Paper 3 Option 31 Weimar and Nazi Germany

Paper 3 Option 31: Weimar and Nazi Germany 1918 -1939 Question Marks Timings Question type 1 4 marks 6 mins Give two things you can infer from Source _ about… 2 12 marks 16 mins Explain why… 3 a 8 marks 12 mins How useful are Source _ and _ for… 3 b 4 marks 6 mins What is the main difference between these views (interpretations) 3 c 4 marks 6 mins Suggest one reason why interpretations _ and _ give different views on… 3 d 16 marks + 4 SPAG 30 mins How far do you agree with interpretation _ about…use both interpretations and your own knowledge…

QUESTION 1 (4 MARKS -6 mins) QUESTION 2 (12 MARKS – 18 mins ) QUESTION 3 A (8 MARKS – 12 mins ) [POINT] One thing I can infer from Source [POINT] One reason why…(WFTQ)…is… [POINT] Source X is useful for …(WFTQ) … because it tells me… _ about… is… [EVIDENCE] Evidence to support this is…(insert quote/description) [EVIDENCE] Evidence to support this is… [EXPLAIN] This meant that…. because… Therefore… [POINT] One thing I can infer from Source [POINT] One reason why…(WFTQ)…is… _ about… is… [EVIDENCE] Evidence to support this [EXPLAIN] This meant that…. because… is…(insert quote/description) Therefore… [POINT] The final reason why…(WFTQ)…is… [EVIDENCE] Evidence to support this is… [EXPLAIN] This meant that…. because… Therefore… [CONCLUSION In conclusion … was caused by…. because…. [EVIDENCE] Evidence to support this (quote/description of sources)…/However it fails to tell me… [OWN KNOWLEDGE] This agrees with my own knowledge because I know… [RELIABILITY] Source _ reliable/unreliablefor …(WFTQ)…because (N. O. P). The provenance affects the usefulness of the source because… [POINT] Source Y useful for …(WFTQ) … because it tells me… [EVIDENCE] Evidence to support this (quote/description of sources)…/However it fails to tell me… [OWN KNOWLEDGE] This agrees with my own knowledge because I know… [RELIABILITY] Source _ reliable/unreliablefor …(WFTQ)…because (N. O. P). The provenance affects the usefulness of the source because…

These three questions are based on two interpretations: QUESTION 3 B (4 MARKS - 6 mins) [POINT] The main difference between the two interpretations of (WFTQ) is… [EVIDENCE] Evidence from interpretation _ to support this is… [EXPLAIN] This shows that the interpretations differ because…. QUESTION 3 C (4 MARKS - 6 mins [POINT] One reason why the two interpretations give different views on (WFTQ) is… [EVIDENCE] Evidence from interpretation _ to support this is… [EXPLAIN] This means that the interpretations would have different views on (WFTQ) because… QUESTION 3 D Do you agree with the interpretation X about “_______” (16 MARKS + 4 SPAG – 24 mins) [POINT] I agree with interpretation X about …. WFTQ… because it argues…………………. . . [EVIDENCE] Evidence to support this is……. . (quote from the source)…. [FOCUS] The interpretation has focused on… [OWN KNOWLEDGE] This supports/refutes my own knowledge because I know… [LINK] Therefore… [POINT] Furthermore, I agree with interpretation X about …. WFTQ… because it argues……………. [EVIDENCE] Evidence to support this is……. . (quote from the source)…. [FOCUS] The interpretation has focused on… [OWN KNOWLEDGE] This supports/refutes my own knowledge because I know… [LINK] Therefore… [POINT] In contrast with interpretation X, interpretation Y argues…. [EVIDENCE] Evidence to support this is……. . (quote from the source)…. [FOCUS] The interpretation has focused on… [OWN KNOWLEDGE] This supports/refutes my own knowledge because I know… [LINK] Therefore… Optional extras: [POINT] Interpretation X and Y agree that…. . [EVIDENCE] Evidence to support this is they both… [OWN KNOWLEDGE] This supports/refutes my own knowledge because I know… [LINK] Therefore… [POINT] I disagree with both of the interpretations about…. WFTQ)…. [OWN KNOWLEDGE] I [LINK] Therefore I disagree that the [CONCLUSION] In conclusion, using my own knowledge I dis/agree with interpretation X because…

