History of Singapore Airlines

In some ways, the history of Singapore Airlines mimics the history of modern Singapore. The main airline serving Singapore underwent several name changes that reflected what was happening geopolitically: it was called "Malayan Airways", then "Malaysian Airways", then "Malaysia-Singapore Airlines", and finally, "Singapore Airlines" in 1972. Also, just like Singapore rapidly moved from Third World to First, Singapore Airlines leapt from obscurity to become a world-class airline. This leap was rapid: for example, in 1977, Singapore Airlines used the Concorde for the Singapore-London route, becoming one of only a few airlines to ever use the majestic aircraft.

The airline has also been central to Singapore's image. Singapore Airlines has a reputation for being efficient, on-time, and delivering impeccable service, exactly what Lee Kuan Yew wanted foreigners to think about Singapore. In fact, Lee Kuan Yew valued a world-class Singapore Airlines so much that he intervened twice when airline pilots went on strike:

In the video, Lee Kuan Yew describes how he talked to the pilots face-to-face and got them to stop their strike. Towards the end of the video, you can hear his famous quote: "Whoever governs Singapore must have that iron in him or give it up. This is not a game of cards."

Here's an interesting video about the history of Singapore Airlines:

Part 2:

New book on Singapore's history

Fourteen academics have collaborated to produce a book detailing the first fifty years of Singapore's independence. A key focus of the book is how Singaporeans have reacted - and adapted - to PAP government policy changes since 1959. However, the book's focus is very broad, even touching on sensitive topics such as race and religion. There's even coverage of rock and roll.

Check out an article about the book, and if it seems interesting, buy it on Amazon.

Structured Essay Question Guide

Structured essay questions (SEQs) account for 40% of marks in the history paper. As such, it is important to learn how to answer the SEQ section well.

Here are some structured essay question notes. While these are based on an old syllabus, there is a lot of overlap between the old syllabus and the current syllabus. The five sets of notes listed below are still very relevant; 90% or more of the content still can be tested.

1. Impact of World War I
2. Communist Russia
3. Nazi Germany
4. War in Europe
5. War in Asia Pacific

There are some notes on Imperial Japan; but this is not in the syllabus as of time of writing. 

Edit: Notes are now hosted on Google Drive instead of Dropbox.

Sources A and B differ. Does that mean that one of them is wrong?

On occasion, one may see a question like one of the three below:

1. "Sources A and B give different accounts of the impact of Hitler's rule. Does that mean that one of them is wrong?"
2. "Sources A and B give different accounts of whether Stalin persecuted Jews. Does that mean that one of them is wrong?"
3. "Sources A says that Hitler faked the burning of the Reichstag,  but Source B says that Hitler did not. Does that mean that one of them is wrong?"

The answer is often no. The sources often are just representing different points of view. For example, it may well be Source A is talking about the economic impact of Hitler's rule, while Source B is talking about the political impact. The political impact could be bad but the economic impact could be generally good. Alternatively, Hitler's rule could be good for most Germans, but bad for the Jews; the sources could be talking about impacts on different groups. Finally, Hitler's rule could be largely beneficial before the war started, but disastrous after the war started, and the sources could be talking about different time periods.

However, it is often important to read the sources carefully, as the answer can sometimes be "Yes, one of the sources must be wrong". For example, for question 3 (the burning of the Reichstag), the reality is that either Hitler set fire to the Reichstag on purpose, or he did not. Therefore, answers of "no" are unlikely to get full credit.

The key to answering such question is to determine whether it is a difference in opinion, or a difference in fact. If it is difference in opinion, then neither of them need to be wrong. If it is a difference in fact (and they are both talking about the exact same thing), then one of them has to be wrong.

Usefulness Source Based Questions

Source A. A cartoon of Stalin which appeared in a British newspaper around 1935.

"How useful is Source A in helping you understand Stalin's rule?"

Usefulness questions are among the toughest questions in the Source Based section. Many weak students tend to write very little for this question, or worse still, nothing at all. You shouldn't be doing this! It is easy to score at least half of the points for the usefulness question, and it is not too difficult to score nearly full marks.

"How?", I hear you cry.

First and foremost, remember the Golden Rule: A source is never completely useful, nor completely useless. As such, your answer should be two sided. That is, you should start your answer with,

"Source A is useful to a large/limited/small extent in ... "

Thereafter, you should have one paragraph explaining the useful aspects of the source, "Source A's usefulness can be seen in... "

After you have finished explaining the useful aspects of the source, go into the other side of the question. "However, the usefulness of Source A is limited. This is because it does not..."

Finally, conclude.

Next, when explaining in what areas it is useful (or not useful), make sure you explain as clearly as possible. To take the cartoon as an example, you could say that "The cartoon is useful in illustrating the authoritarian aspects of Stalin's rule. This is evident from Stalin towering over all the people." Notice the first sentence identifies a specific area of Stalin's rule and the second sentence gives evidence direct from the source (by describing the relevant aspects).
For the "not useful" part of the answer, you might say that it is useful for explaining the political aspects of Stalin's rule, but not the economic aspects of his rule, because it looks like the cartoon was referring to political aspects rather than the economic aspects.

