26 sundayherald 25 March 2007
History
STANDARD GRADE
B
EFORE the exam make sure you have seen
what a real Standard Grade paper looks
like. If you don’t, it might frighten you on
the day of the exam!
It’s vital to use time effectively. At General level
you have one hour and 30 minutes to do roughly 14
or 15 questions over three different contexts. Work
out how long you can spend on each question. It’s
really important to try to finish the exam paper.
At Credit level you will have one hour and 45
minutes for the three units but there is more to
read. At Foundation level you have an hour.
Do yourself a favour – don’t rush through and
leave early. Give the examiners a chance to give
you marks by writing as much as you can in the
time you have for each question. You will not lose
marks by writing something that is slightly wrong.
THE TWO ELEMENTS
Whatever level you sit, there will be Knowledge
and Understanding (KU) questions and Enquiry
Skills (ES) questions.
At General level, KU questions have a source
and then a question. If there are four marks, you’ll
earn three by using the information in the
source and the other mark will be given for
relevant information from your own knowledge.
If there are three marks then it’s two from the
source and one from your own knowledge.
At Credit level, KU questions have no sources
to start you off. Revise for these question by
preparing for the ‘big questions’ from the units
you have studied. These big questions can be
summed up as:
n Why did events happen?
n What were the main facts in the events you are
revising?
n What were the results of the events?
n In what way were certain things important?
Another thing to remember is the difference
between the words ‘describe’ and ‘explain’.
Describe means tell the detailed factual story
about the subject you are asked about. Explain
means give reasons why something happened or
what the effects of an event were.
In one of the contexts, at Credit level only, you will
be asked a question worth eight marks. The answer
to this question requires you to write a short essay
wirth eight marks. The instructions in the booklet
make it clear that your short essay must have have
a beginning, a middle and an end.
For example, a recent question in Unit 2
Context C asked: Describe fully civilian life in
Britain during the Second World War.
In this short essay you must start with a brief
introduction outlining the points you will develop
in your answer. Then you must write several
paragraphs. Write a new paragraph for each
separate topic. For example, write a paragraph for
each of the following: civil defence and precautions
taken against bombing, the effects of bombing
and rationing, evacuation, the Home Guard and
so on. You could also deal with the effect of
the war on morale and how people relaxed or
entertained themselves.
End with a conclusion summing up what you
think were the most important effects of the war
on civilian life.
But be careful.Only spend about 10 to 12
minutes on the whole question. After all, it’s
only worth double the questions that you are
allowing five minutes for.
Enquiry Skills (ES) ask you to judge sources.
Remember to check where the source comes
from, when it was produced and whether it is
primary or secondary. Also consider if it is biased
or neutral or if it gives fact or opinion. If you do
say a source is biased, remember to quote a short
part of the source that shows the bias – otherwise
a marker will think you are just guessing.
These are all things you should consider when
judging a source, so try to work in such comments
to your answer.
Anything in your ES answers which shows that
you are judging a source and supporting your
comments with evidence is much better than just
describing the source.
You will be asked to compare sources, so you
have to identify in what ways they agree or disagree with each other. Do not just describe one
source and then the other. The secret here is to
compare the sources point by point. For example,
if you were comparing two people, you would not
describe each person separately. You would compare their hair, size, clothes, shoes, facial expression
and so on. The same is true of the sources.
You might get a question about a cartoon or
photograph. Make clear in the answer you know
what subject the cartoon is about. Explain the
meaning of any words included in the cartoon.
Are they being used literally or ironically?
Try to explain what all the people or things in
the cartoon mean and how they are relevant to
the question.
THE MINI INVESTIGATION
The Issue: At all levels, Foundation, General and
Credit, in the Enquiry Skills part of the Changing
Life in Scotland and Britain section you will find a
sub heading, “The issue for investigation is ...”,
and then a box with a statement inside it. For
example:
The issue for investigating is:Working conditions
in coal mines were bad in the 1840s.
In the General exam question you will be given
two sources such as this. At Credit you will have
three sources.
Source A is from evidence given to government
investigators finding out about working
conditions in coal mines in 1841.
“My name is Jane Watson. I have worked underground for 33 years. I have nine children. Three of
my babies were born down the mine but two of
them were dead.
