How to answer Unit 2 questions

Section A Weimar Germany

4 Mark Questions - Inference

You will see a source for this question but you do not need to perform CPR - you just need to make inferences.

1. You can get 2 marks by simply describing the facts in the source itself. Its important that you use quotations that are relevant to the question.
2. The other two marks come from drawing a couple of inferences (reading between the lines) to find out what is going on beneath the surface. Try to establish the hidden meaning.

6 Mark Questions - Explain 

This type of question comes in three forms: 

- Explain why something happened.

- Explain the consequences of an event.

- Explain a process (how).

Why = give reasons

How = give ways
Consequences = give results.

10 mark – usefulness of a source. Source question so use CPR

Content

Test what is inside the box (analysis)

1.       What does the source show and what does this suggest/infer?

2.       Can you support this with your knowledge? Explain why this view in the source exists.

3.       Can you challenge this with your own knowledge? Explain that the view could be wrong, unfair or too limited.

Note – It is better to do 2 and 3 but it is not always necessary. You should do at least 2 or 3.

Purpose

Test what is outside the box (evaluation)

1.       Motive - Explain why the author has created this opinion. What might they be hoping to achieve? You may consider extra information about the author, country of origin or extra knowledge about the date to achieve this. Try to assess why they have created this view at this time.

2.       Audience – Who was intended to see this source? This will link to the motive. What impact did the author want to have on the audience?

3.       Purpose – steps 2 and 3 should allow you to make an overall assessment on the purpose of this source. You should summarise this and explain if this makes you trust the source more or less.

Reliability

Test what is outside the box (evaluation)

1.       Are there other aspects of the provenance which you can use to assess its reliability?

2.       Consider the nature of the source – diary, newspaper, photograph, autobiography etc.

3.       Are there any other comments about date, author, origin which you cannot relate to purpose

Judgement

1.       The content is useful for learning = Who, What, Where, When, Why, How

2.       Degree of usefulness (analysis) = Is the content accurate? More accurate = more useful. Less accurate = less useful.

3.       Degree of usefulness (evaluation) = Do you trust the source to be reliable? More reliable = more useful. Less reliable = less useful.

Section B - Hitler's Germany and Vietnam

12 mark questions – Hypothesis (THE COURT ROOM)

This usually starts by putting forward a suggestion or by making a provocative statement (this is known as the null hypothesis). You will then be asked if you agree or disagree with the statement. The key to the answer is to show balance (for and against).

Planning

1.       Identify which theme in the specification the question is based on 

Structure

The basic structure is like a court room trial. There should be three clear paragraphs: (Prosecution, defence and the jury)    

The argument for (prosecution) – develop 2 or 3 points

1.         Opening Argument:  “It is possible to support this point of view. Firstly…….”

2.         Make the Case - PEE (Points, Evidence and Explanation).

Point - Introduce an event, action or organisation which you will use in your argument.

Evidence - (what happened): Facts and details about the event, action or organisation.

Explanation - demonstrate how the evidence proves your argument

3.         Interpretation – You must make an effort explain how this interpretation has been formed. You might wish to try and argue who or what type of person was likely to believe this view.

The argument against (defence) – develop 2 or 3 points

1.         Opening Argument:  “However, it is also possible to argue against this point of view. Firstly…”

2.         Make the Case - PEE (Points, Evidence and Explanation).

Point - Introduce an event, action or organisation which you will use in your argument.

Evidence - (what happened): Facts and details about the event, action or organisation.

Explanation - demonstrate how the evidence proves your argument

3.         Interpretation – You must make an effort explain how this interpretation has been formed. You might wish to try and argue who or what type of person was likely to believe this view.

Conclusion – The Jury

·          * After considering both sides of the story decide if you agree with the null hypothesis or not.

·          * You may decide that it is true to an extent and so you will have to measure how far you agree.

·         * You may even consider how the two different arguments are inter-related and how they impact upon each other. However, you must still reach a judgment as to which side of the argument is most true