Edexcel A2 History - Cold War

Definitely factor by factor, not one paragraph on each source alone - however, as long as you cross-reference both ways then the two may be quite similar as it is often the case that one source focuses most on one factor (if that makes sense).

What I do is I go in with at least three different colour highlighters and when I'm reading the sources I highlight a different factor in a different colour whenever I come across it, making it very easy to cross reference as you can see how the factor you are writing about in your paragraph is covered by each source.

Assuming I'm disagreeing with the question (which I find it easier to do), the structure I tend to use is:
- Intro
- Paragraph 1: Factor agreeing with the question (usually focused on in the first source) and aspects of the others sources which agree with this factor.
- Paragraph 2: Factor that you think was most important. Maybe begin this paragraph or end the previous paragraph with what you see as the major flaw in the argument of the first sources (e.g. if the question is about Reagan, then you might mention how he was in power since 1981 but the Cold War didn't end until the late 1980s under Bush) Again, mention parts of the other sources which agree with this factor. At the end of the paragraph, you should use this factor to counter-argue the factor in the question (e.g. if you've written a paragraph on Gorbachev's new way of thinking then you might say that Reagan's tougher stance meant nothing without this as Gorbachev's predecessors had refused to give in to Reagan).
- Paragraph 3: Other factor mentioned in the sources. Evidence from any source which mentions this factor. Compare this factor with the previous factors to explain why it is less important than that in paragraph 2 and establish whether you think it is more or less important than that in paragraph 1 - maybe use where the sources contradict each other or your own knowledge to criticise the arguments that you disagree with.
- Conclusion

Remember to always link back to the factor in the question - it is not a generic 'why did the Cold War start/end' question so you must compare the significance of any factor you mention with that in the question.

The plan you gave was fine, but I wouldn't go in with a pre-conceived notion of which sources you are going to compare with what, as I hope my structure helped to convey - you cannot tell what each source will cover so you don't know what you will be able to compare!

I went off on a bit of a tangent, but I hope this helped somewhat!

What does everyone think a peaceful coexistence/thaw question could be? Is it possible it could focus around Khrushchev and whether or not he was committed to it? I'm just trying to cover every possible angle... ahh

Haha I hate the last minute period of thinking up the trickiest questions they could possibly ask.

But I think all the questions on all the periods basically come back to the same debates. For the thaw, it's how why did it not end the Cold War, how committed were they, how far did relations improve etc.

And really for me the answer is always that they they is plenty to say they weren't committed to it, or that it wasn't that significant, but actually peaceful coexistence was never intended to end the war, and in that sense they were both fully committed to it.

Remember to all the Soviet leaders, peaceful coexistence was only the idea that communism didn't have to go to war with capitalism, instead it could just wait for it to bring itself down.

Thank you so much! this helped a lot! I just panicked and saw that in 2012 they asked whether Eisenhower's cold war diplomacy was confrontational or coexistence.

Lets just hope it wont be worded disgustingly!

My plan was to read a bunch of example essays on everything. There's no point me trying to cram - if I don't know it now I probably won't remember it XD

I'm praying for peaceful coexistence or sino-soviet. Preferably one of those 'was there a thaw or not?' questions

Good luck everyone!

For a detente question on how committed the superpowers were, how would you guys structure it?

Very: Moscow Summit, Basic Principles Treaty, SALT 1, everyone loves each other.

Very: Helsinki, human rights, recognition of borders.

Actually not at all: Jackson Vanick amendment, criticisms in US of Helsinki, Angola, Afghanistan, SALT 2 cancelled, boycott Olympics etc.

Might add a little bit in the conclusion along the lines of detente was never supposed to end the Cold War, just to let them sort themselves out. In that sense they were pretty committed to it.

any predictions? I've left my revision far too late and could use any help i could get :/

Brilliant thanks! What do you mean by Angola, it's not in my notes

Hi , has anyone looked at last years (2015) part B- start of the Cold War. It's so hard and it's freaking me out.

Hi , has anyone looked at last years (2015) part B- start of the Cold War. It's so hard and it's freaking me out.

Hey guys,
does anyone have any exemplar answers on the topic sino- soviet or the thaw?
Would be a great help! Thanks and good luck!!!!