Just thought I would write up the alternative way of source evaluation which we learnt in lesson:
This applies to the Part A (20 mark) questions.
The mark scheme states that 'the attributes of the source are taken into account in order to establish what weight the content will bear in relation to the question'.
Attributes: nature of source (type), origins (who/when/where), purpose (why), audience (who is it aimed at?)
Introduction
Source 1 gives the impression that.... (continue source referencing)
Either 'it is no surprise/ it is to be expected that Source 1 gives this impression because...' (comment on attributes)
Or 'it is somewhat unexpected that Source 1 gives this impression because...' (comment on attributes)
Middle (Support/Agree AND Disagree/Challenge - Both are exactly the same)
Write in detail how the other sources SUPPORT Source 1 about the impression of..... (Cross reference)
'The fact that Source 2 supports Source 1 is not surprising... this is because...' (comment on attributes)
The fact that Source 3 also supports Source 1 comes as somewhat a surprise... this is because...' (comment on attributes)
Conclusion
Make a final judgement about whether the sources mainly support/challenge the impression given in Source 1. (For example), Certainly the clearest area of challenge is found in Source 2 where.... However... there are areas where they support....
This overall conclusion is/isn't a surprise based on (attributes)... (for example - very different source types, purposes etc)
As our teacher said, we can get full marks using this way, or if we prefer the other method of doing all the source evaluation in the conclusion, we can also get full marks. Good luck!
Thank you Sasha, this is really useful... I shall have to try this structure out!
ReplyDeleteNo problem. I used this (with a slightly adapted version) for my Part B question. I'm not too sure how to structure the conclusion if we do the source evaluation throughout, I shall have to ask our teacher. With my Part B question, I did the source evaluation as said above, but spoke about each source whenever it seemed apt, and then in the conclusion followed the guideline we were given about which source was the one which suggested it most clearly etc.
ReplyDelete