This is an alternative writing frame for question 3 A. It may be clearer and simpler: [CONTENT] Source A is accurate because it says…. [OWN KNOWLEDGE] I know from my own knowledge…. [CONTENT] Source B is more accurate because says… [OWN KNOWLEDGE] I know from my own knowledge…. [RELIABILITY] Source A is less reliable because it is (NOP)… This means that it is more/less useful for…. WFTQ… [RELIABILITY] Source B is more reliable because it is (NOP)… This means that it is more/less useful for…. WFTQ…

Question 1: Give two things you can infer from Source _ about… (4 marks) [POINT] One thing I can infer from Source _ about… is… [EVIDENCE] Evidence to support this is…(insert quote/description)

Question 2: Explain why… (12 marks) [POINT] One reason why…(WFTQ) is… [EVIDENCE] Evidence to support this is… [EXPLAIN] This meant that… [LINK] Therefore, this links to… because… [POINT] Another reason why…(WFTQ) is… [EVIDENCE] Evidence to support this is… [EXPLAIN] This meant that… [LINK] Therefore, this links to… because… [POINT] A final reason why…(WFTQ) is… [EVIDENCE] Evidence to support this is… [EXPLAIN] This meant that… [LINK] Therefore, this links to… because… [CONCLUSION] In conclusion the most important reason why (WFTQ) … was because…

Explain why… The German people were opposed to the Treaty of Versailles. The German constitution caused political problems. People from the left and right wing wanted to end the Weimar Republic. 1923 was a year of crisis for Germany The German economy improved under Stresemann The German international status improved under Stresemann The Nazi party tried to launch a putsch in 1923 The failure of the Munich Putsch helped the Nazis in the long term The support for the Nazis grew from 1929 – 1932 The Weimar Republic collapsed from 1929 – 1933 Hindenburg appointed Hitler as Chancellor on 30 th January 1933 Hitler purged the SA in the Night of the Long Knives The Reichstag Fire helped Hitler consolidate control over Germany The Nazi created a police state Set up concentration camps in 1933 The Nazis used propaganda and censorship The Nazis created Youth Groups Some young people opposed the Nazis There was opposition from the Churches The Nazis wanted to control the lives of women The Nazis persecuted the Jews The Nazis persecuted other social groups.

Question 1: What can you infer… (4 marks) Level Descriptor Mark 1 Simple statement(s) One simple inference = 1 mark Two simple inferences = 2 marks 2 Question 1: What can you infer… (4 marks) Result Statements with evidence One inference supported by evidence = 2 marks Two inference supported by evidence = 4 marks WWW: [ ] You made a simple inference. [ ] You made two simple inference. [ ] You made an inference and supported it with evidence from the Source [ ] You made two inference and supported it with evidence from the Source To improve I must… EBI: [ ] You made a simple inference. [ ] You made two simple inference. [ ] You made an inference and supported it with evidence from the Source [ ] You made two inference and supported it with evidence from the Source Level Descriptor Mark 1 Simple statement(s) One simple inference = 1 mark Two simple inferences = 2 marks 2 Result Statements with evidence One inference supported by evidence = 2 marks Two inference supported by evidence = 4 marks WWW: [ ] You made a simple inference. [ ] You made two simple inference. [ ] You made an inference and supported it with evidence from the Source [ ] You made two inference and supported it with evidence from the Source To improve I must… EBI: [ ] You made a simple inference. [ ] You made two simple inference. [ ] You made an inference and supported it with evidence from the Source [ ] You made two inference and supported it with evidence from the Source

