History
Source provenance and corroboration
- 1.
Entirely fictional archive for source skills, not a real event. In the invented town of Mere, a fictional 1905 petition demands safer mills. A: a mill manager's letter to investors says, 'No serious injury occurred this month.' B: a newspaper repeats A verbatim, naming the manager as its source. C: a hospital register records a mill worker's broken arm but does not state how it happened. All documents and attributions are invented. Explain one reason the audience of A matters.
[2 marks] · no calculatorAnswer explanation
Draft walkthroughs are based on marking guidance, not independently verified derivations.
- Audience identifies an incentive for selection. That incentive is a reason to test the claim, not a demonstration that it is necessarily false.
- Award each point once. Accept other well-supported interpretations addressing the task.
Marking points
- Investors have an interest in the mill's stability and reputation.
- The manager may emphasise reassurance to maintain their confidence.
Examiner tip: Connect audience to a plausible purpose rather than just naming it.
- 2.
Entirely fictional archive for source skills, not a real event. In the invented town of Mere, a fictional 1905 petition demands safer mills. A: a mill manager's letter to investors says, 'No serious injury occurred this month.' B: a newspaper repeats A verbatim, naming the manager as its source. C: a hospital register records a mill worker's broken arm but does not state how it happened. All documents and attributions are invented. Why does B not provide independent corroboration of A?
[2 marks] · no calculatorAnswer explanation
Draft walkthroughs are based on marking guidance, not independently verified derivations.
- Two documents can be one evidential chain. Count independent information sources, not simply the number of places where the claim appears.
- Award each point once. Accept other well-supported interpretations addressing the task.
Marking points
- B explicitly derives its wording from A's author.
- Repetition does not add a separate observation of injuries.
Examiner tip: Agreement is not independent corroboration when one source copies another.
- 3.
Entirely fictional archive for source skills, not a real event. In the invented town of Mere, a fictional 1905 petition demands safer mills. A: a mill manager's letter to investors says, 'No serious injury occurred this month.' B: a newspaper repeats A verbatim, naming the manager as its source. C: a hospital register records a mill worker's broken arm but does not state how it happened. All documents and attributions are invented. Explain what C can and cannot establish about the manager's claim.
[3 marks] · no calculatorAnswer explanation
Draft walkthroughs are based on marking guidance, not independently verified derivations.
- Occupation is not location of injury. Link records carefully: a broken arm may be relevant, but the missing cause and time relationship prevent a decisive contradiction.
- Award each point once. Accept other well-supported interpretations addressing the task.
Marking points
- C supports that a mill worker had a broken arm.
- It does not identify the injury as occurring at the mill.
- Date matching and a definition of 'serious' are needed before treating it as contradiction.
Examiner tip: Do not infer a workplace accident solely from the patient's job.
- 4.
Entirely fictional archive for source skills, not a real event. In the invented town of Mere, a fictional 1905 petition demands safer mills. A: a mill manager's letter to investors says, 'No serious injury occurred this month.' B: a newspaper repeats A verbatim, naming the manager as its source. C: a hospital register records a mill worker's broken arm but does not state how it happened. All documents and attributions are invented. Explain why absence of injury entries in a surviving mill ledger would not necessarily prove safety.
[3 marks] · no calculatorAnswer explanation
Draft walkthroughs are based on marking guidance, not independently verified derivations.
- Absence is meaningful only if the event would normally leave a trace in the record being searched. Establish recording practice and survival before treating silence as evidence of no injuries.
- Award each point once. Accept other well-supported interpretations addressing the task.
Marking points
- The ledger may not have been intended to record every injury.
- Records may be incomplete, lost or selectively preserved.
- Underreporting or classification could hide relevant incidents.
Examiner tip: Ask what this type of record was designed to capture.
- 5.
Entirely fictional archive for source skills, not a real event. In the invented town of Mere, a fictional 1905 petition demands safer mills. A: a mill manager's letter to investors says, 'No serious injury occurred this month.' B: a newspaper repeats A verbatim, naming the manager as its source. C: a hospital register records a mill worker's broken arm but does not state how it happened. All documents and attributions are invented. Assess whether A should be discarded because it has a reputational interest.
[4 marks] · no calculatorAnswer explanation
Draft walkthroughs are based on marking guidance, not independently verified derivations.
- Bias changes the questions a source answers well; it does not erase every use. Keep the letter as evidence of communication strategy while testing the factual claim rather than adopting or rejecting it wholesale.
- Award each point once. Accept other well-supported interpretations addressing the task.
Marking points
- That interest may lead to selective reporting or minimisation.
- The letter remains useful for the manager's presentation to investors.
- Its specific injury claim can be tested against independent dated records.
- Distinguishes usefulness for attitudes from reliability for event counts and reaches a qualified judgement.
Examiner tip: Always specify 'useful for what?' before judging a source.
- 6.
Entirely fictional archive for source skills, not a real event. In the invented town of Mere, a fictional 1905 petition demands safer mills. A: a mill manager's letter to investors says, 'No serious injury occurred this month.' B: a newspaper repeats A verbatim, naming the manager as its source. C: a hospital register records a mill worker's broken arm but does not state how it happened. All documents and attributions are invented. Design a corroboration strategy for investigating the petition's safety demands.
[4 marks] · no calculatorAnswer explanation
Draft walkthroughs are based on marking guidance, not independently verified derivations.
- Triangulate claims across records made for different reasons. A petition documents organised concern; injury frequency and causes need a separate evidential chain with definitions and date matching.
- Award each point once. Accept other well-supported interpretations addressing the task.
Marking points
- Seeks independent inspection, worker or medical records with relevant dates.
- Links identities and circumstances rather than assuming all injuries occurred at work.
- Examines who signed the petition and its purpose without treating demands as measured facts.
- Accounts for dependence and archival gaps before a supported conclusion.
Examiner tip: This invented archive is a method exercise, not a source to add to real historical statistics.
Marking points are indicative, not an official mark scheme. Accept equivalent valid methods and supported interpretations that address the task; award each mark once without requiring the model wording.