The key to this F964/02 sources paper exam is to tick the relevant examiner boxes, this paper is all about exam technique, and good, well chosen comments about the sources, not making comments that are tangential at best.
In part a) You are comparing two sources AS EVIDENCE FOR a particular topic or key issue, too often an answer is given which makes a judgement based on the KEY ISSUE and NOT the sources AS EVIDENCE FOR.
Ideally the structure for part a) should be:
Introduction: what is SIMILAR about the sources, say what you are going to compare, are they both reliable...why? what do they say about the KEY ISSUE in the question, what is comparable is what you're looking to address here.
Paragraph on SIMILARITIES between the 2 sources. You should be looking at linking provenance to content throughout, as this ticks the boxes for AO1 (a well focused comparison on the QUESTION throughout). Do NOT just say, this source is reliable, WHY is that so? WHY might that link to the content? (AO1 & AO2) Obviously you need to analyse, what are the ideas expressed in the sources? compare similar ideas here, explain why their provenance has affected what they say, if its a speech they may very well be exaggerating and the source may be less reliable, does that resonate throughout the other sources as well? Come to a mini conclusion after you've made clear links between content and provenance, remember this is evaluation and judgement, so you're saying WHY is one source superior in answering the question to the other, is it more accurate, more reliable, does its content make sense with your contextual knowledge?
Paragraph on DIFFERENCES between the sources, what does one source say that the other one does not?, try to again weave provenance into this paragraph, evaluating the differences as to why one source omits certain information, contextual knowledge is useful here. Come to a mini conclusion based on the KEY QUESTION, as to why one source is better at answering the question than the other based on their differences, which one gives better content, why?.
CONCLUDE YOUR FINDINGS: Again evaluation is key (AO2) why is one source superior to the other based on content and provenance, DO NOT SEPERATE CONTENT AND PROVENANCE THEY MUST BE LINKED FOR TOP GRADES I CANNOT EMPHASISE THIS ENOUGH. Make a substantiated judgement which doesnt just say why one source answers the question better, judgement cannot just come out of the blue it needs to be supported, so you will link back to your similarities and differences paragraphs picking out why one source is superior, a brief summary if you will.
Will make a seperate post on the part b) questions later.
Thanks. We're told to make our point in our introduction so the examiner know exactly what our argument is e.g. there main reasons which caused ....... to occur were 1)...... 2)..... 3)...... but 1) was the most important reason etc... for an 'Assess the reasons' question. I think I'm okay with the structure of my knowledge based essays I think the key point is to always link. I'm always told to be more assertive, but other than that my essays are usually fine, it's making sure I include enough specifics for my evidence.
Anyone got any ideas what might come up on Tuesday? My teacher suggested a comparison between the BDR & DDR - I hate the comparison ones so much!
My teacher reckons it will be a Nazi Source analysis because of the amount of Post-War questions that have come up, such as the one in January. I agree with you there, I hate the comparison ones, especially with the Nazi and the DDR (June 2010), it was really hard to group the Sources!
Anyone have the questions January 2013 exams questions Foreign Policy 1945 -90?
FOR ANYONE DOING BRITAIN DOMESTIC ISSUES, HOW TO STRUCTURE
Point-what you are talking about,
Evidence-say what the point is
Anaylsis/explain- talk about your point and the effect it would have had in relation to the question
Evidence- another reason about the same point
Analysis/explain- talk about how this next point may effect the question
POINT- honours scandal
EVIDENCE- the honours scandal was when lloyd george was selling honours and using the money made to profit himself and the liberals
ANALYSIS- indicates why the coalition fell from power becuase the country was suffering with huge financal problems however lloyd george still spent the money on himself(something along this line). The sellin of honours also put a strain on lloyd georges relationship with the conservative and led the public to distance themselfs from the coalition. Overall leading to a huge loss in coalition support and illustrating why the coalition fell
EVIDENCE- lloyd george almost sold an honour to joseph robison, who was.....
ANALYSIS- also highlights why the fell from power becuase it led to public to see how irresponsible lloyd george was, once again leading to a decrease in coalition support.(also give some figures on how much honours lloyd george sold)
Do this for each paragraph, you need a total of 4 paragraps and you need to include and intro and conclusion.
My paragraph was just a somewhat detailed overview o what to include but you do need to add a bit more detailed analysis.
Also make you point clear by saying what you will be talking about, make evidence clear by saying