Question 2: (12 marks) Explain why… Level Description Marks Level 1 A simple or generalised answer is given, lacking development and organisation. 1 3 Level 2 Simple explanation, with limited analysis and focus on the question. Some development and organisation of material shown, but a line 4 6 of reasoning is not sustained. Accurate and relevant information is included Maximum 5 marks for answers that do not include an aspect in addition to those prompted by the stimulus material. Result Level Description Marks Level 1 A simple or generalised answer is given, lacking development and organisation. 1 3 Level 2 Simple explanation, with limited analysis and focus on the question. Some development and organisation of material shown, but a line 4 6 of reasoning is not sustained. Accurate and relevant information is included Maximum 5 marks for answers that do not include an aspect in addition to those prompted by the stimulus material. Level 3 An explanation is given, showing some analysis, which is mainly directed at the question. Line of reasoning is generally sustained, 7 9 although some passages may lack coherence and organisation. Accurate and relevant information is included Maximum 8 marks for answers that do not include an aspect in addition to those prompted by the stimulus material. Level 4 An analytical explanation is given which is directed consistently at 10 12 the question, showing a line of reasoning that is coherent, sustained and logically structured. Accurate and relevant information is precisely showing wide ranging knowledge and understanding of the required features or characteristics of the period studied. No access to Level 4 for answers which do not include an aspect in addition to those prompted by the stimulus material. WWW: [ ] Simple statements [ ] Simple explanation with relevant information [ ] Developed explanation with accurate and relevant information [ ] Sustained explanation with precise and wide ranging own knowledge To improve I must…. Result

Question 2: (12 marks) Explain why… Level Marks Level 1 1 3 Level 2 4 6 Result Description A simple or generalised answer is given, lacking development and organisation. Simple explanation, with limited analysis and focus on the question. Some development and organisation of material shown, but a line of reasoning is not sustained. Accurate and relevant information is included Maximum 5 marks for answers that do not include an aspect in addition to those prompted by the stimulus material. Level 3 An explanation is given, showing some analysis, which is mainly directed at the question. Line of reasoning is generally sustained, although some 7 9 passages may lack coherence and organisation. Accurate and relevant information is included Maximum 8 marks for answers that do not include an aspect in addition to those prompted by the stimulus material. Level 4 An analytical explanation is given which is directed consistently at the 10 12 question, showing a line of reasoning that is coherent, sustained and logically structured. Accurate and relevant information is precisely showing wide ranging knowledge and understanding of the required features or characteristics of the period studied. No access to Level 4 for answers which do not include an aspect in addition to those prompted by the stimulus material.

Level 1 1 3 Level 2 4 6 A simple or generalised answer is given, lacking development and organisation. Simple explanation, with limited analysis and focus on the question. Some development and organisation of material shown, but a line of reasoning is not sustained. Accurate and relevant information is included Maximum 5 marks for answers that do not include an aspect in addition to those prompted by the stimulus material. Level 3 An explanation is given, showing some analysis, which is mainly directed at the question. Line of reasoning is generally sustained, 7 9 although some passages may lack coherence and organisation. Accurate and relevant information is included Maximum 8 marks for answers that do not include an aspect in addition to those prompted by the stimulus material. Level 4 An analytical explanation is given which is directed consistently at 10 12 the question, showing a line of reasoning that is coherent, sustained and logically structured. Accurate and relevant information is precisely showing wide ranging knowledge and understanding of the required features or characteristics of the period studied. No access to Level 4 for answers which do not include an aspect in addition to those prompted by the stimulus material.

