Section C - Writing Frame

Section C - Writing Frame

1. Introduction

   • 1) Start with "Historians have long debated (State the issue under the question)
   • 2) "(Historian x) aligns more with this view, arguing (summarise in brief and mention the basis of their argument)"
   • 3) "(Historian y) takes a different view by suggesting (summarise in brief and mention the basis of their argument)"
   • 4) "The criteria for judging the interpretations of these two historians is to analyse the issues raised, evaluate the differing interpretations given and intergate contextual knowledge to decide the extent to which their claims are supported."
   • 5) "Overall, it is clear that (historian x/y) has a more convincing view"

2. For Paragraph

   • 1) "The interpretation that (state the issue under the question) is supported mostly by (extract 1/2)"
   • 2) "(historian x/y) suggests (brief quote) (explain quote)"
   • 3) "This can be supported/challenged by referencing to (add at least one piece of evidence from the context plus an explanation of why that evidence is valid.)"
   • 4) "This is convincing/unconvincing because ..."
   • 5) Try to find a link between the extracts. Is there something similar?
   • 6) "This view can also be seen in the (extract 1/2). (Brief quote) (Explain and add context to challenge/support)"

3. Against Paragraph

   • 1) "However, the interpretation that (state view in question) can be challenged."
   • 2) "(Extract 1/2) is more in line with this challenge (summarise the main point of difference with brief quotes)"
   • 3) "Differently from (extract 1/2) (historian x/y) argues (brief quote) (explain quote)"
   • 4) "This view can be supported/challenged due to context (add context and explain why it relates)"
   • 5) "This is convincing/unconvincing because ..."
   • 6) Try to find a link between the two extracts. Is there something similar?
   • 7) "this view can also be seen in (extract 1/2) (brief quote) (explain and add context to challenge/support)"

4. Conclusion

   • 1) "In conclusion, it is clear that the interpretation (state issue) is/not convincing."
   • 2) Acknowledge areas of agreement first (one sentence)
   • 3) Deal with the least convincing extract first (one sentence)
   • 4) "(Extract 1/2) puts forward a somewhat convincing argument as they base their argument on stronger evidence"
   • 5) Suggest why this may not be the best approach - Does it link well to context?
   • 6) Now deal with the more convincing extract.
   • 7) "(Extract 1/2) is the more convincing because they base their argument on stronger evidence. (Explain why it is a better approach and how it best links with the context)"