“My work is dragging carts of coal with a metal
chain round my belly. My children help me load
the cart. I don't want them to work in the mine but
I have no choice. I feel old and worn out although
I am only 40 years old.”
Source B is from the Renfrew Review’s report
about an investigation into coal mines published
in 1842.
“The Commission investigating conditions
in the coal mines has described the terrible
conditions in which men, women and children
work in our coal mines. But is it the whole truth?
The report made no mention of the Davey safety
lamp which has reduced the risk of explosions or of
many mine owners who provide schools for their
children and pay money out of their own pocket
to women who are expecting a baby and unable
to work.”
Questions
1. How useful is Source A about working
conditions in coal mines in the 1840s? (3 marks)
2. What evidence is there in Source A that working
conditions in coal mines were bad? What evidence
is there in Source B that working conditions in
coal mines were not so bad? (5 marks)
3. To what extent were working conditions in coal
mines in the 1840s bad? Use evidence from the
sources and your own knowledge to come to a
conclusion. (4 marks)
Remember that your first question in the Credit
‘issue for investigation’ section will only ask you to
evaluate one source, not two as was the case in
previous years, so beware if you are using past
papers from before 2005.
Your answers
There are, of course, certain ways to answer these
types of question.
ABOUT THE
AUTHOR
JOHN Kerr is principal
teacher of History at
Balerno High School,
Edinburgh, and also
works within SQA as
an exam marker and
setter for Higher
history. He is also an
author of many text
books covering both
Standard Grade and
Higher history.
For Question 1 you could say: It is a primary
source from the 1840s, from a time when women
and children worked in mines. (Remember at
General level it is never enough just to say a source
is primary or secondary; always develop that
comment by saying why that is significant.)
The source is giving eye witness comments
about working conditions in coal mines in 1841 to
a government investigator, finding out about
working conditions in coal mines, therefore it is
likely to be unbiased. There is evidence of women
and children working, as Jane Watson says she
drags carts loaded with the help of her children.
(Remember you can only get one mark for giving
details of the content of the source.)
However, the evidence comes from only one
person and no other opinion is included.
For the second question remember there are
two parts to it. You must select and organise
evidence from both sources that does and does
not support the issue that working conditions in
coal mines in the 1840s were bad.
From Source A, evidence that working conditions in coal mines were bad includes: pregnant
women work in mines; the work is hard with
25 March 2007 sundayherald 27
chains around workers bellies while they drag the
coal; children work in mines; a feeling of being
“worn out” by work.
Evidence from Source B that working
conditions in coal mines were not too bad
includes: the writer claims the reports are not the
whole truth; the writer comments on new safety
lamps and fewer explosions; the writer comments
on schools for children in some areas; the writer
comments on money paid to women while
unable to work.
In the third question, you must reach a conclusion and decide whether or not you agree with the
issue that working conditions in coal mines were
bad in the 1840s.
You should make use of source evidence used in
previous answers to present a balanced summary
of the arguments. You must then use your own
knowledge to develop your answer further.
At Foundation level you will be asked to “Write
your findings ...”.
That just means you should make up your mind
about the main question. Do you agree with it or
not? Write down words and phrases from source
and any more information you think is relevant to
support your decision.
INTERMEDIATE 2
Your Intermediate 2 exam booklet will contain
three parts. The first part is called ‘The Short
Essay’. You will see there is one essay title for each
of the contexts you have studied. You must choose
one title to answer.
PART 1 – THE SHORT ESSAY
Choose one essay from the sections you have
studied. You might want to do this question as
your last question in the exam. Many candidates
benefit from doing this as they give themselves
the best chance of scoring highly without the
danger of failing to complete the rest of the exam.
Pay attention to the instructions. It says you
must write an essay “using your own knowledge”
and that it should contain “an introduction, development and a conclusion”. This is important. You
cannot get a good mark without those things.
Here is an example of The Short Essay question
in Part 1 of the paper: Explain why so many Irish
immigrants arrived in Scotland after 1830.
Your introduction should set the essay in context. You might start like this: There were many
rersons why so many Irish immigrants arrived in
Scotland after 1830. Many came to escape poverty
and hardship, while others were attracted by the
hope of a good life in Scotland.
You could then go on to develop points.
1. Escape from poverty – low wages and unemployment. 2. In the 1840s a potato famine caused
starvation in Ireland. 3. Many moved to find jobs.
