IB History

1. Origin, purpose, value, limitation: one source, four questions

Learning goal: Evaluate a single source using origin, purpose, value and limitation.

A source question in History asks you to judge a document, not just summarise it. The usual framework has four parts: origin (who made it, when and where), purpose (why it was made and for whom), value (what it helps a historian find out) and limitation (what it cannot show). Each part needs evidence from the source itself and from your own knowledge.

Origin and purpose lead to value and limitation. A private diary written at the time may show honest feelings, but it shows one person's view. A government poster aims to persuade, so it reveals what the state wanted people to believe, even if it is poor evidence of what happened. The same source can be valuable for one question and weak for another, so always judge it against the question asked.

Weak answers list the four words without using them. A better answer names the author, links the purpose to a detail in the text, and then states a specific value, for example: this speech shows how the government framed the war to its own citizens. A specific limitation is also needed, such as: it is written by one side and tells us little about opposition views. Avoid saying that a source is biased without saying how.

Use the question wording. If it asks about value and limitations for a particular topic, build the answer around that topic. Keep to a clear structure, one short paragraph for value and one for limitation, and finish by weighing them. In this course the examples are invented, for example a letter from a fictional minister in the invented Kingdom of Alderland, so they teach the method without any claims about real events.

Worked example

A fictional minister of Alderland writes a public speech praising a new law. Give one value and one limitation for studying public opinion.

1. Value: shows how the government wanted the law presented.
2. Limitation: it is written by an official and does not show what ordinary people thought.
3. So it is better for government aims than for opinion.

Mental model: Origin, purpose, value, limitation.

Common trap: Treating the four parts as one.

2. Comparing sources: build a shared question first

Learning goal: Compare and contrast two sources on the same issue.

Comparison questions ask for similarities and differences between two sources. The best approach starts with a shared question, such as how the sources treat the cause of an event. Without it you may list unrelated details. Choose two or three points on which both sources speak, then compare each point.

Cross-reference rather than describe one source then the other. For each point, write what source A says, what source B says, and whether they agree. Use short quotations or exact details. A comparison of a fictional newspaper from Alderland and a letter from a farmer might show agreement that taxes rose but disagreement on whether this was fair.

Explain differences. Differences often follow from origin and purpose: a newspaper owned by the government has a different aim from a private letter. Then make a judgement: where the sources agree, the claim is stronger; where they differ, a historian looks for more evidence. A strong answer links the comparison to a conclusion, not only a list.

Common errors include writing two separate summaries, only listing similarities, and ignoring the question. Plan for equal balance, and use comparison words such as whereas, similarly and both. All examples in this lesson are invented; check the current official paper format for time and mark details. The method stays the same across topics and across the current and new courses.

Remember that two sources on the same page can still answer different questions. Test your shared question by checking that both sources say something on it. If one does not, choose another point or note that the source is silent.

Worked example

A fictional newspaper and a farmer's letter both mention a tax rise. One calls it fair, the other harsh. Write a comparison sentence.

1. Both sources report a tax rise, but the newspaper calls it fair while the farmer calls it harsh.
2. The difference reflects the government link of the paper and the personal hardship of the farmer.

Mental model: Points, not sources.

Common trap: Counting each source separately.

3. Paper 1 time: spend minutes where marks live

Learning goal: Plan time across source questions using mark values.

Paper 1 is source-based. In the current HL brief it is a 1 hour paper worth 20 percent of the final grade. Time is short, so you plan by marks. Check the official page for the paper you will sit, since the new course changes the timings for first assessment in 2028.

A simple method is to divide time in proportion to marks. If an invented paper had 24 marks in 60 minutes, that is 2.5 minutes a mark. A 6-mark question then gets about 15 minutes. Leave 3 to 5 minutes for the final question's reading and a check. Practise with real past papers from your teacher, timing each question.

Read the question before the sources. Knowing what is asked helps you to mark useful phrases. Spend a short time at the start to skim all sources, because later questions often use the same material. Write short, direct answers; long introductions waste time that the marks do not reward.

