DSE Revision: Paper 1 Data Questions
AdvancedThis lesson covers exam strategy for DSE History Paper 1: the 60% two-hour compulsory format, how to read the five source types, and a three-step framework — read the question, read the sources, write the answer — for corroboration and arguing with your own knowledge.
- From 2018 onwards Paper 1 data-based questions carry 60 per cent, last two hours and are all compulsory; Paper 2 essays carry 40 per cent, with two out of seven in one and a half hours, and School-based Assessment has been abolished
- Paper 1 commonly uses five source types: written extracts, statistics, maps, cartoons and photographs; each is read differently, but all start from provenance and content
- The four question categories: identifying provenance and background, corroboration and contradiction, stance and limitation, and arguing with your own knowledge — rising step by step from understanding to evaluation
文體小知識：史料分析說明文——以卷一資料題的設題邏輯，說明文字、統計、地圖、漫畫、照片五類史料的閱讀方法，訓練出處分析、史料互證與結合所知論證的應試能力。
§Text Passage
1From 2018 onwards the HKDSE History assessment rests on two public papers: Paper 1 consists of data-based questions worth 60 per cent of the subject, lasts two hours and requires candidates to answer all questions; Paper 2 consists of essay questions worth 40 per cent, in which candidates attempt any two of seven questions within one and a half hours. School-based Assessment ceased with effect from the 2018 examination, so the public papers now make up the entire result.
2Paper 1 is set on a wide variety of historical sources, most commonly written extracts, statistics, maps, cartoons and photographs. Written sources such as speeches, letters and press reports directly reflect views and stances; statistics present trends and magnitudes in figures; maps show changes of boundaries and spheres of influence; cartoons express contemporary feelings through satire; photographs record scenes on the spot. Since each type differs in form and depth, candidates should identify the type first and then read it according to its characteristics.
3The questions of Paper 1 fall into four categories: first, identifying the provenance and background of a source; second, comparing sources to find corroboration or contradiction; third, analysing the author's stance and the limitation of the source; and fourth, using one's own knowledge to argue a historical view. The four categories move from understanding towards evaluation, step by step, and candidates must judge from the command words which category a sub-question belongs to before choosing the appropriate way to answer.
4Answers can follow a three-step framework: read the question first, circling the command words and the sources specified; then read the sources, studying their provenance and content and marking key phrases; finally write the answer, quoting the sources and combining them with historical facts learned in the curriculum, giving equal weight to the sources and one's own knowledge. Time management matters too: within the two hours allocate length according to marks, answer the sub-questions one is sure of first, and reserve a few minutes to check the script.
5For revision, candidates should organise facts and figures by theme and master the key dates and vocabulary of frequently examined issues; when practising past papers they should work under time limits and compare their answers with the marking schemes to see whether quotations are accurate and knowledge sufficient. Revision along twin tracks — timelines and thematic notes — links the memory of events with examination technique, so that candidates can perform with confidence in the examination hall.
1Summary 重點摘要
This lesson covers exam strategy for DSE History Paper 1: the 60% two-hour compulsory format, how to read the five source types, and a three-step framework — read the question, read the sources, write the answer — for corroboration and arguing with your own knowledge.
2Vocabulary cards Vocabulary
The compulsory question type of Paper 1, presenting sources such as written extracts, statistics, maps, cartoons and photographs for candidates to interpret and answer with their own knowledge.
The origin of a source — its author, identity, date, occasion and audience — the starting point for judging its nature, stance and reliability.
A source produced at the time of the events, such as a speech, letter, diary or photograph, directly reflecting contemporary views and circumstances.
A later work based on primary sources, such as a textbook or monograph — more systematic but further removed from the events.
Comparing the content of different sources, where matching points corroborate one another and conflicting points contradict — a common angle of data-based questions.
Where two or more sources give conflicting accounts of the same fact; answers must identify the conflict and explain its cause, such as differing stances or purposes.
A slanted presentation caused by the author's stance, interests or beliefs, detectable from loaded wording and the angle of narration.
The extent to which a source fails to reflect the full picture — representing only one side or one period, or serving propaganda purposes.
Words specifying what a question demands — 'identify', 'explain', 'compare', 'to what extent' — which set the depth and length of the answer.
