Transcript Walking Mock Paper 2

5 Questions in 1. 5 hours
Building Blocks to
Success
Reliable?
Why?
What does
it say?
Who?
When
?
What type of
source ?
Useful?
Similar?
Timing – 1.5 hours for 5 Questions
• Start with spending 10 minutes to read
through/highlight/note around the sources
• Question 5 – 30 minutes (worth 19 Marks!)
• Questions 1-4 = 50 minutes
Type of Source
Diaries
Nature ( some things to be aware of)
Give a day to day eyewitness, first-hand view, but only
one view
Memoirs
Views of someone who experienced the event. May be
coloured by hindsight
Posters
Reflect the view of the time. Purpose is to get you to
support a view and is often for propaganda purposes
Photographs
Can give accurate details, but also a narrow view
History book
Cartoons
Can reflect the views of the time. Often designed to
Cartoon
make fun and to turn
a person towards or against
Posters
something and to ridicule
Biography/textbooks Often well researched and useful
Speeches
Can be one sided and designed to persuade and put a
certain point of view across.
Speeches
Photographs
Key Phrase in every Question is..
Use details of the source and your own
knowledge to explain your answer
For every question:
1. Use the Words of the Question
2. Refer to the source
3. Add your knowledge relevant to the Question.
What to do when you’re given a
source…
•
•
•
•
•
What does it tell you?
Who wrote it?
Why did they write it?
When did they write it?
Where do their alliances
lie?
The 5Ws
The 5Ws
What is it (photo, letter,
poster, diary etc)
Who is it by? Author?
What – propaganda or first
What does it tell you?
What – quote or say
what you see
Why - Motive – to
criticise or get support?
When – what was
happening at the time?
Why was it produced?
Motive ?
When was it produced?
hand account?
Who – why published, tone
of the language, how
reliable?
What is it = poster
Who is it by? Government
What – woman needed on
the land
Why was it produced?
Recruit woman to the Land
Army?
When? 1917CK - Only 6 weeks of wheat
left due to Uboat
campaign. DORA
confiscated land and
woman put to work on
land
Usefulness:
“How could source A be useful for…”
1. To tackle this type of question, you need to ask yourself: is the
source relevant to the topic or the question?
2. However, examiners aren’t trying to trick you! (I promise), If they
ask ‘is something useful’ then it almost certainly will be. The
question is therefore how useful.
So you need to ask yourself the following things…
-
What information does it give you that could be useful in your
study?
-
Does the information it gives you provide a complete picture or
does it still leave you with unanswered questions?
How useful is this source to an historian studying the issue of
votes for women? Use details of the
source and your knowledge to explain your answer
The source is useful because it’s a poster for
women suffrage so we can tell what arguments
the Suffragettes were using. They are saying it is
unfair that a woman can be a mayor and not vote
while a man can be a lunatic
and still vote. Even though the source shows extreme
views and is biased showing women favorably as
doctors etc and men in a bad way it is still useful
because it shows how women suffrage campaigners
used propaganda to win people over to their cause.
Not Useful as only shows one of the methods used or
is unrepresentative of the range of methods used
However, suffrage campaigners used many other
methods too such as giant parades, banners,
disrupting political meetings and even
firebombs.
Which source is more useful as evidence
of Old Age Pensions?
B useful because it shows the rivalry
between Liberals and Tories
Trying to get support of OAPs
Refer to what the poster says
C useful in showing how
Labour was using pensions
as a political weapon to
embarrass and criticize the
Liberals. Shows the scale of
poverty
QUOTE
Why do these sources give different
views of the National Insurance Act?
Why do these sources give different
views of the national Insurance Act?
•
•
•
These two sources give different views because one is from the Liberal Party and the
other is from their main opponents the Conservative Party. Source D is trying to sell the
National Insurance Act to people while Source E which is two years after the
introduction of the Act is trying to bring about changes to the Act by highlighting how
many people still hate paying for it.
Source D was published before the National Insurance Act was passed. It was trying to
generate support for the National Insurance Act and to win support for the Liberal
Party by showing ordinary working people that the Liberals were helping them. It tries
to do this by describing National Insurance as a New Dawn which will provide people
with benefits like unemployment benefit and health care. It shows Lloyd George as a
friendly doctor. It does not mention that workers had to pay a contribution to these
benefits and in many industries it was compulsory to join the National Insurance
scheme.