If you run out of time on one question, move on and return. A short answer to every question usually scores more than a perfect answer to some. After practice, review where you lost minutes: re-reading sources, planning too long, or writing narrative. The numbers here are invented to show the method; they are not the real mark allocation.

Past papers and the mark scheme descriptors help you to see how marks are given. Look at how many marks go to value and limitations, and how many to the use of contextual knowledge, then adjust your minutes to match.

Worked example

An invented paper has 24 marks in 60 minutes. How long for a 6-mark question?

1. 60 / 24 = 2.5 minutes per mark.
2. 2.5 x 6 = 15 minutes.

Mental model: Minutes per mark times marks.

Common trap: Using total marks.

4. An essay needs an argument, not a narrative

Learning goal: Build an essay that answers the question with a line of argument.

A History essay answers a question with an argument. Narrative tells what happened in order; argument says why one view is stronger. A thesis is a clear answer to the question that you can defend, for example: the main cause of the fall of the fictional Alderland monarchy was financial weakness, though political mistakes made it worse.

The introduction should define key terms, set the scope and state the thesis. Skip long background. Each body paragraph should have a topic sentence that makes a claim, evidence such as specific facts, dates and names, an explanation of how the evidence supports the claim, and a link back to the question. This keeps every paragraph on the argument.

Include the counter-argument. A paragraph that gives the best case for another view, and then explains why it is less convincing, shows judgement. Use words such as however, although and nevertheless. Weigh factors: say which was most important, and why, instead of listing all as equal.

The conclusion should answer the question and not add new evidence. In an exam, plan for about five minutes: note the thesis, three to four points with evidence, and the counter-argument. Check time on the real paper at the official page. Examples here are fictional and teach the structure only.

A common weakness is to know a great deal but not to use it for the question. Keep asking: does this fact help to answer this question? If not, leave it out. A tight, relevant essay usually scores higher than a long one.

Worked example

Write a thesis for: To what extent was war the main cause of a fictional monarchy's collapse?

1. The thesis answers the question.
2. Example: war was important, but long-term financial weakness was the deeper cause.
3. It gives a judgement to defend.

Mental model: Count all parts.

Common trap: Leaving out the introduction or conclusion.

5. Causation: layers, triggers and weighting

Learning goal: Separate long-term causes, short-term causes and triggers, and weigh them.

Causation asks why something happened. Historians separate long-term causes, which build up over many years, short-term causes, which operate close to the event, and triggers, which are the final events that set it off. A fire needs dry wood (long-term), a hot summer (short-term) and a spark (trigger).

Do not stop at listing. Explain how causes link: poor harvests led to rising prices, which led to unrest, which made a weak government unable to respond. This is a chain. Some causes are also necessary, because the event would not have happened without them, and others are only sufficient or contributory.

Weighting means judging which causes mattered most. Criteria include how much each cause influenced others, whether the event would have happened without it, and how widely it was felt. State the criterion and use it. Saying the economy was most important because other causes grew from it is a weighing argument.

Beware hindsight and single-cause explanations. People at the time did not know the outcome, so judge them by what they knew. Use evidence for every causal claim. The invented case of Alderland is used so that no real historical claim is made; the same method applies to any topic, including those in the new course's concept of cause and consequence.

Another useful habit is to rank causes at the end of your plan, with the strongest first. Then check that your conclusion matches the ranking. A mismatch between the ranking and the final line is a common source of confusion.

Worked example

In fictional Alderland, a poor harvest, a debt crisis and an assassination all came before a revolt. Which is a trigger?

1. The assassination happened last and set it off.
2. The harvest and debt were earlier conditions.

Mental model: Links minus one.

Common trap: Counting links as connections.

6. Significance, consequence, continuity and change

Learning goal: Judge significance and the balance of continuity and change.

Significance asks why something matters. A person or event can be significant for how many people it affected, how deeply, for how long, and how it is remembered. Significance is not fixed: different groups and periods judge it differently, so state who is judging and by what criteria.