4. Scotland was only a short journey away from
Ireland. 5. Letters home from Irish immigrants in
Scotland encouraged others to move.
Each of these numbered points can be developed
in separate paragraphs showing off what you know.
A suitable conclusion is a paragraph at the end of
your essay that makes clear you are summing up
your essay and providing a final overall answer to
the question set. It should be two sentences long
and preferably start with a phrase like “Finally...”
The Earl of
Shaftesbury, shown
here visiting the coal
mines of the Black
Country in the 1840s,
introduced a bill
prohibiting the
employment of
women and children
under 13 in the mines
Photograph:
Hulton Archive/Getty
PART 2 (THE SCOTTISH AND BRITISH SECTION)
AND PART 3 (EUROPEAN AND WORLD)
You must choose one context from Part 2 and one
from Part 3, and a third context from either Part 2 or
Part 3. You will have three questions in each part.
To answer the questions you must use “recalled
knowledge and information from the sources”
where appropriate.
One question could ask for an explanation such
as: “Why was the Beveridge Report considered
important?”
In these questions you must write the points
made in the source in your own words as well as
including information from recall. You are more
likely to score high marks if each point is well
developed and in a separate sentence.
A second type of question (but it could appear
as your second or even first question in a context)
could be a source evaluation question. A typical
style of this question is: “How useful is Source B as
evidence of the work of the Cheka?” (From the Red
Flag section).
In this type of question you should remember
you will not gain marks by copying out the
information given in the exam. You must show the
value or usefulness of the source by writing about
its origin and/or authorship, content, possible
purpose and any ommissions or bias. This allows
you to judge the source.
Finally, at some point in either Part 2 or 3 you
will be asked a comparison question such as:
“Compare the views of sources A and B about the
methods used by the Suffragettes.”
To answer this question, make your judgement
and support it by matching precise points from
the sources, comparing one point in one source
with a point from the other source. Do not just
describe one source then the other one. That is
not comparing!
One of these questions will be a “describe” question, such as: “Describe how Mary Queen of Scots
was treated in England after 1568.”
For this type of question you must be able to
write five well-developed points from your recall.
There are five marks for this question.
HIGHER GRADE
PAPER 1
You have two essays to write in one hour and 20
minutes. That means 40 minutes maximum for
each essay. You must not write too much on your
first essay. Two evenly-balanced answers will give
a better total than one polished essay and one
scrappy rushed effort.
No matter what sections you study, the markers
are looking for the same things.
Essays that rely on telling a story in answer to
the question will only score a bare pass. The essay
might contain some irrelevant information, but it
does at least show the writer knows what the
question is about and there is some attempt to
use the information to arrive at a conclusion.
Better essays will show that the writer understands what the question is really about. It will
contain a lot of relevant information, but
structured in such as way as to back up the points
made in the introduction. In each paragraph you
should make clear how it links to the main question. This would get a B pass.
The best essays also have detailed information,
a good and relevant structure and candidates
show they know that history is about debate.
Every essay in the paper will ask in different ways
why things happened or what you think about a
Turn to page 28
28 sundayherald 25 March 2007
HISTORY
From page 27
certain topic. At A pass you should be able to use
information to analyse and explain, as opposed to
just describing. You should explain the different
points of view about a topic and reach an appropriate conclusion which answers the question set.
Any essay you write must have a introduction,
development and a conclusion.
Your introduction must make clear that you
understand what the question is asking you to do.
Make a brief reference to the title and state the
decision or opinion you intend to support.
In your introduction you should outline the
main ideas or arguments you will develop and
explain in the middle section of the essay.
Here’s a typical question from the Later Modern
section on Britain and Scotland as well as a
possible introduction to show you how it’s done.
The question is: “Why was the right to vote given
to more and more people between 1867 and 1918?”
Here was a good introduction to the question:
“There were many reasons why the franchise [the
right to vote] was extended to more and more
people in 1867, 1884 and 1918. (1)
These reasons included trying to win advantages
for a particular political party (2), changing
attitudes towards the “lower classes” (3) and the
effect of the Great War (4) that acted as a catalyst
and speeded up change.
Probably the most important reason was the
effect of the industrial revolution (5) that changed
where people lived, how they worked and how they
felt about their position in society.
