Paper 3 (Higher Level)

A. Content - teachers choose ONE of these four regions, and TWO regional studies within it:


B. Approach and Assessment > Paper 3 (2 hours)

Exam format

  • Two essay questions will be provided for each of the 12 regional studies.
  • Students must answer two questions in two hours, each from a different regional study.
  • Top level: The response demonstrates an in-depth understanding of the argument in the question. It provides a thorough and well-balanced evaluation of a range of perspectives on the argument. It provides a substantiated judgement that is consistent with the evaluation
  • Note: as for the other Papers, perspectives again means angles or factors, NOT necessarily historiographical schools or named historians.
  • Possible markbands: L1: 0-2 marks; L2 = 3-4 marks (20%); L3 = 5-6 marks (33%); L4 = 7-8 marks (45%); L5 = 9-11 marks (60%); L6 = 12-13 marks (80%); L7 = 14-15 marks (93%)

Paper 3 Question format

ALL essay questions will use the command term "To what extent do you agree...?". No other command terms will be used!

ActiveHistory Insight There are two types of "To what extent do you agree...?" questions that need to be considered: Understanding which type you are answering is the key to success.

Type 1 (invites comparison to other factors):
"Do you agree that this was the most important factor?"

  • (or similar: e.g. 'most significant factor', ' main / major reason', 'most successful')
Suggested approach:
  • 1. Agree (thesis) - argument in favour, substantiating the claim of the question (e.g. by explaining how the factor was important / had a great impact)
  • 2. Disagree (antithesis) - evidence against, challenging the claim of the question (e.g. by explaining the ways in which the factor had a limited impact)
  • 3. Disagree (synthesis) - evidence showing that therefore for a full understanding we need to look at another (but connected) factor
In this way, students will maintain a heavy focus on the 'given' factor in the first two thirds of the essay by looking at that factor from two perspectives, before then broadening out to consider the 'to what extent' more broadly by bringing in another connected factor.

Type 2 (precludes consideration of other factors):
"Do you agree that this factor had a positive impact?"

  • (or similar claim about the factor: e.g. negative / ineffective / insignificant / failure / success)
Suggested approach:
  • 1. Agree (thesis 1) - argument in favour, substantiating the claim of the question (e.g. for whom / in what area the factor had a positive impact)
  • 2. Agree (thesis 2) - second argument in favour, substantiating the claim of the question (e.g. when / where the factor had a positive impact)
  • 3. Disagree (synthesis) - argument against, challenging the claim of the question (e.g. when / where / for whom / in what area the factor had a positive impact)
In this way, students will maintain a heavy focus on the claim of the question in the first two thirds of the essay by looking at that factor from two perspectives, before then broadening out to consider the 'to what extent' more broadly by bringing in another connected factor.