Consequence asks what resulted, short term and long term, intended and unintended. A law may achieve its aim but also cause unplanned effects. Separate the immediate effects from long-term ones, and say who was affected, such as rich, poor, urban or rural groups.

Continuity and change ask what stayed the same and what altered over a period. Most periods show both. A strong answer does not choose one but judges the balance, perhaps by area: politics changed greatly, daily life changed little. Define the period carefully, since the chosen dates shape the answer.

Use specific evidence and a clear criterion. To say that a reform was significant, show scale, depth and duration. Keep in mind that the new course names continuity and change, cause and consequence, perspectives and significance as the four specified concepts, according to the IB update page. The Alderland examples are invented.

For a longer essay, divide the period into phases and compare what changed in each. This shows depth and stops you from treating a century as one block. Name the phase dates carefully using your own studied case.

Practise by choosing one event from your own course and writing two sentences of significance and two of consequence, each with a criterion and one precise fact. Then swap with a classmate and check that every claim has evidence.

Worked example

A fictional Alderland reform changed voting laws but daily work stayed the same. Give a balanced statement.

1. Political life changed because more people voted.
2. Daily life showed continuity because work patterns stayed the same.
3. Overall, change was greatest in politics.

Mental model: Sum both lists.

Common trap: Counting only one list.

7. Historiography: perspectives on the same event

Learning goal: Explain why historians disagree and evaluate perspectives.

Historiography is the study of how history is written. Different historians can reach different conclusions about the same event because they use different evidence, ask different questions, or are shaped by their time and place. An answer should identify the perspective, explain how it was formed and weigh its strength.

A perspective is a position, such as that economic factors drove the event, or that individuals did. To evaluate it, ask what evidence supports it, what evidence it neglects, and what the author's context might be. Writers from a victorious state may stress different features from writers from a defeated one.

Avoid attaching perspectives to named historians unless you are certain of their argument and have studied them. Use accurate names and dates, or describe the view by school of thought. Invented historians of Alderland are used here to teach the process, and they are not real people.

Strong answers compare perspectives, show how they conflict or overlap, and reach a view about which is more convincing and why. New evidence can change interpretations. The new IB course names perspectives as one of four specified concepts, according to the IB update page. Test your own judgement: what additional evidence would change your mind?

When you meet a new historian in class, make a short card: the question they ask, the main argument, the evidence used and one criticism. These cards make revision faster and keep each view precise and fair.

As practice, take a question you have answered and write a paragraph that sets two interpretations side by side. Mark the sentence where you judge between them, and check that the judgement uses evidence and not only preference.

Worked example

Two fictional historians disagree: one says taxes, the other says leaders caused a revolt. How do you evaluate?

1. Check what evidence each uses.
2. Check what each ignores.
3. Weigh which explains more.

Mental model: Perspectives times criteria.

Common trap: Adding instead of multiplying.

8. Regional depth: evaluate a supplied argument

Learning goal: Judge a claim using evidence from a chosen region.

A regional essay often gives a claim and asks to what extent you agree. You must choose evidence from your own studied region, so first plan which case studies fit. Name them clearly, with dates and examples, and do not rely on general statements. This course uses an invented region and so teaches method only.

Break the claim into parts. A claim like the new ruler succeeded mainly through force has two ideas: success and force. Define success, and then examine how far force explains it, compared with other factors such as support, wealth and luck. Each paragraph can test one factor.

Counter-evidence is needed. If force explains some events but not others, say so. Then reach a verdict that has a degree: largely, partly, hardly. Explain the verdict with reasons and note limits in the evidence you have.

Plan before writing. In the current HL brief, Paper 3 is a 2.5 hour essay paper worth 35 percent. The new course makes Paper 3 two essays, according to the IB update page, so check which applies to you. Use the time to plan each essay with evidence and counter-argument, not to write everything you know.

Region-specific knowledge needs revision cards too. Make a card for each key event with date, people, causes and effects, so that you can pick the best example under time pressure. Choose examples that cover different themes.

