1.4 1.4.1 [Explaining of information from Source 1D– L2] The introduction of a special currency for West Berlin without consulting the Soviet Union The Western Powers policy of separation of Germany Any other relevant response (any 1x2) (2) 1.4.2 [Interpretation of information from Source 1D L2] – Blocking of all roads leading to West Berlin Trains were not allowed to enter East Berlin All canal routes leading to West Berlin were blocked Any other relevant response (any 2x2) (4) 1.4.3 [Explaining the usefulness of Source 1D –L3] The source is useful because Payyushkin as Soviet ambassador expresses official views on the reasons for the blockade The source is useful because Payyushkin gives insight to the manner on how Western Powers dealt with crisis in Berlin The letter is dated an indicates that it was written during the crisis in Berlin The letter is an official response to the manner in which the Western Powers dealt with the crisis It is a primary source because . . . . . . . . . Any other relevant response (any 2x2) (4) 1.5 [Interpretation and evaluation of evidence from Sources 2A to 2D L3] – West Berlin was cut off from Western Europe West Berliners could not get to work, visit family The decision to airlift supplies to West Berlin was dangerous as it could have led to war The blockade increased the militarisation of Berlin by both the Soviet Union and the US The blockade increased the tension between East and West The blockade led to the establishment of military organisations (NATO) and (Warschu) Any other relevant response Use the following rubric to assess the paragraph LEVEL 1 Uses evidence in an elementary manner and cannot explain how blockade intensified Cold War tensions between Marks: 0 2 the Soviet Union and US. – Uses evidence partially to report on the topic or cannot report on the topic. LEVEL 2 Evidence is mostly relevant and can explain how blockade intensified Cold Marks: 3 5 War tensions between the Soviet Union – and US. Uses evidence in a very basic manner
1.4 1.4.1 [Explaining of information from Source 1D– L2] The introduction of a special currency for West Berlin without consulting the Soviet Union The Western Powers policy of separation of Germany Any other relevant response (any 1x2) (2) 1.4.2 [Interpretation of information from Source 1D – L2] Blocking of all roads leading to West Berlin Trains were not allowed to enter East Berlin All canal routes leading to West Berlin were blocked Any other relevant response (any 2x2) (4) 1.4.3 [Explaining the usefulness of Source 1D –L3] The source is useful because Payyushkin as Soviet ambassador expresses official views on the reasons for the blockade The source is useful because Payyushkin gives insight to the manner on how Western Powers dealt with crisis in Berlin The letter is dated an indicates that it was written during the crisis in Berlin The letter is an official response to the manner in which the Western Powers dealt with the crisis It is a primary source because . . . . . . . . . Any other relevant response (any 2x2) (4) 1.5 [Interpretation and evaluation of evidence from Sources 2A to 2D – L3] West Berlin was cut off from Western Europe West Berliners could not get to work, visit family The decision to airlift supplies to West Berlin was dangerous as it could have led to war The blockade increased the militarisation of Berlin by both the Soviet Union and the US The blockade increased the tension between East and West The blockade led to the establishment of military organisations (NATO) and (Warschu) Any other relevant response Use the following rubric to assess the paragraph LEVEL 1 Uses evidence in an elementary manner and cannot explain how blockade intensified Cold War tensions between the Soviet Union and US. Uses evidence partially to report on the topic or cannot report on the topic. Marks: 0 – 2 LEVEL 2 Evidence is mostly relevant and can explain how blockade intensified Cold War tensions between the Soviet Union and US. Uses evidence in a very basic manner Marks: 3 – 5