The 8 Mark "Which Interpretation is More Convincing" Question: America 1920-1973 (Q3) (AQA GCSE History)

Revision Note

Natasha Smith

Expertise

History Content Creator

Summary of Question Three

  • Question Three requires you to evaluate which interpretation is more convincing about the issue outlined 

  • The interpretations used in Question Three will be the same interpretations used in Questions One and Two

Amount of marks 

8

The time that you should spend on the question 

No more than 10 minutes 

  • An example of the type of question you may encounter can be seen below:

Question Three for America 1920-1973
An example of Question Three in Paper 1A
  • In previous years, this question has focused on the following topics in American history:

Year of Exam 

Question Topic 

2018

Martin Luther King and Civil Rights

2019

Prohibition 

2020

President Roosevelt

2021

Immigration in the 1920s

2022

Pop culture in the 1950s

Sample 1

New Deal

Sample 2

Women in the 1920s

How to Analyse an Interpretation

  • For the example question above, you will use the same two interpretations as you did in Questions One and Two. These are found in an insert

    • An insert is an additional booklet to your answer paper. It provides key sources or interpretations needed to answer specific questions in the exam

The two interpretations for the example Question Three in America 1920-1973 as they would look in the insert
The two interpretations for the example Question Three in America 1920-1973 as they would look in the insert
  • When analysing an interpretation you should:

    • Read the interpretations carefully 

    • Read the interpretations more than once, if you have time 

    • Focus on just the content of the interpretation

      • If you use the provenance you will receive no marks for the comments made 

    • Whilst reading the interpretation underline or highlight relevant pieces of text 

    • Annotate the interpretation by attaching your knowledge to the content of the interpretation 

  • When analysing an interpretation many students forget to focus on the issue outlined in the question 

    • For example, if a question is asking you about the reactions to the New Deal and the interpretation includes reactions towards immigration, you should ignore  the information about immigration 

A comparison between two historical interpretations about the New Deal. Annotations highlight how convincing their perspectives are.
An image showing how to annotate historical interpretations for the America: 1920 - 1973 course

Why are Some Interpretations More Convincing?

  • Interpretations are used in history to explain the past by looking at history from different points of view

  • However, some interpretations are more convincing than others

  • More convincing interpretations could have one of the following: 

    • More accurate knowledge 

    • A greater understanding of the historical period

    • A more typical experience from the historical period

    • A more accepted point of view

  • The easiest way to decide if an interpretation is more convincing is by using your knowledge

    • For the example question, you could use the Immigration Acts of the 1920s as a reason why Interpretation A is more convincing for showing attitudes to immigrants in the 1920s

Judging Interpretations

  • The “How Convincing” question requires you to make a judgement

  • The common mistakes that students make when making a judgement are: 

    • Not giving a clear judgement. Students do this by: 

      • Explaining that both interpretations are more convincing 

      • Failing to decide which interpretation is more convincing 

      • Using language in their answer which is not decisive e.g. “kind of” or “maybe”  

    • Contradicting your judgments

      • Students sometimes haven’t planned their answers properly. They start to write their answer with one judgment and then change their opinion halfway through 

      • Doing this means that there is not a sustained judgment and you can not access Level 4 (6-8 marks) 

  • Good judgements will: 

    • Explain which interpretation is more convincing 

    • Have a substantiated judgement 

    • Be supported with specific knowledge 

    • Relevant to the interpretations and the question 

  • Although you need to decide if one interpretation is more convincing, it does not mean that one interpretation will be right and the other will be wrong

  • Your judgement does not need to include limitations and you can receive full marks without one

    • Students responses are stronger when they are decisive and clear about which interpretation is more convincing 

  • However, if you include a limitation you will be credited, you must make sure the limitation is: 

    • Supported by knowledge 

    • Focused on the question 

    • Relevant to your answer  

"Which Interpretation is More Convincing" Structure

  • Your answer should consist of: 

    • Specific relevant knowledge 

    • Both interpretations A and B 

    • The wider context of the time

  • Your answer could be written in PEE paragraphs

    • P- Make a point about the question

      • Make it clear which interpretation you are going to discuss 

      • Identify if you find the interpretation more convincing 

    • E- Use information from the interpretation and knowledge to support the point you have made

      • Your knowledge should be specific 

      • Focus on the content from the interpretation 

    • E- Explain why you find the interpretation more or less convincing 

      • Focus on the given issue in the question 

      • For top marks, you need to show your understanding of the wider context of the time 

  • To achieve full marks, you need to repeat this once for each interpretation 

Worked Example of a “Which Interpretation is More Convincing” Question

Worked Example

Which interpretation do you find more convincing about immigrants in America in the 1920s?    

Explain your answer based on your contextual knowledge and what it says in Interpretation A and B. 

[8 marks]

Interpretation A: Adapted from the book Heroes of the Fiery Cross by Alma White published in 1928. 

White was a Protestant bishop and founder of the Pillar of Fire Church which supported the Ku Klux Klan. 

“Thousands of immigrants have arrived in the past twenty years. This has made America the dumping ground for every sort of criminal and undesirable from other countries. They have no respect for our laws. They do not appreciate our great achievements created by the hard work and sacrifice of others. They are only waiting for the chance to replace the Stars and Stripes with the red flag of Communism.”

Interpretation B: Adapted from a speech by Robert H Clancy in the late 1920s. 

Clancy was a Republican politician from an industrial city in northern USA. He had a career as a lawyer, journalist and businessman and advised the US government on the economy. 

“Immigrants are no threat to America but are good citizens. They are active in every profession and walk of life. They often do the hard work that many Americans dislike. They have come to this country to stay and to make a new life for themselves. Immigrants take pride in how quickly they have become part of American society and have adapted to our way of life.”

Answer:

Interpretation A is more convincing than interpretation B. Interpretation A states that immigrants "have no respect for our laws". This demonstrates the attitude that led to the Immigration Acts of the 1920s. This interpretation is more convincing than B because America changed their immigration laws from an open-door system to a closed-door system. The Immigration Acts of the 1920s were designed to limit the number of new arrivals by only allowing a fixed quota to enter America. This change to the law happened because of a large number of people in America sharing similar views or prejudice towards immigrants, similar to Alma White in interpretation A.

Interpretation B is less convincing than A. Interpretation B is convincing because America has always been a melting pot for many different nationalities. People came to America in the 1920s because the industrial boom created economic opportunities and a high standard of living. However, this interpretation is less convincing than A because this view of immigrants was not widely held in America in the 1920s. The strong work ethic that Clancy praises in Interpretation B was usually held against immigrants because they were willing to work for lower wages and were accused of stealing jobs from white Americans. This sort of prejudice against immigrants was the reason for the execution of Sacco and Vanzetti despite a lack of conclusive evidence. 

You've read 0 of your 10 free revision notes

Unlock more, it's free!

Join the 100,000+ Students that ❤️ Save My Exams

the (exam) results speak for themselves:

Did this page help you?

Natasha Smith

Author: Natasha Smith

After graduating with a degree in history, Natasha gained her PGCE at Keele University. With more than 10 years of teaching experience, Natasha taught history at both GCSE and A Level. Natasha's specialism is modern world history. As an educator, Natasha channels this passion into her work, aiming to instil in students the same love for history that has fuelled her own curiosity.