One mark for valid answer and two marks for valid explanation
Message:
e.g.
- France was a selfish country.
Explanation:
e.g.
- During the war, France sought the help of other countries; after the war. It refused to discuss their proposals in the peace conference.
Suggested Answer
The main message of Source E was to satirize France for prioritizing own national interest while neglecting the development as a whole in Europe after WWI.
From Source E, there was a sharp contrast over the attitude of France towards the powers during-war and post-war. During “the war”, France pointed out that war was “our affair”, asking “England, Italy and the USA” to go into “front entrance of war” and fight together as one. That said, in post-war period, the powers brought “suggestions”, “ideas” and “hints”, wishing to enter the door of “the peace”. They were rejected by France as France said post-war international order and arrangement was “my affair”, hindering the powers to involve in that.
Thus, Source E criticized the change of attitude of France after WWI, prioritizing on own national interest while neglecting the development as a whole in Europe, which was the main message of the source.
(b) Identify one general misunderstanding of the impact of the First World War on women’s status, according to the author of Source F. Explain your answer with reference to Source F. (3 marks)
Candidates’ Performance
Performance was good. Most of the candidates were able to identify one general misunderstanding of the impact of the First World War on women’s status, with good reference to Source F. the weakest candidates copied indiscriminately from the Source and did not make use of data about ‘misunderstanding of the impact of the First World War on women’s status’.
Marking Schemes
* One mark for valid answer and two marks for valid explanation
Misunderstanding:
e.g.
- Women’s status was improved obviously after the First World War.
Explanation:
e.g.
- Many countries did not give women voting rights until the end of the Second World War
- Women’s status did not change a lot at home and in the workplace.
Suggested Answer
There was a general misunderstanding towards the rise of women status after WWI, which was depicted in Source F.
From Source F, women had “vital contribution” and held important roles in the war. Therefore, after WWI “in most of Europe”, women’s socio-political rights were being emphasized. Women were given “the right to vote”, so as to enhance their political status. It showed that WWI led to the rising women status.
From Source F, “movements for women’s rights had been far weaker in Catholic parts of Europe”, hindering the prevalence of women suffrage across Europe. Took some catholic countries as examples, “France extended the franchise to women only in 1944, Italy in 1946, Romania and Yugoslavia the same year”. It reflected that the women status had not been significantly enhanced after WWI. There was a general misunderstanding towards the rise of women status after WWI.
(c) Did the First World War bring about a better Europe? Explain your answer with reference to Sources E and F, and using your own knowledge of the development of Europe up to 1929. (7 marks)
Candidates’ Performance
Performance was fair. The question required candidates to discuss whether the First World War brought about a better Europe, with reference to Sources E and F and using the candidates’ own knowledge of the development of Europe up to 1929. Only the best candidates were able to focus their discussion on the key phrase ‘better Europe’ and us both sources and their own knowledge effectively. Mediocre answers discussed how the War affected the development of Europe, with inadequate treatment of the key word ‘better’. Some weak candidates ignored key phrases in the question such as ‘better’ and ‘up to 1929’, and merely wrote prepared answers on the rise of totalitarianism and cause of the Second World War.
Marking Schemes
L1 Vague answer, ineffective in using both Sources and own knowledge. [max. 2]
L2 Lack in balance, effective in using Sources or own knowledge only. [max. 4]
L3 Sound and balanced answer, effective in using both Sources and own knowledge. [max. 7]
Better:
e.g.
- Women’s contribution was recognized after the War. (Source F)
- Europe achieved peace that there were no big conflicts among the powers in the 1920s. (own knowledge)
Not better:
e.g.
- The powers suffered from improvement and ideological conflicts after the War. (Source E)
- Overdependence on the USA made Europe vulnerable to economic depression. (own knowledge)
Suggested Answer
To a small extent, the claim was valid.
From Source E, powers advocated the use of force in the face of clashes before WWI. For example, England, Italy and the USA were armed and ready for the war. But “Now”, cartoonist pointed out that powers brought “suggestions”, “ideas” and “hints” for “the peace”. It reflected powers’ willingness to prevent war through peaceful means after WWI. WWI did bring a better Europe.
From Source F, people recognized “the vital contribution by women in the war”, leading to a “change in the attitude towards women’s suffrage”. Women gained more rights like they “had been given the vote in most of Europe”. Gender equality was promoted after WWI, proving WWI did bring a better Europe.
From my own knowledge, there was absence of peacekeeping body before WWI. After WWI, powers established the League of Nations (1919) to maintain peace. The League had organs like Secretariat, Assembly and Permanent Council of International Justice. By condemnation, economic sanction and military action, international order was maintained. Through collective security, powers could build strong bonding with each other. WWI did bring a better Europe.
From my own knowledge, WWI broke out owing to the clashes among different races. Therefore, US president Wilson proposed “ the Fourteen Points” at the Paris Peace Conference (1919), one of which was “nation self-determination”. It led to the establishment of new nation states like Czechoslovakia, Poland and Lithuania. This reduced conflicts regarding nationalism. WWI did bring a better Europe.
That said, to a large extent, WWI could not bring a better Europe.
From Source E, during “the war”, conflicts were “our affair”. But “Now” (after WWI), they became “my affair” and France refused powers’ “suggestions”, “ideas” and “hints” for “the peace”. Relationships between powers were worsened and conflicts became edgy. WWI did not bring a better Europe.
From Source F, even though it agreed to the rise of women status after WWI, the result was restricted to some regions only. “Movements for women’s rights had been far weaker in Catholic parts of Europe”, like in “France”, “Italy” and “Belgium” had to wait until “1944”, “1946” and “1948” respectively to extend its voting right to women. After WWI, the women status had not been significantly enhanced. Thus, WWI did not bring a better Europe.
From my own knowledge, the League of Nations was meant to maintain the international order. However, it lacked the participation of the US, which was supposed to be a keystone. Moreover, it had ineffective mechanism. As a result, when France occupied Fiume (1924), announced Abyssinia as protectorate (1924), there was no immediate action to stem its aggression. WWI did not bring a better Europe.
From my own knowledge, Paris Peace Conference (1919) failed to solve the post-war problems. For example, France could not seize Fiume. Discontent aroused among people in France and this catalyzed the rise of Mussolini (1922). In 1924, France occupied Fiume and this harmed regional stability. WWI did not bring a better Europe.
From my own knowledge, under the principle of “national self-determination”, new nation states set up were weak in terms of economic and military power. They became the target of aggressors. In 1939, Germany invaded whole Czechoslovakia and Poland, sparking off WWII. It reflected that WWI failed to establish a new international order but paved the way to WWII. WWI did not bring a better Europe.
To conclude, although powers made every endeavor to improve the international situation like establishing the League of Nations and enhancing women status, the results were not significant. Worse still, it further led to the outbreak of WWII. Thus, to a small extent, the claim is valid.