I would talk to your teacher to ask for tips that would be specific to your essays and writing style. However, I always had the basic guide that I'd follow to write my essay and I achieved an A*
The general structure that is taught is: intro, 2-3 supporting arguments, counter argument, conclusion. This should get you good grades if done well.
However, an easier way to get the higher grades would be: intro, 3-4 supporting arguments, conclusion. Instead of adding a counter argument paragraph, criticise your points within your supporting argument paragraphs but acknowledge why your argument is more convincing and why the criticism is weak. (e.g., if you have listed a policy that was effective that supported your argument, talk about why some may say it has weaknesses or limitations but then discredit this by acknowledging how the success outweighed this or the impact)
I've written a guide as to how I wrote my essays following this structure. However, if you'd prefer to use the first method, ignore the points that begin with a + and instead add the counter argument structure that is at the bottom of the page (include this before the conclusion).
Intro: (it may seem like a lot, but you only need a sentence or two for each point.)
- context, give the context to the era that is relevant to the question
- set out the question e.g., how has the context led to this question being asked
- open up the line of debate (what are the arguments for the question)
- set out your argument and why it is convincing
-t his should lead onto the factors that you'll be talking about in your essay. when talking about why your argument is convincing, back it up with the factors that you'll be talking about
- acknowledge the other argument
- closing line
Paragraph structure for your argument:
- point (your factor/event)
- explain/summarise the factor
- ensure you use specific factual detail in your explanation (e.g., date, names, events policies, etc)
- what is the significance/result of the specific factual detail
+ why there may be a weakness of this argument/why others may disagree
+ why is the counterargument irrelevant or not strong enough
- bring back to your factor and how does this support your argument (e.g., evidently this led to no radical change as...)
Conclusion:
- your overall argument (e.g., in conclusion it is evident that there was...)
- why you have come to this conclusion (bring in your factors, no new information, just a summary)
- acknowledge the counter argument and why it was a weakness (e.g., there is limited evidence, it was unsuccessful, they were few and far between, etc)
- concluding line (therefore...)
Paragraph structure for the counter argument if you wish to include this instead of criticising your points (structure 1):
-point (your factor/event)
-explain/summarise the factor
-ensure you use specific factual detail in your explanation (e.g., date, names, events policies, etc)
-why was this a failure or is irrelevant (reasoning as to why this is not the stronger argument)
-why is this an argument that you have not considered and why is your argument stronger
Hope this helps, I know it's very long and wordy but this was the method that I followed to get an A* in history. As mentioned before, if you don't want to use this method, I'd also recommend speaking to your teacher and asking the for specific advice tailored to your style.