The 'compare the views' source question: making an overall comparison of two sources' viewpoints and developing point-by-point comparisons of detailed agreement and disagreement on the issue.

What this dot point is asking

One of the Scottish History source questions asks you to compare the views of two sources about an issue, usually for 5 marks. The marks reward an overall comparison of the two sources' main viewpoints and several developed, point-by-point comparisons of agreement or disagreement. The skill is precise matching, not retelling: you must connect a claim in one source directly to a claim in the other and explain the relationship.

How the marks are awarded

The marker is looking for connections. Every creditworthy point must do two things: identify a precise view in one source, and link it to the corresponding view in the other, saying clearly whether they agree or disagree. A point that summarises a single source, however accurate, gives the marker nothing to credit, because the question rewards the relationship between the two.

The overall comparison

Open your answer with the overall point. For example, on the reasons for Scottish emigration: "Overall, Source A and Source B largely agree that economic hardship pushed Scots to emigrate, though Source B places more weight on the role of active recruitment by the colonies." That single sentence frames the whole answer and earns the overall-comparison mark.

Developed point-by-point comparisons

After the overall point, build three or four detailed comparisons. Each one isolates a specific claim from each source and explains the relationship:

• Select a claim from Source A. Quote or paraphrase the exact line.
• Find the matching or opposing claim in Source B. Quote or paraphrase it too.
• State the relationship explicitly. Say whether they agree or disagree, and why.

A strong detailed comparison reads: "Source A argues that 'falling rents and clearances drove families from the land', while Source B agrees, noting that 'the loss of crofts left thousands with no choice but to leave'. Both therefore identify rural dispossession as a cause." Each developed comparison of this kind earns a mark, up to the maximum of four.

Avoiding the describe-then-describe trap

The single most common way to lose marks is to write a paragraph summarising Source A in full, then a paragraph summarising Source B in full, and leave the marker to spot the comparisons. This earns little or nothing, because the question is testing whether you can make the comparison. Always interleave the sources: take a point, compare it across both, then move to the next point.

Examples in context

A full-mark answer on a comparison of two sources about the impact of the Great War on Scotland would run: "Overall, the two sources agree that the war brought hardship to Scottish communities, though Source C stresses the loss of life while Source D emphasises industrial change (overall comparison). In detail, Source C states that 'no Scottish town was untouched by the casualty lists', which agrees with Source D's claim that 'grief reached into every street', so both identify the human cost as severe (detailed comparison). However, Source C says little about the economy, whereas Source D argues that 'the munitions boom transformed Clydeside', so Source D adds an economic dimension Source C omits (detailed comparison). Finally, Source C presents the war as wholly destructive, while Source D notes 'new opportunities for women in the workplace', a more mixed view, so here the sources partly disagree (detailed comparison)." The overall point plus three developed comparisons, each linking a precise claim in one source to a precise claim in the other, secures the 5 marks.

Try this

Q1. How many marks usually come from the overall comparison, and how many from detailed comparisons? [2 marks]

• Cue. One mark for a developed overall comparison and up to four for developed point-by-point comparisons of detail.

Q2. Why does describing each source in turn score badly? [2 marks]

• Cue. The question credits the comparison itself; a description of a single source makes no link between the two, so there is nothing to mark.