Examiners are told not to look for a set answer. The interpretation in the question may be agreed with or rejected – but it must be considered seriously, even if the claim is then rejected. Answers need to use all five Sources, evaluating them as to their strengths and limitations as evidence and testing them against contextual knowledge. This collection of sources shows the three Nazi pieces of evidence (A, C and D) very much supporting the proposition. Instruction and aspirations for what can be achieved are evident. