1. How reliable is.... Which source is more reliable in....

2. Reliability How do I answer these questions? i. e. How reliable is this source.... ?i. e. How reliable is this source.... ? Balance Most sources chosen are reliable in some ways but not others. Comments on origin Who produced it? In what circumstance? For what purpose? Did they have a motive to mislead? How might this affect reliability? Comments on balance Does the source give a balanced / one - sided view? Have certain things been deliberately missed out to provide a false picture?

3. Reliability How do I answer these questions? Comments on tone Is the source designed to shock or provoke a reaction? Is the language emotive or dispassionate? Use of contextual knowledge Does the source support or contradict what is accepted to be true of this period? You must support with your own knowledge. This is perhaps the best way of analysing the reliability of a source. Use of other sources Do other sources support / contradict the point being made. Are the other sources themselves reliable ** You can use other sources to support / contradict even if not mentioned in the question you are answering ** You must ALWAYS quote from written sources / describe pictures.

4. How reliable is this source in showing attitudes towards votes for women? (7) Level 1: Comprehension only / general assertion. [1-2] Level 2: Valid inference / s from the postcard unsupported by detail from the picture. [2-3] OR Level 2: Makes contextual reference without inference unsupported by detail from the picture. [2-3] Level 3: Valid explanation of how reliable the postcard is in showing attitudes towards votes for women, supported by detail from the picture. OR from contextual knowledge [4-6] Level 4: Valid explanation of how reliable the postcard is in showing attitudes towards votes for women, supported by detail from the picture. AND put into context. [6-7] An anti-suffrage postcard produced in 1908

5. Level 4: Valid explanation of how reliable the letter is in explaining attitudes towards the budget, supported by detail from the source. AND put into context. [6-7] I believe this source is reliable in showing some attitudes towards votes for women but not completely reliable in showing all attitudes. I can see this because it shows me a cartoon of a scene where a woman is attempting to vote. However the women has realised she has ‘ left a cake in the oven.’ She is therefore rushing out and disrupting the voting, knocking people and a table over as she does. This suggests women cannot handle the responsibility of voting and her role in the home. I know it is not completely reliable because it is a very one - sided account, showing very negative attitudes towards votes for women, it has the purpose to persuade people women should not gain the vote. It also goes against my own knowledge as i know many people actually did support women ' s suffrage.

6. How reliable is this source in showing attitudes towards Lloyd Georges ’ Budget? (7) Level 1: Comprehension only / general assertion. [1- 2] Level 2: Valid inference / s from the postcard unsupported by detail from the picture. [2-3] OR Level 2: Makes contextual reference without inference unsupported by detail from the picture. [2-3] Level 3: Valid explanation of how reliable the letter is in explaining attitudes towards the budget, supported by detail from the source. OR from contextual knowledge [4-6] Level 4: Valid explanation of how reliable the letter is in explaining attitudes towards the budget, supported by detail from the source. AND put into context. [6-7] Source E Dear Sir, The strength of this kingdom, in all its past struggles has been its great reserve of wealth and the sturdy independent character of its people. The measure which is being pushed through the House of Commons with haste will destroy both. It will extort wealth from its possessors by unjust taxation. It will distribute it in small doles, the most wasteful of all forms of expenditure, and will weaken the character of the people by teaching them to rely, not on their own exertions, but on the State. A letter to the Times in July 1908.

7. Level 4: Valid explanation of how reliable the letter is in explaining attitudes towards the budget, supported by detail from the source. AND put into context. [6-7] I do not believe this source is completely reliable in showing me attitude towards Lloyd George ’ s budget as its purpose it to persuade people the budget was a negative introduction. I can see this because it is a very one - sided account, which is very pessimistic towards the budget. It says ‘ It will extort wealth from its possessors by unjust taxation.’ it also says it will ‘ destroy ’ Britain and it will ‘ weaken the character of the people ’. This suggests it is an immoral and corrupt act. I know this source may not be reliable as there was much opposition to the budget from the wealthy people who argued the budget, introduced in 1909 which taxed the rich to fund the old Age Pension 1908, would create a ‘ nanny state ’, these people were in the minority as many people did believe the poor needed help.