Source E is trying to undermine the Act because it disagrees with it. During this period
the Liberal Party carried out a range of welfare reforms like School Meals, Old Age
Pensions and National Insurance because it became convinced that the state had to act
to help the poorest in society. Many Conservatives believed that people should be
encouraged to support themselves and we can see in Source D that Conservative MPs
are making this case at public meetings
Reliability:
•A reliable person is someone you can trust to do something
•A reliable source is one that you can trust to tell you something
•An unreliable source is one that you think might be biased, untrue,
exaggerated or otherwise not be trusted.
•Usefulness and reliability are closely linked – but they are not the
same thing. A source can be unreliable but still useful. It can tell you
what a person thinks and what their attitude was.
How do you test a source for reliability?
Content- relevant to question?
Origin- where’s it from? Who wrote it?
Purpose- WHY produced?
-Does the source fit in with your own knowledge of the time/events?
Trustworthy??
 The key is to think about WHO produced the
source and WHY?
 Does it contain fact that agrees with your
knowledge?
 Look at the tone/language. Does it convey a
biased opinion or an angry, critical tone? Is the
person trying to persuade??
Purpose and tone?
Labour MP in opposition to the Liberals
wants to make David Lloyd George look
bad. Aim to criticise the pension which
was introduced in 1909.
Trustworthy??
 The key is to think about WHO produced the
BEsource
CAREFUL!!
and WHY? Biased sources are
 Does
it contain fact that agrees with your
still
USEFUL
knowledge?
They
a person’sDoes
opinion
 Lookshow
at the tone/language.
it conveyat
a the
biased opinion or an angry, critical tone? Is the
time
person trying to persuade??
Which Source do you trust
more?
B is more trustworthy than C. B is a ...
It tells us ...............................................
I know that this is true because .
C is less trustworthy because ..
It makes the factories seem clean and safe.
This was to encourage women to work in the
munitions factories
Source C
Prisoners were held down by force, flung
on the floor, tied to chairs and iron
bedsteads while the tub was forced up
the nostrils. After each feeding the pain
gets worse. We cannot believe that any
of our colleagues will agree that this
form of prison treatment is justly
described as necessary medical
treatment.
From the medical journal The Lancet
published in August 1912
How far do these two sources
agree about the treatment of
suffragettes whilst in prison? (9)
Level 5: Explains and evaluates the similarities of both sources, using
relevant contextual knowledge, or cross-reference, or
tone/language/purpose supported by detail from both sources. [8-9]
I can see this because Source C, written in the medical
journal The Lancet in 1912, argues that ‘Prisoners were
held down by force, flung on the floor, tied to chairs and
iron bedsteads while the tub was forced up the nostrils’.
This suggests that the treatment of suffragette women
whilst in prison on hunger strike was extremely brutal.
This is in agreement with Source D. I can see this because
Source D shows me a suffragette woman being held down
by force by two members of staff whilst a doctor forces
food down a tube into her nostrils. The procedure looks
extremely violent and cruel. Around it says ‘Torturing
women in prison’ which further supports the claim the
act is inhumane.
Source D
I believe these two sources may agree as they both support my own
knowledge that the treatment of women whilst on hunger strike
was cruel. As a response to hunger striking, in 1909 the
government introduced force feeding. This was a horrendous act
which caused much damage to women and created much support for
As shown in source D, the
suffragettes publicised to gain publicity and
sympathy for women, this is likely to be
the purpose of Source D. However Source
C has not been produced to create
sympathy for the suffragettes, the author
is genuinely shocked at how these women
were treated
women enduring this.
‘In the period 1890-1918 government action improved the lives of
people in Britain.’ How far do you agree with this interpretation?
Agree with statement
Disagree with Statement
Apply your knowledge
Apply your knowledge
Add sources that support what
you are saying
Add sources that support what
you are saying
Finish with a balanced
conclusion
I partially agree with this interpretation. The Liberal government brought in
measures to help children like the School Meals in 1906. Old Age Pensions
also improved lives. As Source B shows, pensioners over 70 got 5 shillings
a week or 7s 6d if they were a couple. Other Acts like National Insurance
1911 improved lives with unemployment and sickness benefit. Source D talks
about National Insurance in 1911 as a new dawn.
On the other hand, there is an argument that government action did not improve
people’s lives, or did not make much difference. Many measures like School
Meals were not compulsory so it was up to local councils to decide
whether they brought them in. Acts like the Children’s Act were difficult to
enforce often because parents did not even know about the Acts. Although
measures like Old Age Pensions helped many old people it was still not that
common for people to reach the age of 70. Source B shows how one woman
died because you did not qualify for pensions until you were 70.