Finally, another important reason why the
franchise was extended was the change in political
ideology (6) since the 1850s.
The middle part is the longest. In the introduction you’ll see there are six numbered points.
When you write your own introductions, it’s a
good tip to faintly number your main ideas – that
tells you how many separate middle section paragraphs there should be.
It must have several paragraphs with a new
paragraph for each individual point or idea. Try to
write a key sentence to start each new paragraph
that outlines what it will be about.
The detailed knowledge contained in the
paragraph must be relevant to the key sentence.
Write a short, one sentence summary at the end
of each paragraph which links to the main
question.
Your conclusion is vital. Without one your essay
will barely pass.
The Berlin Wall was
justified by East
Germany as a means
of keeping subversive
westerners out
Photograph:
Paul Schutzer/
Time Life/Getty
Make your mind up about the question and
make clear what your overall opinion is.
Summarise the main points in your argument
and also try to prioritise them, which means
deciding which were the most important points in
your answer.
PAPER 2
This contains the sources and questions for all the
Special Topics studied for higher – but do not worry.
You only have to deal with one Special Topic.
25 March 2007 sundayherald 29
opinion saw the wall as a way of imprisoning the
people inside East Germany.
In conclusion, the source is of limited value, only
showing a biased, selective set of reasons
presented by the Warsaw Pact for building the wall.
Level/Paper
Time
Turn to page 30
Succeed
Friday May 18
Intermediate 1
9am-10.30am
Intermediate 2
9am-10.45am
Higher (Paper 1)
9am-10.20am
Higher (Paper 2)
10.40-12.05pm
Advanced Higher
9am-12pm
Foundation
9am-10am
General
10.20am-11.50am
Credit
1pm-2.45pm
The Contextual question
You will also be asked to what extent a source
explains something. Here is an example:
How fully does Source A reflect public opinion
about the remilitarisation of the Rhineland in
March 1936? Use the source and recalled
knowledge.
Source A is from the Dundee Courier and
Advertiser, 9th March 1936, referring to Germany’s
reoccupation of the Rhineland:
“There can be no doubt in the mind of the
country. It will refuse to be led into a new world
war. The plain truth is that the Treaty of Versailles
is in tatters. It was an imposed Treaty, valid just as
long as the country on which it was imposed
remained too weak to resist. That time was passed
when Germany recreated her army last year. If
Germany’s revival was to be resisted it should have
been resisted then.”
Here is a good answer:
In March 1936 Hitler remilitarised the
Rhineland area of Germany. His action broke the
Test
HISTORY EXAM
TIMETABLE
The Comparison question
This question requires you to make clear
connections and comparisons between sources.
The skill being assessed is your ability to compare
and that does not mean your ability to describe
two sources.
Make it easy for a marker to give you marks by
following the recommended style of answering.
Start your answer with the word ‘Overall’ and then
identify the main difference between the sources.
For example, in the Appeasement and Road to
War section you will probably get a source for
appeasement and one against it. So your answer
could start “Overall, Source A supports a policy of
appeasement while source B is opposed to it.”
Then you should use the phrase “In detail” and
then write the rest of your answer comparing the
sources point by point.
If you want a good mark it is not enough just to
quote a sentence from one source then compare
by quoting from another. By all means do that as
part of your answer but you should also explain
the point being made by your extracts in your own
words. That is what is meant by a developed comparison.
www.leckieandleckie.co.uk
Source A: from a Declaration of the Warsaw Pact
Powers, 13 August 1961.
The Western Powers continue to use West Berlin
as a centre of subversive activities against the
German Democratic Republic (GDR) and all other
socialist countries. They smuggle their agents into
the GDR for all sorts of subversion, recruit spies
and incite hostile elements to organise sabotage
and provoke disturbances in the GDR.
Due to the aggression of the reactionary forces of
the German Federal Republic and its NATO allies,
the Warsaw Pact member states must take necessary measures to guarantee their security and,
especially, the security of the GDR in the interests of
the German people themselves.
The governments of the Warsaw Pact member
states propose to establish an order on the borders
of West Berlin which will securely block the way to
the subversive activity against the socialist
countries. In this way reliable safeguards and
effective control can be established around the
whole territory of West Berlin, including its border
with East Berlin.
Here is a good answer to the question.
This source, produced by the communist
Warsaw Pact, is useful to an extent but is a one
sided, biased viewpoint.