Drawing on facts learned in the curriculum to supplement the sources; higher-order sub-questions usually state 'with reference to the sources and using your own knowledge'.
3Step by step Steps
- Step 1: Know the structure and weighting of Paper 1Understanding the structure of Paper 1 is the first step. From 2018 onwards Paper 1, the data-based paper, carries 60 per cent of the subject, lasts two hours and requires all questions to be answered; Paper 2, the essay paper, carries 40 per cent, with two questions chosen out of seven in one and a half hours; School-based Assessment has been abolished, so the public examination decides the whole result. Data-based questions are set on the compulsory part, and each question contains several sub-questions rising from easy to hard to accommodate candidates of different abilities. For example, one question may first ask candidates to identify the message of a cartoon, then explain the artist's stance, and finally comment on the issue with their own knowledge — step by step.
- Step 2: Identify the five source types and their featuresPaper 1 commonly uses five types of sources — written extracts, statistics, maps, cartoons and photographs — and each type is read differently. For written sources note the genre and tone; for statistics read the title, units and trend; for maps study the boundaries, arrows and legend; for cartoons identify the figures, symbols and caption to see what is being satirised; for photographs observe the scene and what the people are doing. For example, in a newspaper cartoon of the 1930s, if a giant beast wears a hat labelled with a country's name, the beast stands for that expanding country; the answer should first describe the pictorial details and then explain their symbolic meaning, never one without the other.
- Step 3: Read the provenance first to judge nature and reliabilityAlways read the provenance first — the author, identity, date, occasion and audience — to judge the nature and stance of a source. Primary sources come from those present at the time, such as speeches, letters and diaries; secondary sources are later compilations such as textbooks and monographs; which carries more evidential value depends on the question. For example, two accounts of the same war — a government communiqué stressing victories, and a fallen soldier's letter home revealing civilian suffering — reflect respectively the official and the personal angle; the answer should point out this difference of perspective instead of simply declaring one true and the other false.
- Step 4: Practise corroboration and handling contradictionsCorroboration means comparing the content of different sources to find where they support or contradict each other. First summarise the points of each source, then match them: matching points corroborate each other, opposite points contradict, and the reason for a contradiction — such as the authors' different stances or purposes — must be explained. For example, if Source A's speech boasts an economic boom while Source B's table shows unemployment rising steadily, the two contradict each other; the candidate should point out that the speech is government propaganda, that the statistics are more objective, and should cite the years and figures in the table to support that judgement.
- Step 5: Analyse the author's stance and the source's limitationStance and limitation are the focus of higher-order sub-questions. Stance is the author's attitude towards an event, visible in the wording — complimentary or derogatory — and the angle of narration; limitation is where a source fails to show the full picture, for example representing only one side, covering only one period, or serving a propaganda purpose. For example, a wartime propaganda poster depicting the enemy as a brutal monster aims to rally morale, so it reflects only the home government's view and not the enemy's real situation; a complete answer states both the poster's message and its limitation as propaganda.
- Step 6: Answer with your own knowledgeUsing your own knowledge is the key to scoring in data-based questions. 'Own knowledge' means the facts learned in the curriculum — the dates, causes, course and effects of events. An answer should first quote the key phrases of the source and then support the argument with historical facts, the two linked together, with neither missing. For example, when asked about the author's attitude to appeasement, first quote words such as 'weak' and 'concession' to show a critical stance, then add from knowledge that after the Munich Agreement of 1938 Germany annexed the whole of Czechoslovakia in 1939 and invaded Poland — evidence that the author's criticism was justified.
- Step 7: Match depth and time to the command wordsCommand words determine the depth and length of an answer and hence the use of time. 'Identify' and 'describe' are low-level commands calling for direct points from the sources; 'explain' requires analysis of causes; 'compare' requires point-by-point contrast; 'comment' and 'to what extent do you agree' require a clear stance, supported arguments and a conclusion. For example, a 4-mark 'identify' item should be answered in brief points, whereas a 10-to-12-mark 'comment' item needs an introduction, arguments, historical examples and a conclusion; within the two hours, allocate time according to marks and reserve a few minutes to check the script.