Practise with a short timed task: read a claim, write a thesis with a degree, and list one point for, one against and one criterion. Doing this in ten minutes builds the habit you need in the exam room.

Worked example

Claim: a fictional ruler succeeded mainly through force. Name two other factors to test.

1. Popular support.
2. Economic strength.
3. Compare each with force.

Mental model: Multiply by 60.

Common trap: Using 100 minutes per hour.

9. The historical investigation: 20 percent, your question

Learning goal: Plan an investigation with a focused question and sources.

The internal assessment is a historical investigation that you choose, worth 20 percent of the final grade in the HL brief. The new course keeps it and has three sections, according to the IB update page. Always follow your teacher and the current guide for word limits and rules.

Start with a focused question. It should be narrow enough to answer in the space, open enough to allow an argument, and answerable with accessible sources. Compare: what happened in a region (too wide) with how far did a specific policy change a village economy (more focused).

Choose sources that fit the question and note their origin and purpose as you collect them. Keep a record of each: author, date, place, why you chose it. Evaluate at least a few in depth and use others for context. Do not use sources you have not read.

In your analysis, use evidence to build an argument, and reach a conclusion that answers the question. Cite sources consistently and follow the academic honesty policy; do not copy. Keep a log of your decisions and drafts, since this makes the process easier to explain. All the examples here are invented.

A final tip is to write a short plan for the investigation, with dates for each stage. Early planning leaves time for finding sources in archives or libraries, which can take longer than expected, and for revision.

Practise by writing three versions of one question, from too wide to well focused, and note what changed each time. Ask your teacher for feedback on the final one before you commit to it.

Worked example

Improve: What happened in Alderland? Make it focused.

1. Add a policy and a time.
2. Example: How far did the 1850 tax law change farm incomes in Alderland? (invented)

Mental model: Percent to decimal.

Common trap: Treating 20 as 20 percent of 20.

10. Old course, new course: know which one you are in

Learning goal: Identify which course version applies and what changes.

The IB update page says the new History course was launched in February 2026, first teaching August 2026, and first assessment May 2028. Until then, the current course applies. Last updated on the page was 20 March 2025, so check the official page again for later changes.

Content changes include four specified concepts: cause and consequence, continuity and change, perspectives and significance. Prescribed subjects become paired case studies, world history topics become global themes, and depth studies become regional in-depth topics, according to the update page.

Assessment changes include a Paper 1 designed around the paired case studies, a new section A in Paper 2 with a question on a specified concept, a Paper 3 of two essays instead of three, and an internal assessment with the reflection section removed. Timings are adjusted, so use the official figures for your sitting.

What to do: ask your teacher which version you follow and what year you sit the exam. Use only the brief for your version. The weights quoted in this course are from the HL brief for the current course: Paper 1 20, Paper 2 25, Paper 3 35 and investigation 20 percent. SL weights are not stated here.

Check also that your notes include both versions where they differ. If you revise only the old course by mistake, you may lose marks on the new format. Ask your teacher for the official specimen materials.

Practise by making a one-page chart of the old and new course with columns for content, papers and internal assessment. Tick each item once you have checked it on the official page, and add the date you checked.

Worked example

A student sits in May 2027. Which course applies?

1. First assessment of the new course is May 2028.
2. So the current course applies.

Mental model: End minus start.

Common trap: Counting months wrongly.

11. Using your own knowledge in source questions

Learning goal: Add precise outside knowledge to source analysis.

Source questions reward your own knowledge when it is precise and linked to the source. Contextual knowledge tells the reader what was happening when the source was made: the events, groups and debates around it. Use it to explain a detail in the source, to test a claim, or to show what the source leaves out.

Precision matters. A date, a named law or a figure from your studied case is stronger than a general statement such as things were bad. Do not drop in facts that do not connect to the source; each piece of knowledge should answer the question of why this detail matters here.

A useful pattern is: quote a few words from the source, explain what they mean in context, and then say whether this supports or challenges another source or the question. For example, a fictional Alderland letter says the harvest failed; your knowledge of the invented price rise can corroborate it.

