General technique hints for handling source material.

Look at the source.
Underline what it is,
put a box round who wrote it and
ring the date.

Think to yourself -
why has the examiner decided to use this source?
What point does it make?
Have they chosen it because it is controversial in some way?

When you are asked “What can we learn from Source 1 about ....” you must be very precise and thorough in your response.
Check the source line by line/ section by section for information.

Sometimes the source will give straightforward factual information (if it is a graph, a table or a map) - although statistics can be rigged, so check whose statistics they are!!!!

However if the source is a written one you will need to think about saying that the source alleges, claims, suggests, argues, gives the impression, implies = inferences.

When you refer to a written source in your writing don’t give the impression that you accept what it says at face value.
IE use your common sense.

In either case it helps to quote short bits of the source or to paraphrase them in your answer.

If you are asked to compare sources the once again you must be very precise and thorough in your answer and you must take care to use the right sources.

You must cross-refer confidently to get the highest mark.
“Source A agrees with Source B that .......... However, Source C contradicts Source A on this because whereas Source A says (quote) Source C clearly says/implies that (quote/paraphrase).

Don't just go through everything that Source A says and everything that source B says.Go backwards and forwards between the two.

Question check:
Check whether the question just asks you to use the source or whether it asks you to use the source and your own knowledge. Do exactly what you are asked or you will lose marks.

If you are asked to comment on the usefulness of a source you are being asked
what does it tell us
what doesn’t it tell us (this inevitably means knowing other information)
and also you are expected to evaluate the quality of the source as evidence
how does it compare with other sources?
how far can we accept what it says?
what are its limitations?

You are looking out for evidence of omissions and gaps - maybe due to lack of knowledge or due to restrictions / censorship or being ‘economical with the truth’ due to deliberate bias
or also misrepresentation (incorrect or misleading information due to bias).

To establish ‘usefulness’ you need to run down a checklist in your head:
Who, What, When, Where, Why, Who for?

The usefulness of a source is affected by who wrote it (type of person, their involvement in the issue, their knowledge, their opinion of events). Comment on that.

Its usefulness is also affected by what type of thing they are writing (diary, newspaper report, memo, autobiography / memoires, despatch etc). This also includes 'who for' since the expected audience will influence what they put in and what they leave out. Comment on that.

Its usefulness is affected by when it was written. Make sure you notice the date especially if it is a primary source. Comment on it.

Where is also significant for it will determine whether they are an eye witness; how much could they see from where they were, do we get a full picture etc. Comment on it.

Be clear what their purpose is in writing - why they wrote is significant (eg have they been asked to excuse something or defend a something, are they justifying something they are about to do etc).

SIMPLE SPELLING POINTS -
BIAS
BIASED
PROPAGANDA.