The Night Before: Last Minute Tips for AQA Paper 1H

The night before the exam... A room full of nervous students. What advice to you give?

It’s tempting to “throw the kitchen sink” and bombard students with everything they could possibly need to know. But at this late stage, there’s not much to be gained from this – what knowledge they have now is basically what they’ll have tomorrow morning, and anything else they might want to recap and revise they’ll be much better doing at home by themselves (or, preferably, they’ll get an early night and good sleep).

I’m also not a fan of predictions. It’s a serious risk that trying to second-guess the exam writers will send students off on the wrong scent.

Instead, I’ll suggest here a more targeted, concepts- and skills-focused approach. The brief resource to accompany this can be found here.

 

Tip 1: Think about Timing and Order

Most simply, the paper is 2½ hours long. That means 1 hour for Section A and 1½ hours on Section B. Students are told this on the front of the paper, but it’s useful to remind them of what this means.

It shouldn’t matter what order they answer questions in (although only answer 2 out of 3 questions for Section B!). It is, however, worth reading through all four questions on the paper first, before starting to plan and write.

Timing must include planning – ideally 10 minutes for Section A and 5 minutes per Section B question. No plan = no coherent answer!

 

Tip 2: Identify the Argument in the Extracts

For Section A, the question stem (“Using your knowledge of the historical context, assess how convincing the arguments in these three extracts are in relation to…”) always remains the same. It is the question focus (after the words “in relation to”) that tells students what they’re looking for.

Knowing this is key to identifying what the argument in each extract is.

An AQA webinar recently pointed out that lots of students struggle to identify the argument in an extract. Each extract will make a number of individual points, but these will build towards a key line of argument. And the argument will almost always be summed up best with a single sentence or short quote.

Take for example, this (made up) question: 

Using your knowledge of the historical context, assess how convincing the arguments in these three extracts are in relation to the politics of autocracy, c. 1894 to 1917.

Extract A: Abraham Ascher, Stalin: A Beginner’s Guide (2016) Tsar Nicholas II, who ascended the throne in 1894, possessed none of the qualities necessary for effective leadership. He did not understand that even rulers who claim absolute power need to gain the confidence of large sectors of the population. Although moderately intelligent, he lacked the personal drive and vision to take charge of the government, to familiarize himself with the workings of his administration, and to instill a sense of purpose and direction into the ministers and the bureaucracy. He was narrow-minded and prejudiced, incapable of tolerating people who did not fit into his conception of a true Russian, a fatal flaw in a country composed of over a hundred ethnic groups with a wide range of cultures, languages, and religions. Nicholas also could not bear the word ‘intelligentsia’, which he considered ‘repulsive’ because many of its members tended to oppose autocratic rule. The Tsar was convinced that except for the intelligentsia most people in the Empire were deeply devoted to him.

When supporting or challenging the main points made here (Nicholas II didn’t understand government work, he was intolerant of other opinions and the public, he hated the intelligentsia), students need to relate these back to the overall argument being made, best summarised in these words from the first sentence: “Nicholas II…possessed none of the qualities necessary for effective leadership.” This, in turn, needs to be related to the question focus, the politics of autocracy c.1894 to 1917.

A neat way of doing this is to give the quote to introduce the argument, then summarise what it means in relation to the question, before tackling the main points given in the extract. For example, Stating that “Nicholas II…possessed none of the qualities necessary for effective leadership”, Ascher contends the politics of autocracy, 1894-1917, was made much less effective by the Tsar’s personal and political limitations.

 

Tip 3: Know the Meaning of Command Words

For section B, students have been asked in the past questions beginning with:

• “Statement”. Assess the validity of this view…
• How significant was/were…?
• How effective was/were…?
• To what extent was/were…?

Two of these are straightforward. Assess the validity of this view = How far do you agree? To what extent…? = How far?

However, the other two can potentially lead students down the wrong path.

Questions beginning How significant was/were…? can be answered by focusing on the factor given only, or by bringing in other factors. For example, the 2019 question “How significant was the growth of towns, in the years 1894-1914, to changing Russian society?” might simply focus on the social impact of urbanisation (a big ask requiring knowledge that really exceeds the specification), or compare urbanisation to other factors impacting Russian society, as the mark scheme makes clear (below). It’s worth pointing out, though, that these other factors will certainly seem more relevant and convincing to the question if linked clearly to the stated factor of growth of towns:

By contrast, How effective was/were…? questions ask students to focus squarely on the factor given, as in the 2021 question “How effective were tsarist policies towards ethnic minorities and Jews in strengthening the Russian Empire in the years 1855 to 1894?” Here, only points linked directly to ethnic minority policies and Jews can be credited, as the mark scheme indicates:

 Tip 4: Identify the Theme in the Question

Although not explicitly stated by the specification, the 1H course basically runs according to 4 broad factors: power/authority (incl. opposition), economy, society, and culture (individuals are sprinkled in amongst all of these).

In order to avoid straying from the point of Section B question, it’s very useful for students to start with identifying which theme is actually being asked about in each. Just tweaking one or two words in a question four radically alter the approach students have to take.

Consider these three questions, all about the consequences or the 1861 Emancipation Edict (and other relevant factors).

 

How significant was the Emancipation of the Serfs to strengthening Tsarist political authority, c. 1855-1881? Theme: Power/authority (incl. opposition) Possible thesis statement: “The Emancipation of the Serfs actually did little to strengthen Tsarist political authority, sparking wide-ranging protest movements amongst liberals, nobles, and peasants.” Possible factors: Emancipation (stated factor); Great Reforms; Counter-Reforms; Russification; Orthodox Church

 

How significant was the Emancipation of the Serfs to Russia’s economic development, c. 1855-1894? Theme: Economy Possible thesis statement: “The Emancipation of the Serfs was the trigger for huge economic development, enabling the growth of industry, agriculture, and towns.” Possible factors: Emancipation (stated factor); Industrialisation; Urbanisation; Agricultural Development

 

How significant was the Emancipation of the Serfs to cultural change in Russia, c. 1855-1894? Theme: Culture Possible thesis statement: “The Emancipation of the Serfs enabled some cultural changes to take place, including the expansion of literacy amongst peasants, but was far less significant than other drivers of cultural development.” Possible factors: Emancipation (stated factor); Growing Literacy; Urbanisation; Orthodox Church; Russification

 

How significant was the Emancipation of the Serfs to Russia’s social transformation, c. 1855-1894? Theme: Society Possible thesis statement: “The Emancipation of the Serfs had wide-ranging societal implications, although many were unanticipated and did not necessarily improve the standard of living for peasants who were emancipated.” Possible factors: Emancipation (stated factor); Urbanisation; Emergence of Working and Middle Classes; Outbreaks of Disease

 

Tip 5: Be Philosophical

This is much easier said than done. But I’d try to take the pressure of students. They’ve worked hard for two years. They can’t control what questions are on the paper, who marks their paper, or when they sit it. So they don’t need to worry about those things.

Instead, focus on the one thing that can be controlled. What they write.

In the end, I'll tell them there’s only one purpose to their exam. To tell a stranger what they know. That’s all they can possibly do – and if they do that as well as you know they can, they’ll be fine.

Good luck to you and your students!