Question 3 a: How useful are Source _ and _ for… (8 marks) QUESTION 3 A (8 MARKS – 12 mins ) [POINT] Source X is useful for …(WFTQ) … because it tells me… [EVIDENCE] Evidence to support this (quote/description of sources)…/However it fails to tell me… [OWN KNOWLEDGE] This agrees with my own knowledge because I know… [RELIABILITY] Source _ reliable/unreliablefor …(WFTQ)…because (N. O. P). The provenance affects the usefulness of the source because… [POINT] Source Y useful for …(WFTQ) … because it tells me… [EVIDENCE] Evidence to support this (quote/description of sources)…/However it fails to tell me… [OWN KNOWLEDGE] This agrees with my own knowledge because I know… [RELIABILITY] Source _ reliable/unreliablefor …(WFTQ)…because (N. O. P). The provenance affects the usefulness of the source because…

Mark Question 3 a: (8 Mark) How useful are sources for… questions Description What did I get? Level 1 A simple judgement on utility is given, and supported by undeveloped comment on the content of the sources and/or their 1 2 provenance 1. Simple comprehension of the source material is shown by the extraction or paraphrase of some content. Limited contextual knowledge is deployed with links to the sources. Level 2 Judgements on source utility for the specified enquiry are given, using valid criteria. Judgements are supported by developed 3 5 comment related to the content of the sources and/or their provenance 1. Comprehension and some analysis of the sources is shown by the selection and use of material to support comments on their utility. Contextual knowledge is used directly to support comments on the usefulness of the content of the sources and/or their provenance. Level Judgements on source utility for the specified enquiry are given, applying valid criteria with developed reasoning which takes into 3 account how the Provenance affects the usefulness of the source 6 8 content. The sources are analysed to support reasoning about their utility. Contextual knowledge is used in the process of interpreting the sources and applying criteria for judgements on their utility. WWW: [ ] I made simple statement about the source [ ] I made simple statements using evidence from the source. [ ] I made simple statements using the source and my OK. [ ] I made developed statements using the source, my own knowledge and mentioned reliability (context/NOP) [ ] I made developed statements using BOTH sources, precise own knowledge and mentioned reliability (context AND NOP) [ ] I have reached an overall judgement on the reliability of the sources in regards to the question To improve I must… Mark Question 3 a: (8 Mark) How useful are sources for… questions Description What did I get? Level 1 A simple judgement on utility is given, and supported by undeveloped comment on the content of the sources and/or their 1 2 provenance 1. Simple comprehension of the source material is shown by the extraction or paraphrase of some content. Limited contextual knowledge is deployed with links to the sources. Level 2 Judgements on source utility for the specified enquiry are given, using valid criteria. Judgements are supported by developed 3 5 comment related to the content of the sources and/or their Level 3 6 8 provenance 1. Comprehension and some analysis of the sources is shown by the selection and use of material to support comments on their utility. Contextual knowledge is used directly to support comments on the usefulness of the content of the sources and/or their provenance. Judgements on source utility for the specified enquiry are given, applying valid criteria with developed reasoning which takes into account how the Provenance affects the usefulness of the source content. The sources are analysed to support reasoning about their utility. Contextual knowledge is used in the process of interpreting the sources and applying criteria for judgements on their utility. WWW: [ ] I made simple statement about the source [ ] I made simple statements using evidence from the source. [ ] I made simple statements using the source and my OK. [ ] I made developed statements using the source, my own knowledge and mentioned reliability (context/NOP) [ ] I made developed statements using BOTH sources, precise own knowledge and mentioned reliability (context AND NOP) [ ] I have reached an overall judgement on the reliability of the sources in regards to the question To improve I must…

simple judgement on utility is given, and supported by ped on the content of the sources and/or their provenance 1. Simple nsion of the source material is shown by the extraction or e ontent. Limited contextual knowledge is deployed with links to the 6– 8 • 1 1– 2 • A simple judgement on utility is given, and supported by undeveloped comment on the content of the sources and/or their provenance 1. Simple comprehension of the source material is shown by the extraction or paraphrase of some content. Limited contextual knowledge is deployed with links to the sources. 2 3– 5 • Judgements on source utility for the specified enquiry are given, using valid criteria. Judgements are supported by developed comment related to the content of the sources and/or their provenance 1. Comprehension and some analysis of the sources is shown by the selection and use of material to support comments on their utility. Contextual knowledge is used directly to support comments on the usefulness of the content of the sources and/or their provenance. 3 6– 8 • Judgements on source utility for the specified enquiry are given, applying valid criteria with developed reasoning which takes into account how the provenance 1 affects the usefulness of the source content. The sources are analysed to support reasoning about their utility. Contextual knowledge is used in the process of interpreting the sources and applying criteria for judgements on their utility. Notes

