Modern History Source Based Exam (1 Viewer)

[clareh08]

Hey there,
So I have my first assessment for Year 12 coming up so was wondering if anyone would be able to give me any tips/tricks for studying and writing about sources
It's on the first three dot points of the syllabus- stalemate and nature of trench warfare
Thanks! x

 

[Smooth Operator]

Perspective, reliability and usefulness.

 

[dinomyte]

Source analysis is a skill so you should practice lots of it and get it marked by your teacher.

Some things to take note of:

- just because the source takes on a certain nationality, it does not mean the source is biased. You can only say if it is biased if the evidence in the source suggests so.

- just because the source is biased, it does not mean the reliability is lowered. In most cases, I would say that yes, a biased perspective does not present a factually accurate account however sometimes the bias is also reliable for providing the perspectives of soldiers at the time

- just because the source is a primary source, it does not necessarily make it reliable - while it is a first hand account, you must also consider if there is bias, emotive language, is it from an official source? If so, was it subject to censorship? You should take note of official sources because censorship was prevalent during this period, and they often romanticised soldier life and hid images of dirty trenches from the public.

- always talk about corroboration of sources I.e can the factual information in your source be backed up by other sources?

- for trench warfare in particular you need to know your content as this will help you for the usefulness section. Compare your knowledge of the dot point and the information provided in the source, and see if the source supports your knowledge, and then SPECIFY it. i.e this source is useful for showing that the soldiers indeed suffered gangrene, lice, freezing temperatures etc.

Good luck!!! I remember my first assessment on source analysis and I accidentally called the Daily Mail a reputable source and lost marks for it ahahaha

 

[Smooth Operator]

Also, make sure if you're doing your perspective or reliability tests and you're providing examples from the source, it shows to the marker you're really getting in to the source. As it's all well and good to call a source biased but provide an example from the source which indicates it.

 

[limplict]

Source analysis is a skill so you should practice lots of it and get it marked by your teacher.

Some things to take note of:

- just because the source takes on a certain nationality, it does not mean the source is biased. You can only say if it is biased if the evidence in the source suggests so.

- just because the source is biased, it does not mean the reliability is lowered. In most cases, I would say that yes, a biased perspective does not present a factually accurate account however sometimes the bias is also reliable for providing the perspectives of soldiers at the time

- just because the source is a primary source, it does not necessarily make it reliable - while it is a first hand account, you must also consider if there is bias, emotive language, is it from an official source? If so, was it subject to censorship? You should take note of official sources because censorship was prevalent during this period, and they often romanticised soldier life and hid images of dirty trenches from the public.

- always talk about corroboration of sources I.e can the factual information in your source be backed up by other sources?

- for trench warfare in particular you need to know your content as this will help you for the usefulness section. Compare your knowledge of the dot point and the information provided in the source, and see if the source supports your knowledge, and then SPECIFY it. i.e this source is useful for showing that the soldiers indeed suffered gangrene, lice, freezing temperatures etc.

Good luck!!! I remember my first assessment on source analysis and I accidentally called the Daily Mail a reputable source and lost marks for it ahahaha

Great advice here but just a clarification of a couple of things:

- Blatant bias does reduce the reliability of the source, but it may still be useful in providing knowledge regarding a particular perspective
- Dinomyte's said a really important thing about primary sources - don't automatically assume they're reliable! E.g one of the sources in one of my Mod exams was a letter from a soldier. Sure, he was an eyewitness and a direct participant in the events of WWI but his use of emotive language detracted from its reliability. Similarly, do not automatically assume secondary sources are unreliable/not useful because they often have the benefit of hindsight and a larger source of evidence to base their conclusions on.

Some other tips:
- my teacher (who's marked the Hsc question for this before) always stressed to us that you have to assess the reliability first and then discuss what it's useful for. Also try and include a limitation for the source in your paragraph on usefulness
- never compare the sources! Always deal with their perspective, reliability and usefulness separately
- the nature of trench warfare encompasses not only the conditions of the trenches e.g the rats, the cold, trench foot etc; but also the weapons and tactics of trench warfare, the structure of the trenches and what the life of an average soldier was
- for the question that requires you to use your own knowledge, don't forget to use all the sources specified in the question!! Normally it's an 8 marker, and if you don't use both sources then the maximum mark that you can get (in the HSC at least) is a 4/8. One of my classmates made that mistake and it really brought his mark down. Also, it's good to use mainly your own knowledge in this question - anyone can quote the source and extract information from the sources so what will differentiate you from the rest of the state is the stuff that you talk about that's not in the source. My teacher suggested that you mention each source once, then answer the question using your own knowledge for the rest of it (and if you're mentioning/quoting something from the source then don't forget to name which source you're taking it from! Seems obvious but some people do forget this)

Good luck for your exam

 

[callipygian]

Source analysis is a formula. Honestly, if you follow the basic formula with a decent amount of skill, you're guaranteed a good mark.
Basically:

Paragraph 1: Source A reliability:
- State the type of source and link to reliability
- State whether primary/secondary and link to reliability (but never say that primary is more reliable than secondary or vice versa, be specific to the source you are analysing (e.g. "Source A is a primary source and hence was written at the time of the events described, adding to reliability because the details are likely to be accurate, but detracting from reliability because the author was emotionally involved in the events which may have caused bias.")
- State perspective and link to reliability
- State other fun facts about the source (look at the little descriptor at the top, talk about type/motive/origin/audience/etc.) and link to reliability
- There is no conclusion on whether the source is reliable, this is just a discussion.

Paragraph 2: Source A usefulness:
- "Source A is a _____ useful source to a historian studying _____ because it provides evidence for ______"
- Every source is useful to a certain extent.
- This paragraph has to be a strong judgement on how useful the source is
- Usefulness depends on evidence. What can the source provide evidence for? Does it prove that soldiers in 1914 were enthusiastic about the war? Does it mention their rations, their equipment? Extract every piece of evidence from the source that you possibly can.

Paragraph 3: Source B reliability

Paragraph 4: Source B usefulness

You can add a 1 sentence conclusion if you feel the need but it's not at all required.

Generally, more writing = better marks for source analysis, so try to use more than the given lines if possible. Also, practice is the most important thing here - hand in thousands of these to your teacher throughout the year; every time you get bored of your other modern essays do one of these and hand it in, they take 1/2 an hour max (you should be getting them done in 20 mins + reading time) and the more you practice this the better you will do.

Hope this helped

 

[D94]

Just answer the question. Many students get caught up with a method to answer such questions that they end up not even answering the question properly.