It was written during the Cold War crisis in
Berlin, leading to the building of the Berlin Wall
in 1961. Berlin had been divided between the
victorious allies at the end of World War Two and
West Berlin was in the heart of East Germany but
the Warsaw Pact believed West Berlin was a centre
for spies – “The Western Powers continue to
smuggle their agents into the GDR for all sorts of
subversion.”
The Warsaw Pact wanted to justify their actions
and claimed they were forced to build the wall by
“the aggression of the reactionary forces of the
German Federal Republic and its NATO allies”.
On the other hand, the source does not make
clear other concerns of the Warsaw Pact. Firstly,
East Berlin was used as an ‘escape’ point for many
people wanting to start a new life in the west. Over
three million people had escaped into West Berlin.
Secondly, the Warsaw pact was also concerned
about the prosperity gap between west and east.
Workers from the east could see the higher
standard of living in the west and wanted to be
part of it.
Thirdly, the Warsaw Pact does not mention that
while the west was a successful democracy the
communist state used force to control its people
and was very unpopular.
Finally, the Warsaw Pact was concerned they
were losing the propaganda war and although
they claimed the wall was defensive, most world
Practise
Each Special Topic will provide you with five
sources, some primary and some secondary.
Some may be visual, for example a drawing,
photograph or a cartoon, but most will be text
based.
There will be five questions. Three of the
questions will target an individual source each but
one question will ask about two of the sources and
one of the questions will ask you to deal with three
of the sources.
Paper 2 is worth a total of 30 marks. Each of the
five questions has its own number of marks
indicated after the question. One of the questions
will be worth eight marks, the others will usually
be worth five or six marks.
The Paper 2 examination lasts for one hour and
25 minutes (85 minutes) and your target is to
answer all five questions in that time.
Each source-based question will require you to
use a specific skill in answering them, such as
comparing or evaluating.
In comparision questions you should compare
the content of the sources point by point. In the
other questions you will be asked to use your own
knowledge and the source content to reach a
decision such as how useful, typical or reliable a
source is. You could also be asked how fully a
source explains something.
Here is an example of a source evaluation
question from the Cold War section (Special
Topic 8).
How useful is source A in explaining Warsaw
Pact concerns over the situation in Berlin in 1961?”
The answer to this question is worth 5 marks. In
reaching a conclusion you should refer to the
origins and possible purpose of the source; the
content of the source, recalled knowledge.
Evaluating visual sources
In recent years illustrations such as pictures,
drawings, cartoons, posters and maps have all
been used in some of the Special Topics of
Paper 2.
These questions often ask you to set a cartoon
or illustration in context and then analyse it,
making clear the meaning of the illustration or
the intention of the artist.
The secret of a good answer to a picture question
lies in knowing what the illustration is about and
what point of view the artist has about the event.
Every source in the exam comes with a brief
introduction outlining where the source comes
from and when it was produced. This information
is always useful in letting you know what the
source is about.
In your answer, you should not only describe
the content of the cartoon but also try to relate all
the features in the cartoon or picture to the
question asked.
You must also use recalled information to
evaluate the cartoon and reach an appropriate
conclusion.
Revise
This answer combines recall with effective use of
quotes to reach a full evaluation of the source.
The answer deals with the origins of the source
by explaining where the source came from and
the historical background that led to the Warsaw
Pact producing the source.
The answer also identifies bias in the source
and indicates this is an attempt by the Warsaw
Pact to justify their actions. This deals with the
instruction to comment on the purpose of the
source.
The content of the source is explained and used
to back up points made in the answer. There is also
a large amount of recalled knowledge here. This
answer could reasonably expect to gain full marks.
30 sundayherald 25 March 2007
HISTORY
From page 29
Treaty of Versailles and the Treaty of Locarno,
signed in 1925, in which Germany voluntarily
agreed to the status of the Rhineland.
Source A reflects partly public opinion about the
remilitarisation of the Rhineland.
By writing “it will refuse to be led into a new world
war”, the Dundee Courier and Advertiser is referring
to the strong anti-war feeling in the country.
Britain had been traumatised by the Great War
and did not want to repeat it. The Great War had
been “the war to end all wars”.
The public were also worried about a future war
in which “the bomber would always get through”.
