Answering the How fully source question: using points selected from the source and points of recalled knowledge the source omits to judge how fully a source describes or explains a development.

What this dot point is asking

The "How fully" question, sometimes phrased "To what extent", is a source-handling question that appears across the contexts of SQA National 5 History. It gives you a source and asks how fully it describes or explains a named development or set of reasons. The skill it tests is twofold: reading a source for relevant points, and bringing in your own recalled knowledge of what the source leaves out. It is the question that most clearly combines source work with revision, because you cannot score well from the source alone.

This is one of the source questions where method reliably converts into marks. SQA credits both relevant points taken from the source and relevant points of recall the source omits, so a candidate who knows the topic and follows the structure can reach the tariff. The classic failure is to quote the source thoroughly but add nothing of your own, which caps the answer.

The answer

The "How fully" question rewards three things: relevant points selected from the source, relevant points of your own recalled knowledge that the source does not mention, and a supported judgement on how fully the source covers the issue. SQA limits how many marks come from source points alone, so recall is essential to reach the top of the tariff. The reliable structure is: state the source covers the issue partly; give each source point ("the source says..."); give each omitted point of recall ("the source does not mention..."); then judge how fully overall.

Select points from the source

First, mine the source for points that genuinely bear on the named issue. Anchor each so the marker can see it came from the source: "the source describes...", "the source explains that...". Do not copy the whole source; select the parts relevant to the question and put each as a separate point. There is a cap on marks from source points, so two or three well-chosen source points are usually enough before you turn to recall.

Add recalled knowledge the source omits

The decisive part of the answer is your own knowledge. Identify relevant points about the issue that the source does not include, and signpost each clearly: "the source does not mention...". These omitted points are what lift the answer above the source-point cap, and they are where revision pays off. Aim for three or four relevant omissions, each a developed point about the issue, not a vague gesture.

Reach a balanced judgement

Close with a judgement on how fully the source covers the issue, supported by the points you have made. "The source describes the development only partly, because while it covers several aspects it leaves out important ones such as..." A judgement that weighs what the source includes against what it omits, rather than a bare "not fully", is what completes the answer.

Examples in context

Suppose Source C describes the effects of an economic change, and the question asks how fully it describes those effects. A weak answer simply restates the source: "The source says prices rose. The source says people moved to towns. So the source describes it fully." It uses only the source and reaches an unsupported verdict, so it is capped low.

A full-mark answer balances source and recall: source points, "the source describes rising prices" and "the source describes people moving into towns for work"; recalled omissions, "however, the source does not mention the overcrowding and poor housing this caused", "it does not mention the strain on water supplies and public health", "it does not mention the new factory discipline workers had to adjust to"; judgement, "so the source describes the effects only partly, covering the economic shift but leaving out the social consequences". Two source points, three developed omissions, a supported judgement.

Try this

Q1. Why can you not gain full marks on a "How fully" question using the source alone? [2 marks]

• What the marker wants. Because SQA caps the marks available from source points; reaching the top of the tariff requires adding relevant recalled knowledge the source leaves out.

Q2. How should you signpost a point of recalled knowledge so the marker credits it? [1 mark]

• What the marker wants. With a clear phrase such as "the source does not mention...", followed by a developed, relevant point about the issue from your own knowledge.

Q3. What does a good judgement on a "How fully" question look like? [2 marks]

• What the marker wants. A supported statement weighing what the source covers against what it omits, such as "the source covers the issue only partly because it includes X but leaves out Y", rather than a bare "not fully".

A note on sources

This guide is AI-written and not individually human-reviewed. Question wording and mark allocations follow the published SQA National 5 History format; verify current paper structure and question types against the SQA National 5 History course specification and marking instructions at sqa.org.uk.