History IA - evaluation of sources?

[Iateapenguin]

Hello there,

Firstly I'd just like to say, I'm pretty new to this site so please don't shoot me down too hard if I've posted this in the wrong place, or haven't seen a thread that already has this information, but I'm sort of panicking and need information quickly!

What exactly should I put in my evaluation of sources? Should I include any information from the sources themselves? I'm using a document (the Marshall Plan speech) and a recent analytical/narrative book.

My teachers keep telling us not to talk about "superficial evaluation", so I'm beginning to really wonder if what I've written is analytical or relevant enough!

If someone could just give me points further than "Nature origin purpose" or point me to somewhere with good information on this I would be so, so grateful.

Thanks!

[Emmi]

Origin: Who is the source? Who are they? What are their credentials?

Purpose: Why was this source produced? What effect did the author intend to have?

When you're doing your evaluation of sources, you need to be specific about your sources and what specifically makes them valuable or limited. How do the things you listed in the origin and purpose make it value or limited? It's not enough to say "This book is on Soviet history and the author is American so he might be biased against them." Is he biased at all? If so, where in the book can you give an example? You can only say it is biased if there is bias. Otherwise, find another limitation.

In your Part C just focus on the values and limitations of your source. If you want to discuss the content of the source (which you should), save it for your analysis portion in Part D.

Have a look at Keel's OPVL guide for some inspiration:

[Iateapenguin]

Thanks very much for the help! I've just finished writing about the book, the trouble now is finding what to say about the document!