braindrainedAsh
Journalist
There are a lot of questions posted on this forum about how to analyze sources. I thought I would create this one-stop thread where everyone can share their advice on how to best analyze sources.
Please reply to this thread with your tips and tricks for analyzing sources.
Here are some of my tips:
There are three main things that you are asked to assess in the HSC when it comes to the sources in the WW1 section of the exam.
1. Usefulness- often the question specifies the type of purpose the source may be used for e.g. a historian is researching life in the trenches.... a source about life on the home front will not be very useful for this purpose. Also, usefulness depends on the content of the source. What does it tell you about WW1? Usefulness is also closely related to reliability and perspective.... the source may not be very useful if it is propaganda, or unreliable. A source may be useful in one way, e.g. in showing the uniforms soldiers had to wear, but not useful in another way e.g. it doesn't show the conditions in the trenches.
2. Perspective- perspective is very important. The perspective of an officer will be different to the perspective of a soldier, or a mother on the home front, or a government official. A German perspective will be different to a British perspective... the perspective of someone who was there at the time as opposed to someone who wasn't will be different. These differing perspective will shape the opinions and ideas reflected in the source.
3. Reliability- is the source propaganda? Is it a reliable account of what actually happened? Was the person who composed the source actually there or did they get their information from secondary sources? Was it written at the time of the event, or 20 years later? Did the composer have a certain motive that could have impacted upon the source reliability? Also, consider the audience.... what impact does the composer want the source to have on the audience? Do they want mums and dads to not worry about their soldier sons? Do they want people to vote a certain way in an election?
There is no magic formula to writing responses to these questions but there are a few key things that you can think about.
Some particular types of sources raise questions of their own that can be considered.
Photographs- could the photograph be staged for publicity? Who is the photographer? Does the photo look realisitic?
Memoirs- time can change people's memories of events. Sometimes historical events can be romanticized in memoirs. Also, the person writing the memoir could want to see things from a certain perspective in order to justify their own actions in the past... people want to paint themselves as the hero, not the villain when they write a memoir.
Newspaper stories- could information have been censored (think d-notes, which stopped the publication of classified information)? Does it tell the whole story? What perspective does it provide?
Personal letters- could soldiers be hiding the whole truth because they don't want to upset relatives or friends at home? Does it appear to be an honest account?
Diaries- these are often quite reliable if they are kept for personal reference only.
Extracts from textbooks- what sources has the author used for their information?
These are just a few things you can consider, feel free to post with stuff I have neglected to write about, and with your own tactics/tips/tricks about source analysis.
Please reply to this thread with your tips and tricks for analyzing sources.
Here are some of my tips:
There are three main things that you are asked to assess in the HSC when it comes to the sources in the WW1 section of the exam.
1. Usefulness- often the question specifies the type of purpose the source may be used for e.g. a historian is researching life in the trenches.... a source about life on the home front will not be very useful for this purpose. Also, usefulness depends on the content of the source. What does it tell you about WW1? Usefulness is also closely related to reliability and perspective.... the source may not be very useful if it is propaganda, or unreliable. A source may be useful in one way, e.g. in showing the uniforms soldiers had to wear, but not useful in another way e.g. it doesn't show the conditions in the trenches.
2. Perspective- perspective is very important. The perspective of an officer will be different to the perspective of a soldier, or a mother on the home front, or a government official. A German perspective will be different to a British perspective... the perspective of someone who was there at the time as opposed to someone who wasn't will be different. These differing perspective will shape the opinions and ideas reflected in the source.
3. Reliability- is the source propaganda? Is it a reliable account of what actually happened? Was the person who composed the source actually there or did they get their information from secondary sources? Was it written at the time of the event, or 20 years later? Did the composer have a certain motive that could have impacted upon the source reliability? Also, consider the audience.... what impact does the composer want the source to have on the audience? Do they want mums and dads to not worry about their soldier sons? Do they want people to vote a certain way in an election?
There is no magic formula to writing responses to these questions but there are a few key things that you can think about.
Some particular types of sources raise questions of their own that can be considered.
Photographs- could the photograph be staged for publicity? Who is the photographer? Does the photo look realisitic?
Memoirs- time can change people's memories of events. Sometimes historical events can be romanticized in memoirs. Also, the person writing the memoir could want to see things from a certain perspective in order to justify their own actions in the past... people want to paint themselves as the hero, not the villain when they write a memoir.
Newspaper stories- could information have been censored (think d-notes, which stopped the publication of classified information)? Does it tell the whole story? What perspective does it provide?
Personal letters- could soldiers be hiding the whole truth because they don't want to upset relatives or friends at home? Does it appear to be an honest account?
Diaries- these are often quite reliable if they are kept for personal reference only.
Extracts from textbooks- what sources has the author used for their information?
These are just a few things you can consider, feel free to post with stuff I have neglected to write about, and with your own tactics/tips/tricks about source analysis.