Gas bombing would put civilians in the front line
and thousands would die.
In 1936, 11 million signatures on a peace
petition show that Source A is quite right.
By writing, “The plain truth is that the Treaty of
Versailles is in tatters”, the paper is referring to the
many times the treaty has been changed or broken,
such as the end of reparations, German rearmament,
the Anglo-German naval treaty. In Britain there was
also a strong feeling that the treaty was too harsh
and unrealistic and by the 1930s there was a feeling
that alteration of the treaty was acceptable.
Finally, the paper states “If her resurgence was to
be resisted it should have been resisted then.”
This is a reference to the belief that Germany was
now too strong since it rearmed in 1935 and that
Britain could do little about it now.
Overall the paper deals with many of the
attitudes, although it ignores some points.
It does not mention the feeling that social
problems in Britain in the 1930s were more
pressing and as Lord Lothian said: “Hitler is only
going into his own back garden.” In other words, he
was attacking nobody so it was inconceivable that
Britain would risk a war when Hitler had used no
violence to simply move his own troops within his
own country’s borders.
This is a good answer because there is a clear
introduction which sets the scene, or context, of
the source. By doing this, the candidate is also
TAKE THAT STEP...
To a host of exciting programmes in:
Art, Design & New Media • Business Administration
Social Care • Computing • Construction • Creative Industries
E C D L and P C Passport • Early Education & Childcare
Hairdressing & Beauty Culture • Hospitality & Catering
Photography • Music Performance & Sound Engineering
Supported Learning • Scottish Wider Access to Higher Education
Working with Communities
To Order YOUR copy of our new 2007/08
Prospectus ring our Advice Hotline on:
0141 778 2426
Visit us at www.jwheatley.ac.uk
See us at our new EASTEND CAMPUS!!
Ring for more information.
showing recalled knowledge, necessary in terms
of the question, which instructs: “use the source
and recalled knowledge.”
The answer is a good length and effectively uses
quotes from the source to introduce paragraphs
which then include recalled knowledge to explain
and develop the points made in the answer.
The answer is also balanced by a consideration
of points relevant to public opinion at the time,
but which are not mentioned in the source.
Finally, there is a conclusion which answers the
question and ties together the main points in the
answer. This is worth full marks.
Another evaluation task – the opinion question.
An opinion question is based on a source in which
the author makes clear his or her opinion or view
about a person or event. You will be asked how far
you agree or disagree with the view.
This example is from the special topic on the
Crusades.
Question: How well does the source illustrate
the character of Bohemond as a crusading leader?
(6 marks)
Source D: from the Alexia by Anna Comnena,
written in 1140.
“For he [Bohemond] was quick, and a man of
very dishonest disposition. Although inferior to all
the Latins who had crossed over into Asia, he was
more malicious and courageous than any of them.
But even though he thus excelled all in great
cunning, the inconstant character of the Latins was
also in him. Truly, the riches which he spurned at
first, he now gladly accepted. For when this man of
evil design had left his country in which he
possessed no wealth at all (under the pretext,
indeed, of adoring at the Lord’s Sepulchre, but in
reality trying to acquire for himself a kingdom), he
found himself in need of much money, especially,
indeed, if he was to seize the Roman power. In this
he followed the advice of his father and, so to
speak, was leaving no stone unturned.”
Here is a good answer:
Bohemond is described as malicious and
dishonest but also courageous. Bohemond had
little or no wealth in his own country so accepted
riches to go on crusade. The source claims
Bohemond wanted to gain wealth and power. He
was ambitious, even wanting to seize the power of
Byzantium if he could.
This opinion of Bohemond seems supported by
the facts. Bohemond was in favour of abandoning
his oath to Alexius. He was prepared to negotiate
with the Muslim Firouz while at the siege of
Antioch and Bohemond refused to travel further
towards Jerusalem once he gained Antioch
and indeed was insistent that the other leaders
kept to their oath so that Bohemond could have
Antioch if he could capture it. This evidence
suggests that the character of Bohemond was well
illustrated in the source.
This is a good answer because the source is used
well with appropriate information taken from it.
There is useful and relevant recall used to
support the opinion in the source.
The answer ends with an explicit link to the
question and a direct answer to the question asked.
