A-Level History: How to Approach the Extract/Interpretation Question
Interpreting and analysing historiographical extracts is an important part of the A-Level History examination across all of the exam boards. In this blog, one of our expert History tutors will unpack how to approach and answer the extract question to secure top marks.
What is an extract?
An extract is a piece of text taken from a published historiographical work, often a book. This means that it is a secondary source—a second-hand account which describes, analyses, interprets, or evaluates information originally collected from primary sources.
How is the extract/interpretation question structured?
The exact phrasing of the question varies between the different exam boards, but each asks you to determine how convincing the extracts are in relation to the question you are being asked.
The AQA paper provides three extracts and is phrased along the following lines: “Using your understanding of the historical context, assess how convincing the arguments in these three extracts are in relation to Britain and India in the years 1914 to 1947.”
The OCR and Edexcel papers both provide two extracts, although OCR calls these ‘interpretations’, and they also ask you to decide how convincing the extracts are. OCR phrases the question as: “Evaluate the interpretations in both of the two passages. Explain which you think is more convincing as an explanation of the reasons for the Salem witch trials.”
The Edexcel paper, in contrast, will read along the following lines: “Study Extracts 1 and 2 in the Extracts Booklet before you answer this question. In the light of differing interpretations, how convincing do you find the view that it is misguided to blame one specific individual for the failure of the Fourth Crusade? To explain your answer, analyse and evaluate the material in both extracts, using your own knowledge of the issues.”
How should I approach the question?
The key word in this question is “convincing”. In other words, how believable or true are the arguments put across in the extracts? You will need to pick out the strands of argument in each extract and decide which are the most convincing, using historical evidence from your own knowledge.
The best way to structure your answer to this question is to address each extract in a separate paragraph. Read each extract before you start writing. Highlight what the main argument is and decide whether or not you think this is convincing, based on your own knowledge. This is the argument you will begin with. Then, highlight one or two other arguments that the extract makes and repeat the same process. Is the argument convincing? What evidence can you bring in to support or challenge this argument?
Remember that each extract is likely making a different argument about the same event/process. For example, if the extracts are talking about British expansion in Africa in the late nineteenth-century, you are probably going to have one which emphasises economic reasons, one which talks about European competition, and, if there is a third extract, one which talks about a third factor (the role of individuals, missionaries, and traders, or perhaps a combination of multiple factors). This should give you some hint of what details or case studies you might bring in.
For each extract, try to identify a counterargument. This can either be a sub-argument made in the same extract or your own knowledge that you bring in to counter the extract’s argument.
This structure may be helpful to follow for each extract:
What is the key argument made in the extract?
Do I find it convincing or not?
What evidence can I bring in to support the argument (if I find it convincing) or to challenge the argument (if I don’t find it convincing)?
If I find it convincing, is there any evidence I can bring in to provide a counterargument?
Why is my reading of the extract (i.e. that it is convincing or that it is not convincing) correct? Starting the sentence with “nevertheless”, “overall”, or “however” can be effective ways of doing this.
Here is an example of a good final sentence for the paragraph to reiterate your own argument:
“However, despite the fact that economic factors, such as the discovery of diamonds in southern Africa, were important in motivating expansion in Africa, the extract is still convincing in arguing that European competition was the most important reason because the 1884 Berlin conference and its ‘effective occupation’ rule led Britain to convert its informal influence in East Africa into formal colonial rule.
This final sentence of the paragraph acknowledges the counter-argument (economic factors) but doubles down on the main argument that has been made in the paragraph (that the extract is convincing in arguing that European competition was the most important reason for British expansion in Africa).
Final tips
The key skill that is being tested in this question is the ability to identify an argument put forward by a historian and decide, based on your own knowledge, whether or not you agree with it. For each argument you identify, think about the evidence that you can draw on - does this support or challenge the argument made by the historian? Approaching each of the extracts in this way will help you to clearly structure and articulate your answer, and should help you to access the top marks for this question.
