2008 DBQ
Factors Shaping the Modern Olympic Movement
Point of view?
1. This Algerian competitor reaches out to these women in her country who think that women don’t have that capability to be an athlete.
No. This merely shows a basic understanding of the document. It doesn’t analyze the words in light of who this person is and why she’s saying this at this time or to this particular audience.
2. Since he was the chairman of the committee for Japan he must have a very strong influence on the general public, and his word is to be trusted.
No. We need an explanation of why he’s to be trusted – not merely an assertion of this trust. Plus, the implied link between his strong influence on the public and his trustworthiness doesn’t really follow logically. Very bad rulers also have a strong influence on the public but most definitely cannot be trusted.
3. It should be taken into consideration that the speaker in document six seemed a bit boastful of his own country, which is expected from someone in their government.
Maybe. Picking up on the tone of a document (in this case noting how the press release is “boastful”) can perhaps qualify for POV assessment … but we really need more explanation, especially after the claim that being boastful is “expected from someone in their government.” Oh, yeah? What is it about their government (the Soviet Union) – or the nature of a press release – that leads you to “expect” such a boastful tone? Explain, explain, explain …
4. These statistics can be relied on because they are accurate numbers and are statistics.
No. Statistics can be accurate or inaccurate. You have to explain why the International Olympic Committee’s statistics would be presumed to be accurate. Ex.: One can presume the numbers are accurate because the IOC has a vested interest in continuing its highly lucrative international games every four years, and fabricating or falsifying its statistics would surely come to light sooner or later, thereby undermining its credibility and perhaps imperiling future games.
5. The mayor is suggesting that without the 1964 Olympics Japan would not have become a world power. But this may be overstating the importance of the games because it takes much more to sustain a nation’s economy than just a two-week athletic competition. His comments, therefore, can be seen as self-serving in that they make his own role as the chairman of the organizing committee seem tremendously important.
Yes, yes, yes! Notice the language: “this may be overstating” rather than the less nuanced “is an outright lie” … his comments “can be seen as self-serving” and not “are clearly biased.” The main thing is that a clear explanation bolsters the analysis of his possibly “self-serving” comments. Also notice that this assessment of POV is three sentences, whereas the failed attempts earlier were just one.
Additional document?
1. Some documents that could have been helpful could be some articles from the judges. This would have been useful to see if there was any cheating going on between all of the competitors.
No. But it could be turned into an Additional Document point with a little elaboration: Such a document from the 1936 games would allow us to better evaluate the veracity, or truthfulness, of the British team official’s comments about the Nazis.
2. Additional documents that would have helped my argument would have probably been a chart or paragraph that illustrates the number of wars since the beginning of the modern Olympics, so that a trend could be established.
Probably. But to make it rock solid add this to the end: “so that a trend could be established and we could then clearly see whether the original rationale for the Olympics – that it would help prevent war – proved insightful or naively idealistic. Needless to say, such a document would no doubt support the latter.
3. Also a document showing the feeling of the losing competitors, so that we could see if war was on their minds, or rather just trying to beat them at the next Olympic games.
Not quite. Remember to keep the prompt and your thesis statement in mind as you explain the need for additional documents. This essay may have argued that nationalism shaped the modern Olympics, so explain the need for the document in terms of how it would better allow us to analyze nationalism as a factor. Be explicit: This would perhaps show the extent to which nationalistic thoughts pervaded the minds of athletes, especially those from countries not central to the Cold War or caught up in longstanding regional conflicts in South and East Asia.
4. An additional document needed is maybe a treaty proposed from one country to another as a result of the rising movement of the Olympics as a symbol of its true effects on creating peace between countries.
Yes. Barely. Even better: A peace treaty of this sort would directly confirm at least partially the founding dream of peace through athletic competition, despite the 20th century’s bloody record of warfare.
5. A helpful document would be a record of a country’s gross domestic income or wealth after sponsoring the Olympics showing its effect.
No. The prompt asks you to analyze the factors shaping the Olympics – not the effects of the Olympics. But the nature of the documents suggested here (economic statistics) is good. How about this: A helpful document would be one that shows the gross domestic product for major countries during the period 1980-2000 – data that could then be compared to the figures in Document 9. This would allow us to put the sharp rise in broadcasting revenue for the Olympics into better context and maybe allow us to evaluate whether the commercialization of the Olympic Games exceeded, fell short of, or closely tracked world economic output.