Be careful with facts you are unsure of. A wrong detail loses credibility and may be penalised. If you cannot remember an exact date, use a safe description of the period. Practise by taking one source and listing three things that you know which are relevant, then deciding which one best answers a likely question. Keep revision notes short and organised by theme.

Practise with one past source question: highlight the facts in the source, then write a margin note of precise context for each. Later, choose the two notes that best answer the question and discard the rest.

Worked example

A fictional letter says bread cost more. Add one piece of context.

1. Context: an invented poor harvest raised grain prices.
2. This corroborates the letter's claim.

Mental model: Total minus used.

Common trap: Using all of them.

12. Writing introductions and paragraphs that argue

Learning goal: Write an opening and paragraphs that stay on the question.

An introduction in History should be short and useful. Define any key word in the question, set the time and place, and state the thesis. Avoid long background that does not help the argument. Two to four sentences are enough in an exam, and in a longer essay a short paragraph can also outline the main lines of argument.

A paragraph begins with a topic sentence that makes a claim. Next comes evidence: a specific fact, example or source detail. Then an explanation, which says how the evidence supports the claim. Finally a link, which connects the point to the question or the thesis. Use the same pattern every time and your essay will read clearly.

Check that each paragraph answers the question and does not drift into narrative. If you write and then and next, you are probably telling a story. Replace it with because, therefore and this shows. Use varied evidence, such as statistics from your studied case, statements and actions of people, and the view of a historian when you are sure of it.

Revise by reading only the topic sentences. They should form a line of argument that answers the question. If one does not fit, move or delete the paragraph. The Alderland examples in this course are invented, so the skill is practised without any claim about real events. Practise writing three topic sentences for a past question before writing the whole essay.

Practise by writing the opening and one paragraph for a past question in twelve minutes. Then underline the thesis, the topic sentence, the evidence and the link, and check each one exists and is clear.

Worked example

Rewrite: Then the king raised taxes and then people were unhappy.

1. Rewrite with cause: The king's tax rise made people unhappy because wages stayed the same.
2. This explains rather than narrates.

Mental model: Paragraphs times parts.

Common trap: Adding instead.

13. Counter-argument and balanced judgement

Learning goal: Use opposing views to strengthen a conclusion.

A counter-argument is the best case against your own view. Including one shows that you have thought about the question rather than merely collected facts. It needs to be a real alternative backed by evidence, not a weak version that is easy to knock down. Place it in its own paragraph or inside a paragraph that weighs the two views.

Weighing is the heart of judgement. Compare the two views on a criterion, such as how much evidence supports each, how widely each factor mattered, and whether the event would have happened without it. Say which is stronger on that criterion, and why. A clear criterion turns an opinion into an argument.

Concede honestly where the counter-argument has force. Phrases like although this factor played a part, it was less important because show balance and keep your thesis. Do not change your thesis half-way through; if your view shifts while planning, rewrite the thesis first.

Finish with a conclusion that gives a final judgement with a degree, such as largely or partially, and a short reason. Do not introduce new evidence. In the exam, use the planning time to write a counter-argument line next to every main point. This takes under a minute and improves the essay a great deal. All cases here are invented.

Keep a short list of connecting phrases such as although, however and on balance, and use each at least once in every essay you write.

Practise by taking an old essay and adding a counter-argument paragraph and a one-line criterion. Compare the two versions and notice how the judgement becomes stronger, clearer and easier to defend.

Worked example

Thesis: finance was the main cause. Give a counter-argument and a weighing criterion.

1. Counter: war pressure forced the crisis.
2. Criterion: would the crisis have happened without war?
3. Weak finances existed before the war, so finance remains deeper.

Mental model: Same as number of points.

Common trap: Adding extra points.

14. Planning an essay in the exam

Learning goal: Use planning time to produce a clear essay in the time given.

In the current HL brief, Paper 2 is an essay paper of 1.5 hours worth 25 percent. The new course adds a short-response section, according to the IB update page, so confirm the format and time for your sitting. Planning time is part of the paper, not extra to it.

