How do you answer the WJEC Unit 2 interpretations question that asks how far nominated sources support or contradict a given interpretation?
The interpretations-from-sources question (Unit 2 and 4): identifying the interpretation in a nominated source, using the other nominated source and own knowledge to test how far it supports or contradicts that interpretation, and reaching a judgement, without turning it into a source-comparison.
How to answer the WJEC A-Level History Unit 2 (and Unit 4) interpretations question. Covers identifying the interpretation in a nominated source, using a second nominated source and your own knowledge to decide how far it supports or contradicts that interpretation, reaching a supported judgement, and avoiding the trap of writing a source comparison.
Reviewed by: AI editorial process; not yet individually human-reviewed
Have a quick question? Jump to the Q&A page
Jump to a section
What this dot point is asking
The WJEC Unit 2 depth-study paper (and the source-based question in Unit 4) includes an interpretations question that works with nominated primary sources. It gives you an interpretation (a view put forward in one source, or stated in the question) and asks how far the nominated source or sources support or contradict it, tested against your own knowledge. This is a distinct skill from the AO2 source-value question and from the Unit 5 historiography question, and the examiner is clear that it is not a source comparison.
The answer
Identify the interpretation, not just the source
Read the first nominated source for its argument, not just its facts: what view of the issue does it advance, and on what basis (its content and who produced it)? Write the interpretation in one sentence before you go further, because everything that follows is a test of that view.
Test the nominated source against the interpretation
Work through the evidence systematically. For each relevant point, ask: does this support the interpretation, or does it cut against it? Then bring in own knowledge to say whether the wider record backs that point. The aim is a running judgement on the extent of support, not a description of each source in turn.
Reach a judgement, and avoid the comparison trap
The examiner stresses that this is not a comparison question. You should not weigh the general value of one source against the other, and you should not treat the sources in isolation with separate provenance paragraphs. Instead, keep the stated interpretation in view throughout and conclude with a clear verdict on how far it is supported.
- State the interpretation in one sentence.
- Test the nominated evidence against it, point by point.
- Anchor with own knowledge, confirming which points the record supports.
- Judge the extent of support, answering "how far" or "to what extent" directly.
Examples in context
Model paragraph (testing support for an interpretation). Suppose the first source argues that Nazi control rested mainly on terror, and the second is a report on the popularity of regime policies. A top-band answer first states the interpretation: control rested chiefly on coercion. It then tests the second source against it, noting that evidence of genuine enthusiasm for certain policies qualifies the "mainly terror" view, while passages hinting at fear of denunciation support it. Own knowledge sharpens the verdict: the Gestapo relied heavily on public denunciations, which suggests terror and consent were intertwined rather than alternatives. The paragraph therefore reaches a judgement that the second source partly contradicts the interpretation, because it shows control rested on a mixture of coercion and consent, not terror alone. Note what the answer does not do: it never weighs the general reliability of one source against the other, and it never drifts into a provenance checklist. It stays fixed on the degree of support for the stated view, which is what this question rewards.
Try this
Q1. What is the first thing to establish before testing the sources in this question? [2 marks]
- Cue. The interpretation itself: the view advanced in the nominated source, stated in one sentence.
Q2. Why is it a mistake to weigh the general value of one source against the other here? [3 marks]
- What the marker wants. WJEC states this is not a comparison question; the mark is for how far the nominated evidence supports the stated interpretation, judged with own knowledge, not for ranking the sources' reliability.
Q3. Outline a top-band answer to "To what extent does the second source support the interpretation in the first?" [20 marks]
- What the marker wants. A precise statement of the interpretation, a point-by-point test of where the nominated evidence supports and contradicts it, own knowledge confirming which side the record favours, and a clear judgement on the extent of support, with no drift into source comparison.
Exam-style practice questions
Practice questions written in the style of WJEC exam questions on this dot point, with worked answer explainers. The year tag is the paper they imitate, not the source.