Question 3 a: (8 Mark) How useful are sources for… questions Mark Description What did I get? Question 3 a: (8 Mark) How useful are sources for… questions Mark Description Level 1 A simple judgement on utility is given, and supported by undeveloped comment on the content of the sources and/or 1 2 their provenance Level 2 Judgements on source utility for the specified enquiry are given using valid criteria. Judgements are supported by 3 5 developed comment related to the content of the sources and/or their provenance. Level 3 Judgements on source utility for the specified enquiry are given, applying valid criteria with developed reasoning which 6 8 takes into account how the provenance affects the usefulness of the source content. Level 1 A simple judgement on utility is given, and supported by undeveloped comment on the content of the sources 1 2 and/or their provenance Level 2 Judgements on source utility for the specified enquiry are given using valid criteria. Judgements are supported by 3 5 developed comment related to the content of the sources and/or their provenance. Level Judgements on source utility for the specified enquiry are given, applying valid criteria with developed reasoning 3 which takes into account how the provenance affects the 6 8 usefulness of the source content. WWW: EBI: What did I get?

Question 3 b: What is the main difference between these views (interpretations) (4 marks) [POINT] The main difference between the two interpretations of (WFTQ) is… [EVIDENCE] Evidence from interpretation _ to support this is… [EXPLAIN] This shows that the interpretations differ because….

Question 3 b: What is the main difference… (4 marks) Level Descriptor Result Mark L 1 Limited analysis of the interpretations is shown by 1 2 the extraction or paraphrase of some content, but differences of surface detail only are given, or a difference of view is asserted without direct support. L 2 The interpretations are analysed and a key difference 3 4 of view is identified and supported from them. WWW: EBI: [ ] You have paraphrased the interpretation [ ] You have identified a difference without strong support [ ] You have identified a difference and used precise evidence from the interpretation to support your answer To improve I must…

Question 3 c: Suggest one reason why interpretations _ and _ give different views on… (4 marks) [POINT] One reason why the two interpretations give different views on (WFTQ) is… [EVIDENCE] Evidence from interpretation _ to support this is… [EXPLAIN] This means that the interpretations would have different views on (WFTQ) because…

Question 3 c: Suggest one reason why… (4 marks) Level Descriptor Result Mark L 1 A simple valid explanation is offered but displaying 1 2 only limited analysis. Support for the explanation is based on simple undeveloped comment or on the selection of details from the provided material or own knowledge, with only implied linkage to the explanation. . L 2 An explanation of a reason for difference is given, 3 4 analysing the interpretations. The explanation is substantiated effectively. WWW: EBI: [ ] You wrote a simple statement about the interpretation [ ] You have identified one reason without strong support [ ] You have identified a reason and used precise evidence from the interpretations to explain your the interpretations to explain answer your answer To improve I must…