Spend the first few minutes on the question. Underline the command term and the key words, such as to what extent, compare and contrast, or evaluate. Identify the period and place. A good plan has a thesis, three or four points with evidence, a counter-argument and a conclusion line. This takes about five minutes if you practise.

Divide the time in proportion. With an invented 45 minutes per essay, you might use 5 minutes planning, 35 minutes writing and 5 minutes checking. If you must write two essays, give each equal time unless marks differ. Keep an eye on the clock between paragraphs and do not run over for a favourite point.

If time runs out, write a short conclusion that states the judgement, rather than leave the essay without one. After the exam, use practice essays under timed conditions and check your plan against the mark scheme descriptors your teacher provides. The numbers here are invented and the real time allowances are on the official page.

Practise under timed conditions: set a clock for the whole paper length, plan for five minutes and then write. Afterwards, note where time went and adjust your plan for the next attempt, using real past papers from school.

Worked example

An invented essay has 45 minutes. 5 for planning and 5 for checking. How long to write?

1. 45 - 5 - 5 = 35 minutes.

Mental model: Multiply by 60.

Common trap: Using 100 minutes per hour.

15. The four concepts in the new course

Learning goal: Use cause and consequence, continuity and change, perspectives and significance as thinking tools.

According to the IB update page, the new History course uses four specified concepts: cause and consequence, continuity and change, perspectives and significance. They run through the content and assessment. Learn to ask each concept's questions of any topic you study, as they give you a ready structure for analysis.

For cause and consequence ask why it happened and what resulted; separate long-term and short-term, intended and unintended. For continuity and change ask what stayed and what altered and how fast. These two concepts often work together in a long period essay, such as comparing the start and end of a reign.

For perspectives ask who saw the event, how it looked to them and why they differ. This includes the views of people at the time and of later historians. For significance ask why it matters, to whom, and for how long. Always give a criterion and avoid saying something is significant just because it is well known.

Practise by taking one invented event and writing one sentence for each concept. Then choose which concept best fits a given question. The new Paper 2 has a section A question on a specified concept, according to the update page, so the skill is directly assessed. Check your own version at the official page. All events used here are invented.

Practise by writing a one-line answer for each concept on three different topics you study. Then compare the lines and see which concept gives the most to say about each topic, which is a useful guide for choosing in an exam.

Worked example

For a fictional reform, write a significance statement with a criterion.

1. It was significant because it affected most farmers.
2. The criterion is scale.
3. It lasted forty years in this invented case, so duration also supports it.

Mental model: Concepts times events.

Common trap: Adding.

16. Sources, referencing and academic honesty

Learning goal: Keep a source record and cite sources properly for the investigation.

The historical investigation needs a clear record of sources. For each source note the author, title, date, place, publisher or archive, and where you found it. Add a line on why it is useful and what its limits are. A well-kept record saves time and prevents mistakes when you write the final version.

Citing means telling the reader exactly where an idea or quotation comes from. Use one consistent style that your school accepts, such as footnotes or in-text references with a bibliography. Check your school's policy and the IB guidance for details. Cite for direct quotations, paraphrased ideas, figures and images.

Quote sparingly and with purpose. A short quotation can show the exact wording that supports a point; a long one wastes words. After the quote, explain what it shows. Paraphrase well: change the structure and wording, but keep the idea attributed to the source. Never present another person's work as your own.

Academic honesty means that your work is your own and your sources are credited. Copying without credit can lead to serious penalties. Keep drafts and notes as evidence of your process, and ask your teacher when unsure. Use sources from libraries, archives and reliable websites, and judge their origin and purpose. The examples here are invented and no real source is quoted.

Practise by building a model record for three sources and one bibliography entry in your school's style. Check with your teacher that the format meets the rules, and keep the record up to date as you work.

Worked example

Write a source record line for an invented diary of Alderland.

1. Author: invented farmer.
2. Date: invented year.
3. Use: shows daily life.
4. Limit: one person's view.

Mental model: Used minus listed.

Common trap: Ignoring the missing one.