Yeah thats wat I've been doing, taking notes on the events which each source described.
There are 10 sources:
- Map of the western front showing 4 offensives with other info
- A letter by a british soldier to a friend
- Info on german propaganda and how british was better
- Extract bout the Somme and haigs tactic
- Statistic of times spent in areas of trenches
- Photograph of woman in a shell making factory
- Info of women and their impact on the war effort
- Photograph of french soldiers in trench near verdun
- Extract from british soldider during the somme
- Extract from german soldier during ludendorff offensive
Wow....rarely would any HSC cover literally almost all dot points over that many sources.
Ok, I foresee a few multiple choice questions relating directly to what you can see in the source, so make sure you know the source. I can't stress any further (on an online forum) because you can go and remember formulas for testing reliability and usefulness, but that's useless if you don't know the source. You need to know the context of the source and so this can relate to its reliability and whether or not it is accurate or even real.
Maps are usually objective, so chances are that it is a MC. It's just extracting data from what is right in front of you.
Depending on the letter, it could be censored because during the wartime period, many letters were censored so it would portray a relatively positive time at war. You need to watch out for over glorifying or vagueness in detail.
German propaganda as opposed to the British efforts are somewhat subjective. Not knowing exactly what it says, I would say watch out for bias in how that information is presented. Maybe it was from a British general or politician, so naturally, they would have a tendency to say the British propaganda was better.
The Somme and Haig's tactics are usually universally agreeable, in a sense that historians believe that Haig's intentions were to just bleed out the Germans, with no great plan (if I recall correctly). Essentially, it was a stuff up due to the heavy losses and lack of decisive decision making.
Statistics are usually objective, but it may depend on the source of the statistics.
Women and their war effort are usually short answer questions or MC for that source you've said, maybe how they contributed, eg. working at munitions factories, taking up most of the industry and transportation sectors.
Photographs can be staged, so remember that, but this must be said using evidence from the source, eg. all french soldiers at v\Verdun smiling towards a camera - raises concerns as to whether it is actually legit or not.
Extracts from soldiers and officers need to be taken with consideration as to when they were recorded down, whether it's a primary/secondary source. The extract could be from an interview some 30 years later, and the soldier's experiences may be vague or inaccurate due to the lapse in time.
So essentially, know what the question is asking, know the source and its context well, and then if you want to, apply whatever formula or strategy to answer the question.