Useful tips for answering this type of question
include identifying the opinion of the writer and
selecting appropriate quotes to show those
opinions.Which, if any, of the opinions do you agree
with? Use your own recall to defend the opinion.
Which, if any, of the opinions do you disagree with?
Use your own recall to explain why you disagree.
Reach a decision. Do you or do you not agree
with the opinions in the source? Sometimes your
answer will contain the word ‘partly’, sometimes
not, in this type of question.
End with a conclusion which answers the
precise question set. Go back and read the
question again carefully to make sure your conclusion is the best it can be.
The eight mark question
Whatever Special Topic you study for Paper 2, one
of the five questions will always be worth eight
marks. Just like the other questions in Paper 2, the
eight mark question is predictable and if you
follow the processes you will be successful.
As it is a bigger question in terms of marks and
the number of sources used, some students think
the eight-mark question is harder. Like all the
other questions in Paper 2, it is a different type of
question, that’s all. And some other questions in
the paper will be worth six marks – so eight isn’t
that many more!
In the eight-mark question, you will be asked a
Bohemond I, Prince of Antioch, portrayed here
question about three sources. You will be told
which sources to use in the question.
You will be expected to write at least one page of
A4 and preferably more.
You will be expected to refer to all three sources
AND a lot of your own knowledge. The question
will always end with “Refer to sources ... and your
own knowledge.”
You will be expected to answer the question.
That seems obvious but every year candidates
think they will pass this question just by
describing the sources. They don’t pass!
The eight mark questions usually ask ‘big’
overview type questions which aim at the heart
of the topic. For example, in Special Topic 7 on
Appeasement, the eight-mark question will usually
ask about a big theme that runs through the whole
topic such as why Britain followed a policy of
appeasement. Other examples of big overview
questions have been:
From ‘The Crusades’: To what extent did
developments in crusading during the Third
Crusade lead to a decline of the crusading ideal?
From ‘Patterns of Migration’: How successfully
did Irish immigrants assimilate into Scottish
society during the period 1830s-1930s?
Since you will have used two of the three
sources earlier in the exam, clearly you will not be
asked exactly the same question as before about
the sources so you will not score well if you simply
repeat the answer you wrote previously. The secret
of success lies in using the sources in the different
ways required by each question.
Markers have a scheme which lays out roughly
how many marks should be given to certain types
of answer.
In a very good answer, you will use the
25 March 2007 sundayherald 31
Succeed
Here is your question: How fully do sources B, C
and D and help us to understand British policy
towards Germany in the late 1930s?
Now you are ready for your exam. Good luck. On
the other hand, when a famous golfer was told he
had been lucky when he holed a long putt, he
replied, “You know, the more I practice the luckier
I get.” In other words, you don’t need luck. You
have worked hard and you know what to expect in
the exam. Eat and sleep well before the exam.
Allow plenty of time to arrive at the place you will
sit the exam. Be as relaxed as you can be. Use time
carefully and all will be well.
Test
Source D is from Why England Slept by J.F.
Kennedy, 1940.
“People felt that Hitler in 1938 was merely
bluffing. People felt that Chamberlain was badly
taken in, but I think Chamberlain could not have
fought even if he had wanted to. I believe that
Chamberlain was sincere that thinking that a great
step had been taken towards healing one of
Europe’s problem areas. Most people in Britain felt,
‘It’s not worth a war to prevent the Sudeten Germans from going back to Germany’. They failed at
that time to see the larger issue, involving the domination of Europe. But although all these factors
played a part in the settlement of Munich, I feel
that Munich was inevitable on the grounds of lack
of armaments alone.”
What markers thought of the Appeasement
answer
First of all, it starts with an evaluation of the
sources in terms of the question asked and sets
the scene for the balanced answer which follows.
It establishes that British policy was mainly
appeasement but the policy changed.
The answer deals with all three sources fully. It
uses quotes from all the sources appropriately to
support points made in the answer.
This answer also uses recalled knowledge to
develop points made in the sources, for example
by referring to the League of Nations failures.
Once the sources have been fully dealt with,
there is a balanced evaluation which considers
other reasons for appeasement not identified in
the source. Lots of recalled knowledge is used here.
Finally, the person who wrote this answer
looked carefully at the question and saw the
reference to British policy in the late 1930s.
Since Britain went to war in 1939, clearly the
policy of appeasement changed and that makes
a good answer since the writer has thought
about the question.