Question 3 d: How far do you agree with interpretation _ about… (16 marks + 4 SPa. G) Do you agree with the interpretation X about “_______” QUESTION 3 D (16 MARKS + 4 SPAG – 24 mins) [POINT] I agree with interpretation X about …. WFTQ… because it argues…………………. . . [EVIDENCE] Evidence to support this is……. . (quote from the source)…. [FOCUS] The interpretation has focused on… [OWN KNOWLEDGE] This supports/refutes my own knowledge because I know… [LINK] Therefore… [POINT] Furthermore, I agree with interpretation X about …. WFTQ… because it argues……………. [EVIDENCE] Evidence to support this is……. . (quote from the source)…. [FOCUS] The interpretation has focused on… [OWN KNOWLEDGE] This supports/refutes my own knowledge because I know… [LINK] Therefore… [POINT] In contrast with interpretation X, interpretation Y argues…. [EVIDENCE] Evidence to support this is……. . (quote from the source)…. [FOCUS] The interpretation has focused on… [OWN KNOWLEDGE] This supports/refutes my own knowledge because I know… [LINK] Therefore… Optional extras: [POINT] Interpretation X and Y agree that…. . [EVIDENCE] Evidence to support this is they both… [OWN KNOWLEDGE] This supports/refutes my own knowledge because I know… [LINK] Therefore… [POINT] I disagree with both of the interpretations about…. WFTQ)…. [OWN KNOWLEDGE] I [LINK] Therefore I disagree that the

(d) How far do you agree with Interpretation 2 about reasons for the growth in support for the Nazi Party in the years 1929– 32? Explain your answer, using both interpretations and your knowledge of the historical context. (20) I mostly agree with Interpretation 2 about the reasons for the growth in the support for the Nazi Party in the years 1929 – 1932. The interpretation focuses on the wider economic and social reasons for the growth in the Nazi party, the Wall Street Crash and subsequent unemployment. According to the interpretation these reasons ‘played a much larger role than any actions of the Nazi leader himself in bringing Hitler to power. I would agree with this because it was during the Depression that the Nazis became the largest party in the Reichstag with 230 seats in the July 1932 election. I agree with this interpretation because it shows that the Nazi party was a ‘small party with little support’. This is true. In 1928 the Nazis only took 2. 8% of the vote. However they became much more popular when the economy crashed. It was this economic crisis that made the Nazi messages appealing to the German people. For example the offer of ‘Work and Bread’. In contrast to Interpretation 2, Interpretation 1 focuses on the role of Hitler and Goebbels in persuading the German people to support the Nazis. The interpretation focuses on his ‘charismatic leadership’ and his ability to give ‘hope’ to the Germans. It focuses on Goebbels's use of propaganda targeting ‘the specific grievances of the Germans. ’ I therefore do agree with interpretation 1 that Hitler’s oratory and Goebbels propaganda gained the support of the German people. The Nazis were experts in propaganda and used modern technology to spread their message effectively. Hitler was the first politician ever to use an aeroplane to travel to different German cities to campaign for support. However these reasons were ultimately only effective because of the Depression. Therefore I would agree more with Interpretation 2 about the reasons for the growth in support of the Nazi party in the Year 1939 – 1932 as the Depression was the catalyst that made Hitler and Goebbels's message appealing to the German people, increasing their support for the Nazi Party.

Level Question 3 d: (16 marks + 4 SPAG) How far do you agree? Description Result Answer offers simple valid comment to agree with or counter the L 1 interpretation. Limited analysis of one interpretation is shown by selection 1 4 and inclusion of some detail in the form of simple paraphrase or direct quotation. Generalised contextual knowledge is included and linked to the evaluation. Answer offers valid evaluative comment to agree with or counter the L 2 interpretation. Some analysis is shown in selecting and including details 5 8 from both interpretations to support this comment. Some relevant contextual knowledge is included and linked to the evaluation. An overall judgement is given but its justification is insecure or undeveloped and a line of reasoning is not sustained. � Answer provides an explained evaluation, agreeing or disagreeing with the L 3 interpretation. Good analysis of the interpretations is shown indicating 9 12 difference of view and deploying this to support the evaluation. Relevant contextual knowledge is used directly to support the evaluation. An overall judgement is given with some justification and a line of reasoning is generally sustained. Answer provides an explained evaluation reviewing the alternative views in L 4 coming to a substantiated judgement. Precise analysis of the interpretations 13 16 is shown, indicating how the differences of view are conveyed and deploying this material to support the evaluation. Relevant contextual knowledge is precisely selected to support the evaluation. An overall judgment is justified and the line of reasoning is coherent, sustained and logically structured. SPAG 1 2 SPAG is poor and hinders understanding 3 4 SPAG is accurate WWW: EBI: [ ] You wrote a simple statement agreeing or disagreeing with the interpretation. [ ] Your argument is one sided with relevant contextual knowledge. [ ] You have a balanced argument with accurate contextual knowledge and have reached a judgement [ ] You have a balanced argument with precise details used from the interpretations and have used accurate contextual knowledge and have reached a strong overall judgement To improve I must….

