NEA GUIDE
Examiners Report
● DO: well argued, focused, effectively structured w/ powerful evaluative line for both
sources + interpretations, interpretations linked to Q, clear footnotes/bibliography.
● DON'T: fail to address date full date range, struggle to provide judgement in response
to set Q, use sources and interpretations simply to offer uncritical commentary, don't
just describe views of others and neglect your own judgement.
● Footnotes, appendix, bibliography = NOT part of word count (4500).
● AO1 - DON'T: try to include as much factual info within word limit eg. lengthy
descriptions/contextual overviews only obscure higher level skills + weaken sense of
powerful, focused argued response; DO: be selective with supporting material.
● AO2: highest differentiator between high + low marks = effective evaluation. DON'T:
use sources simply as evidence, take them at face value w/ little attempt to argue
value of content or provenance; DO: better responses linked material in the source to
particular aspect of argued response for AO1 and came to a clear judgement about
how valuable the source was as evidence, include sources in appendix.
● AO3: key element is effective evaluation - DO: quote short sections of chosen
interpretation, evaluate contrasting interpretations, recognise strengths and
weaknesses of each interpretation to arrive at firm judgement as to how far they are
convinced by each - link academic profile of a historian to the views expressed within
+ show that historical interpretation is not produced in a vacuum and that various
factors may influence the extent to which that particular view is deemed convincing.
AO2: Tip to link source = attach it at the end of the last paragraph as a piece of evidence
then in the next paragraph treat it as analysis of the source and what it shows about your
previous or next argument eg. “The value of X is significant as it highlights” - Evaluate
provenance, tone, content, argument.
1. Source must be significant to the topic + best if it has a clear argument as this will
give you something to make a substantial judgement about.
2. Find lots of detail about the author of the source, their motivation and credibility,
audience it addressed, time produced (social, economic, political, religious context).
3. No limit to the length of source but get a handle on the content + argument - be wary
of very long sources which require too many words to cover all ins and outs.
AO3: Tip to link historians = “It is important at this point to assess two of the key historians
writing about X. Both were (writing at the same time?)… but differ in their evaluation of…” -
You need to make judgements about the comparative validity of different interpretations.
1. Make your point about the issue you are writing about.
2. Explain your historian’s overall argument and how it relates to your point/argument.
3. Look at aspects of the argument + supporting the view w/ evidence that backs up the
point being made.
4. Look at aspects of the argument + illustrate weaknesses of the argument using
evidence that contradicts the argument, and use this evidence to counter the
historian’s view.
5. Compare aspects of one historian’s view with that of another and using supporting
evidence argue why one interpretation is more convincing than the other.
© 2024 Grades Express
Examiners Report
● DO: well argued, focused, effectively structured w/ powerful evaluative line for both
sources + interpretations, interpretations linked to Q, clear footnotes/bibliography.
● DON'T: fail to address date full date range, struggle to provide judgement in response
to set Q, use sources and interpretations simply to offer uncritical commentary, don't
just describe views of others and neglect your own judgement.
● Footnotes, appendix, bibliography = NOT part of word count (4500).
● AO1 - DON'T: try to include as much factual info within word limit eg. lengthy
descriptions/contextual overviews only obscure higher level skills + weaken sense of
powerful, focused argued response; DO: be selective with supporting material.
● AO2: highest differentiator between high + low marks = effective evaluation. DON'T:
use sources simply as evidence, take them at face value w/ little attempt to argue
value of content or provenance; DO: better responses linked material in the source to
particular aspect of argued response for AO1 and came to a clear judgement about
how valuable the source was as evidence, include sources in appendix.
● AO3: key element is effective evaluation - DO: quote short sections of chosen
interpretation, evaluate contrasting interpretations, recognise strengths and
weaknesses of each interpretation to arrive at firm judgement as to how far they are
convinced by each - link academic profile of a historian to the views expressed within
+ show that historical interpretation is not produced in a vacuum and that various
factors may influence the extent to which that particular view is deemed convincing.
AO2: Tip to link source = attach it at the end of the last paragraph as a piece of evidence
then in the next paragraph treat it as analysis of the source and what it shows about your
previous or next argument eg. “The value of X is significant as it highlights” - Evaluate
provenance, tone, content, argument.
1. Source must be significant to the topic + best if it has a clear argument as this will
give you something to make a substantial judgement about.
2. Find lots of detail about the author of the source, their motivation and credibility,
audience it addressed, time produced (social, economic, political, religious context).
3. No limit to the length of source but get a handle on the content + argument - be wary
of very long sources which require too many words to cover all ins and outs.
AO3: Tip to link historians = “It is important at this point to assess two of the key historians
writing about X. Both were (writing at the same time?)… but differ in their evaluation of…” -
You need to make judgements about the comparative validity of different interpretations.
1. Make your point about the issue you are writing about.
2. Explain your historian’s overall argument and how it relates to your point/argument.
3. Look at aspects of the argument + supporting the view w/ evidence that backs up the
point being made.
4. Look at aspects of the argument + illustrate weaknesses of the argument using
evidence that contradicts the argument, and use this evidence to counter the
historian’s view.
5. Compare aspects of one historian’s view with that of another and using supporting
evidence argue why one interpretation is more convincing than the other.
© 2024 Grades Express