For all those reasons this answer gets into the
full marks zone – eight marks out of eight.
Practise
Special Topic 7: Appeasement and the Road to
War, to 1939
Study the sources below and then answer the
questions which follow.
Source B is from an article by Richard Cockett in
Modern History Review, February 1990.
“All that Chamberlain’s appeasement did in
practice was to swell Hitler’s appetite for territorial annexation. Appeasement did exactly the
opposite of what it had been designed to achieve.
Arthur Mann of the Yorkshire Post argued quite
correctly that by repeatedly surrendering to force,
Chamberlain has repeatedly encouraged
aggression. Mr Chamberlain’s policy has throughout been based on a fatal misunderstanding of the
psychology of dictatorship.”
Photograph: Mary Evans Picture Library
Source C is by RJ Overy from The Origins of the
Second World War, Seminar Studies in History.
“Could the war have been prevented? It is sometimes argued that if Britain and France had been
prepared to confront the dictators sooner, even to
the extent of fighting for the Rhineland in 1936 or
the Sudetenland in 1938, then major war would
have been unnecessary. This is to ignore the reality
confronting British and French leaders in the 1930s.
They were faced with a confusion of different pressures both at home and abroad. As it was ,they
chose to find areas for compromise which did not
fatally weaken British or French interests. It was not
lack of statesmanship that was at fault, but the
basic weakness of the international structure
which Britain and France were trying to salvage.”
www.leckieandleckie.co.uk
sources (by quoting for example), develop them
by explaining the meaning of individual points
and including your own knowledge. End by
giving a balanced, thorough answer to the
question. This will get you seven or eight marks
depending on the amount of detailed knowledge
you include.
If you refer to relevant parts of the sources (for
example by quoting), use a limited amount of
recall and reach a short and basic evaluation of
the sources as the question asks, you will at least
pass with between four or six marks. Many people
get this band of marks.
You will not pass if you only select some
relevant evidence from the sources, but do not try
to evaluate the sources or use any recall. You will
only get one, two or three marks out of eight
depending on how much evidence you select
from the sources. In other words, you will not pass
just by describing the content of the sources.
Revise
circa 1100, was a leading crusader
Here is an answer to the Appeasement
question:
British policy towards Germany in the late 1930s
was mostly aimed at appeasing Hitler, but by 1939
that policy had changed.
The sources are partly useful in helping us to
understand that policy.
Source B is perhaps the least helpful since it is
opposed to appeasement. However, it implies some
reasons such as Chamberlain’s belief that he could
understand Hitler and his actions, summed up in
the source as “the psychology of dictatorship”. The
source also implies appeasement was meant to
reduce Hitler’s demands since it says “All that
Appeasement did in practice was to swell Hitler’s
appetite” which was “the opposite of what it had
been designed to achieve.”
Source C claims that it is necessary to understand “the reality confronting British and French
leaders in the 1930s” so as to understand appeasement. It states that “different pressures both at
home and abroad” were to blame for appeasement
but does not go into detail. What the source does
blame is “the basic weakness of the international
structure which Britain and France were trying to
salvage”. After the League of Nations was seen to be
powerless to stop aggression, appeasement was
adopted as a way of finding “areas for compromise”
instead of war.
The third source suggests appeasement was a
result of politicians misjudging Hitler – “People felt
that Hitler was merely bluffing” – and that public
opinion was not prepared to support a warlike
policy. Britain was too weak to fight because of a
“lack of armaments” and also appeasement may
have been the result of failing to see “the larger
issue, involving the domination of Europe.”
Overall, the sources help us to understand many
of the reasons behind the policy of appeasement.
However, other reasons were also important such
as fear of communism spreading if Hitler was overthrown and Germany weakened.
Britain was also concerned about protecting its
empire in the face of threats from Japan and Italy
and although Hitler was the main enemy, Britain’s
resources were too overstretched to deal with
conflict on three fronts.
The voting public also had to be considered. Not
only did they not want a return to the Great War,
they were also afraid of a future war which would
devastate cities with gas bombing.
Finally, the question asks about British policy
in the late 1930s and at no point do the sources
deal with the change in British policy which led
to Britain declaring war on Germany in
September 1939.
So overall the sources only give some reasons why
appeasement was adopted and none at all about
why that policy changed.