Silvapages

Mark Band: 0

The work does not reach a standard described by the descriptors below.

Mark Band 1-2

Answers lack understanding of the demands of the question or accurate/relevant historical knowledge. Answers show little or no evidence of structure and consist of little more than unsupported generalizations.

Mark Band 3-4

Answers reveal little understanding of the question. While historical details are present, they are largely inaccurate and/or of marginal relevance to the task. There is little or no understanding of historical context or historical processes. While there may be a recognizable essay structure, answers consist of little more than poorly substantiated assertions.

Mark Band 5-6

Answers indicate some understanding of the question. There is some relevant, accurate historical knowledge but detail is insufficient. Understanding of historical processes and (where appropriate) comparison and contrast may be present but underdeveloped. While there may be a recognizable essay structure, the question is only partially addressed.

Mark Band 7-8

Answers indicate that the demands of the question are generally understood. Relevant in-depth historical knowledge is present but is unevenly applied throughout. Answers are presented in a narrative or descriptive manner. Alternatively, there is a limited argument that requires further substantiation. Some attempt at analysis may be present but limited. There has been some attempt to place events in their historical context and to show an understanding of historical processes and (where appropriate) comparison and contrast. There is evidence of an attempt to follow a structured approach, either chronological or thematic.

Mark Band 9-11

Answers indicate that the demands of the question are understood and addressed, though not all implications are considered. Relevant, largely accurate in-depth historical knowledge is present and applied as evidence. Critical commentary indicates some understanding. Events are generally placed in their historical context. There is an understanding of historical processes and (where appropriate) comparison and contrast. There may be some awareness of different approaches to, and interpretations of, historical issues and events. However, responses that mainly summarize the views of historians and use these as a substitute for, rather than a supplement to, the deployment of relevant historical knowledge cannot reach the top of this band. There is a clear attempt to structure answers chronologically or thematically. Synthesis is present but underdeveloped.

Mark Band 12–14

Answers are clearly focused responses to the demands of the question. Relevant in-depth historical knowledge is applied as evidence. Critical commentary indicates some in-depth understanding but is not consistent throughout. Events are placed in their historical context. There is a sound understanding of historical processes and (where appropriate) comparison and contrast. There may be awareness and some evaluation of different approaches to, and interpretations of, historical issues and events. These are used to supplement, in a relevant manner, the arguments presented. Answers are well structured using evidence to support relevant historical arguments. Synthesis is present but not always effectively or consistently integrated.

Mark Band 15-17

Answers are clearly focused responses, showing a high degree of awareness of the demands of the question. Where appropriate, answers may challenge the question successfully. In-depth and accurate historical knowledge is applied consistently and convincingly to support critical commentary. Events are placed in their historical context. There is a clear understanding of historical processes and (where appropriate) comparison and contrast. There may be evaluation of different approaches to, and interpretations of, historical issues and events. This evaluation is integrated effectively into the answer to support and supplement the argument. Answers are well structured and clearly expressed, using evidence to support relevant, balanced and focused arguments. Synthesis is well developed, with knowledge and critical commentary fully and effectively integrated.

Mark Band 18-20

Answers are clearly focused responses, showing a high degree of awareness of the demands of the question. Where appropriate, answers may challenge the question successfully. In-depth and accurate historical knowledge is applied consistently and convincingly to support critical commentary. In addition, answers may reveal a high level of conceptual ability. Events are placed in their historical context. There is a clear understanding of historical processes and (where appropriate) comparison and contrast. There may be evaluation of different approaches to, and interpretations of, historical issues and events. This evaluation is integrated effectively into the answer to support and supplement the argument. In addition, an awareness of the reasons for circumstances that produced differing and often conflicting historical interpretations is present. Answers are well structured and clearly expressed, using evidence to support relevant, balanced and well-focused arguments. Synthesis is highly developed, with knowledge and critical commentary fully and effectively