The 8 Mark "Which Interpretation is More Convincing" Question: America 1920-1973 (Q3) (AQA GCSE History)
Revision Note
Written by: Natasha Smith
Reviewed by: Bridgette Barrett
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:
In previous years, this question has focused on the following topics in American history:
Year of Exam | Question Topic |
|---|---|
2018 | |
2019 | |
2020 | |
2021 | |
2022 | |
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
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
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.
Last updated:
You've read 0 of your 5 free revision notes this week
Sign up now. It’s free!
Did this page help you?