8. Is one source more reliable than the other to an historian studying poverty at the beginning of the twentieth century. (9) Level 1: Comprehension only / general assertion. [1-2] Level 2: Valid inference / s unsupported be detail from a source. [2-3] OR Level 2: Details of the sources are matched, but no / valid inference is made. [2- 3] Level 3: Valid inference / s supported by detail from a source / s. [6-7] If refers to one source only do NOT reward at the top of the level. Level 4: Argues one is more reliable by evaluating its content, using relevant contextual knowledge, or cross - reference, or tone / language / purpose supported by detail from the source. [6-8] Level 5: Compares the merits of BOTH sources by evaluating their content, using relevant contextual knowledge, or cross - reference, or tone / language / purpose, supported by detail from both sources. [8-9] If there is contextual knowledge but no detail from a source mark within Level 3. Source D Under the window facing the door is the large bed, in which sleep mother, father and two children. A baby is asleep in a pram by the bed and another child is asleep in a cot in the corner. The second window can be, and is, left partly open at night. At the foot of the bed is a small table. Three wooden chairs and a chest of drawers complete the furniture. The small fireplace has no oven, and open shelves go up each side of it. There are two saucepans, both burnt. There is no larder. From Round about a Pound a week by Maud Reeves published in 1913. She is describing a room in London, lived in by one family in the early years of the twentieth century. Source C Rowntrees poverty live 1901

9. Level 5: Compares the merits of BOTH sources by evaluating their content, using relevant contextual knowledge, or cross - reference, or tone / language / purpose, supported by detail from both sources. [8-9] I believe source C is more reliable than source D to an historian studying poverty at the beginning of the twentieth century because Source C is Rowntree ’ s poverty line, developed after years of research, whereas source D is one woman ’ s account of one family living in London, therefore it may be less objective. I believe Source D is less reliable because it is only a one - sided account of poverty. It tells me things like six people lived in one room, four in one ‘ large bed ’, it goes onto say the ‘ small fireplace has no oven ’. This suggests this family lived in extreme poverty I believe it is less reliable as it was produced by Maud Reeves in 1913. By 1913 the Liberal Welfare Reform had introduced many changes to British society which were helping the poor to get out of poverty. For example the Old Age Pension Act of 1908 helped old people, whereas the National Insurance Act 1911 helped the workers. Therefore this account of one family ’ s life seems too extreme.

10. Level 5: Compares the merits of BOTH sources by evaluating their content, using relevant contextual knowledge, or cross - reference, or tone / language / purpose, supported by detail from both sources. [8-9] I believe Source C is more reliable because it shows me Seebohm Rowntree ’ s poverty line. It shows me how people would dip in and out of poverty during their lifetime, going in to poverty at times such as early childhood when they were too young to earn money and in later life when they were too old to earn money. I believe it is more reliable as it is based on years of research in York which he undertook to investigate life for the poor. It is also more objective than Source D as it represents a larger proportion of the public. Furthermore his findings that 28% of people in York lived in poverty are supported by the findings of Booth who discovered 31% of people in London lived in poverty. I therefore believe Source C to be more reliable to an historian studying poverty at the beginning of the twentieth century than Source D.

11. Do you think source A is more reliable than Source B in showing women ’ s work in the munitions factories? (9) Level 1: Comprehension only / general assertion. [1-2] Level 2: Valid inference / s unsupported be detail from a source. [2-3] OR Level 2: Details of the sources are matched, but no / valid inference is made. [2-3] Level 3: Valid inference / s supported by detail from a source / s. [4-5] If refers to one source only do NOT reward at the top of the level. Level 4: Argues one is more reliable by evaluating its content, using relevant contextual knowledge, or cross - reference, or tone / language / purpose supported by detail from the source. [6-8] Level 5: Compares the merits of BOTH sources by evaluating their content, using relevant contextual knowledge, or cross - reference, or tone / language / purpose, supported by detail from both sources. [8-9] If there is contextual knowledge but no detail from a source mark within Level 3. Source A – an official war painting commissioned by the Government in 1915 Source B – a photograph taken from a History textbook. This photograph was taken in 1918

12. Level 5: Compares the merits of BOTH sources by evaluating their content, using relevant contextual knowledge, or cross - reference, or tone / language / purpose, supported by detail from both sources. [8-9] I believe source B is more reliable than source A in showing me women ' s work in the munitions factories because Source B is a photograph giving an actual account of a munitions factory, whereas Source A is a painting commissioned by the Government in 1915 which may have an ulterior motive. I believe Source A is less reliable because it is a painting which shows women hard at work in a munitions factory. There are lots of women who look hard working and content as they produce ammunition. I believe it is less reliable as it was commissioned by the government in 1915. in 1915 there was a munitions crisis and many women were persuaded to join the war effort by helping in the munitions factories. Therefore its purpose may have been to persuade women to work in munitions factories, therefore it may not show what an actual factory looked like.

13. Level 5: Compares the merits of BOTH sources by evaluating their content, using relevant contextual knowledge, or cross - reference, or tone / language / purpose, supported by detail from both sources. [8-9] I believe Source B is more reliable because it is an actual photograph which is used in a History textbook. It shows me women working in a more cramped munitions factory, they look hard working and there are rows of ammunition which have been made. I believe this to be more reliable as it shows a scene in a factory from 1918 when more women were accepted into the workplace due to the shortage of male workers. By 1918 nearly 1 million women worked in the munitions factories, compared to only 200,000 in 1914. I therefore believe Source B to be more reliable in showing women ’ s work in the munitions factories than Source A.