Third, you may wish to comment on reliability by comparing to your contextual knowledge or cross-referencing to other sources of the Source Based Question. In general, the more reliable a source is, the more useful it tends to be. However, even sources that are not very reliable can still be useful, as they can illustrate a particular point of view (e.g. propaganda). When referring to contextual knowledge, be sure to quote specific events (in this case, you could certainly mention that one example of Stalin's dictatorship was that he sent his opponents to gulags, or concentration camps). When cross-referencing to other sources, remember to quote directly from them. It may also be worth examining the provenance of the source. In this case, the fact that the cartoon was published in a British newspaper can either be used to support or challenge its reliability.

These are the main points for answering usefulness questions. If you've grasped them, you should be confident of scoring well in usefulness questions. But the only way to be sure that you've understood these points is to apply them. So practice, practice, and practice usefulness questions until you've got the hang of them. Good luck!

Source Based Similarity and Difference Questions

A very common type of question in the Source Based section is similarity/difference questions, also known as comparison questions.

Such questions can be phrased in various ways:

1. To what extent are Sources A and B similar?
2. To what extent are Sources A and B different?
3. In what ways are Sources A and B similar?
4. In what ways are Sources A and B difference?
5. Compare and contrast Sources A and B.

First and foremost, remember to read the question carefully. Some of the questions seem similar, but need to be answered in different ways. For example, "In what ways are Sources A and B similar?" requires you to give only similarities, but "To what extent are Sources A and B similar?" requires you to give both similarities and differences. In general, "To what extent" requires a two-sided answer, while "In what ways" only requires a one-sided answer. Finally, "Compare and contrast" requires a two sided answer.

Next, remember that sources can be compared in several ways:

• Content
• What do the sources actually say?
• Tone
• Is one sarcastic, and the other objective?
• Purpose
• Is one meant to criticize Hitler, and the other meant to rally support for Hitler?
• Is one meant to provide an objective viewpoint of the facts, and the other to provide information regarding a very specific viewpoint? 
• Provenance
• Is one a picture source, and the other a textual source? Is one a speech, and the other a cartoon? Even if both are the same type: is one a government speech and the other a non-government speech? Et cetera.

Third, remember to quote or describe findings from the source in order to support your claims.

Last but not least, if the question starts with "To what extent", remember to conclude with a sentence or short paragraph describing to what extent the sources are similar or different.

Once you do this, you should ace the question.

Reliability Questions

Questions on reliability come out in most Source Based Questions. Moreover, they are typically worth more marks than inference questions as well as similarity/difference questions. As such, it is important to learn how to answer reliability questions well.

The first thing to note is that reliability questions can come disguised in many forms. The most obvious is "To what extent is Source A reliable...". But there are more, for example:

• Do you believe what the source says...
• Does the source prove that...
• Explain whether the source is credible with respect to...

(Usefulness, however, is a separate concept from reliability)

Tip #1:

One important thing to note is that sources are almost never completely reliable nor completely unreliable. As such, you should write at least one paragraph explaining the reliable aspects, and at least one paragraph explaining the unreliable aspects.

Tip #2:

After you have determined the type of source (photograph/text etc), look at the content of the source. Does your contextual knowledge (i.e. the knowledge you have from your textbook and your teacher) agree with that of the source? For example (this example is made up, as are many subsequent examples in this post), suppose you have a source that says:

Source A:

"We have always been very fair towards the Jews." - Adolf Hitler, before the 1936 Olympics in Berlin

You would immediately start by writing 'This source is to a large extent unreliable', because you know from your studies that the Nazis persecuted the Jews. Furthermore, to get good marks, you should immediately support your claim by giving specific, concrete examples. You could say that Jews were required to resign from all government jobs. You could also say that Jews were sent to concentration camps. You could also cross-reference to other sources (i.e. compare Source A to other sources, and see whether the content from Source A is consistent or inconsistent with the content from other sources. For example, if Source B tells you something different, you could point that out by quoting from it.).

Tip #3: 

Also, comment on the purpose. Source A is a quote of Hitler before the 1936 Olympics. Why might Hitler want to make such a statement? Perhaps Hitler may have wanted to portray a positive image of Germany to foreigners so that they would come to Germany. (Trivia: A major boycott of the 1936 Berlin Olympics nearly succeeded). It's worth writing this down to cast doubt on the reliability of the source.

Tip #4: 

Don't forget who wrote the source! In this case, it's Hitler. It's not really worth commenting for Source A, but for other sources, it might.

For example:

     Source B: Soviet government photograph of 1933 showing tractors on a collective farm

(Photo is taken from BBC)

Suppose the question was "To what extent does Source B prove that the Soviet Union invested a lot in collectivization?"

You might start off by saying something like "It proves to a limited extent, because from the photograph I can see a lot of tractors, which clearly cost a lot of money..."

But thereafter, you should raise some concerns. In particular, you might want to say "However, I have some doubts about its reliability. This photo was a Soviet government photograph, and the Soviet government was well known for producing propaganda in order to make the country more successful than it really was. Therefore, this could have been staged."

Tip #5: 

Comment on typicality. You could also say, "Moreover, Source B is only one photograph. It only shows what happened in one part of the Soviet Union, and may not be representative of the entire country (and the USSR was the largest country in the world)."

However, I would not spend too much time talking about typicality because not a lot of credit is given for it.