WJEC 201920 marksUse the two sources and your own knowledge. To what extent does the second source support the interpretation offered in the first about the depth study you have studied?Show worked answer →
This is the WJEC Unit 2 interpretations question, distinct from the AO2 source-value question and from the Unit 5 historiography question. It works with two nominated primary sources, not a historian's passage.
Start by stating the interpretation in the first source: what view of the issue does it put forward, and on what basis (its content and attribution)?
Then test the second source against it. Decide, point by point, where the second source supports that interpretation and where it contradicts or qualifies it, using your own knowledge to confirm which side the historical record favours.
Reach an overall judgement on how far the second source supports the interpretation. The top band sustains this line throughout and answers "to what extent" with a clear verdict. Crucially, this is not a comparison: do not weigh the general value of one source against the other, and do not list provenance points in isolation. The focus is the degree of support for the stated interpretation.
WJEC 202220 marksUse the two sources and your own knowledge. How far does the evidence of these sources support the view that the depth-study development was driven mainly by a named factor?Show worked answer →
A version of the interpretations task where the interpretation is stated as a "view" and both nominated sources are tested against it.
Identify the interpretation precisely (the development was driven mainly by the named factor). Then work through each source, deciding where its content supports that view and where it points to other factors, anchoring the judgement in your own knowledge of the period.
The top band reaches a supported judgement on how far the sources, taken together, sustain the stated view, distinguishes where they back it from where they qualify it, and avoids both isolated provenance comments and a generic source comparison. The mark is for the degree of support for the interpretation, judged with own knowledge.
Related dot points
- Evaluating primary sources: assessing provenance, content and tone, weighing value against limitations using own knowledge, and structuring a balanced source evaluation.
How to answer the WJEC A-Level History primary-source question. Covers provenance, content and tone, judging value against historical context using your own knowledge, and a reliable structure for a balanced AO2 source evaluation.
- Analysing historical interpretations: identifying the argument, explaining the basis of an interpretation, evaluating it with own knowledge, and reaching a judgement on how convincing it is.
How to answer the WJEC A-Level History interpretations question. Covers identifying a historian's argument, explaining the basis of an interpretation, evaluating it against your own knowledge, and reaching a supported judgement on how convincing it is, for the AO3 marks.
- Interpreting history: understanding why historians disagree, analysing the basis of an interpretation, evaluating its strengths and limits with your own knowledge, and reaching a supported judgement.
A WJEC A-Level History breadth study skill page on interpreting history: why historians disagree, how to analyse the basis and approach of an interpretation, how to evaluate it against your own knowledge, and how to reach a supported judgement in the interpretations question.
- Nazi Germany 1933 to 1945: the consolidation of dictatorship, the machinery of the police state, propaganda and society, persecution and the Holocaust, and Germany at war.
A WJEC A-Level History depth study of Nazi Germany from 1933 to 1945, covering the consolidation of Hitler's dictatorship, the police state and the SS, propaganda and the control of society, the persecution of Jews and the Holocaust, and Germany at war.
- The French Revolution 1774 to 1795: the crisis of the old regime, the events of 1789, the radicalisation of the Revolution, the Terror, and the Thermidorian reaction.
A WJEC A-Level History depth study of the French Revolution from 1774 to 1795, covering the crisis of the ancien regime, the causes and events of 1789, the radicalisation of the Revolution, the execution of Louis XVI, the Jacobin Terror, and the Thermidorian reaction.
- Britain and the suffragettes: the campaign for women's suffrage, the suffragists and suffragettes, militancy and the government response, the impact of the First World War, and the winning of the vote.
A WJEC A-Level History depth study of Britain and the suffragettes, covering the women's suffrage campaign, the suffragists (NUWSS) and suffragettes (WSPU), militant tactics and the government response, the impact of the First World War, and the winning of the vote in 1918 and 1928.
Sources & how we know this
- WJEC GCE AS and A Level in History specification — WJEC (2015)
- WJEC GCE Unit 2 History Specimen Assessment Materials — WJEC (2015)