5Worked example Example
Mock data-based question practice: Source 1 is an extract from the editorial of a British newspaper in September 1938 praising the Munich Agreement for delivering 'peace for our time'; Source 2 is an extract from a speech by a British backbench MP in Parliament in October of the same year, criticising the Agreement for betraying Czechoslovakia and strengthening Germany; Source 3 is a statistical table showing German military spending rising sharply from 1935 to 1939. The question has three parts: (a) identify the difference in stance between Source 1 and Source 2 towards the Agreement; (b) how does Source 3 corroborate the view of Source 2? (c) To what extent do you agree with the evaluation in Source 1? Answer with your own knowledge.
- Read the question and identify the source types: the three sources comprise two written sources — a newspaper editorial and a parliamentary speech — and one statistical source; the three parts correspond to stance comparison, corroboration and comment-with-knowledge, so circle the command words and the sources named in each part before writing
- Read the provenance: Source 1 comes from a British newspaper in the very month the Agreement was signed, when public opinion hoped above all to avoid war, so the editorial leans positive; Source 2 is a parliamentary speech one month later, and a backbench MP is prone to criticise government policy; the two differ in identity and occasion, and naturally in stance
- Compare the stances (part a): Source 1 sees the Agreement as a guarantee of peace, in an optimistic tone; Source 2 sees it as concession and betrayal, in an indignant tone; quote one or two key phrases from each and state clearly the contrast between 'praise' and 'criticism'
- Corroborate (part b): Source 3 shows German military spending rising sharply from 1935 to 1939, corroborating Source 2's criticism that 'Germany grew stronger' — after taking the Sudetenland, Germany's resources and armed forces kept expanding; cite the years and the trend in the statistics and explain how the data support the speech
- Comment with your own knowledge (part c): your knowledge includes Germany's annexation of the whole of Czechoslovakia in March 1939 and its invasion of Poland in September that year, proving that appeasement failed to buy lasting peace — hence disagreeing with Source 1 to a large extent; concede that Britain and France were not yet re-armed and the Agreement may have bought time, but on balance the criticism stands
- Answer: (a) The editorial of Source 1 praises the Agreement for bringing peace, in an optimistic tone, treating it as a great diplomatic achievement; the speech of Source 2 criticises it for betraying Czechoslovakia and emboldening Germany, in an indignant tone; the two stances — one complimentary, one critical — are poles apart. (b) The statistics in Source 3 show German military spending rising sharply from 1935 to 1939, corroborating Source 2's criticism that Germany grew stronger: after the Agreement Germany was not satisfied but kept expanding its army with its new resources, and the data lend objective support to the speech. (c) I disagree with the evaluation in Source 1 to a large extent. Barely half a year after the Agreement, Germany annexed the whole of Czechoslovakia in March 1939 and invaded Poland in September of the same year, triggering the Second World War; 'peace for our time' proved an illusion, and appeasement instead handed Germany strategic resources and time. Admittedly, Britain and France had not completed rearmament and the Agreement may have bought time to prepare, but judged by its outcome the cost far outweighed the gain, so the criticism of Source 2 fits the historical facts better than the praise of Source 1.
6Common mistakes Mistakes
7Quick check Quick check
Q1Since 2018, what are the weighting, duration and answering requirement of DSE History Paper 1?
Q2What are the five common types of sources in Paper 1? Give an example of each.
Q3What is 'corroboration', and how should answers handle two contradictory sources?
Q4What does the 'provenance' of a source include, and why must you read it before answering?
Q5When a question asks you to comment 'using your own knowledge', what else is needed besides quoting the sources? Use appeasement as an example.
8Recap Recap
- From 2018 onwards Paper 1 data-based questions carry 60 per cent, last two hours and are all compulsory; Paper 2 essays carry 40 per cent, with two out of seven in one and a half hours, and School-based Assessment has been abolished
- Paper 1 commonly uses five source types: written extracts, statistics, maps, cartoons and photographs; each is read differently, but all start from provenance and content
- The four question categories: identifying provenance and background, corroboration and contradiction, stance and limitation, and arguing with your own knowledge — rising step by step from understanding to evaluation
- The three-step framework: read the question (circle the command words) → read the sources (provenance + content) → write the answer (quotations + own knowledge), giving both equal weight
- Command words set depth and length: 'identify' calls for direct points while 'comment' needs a stance, arguments and a conclusion; allocate time by marks and reserve a few minutes to check the script