To keep explanation separate from endorsement, describe what happened, explain why from the evidence, attribute any judgements to the people who made them, and only judge when the question asks, using stated criteria.
This lesson completes the Second World War depth-study pathway and uses the labelling habit from evidence and source interpretation.
Why does this matter in an exam?
Markers reward answers they can follow from evidence.
A sentence such as “this was a terrible decision” gives a feeling, not evidence. It also asks the marker to accept your view without support. The same sentence rewritten with a reason and a source gives the marker something to credit.
Keeping the boundary clear does not make your answer cold. It makes it persuasive, because every claim can be traced to something.
Four kinds of sentence to tell apart
| Kind | What it does | Example stem |
|---|---|---|
| Fact | Records something the evidence supports | “On that date the authority ordered…” |
| Source viewpoint | Reports what an author claimed or felt | “Source F argues that…” |
| Interpretation | Reports a later historian’s explanation | “One historian argues that…” |
| Endorsement | Approves or condemns without evidence | “It was right/wrong to…” |
In exam answers you use the first three freely. You use the fourth only when a judgement is asked for, and then you support it.
Worked example
The extract is invented for practice. It concerns an invented authority, not a real government.
Source F (invented practice extract). Order issued by the coastal authority of an invented region, 1942. “Households within two miles of the shore must move inland within ten days. This is required for the defence of the region. Compensation will be paid.”
Question: Explain why the authority issued this order. (Our wording, for practice.)
Step 1, what happened: the authority ordered households near the shore to move inland within ten days.
Step 2, reasons from the evidence: the source states “the defence of the region” as the purpose. That is the authority’s stated reason, so we attribute it: “Source F says the order was required for defence.”
Step 3, what we cannot tell: whether the authority’s stated reason was its only reason, and how the households felt. The source does not say.
Step 4, a judgement only if asked: if the question asked “how far was the order justified?”, we would set criteria, for example the threat the authority described and the hardship it caused, give evidence on each side, and then conclude.
Answer for the question as set: “The authority issued the order because, according to Source F, the shore needed to be cleared for the defence of the region. The order gave ten days and promised compensation, which suggests the authority recognised the cost to households. The source does not show whether other reasons existed.”
The mistake to watch for
Mistaken answer: “The authority was cruel to throw families out of their homes.”
This is a moral verdict with no criteria and no evidence, and it answers “was it cruel?”, not “why was the order issued?”. Equally, “The order was obviously the right thing to do” is an endorsement, and it does not answer the question either. The correction is to replace the verdict with what the source shows: the stated reason, the time allowed and the compensation offered.
Check yourself
1. Label each: (a) “Source F states the order applied within two miles of the shore.” (b) “The order was unfair.” (c) “One historian argues such orders were common in wartime.”
Show answer
(a) Source viewpoint, with the claim attributed to the source and checked against its wording. (b) Endorsement or condemnation without evidence. (c) Interpretation, since it reports a historian’s view (in this exercise, invented).
2. Rewrite “The authority was wicked” so that it fits the evidence in Source F.
Show answer
“Source F shows the authority ordering households to leave within ten days for the stated purpose of defence, and offering compensation. The source does not show how households experienced the order.”
3. A question asks “How far was the order justified?” Name two criteria you could use.
Show answer
For example: the threat described at the time, and the hardship the order caused. Other sensible criteria are also acceptable if you state them and support them with evidence.
Where this leads next
You have now covered locating, comparing, explaining and keeping judgement apart. Test all four together with the integrated practice set, or return to explaining a documented development if your claims still need work.
If you would like feedback on exactly where evidence ends and opinion begins in your writing, our online one-to-one History tuition can review your own paragraphs.