General Remarks

It is essential to the credibility of the History Aptitude Test (HAT) that, as far as possible, it is marked in a uniform way and to a common set of standards and expectations.  The following guidelines have been devised in relation to the published specifications of the HAT.  They have been approved by the History Admissions Subcommittee, and you need to follow them closely.

Do not award marks which are not whole numbers as the web system can only accept whole numbers.  Please do not deduct marks for spelling and grammatical errors unless they obstruct the expression of meaning. In reflecting on the quality of candidates’ expression, give preference to clarity over style.  The use of high-quality vocabulary should not be rewarded for itself, but only when it assists the expression of relevant material.

Note that the essay exercise [1(c)] is not intended as a test of candidates’ depth of knowledge, and must not be marked as such.  Candidates have been advised that no special preparation or revision is required for the HAT, so it is unreasonable to expect them to write with the same depth and/or accuracy on points of detail that we would expect from prepared written work.

Please use the whole of the marking scale.  The best entrance-level work should gain full marks

Marking Guidelines for Each Question

1(a)

This question relates to the following criteria:

• careful and critical reading;
• precision in the handling of concepts;
• clarity and facility of writing

For 7–10 marks, the candidate should capture, in clear English, and in his/her own words, the author’s view that chivalry is an elusive term, both in time period and in content.

For 4–6 marks, the candidate should have the right general understanding of the passage but might concentrate exclusively on the temporal issue.

For 0–3 marks, the candidate should have only a hazy idea, or no idea, of what the paragraph means or may become preoccupied with Marie Antoinette or Burke.

Many candidates may be tempted to bring in material from later paragraphs. It should be remembered that this is not the purpose of this question.

1(b)

This question relates to the following criteria:

• careful and critical reading;
• analytical approach;
• precision in the handling of concepts;
• clarity and facility of writing

For 14–20 marks, the candidate should capture most or all of the points below, in a  clearly-expressed manner that reproduces the sense of a logical argument. 

For 8–13 marks, the candidate should show a broad grasp of the argument, in which several points below are either missed or misunderstood.  They may attempt to provide their own definition or may become distracted by knights and castles at the expense of chivalry.

For 0–7 marks, the candidate may have an idea of what the piece is about, but only a limited grasp, or no grasp, of its argument.

The important elements of this piece are:

      1.   It is inherently difficult to define ‘chivalry’ as a “tonal” concept.

      2.   A particular difficulty is the way the term evokes very  particular pre-conceptions.

      3.   The word ‘knight’ can be defined in quite precise terms but the abstract concept associated with it evades such definition.

      4.   It was a word that was used during the Middle Ages in different ways by different authors.

      5.   The temporal boundaries of chivalry are imprecise.

      6.   A sense that all historical abstractions are difficult to reduce to a definition.

1(c)

This question relates to the following criteria:

• analytical approach;
• coherent argument;
• precision in the handling of concepts and selection of evidence;
• relevance to the question;
• historical imagination;
• originality;
• clarity and facility of writing

It may be helpful to have in mind typical degree class boundaries in assessing this exercise, with the proviso that depth and accuracy of knowledge (as distinct from precision in its deployment) are not being tested.

What this question is intended to test is the ability of a candidate to seize upon the issue of definition and apply it to an interesting and significant group or idea. Examples might include fascists in the 20th century, middle classes in the 18th or 19th century, Protestants in the Reformation or the Crusading movement in the Middle Ages. Answers may limit themselves to issues of definition or may also address the relationship between the group or idea and the wider society. The wording of the question is intended to allow flexibility and markers are encouraged to welcome any reasonable example chosen by the candidate.

For 30–40 marks, the candidate should write a ‘first-class’ answer, which fully grasps the point of the question. The very best answers will show imagination and will avoid merely listing problems of definition.

For 15–29 marks, the candidate will broadly meet the challenge of the question, but might simply list the difficulties of definition without arriving at a solution. The choice of example will be adequate but perhaps a little predictable.

For 0–14 marks, the candidate will neglect the issue of definition completely, or may resemble an answer in the 15–29 range, but with more, or deeper, flaws than those listed above.

2

This question relates to the following criteria:

• careful and critical reading;
• historical imagination;
• originality;
• precision, clarity and facility of writing

Note that candidates are NOT expected to write a cogent or structured piece of writing about the source, though they are expected to express themselves clearly and accurately.

For 21–30 marks, candidates will show that they have read the text closely, accurately and thoughtfully. As well as the more basic points mentioned below, they will spot:

• That the gifts are presented to the ‘in-laws’ separate from a dowry (presumably to the husband). This also implies that although Dikko’s personal advance may have been due to British support, he probably comes from an important family.
• That the wedding celebration at Katsina was ‘bigger’ than the one at Kano. So it is a reasonable (and accurate) inference that the first wedding at Kano was in her parents’ home and the second in her new husband’s and that the second was intended to impress both his subjects and (perhaps) the British. There is a suggestion of competitive display
• That the fact that two celebrations were held demonstrates that this wedding alliance was important to both families.

These candidates will have shown a power to generalise and separate (it does not matter if their speculations are factually wrong, so long as they are reasonable ones to make for the evidence before them). Very strong answers may try to use the passage as a ‘jumping-off point’ for thinking about wider aspects of the society described.

For 12–20 marks, candidates will have made sense of the text and thought of some things to say, but their judgements – though relevant – may be less penetrating, less clearly-expressed, or less easily sustainable from the text.  They would, however, be expected to note:

• That wedding celebrations are clearly an important method of displaying status: that this marriage was the ‘biggest’ at the palace suggests that it was extremely important.
• That power in the society was dependent on good relationships with the British colonial officers.
• That Ma’daki’s parents were obviously persons of importance and displayed that importance through material gifts.
• That Ma’daki herself possesses slaves, so therefore slavery is accepted in the society (and an alert candidate would note that the British were not suppressing it).
• That the husband had enough respect for his wife to take her to see his domain and then on other journeys.

For 0–12 marks, candidates will more or less have failed to interpret the text, writing comments that simply reproduce what is in it, or draw substantially upon extraneous material.  Answers in this category may be very short, or poorly-expressed.

	back to the top
	back to the History Aptitude Test: Introduction
	back to Applying to Oxford
	back to Prospective Undergraduates home page