Level L 1 1 4 Question 3 d: (16 marks + 4 SPAG) How far do you agree? Description Resu lt Answer offers simple valid comment to agree with or counter the interpretation. Limited analysis of one interpretation is shown by selection and inclusion of some detail in the form of simple paraphrase or direct quotation. Generalised contextual knowledge is included and linked to the evaluation. L 2 5 8 Answer offers valid evaluative comment to agree with or counter the interpretation. Some analysis is shown in selecting and including details from both interpretations to support this comment. Some relevant contextual knowledge is included and linked to the evaluation. An overall judgement is given but its justification is insecure or undeveloped and a line of reasoning is not sustained. � Answer provides an explained evaluation, agreeing or disagreeing with the L 3 interpretation. Good analysis of the interpretations is shown indicating 9 12 difference of view and deploying this to support the evaluation. Relevant contextual knowledge is used directly to support the evaluation. An overall judgement is given with some justification and a line of reasoning is generally sustained. Answer provides an explained evaluation reviewing the alternative views in L 4 coming to a substantiated judgement. Precise analysis of the interpretations is 13 16 shown, indicating how the differences of view are conveyed and deploying this material to support the evaluation. Relevant contextual knowledge is precisely selected to support the evaluation. An overall judgment is justified and the line of reasoning is coherent, sustained and logically structured. SPAG 1 2 SPAG is poor and hinders understanding 3 4 SPAG is accurate WWW: [ ] You agreed or disagreed with the interpretation [ ] You used the interpretations [ ] You explained the different views in the interpretations [ ] You used your Ok to support or refute the interpretations [ ] You showed how the differences of view are conveyed [ ] You reached an overall judgement [ ] You wrote coherently [ ] Your answer was well organised To improve I must….

Question 3 d: (16 marks + 4 SPAG) How far do you agree? Level L 1 1 4 Description Result Answer offers simple valid comment to agree with or counter the interpretation. Limited analysis of one interpretation is shown by selection and inclusion of some detail in the form of simple paraphrase or direct quotation. Generalised contextual knowledge is included and linked to the evaluation. L 2 5 8 Answer offers valid evaluative comment to agree with or counter the interpretation. Some analysis is shown in selecting and including details from both interpretations to support this comment. Some relevant contextual knowledge is included and linked to the evaluation. An overall judgement is given but its justification is insecure or undeveloped and a line of reasoning is not sustained. L 3 9 12 � Answer provides an explained evaluation, agreeing or disagreeing with the interpretation. Good analysis of the interpretations is shown indicating difference of view and deploying this to support the evaluation. Relevant contextual knowledge is used directly to support the evaluation. An overall judgement is given with some justification and a line of reasoning is generally sustained. L 4 13 16 Answer provides an explained evaluation reviewing the alternative views in coming to a substantiated judgement. Precise analysis of the interpretations is shown, indicating how the differences of view are conveyed and deploying this material to support the evaluation. Relevant contextual knowledge is precisely selected to support the evaluation. An overall judgment is justified and the line of reasoning is coherent, sustained and logically structured. SPAG 1 2 SPAG is poor and hinders understanding 3 4 SPAG is accurate

Interpretation 1 Content: What does it say? What OK have you got to back this up? OK: What alternative arguments do you know independent ly? Tone: How is the message conveyed? Similarities and differences: Interpretation 2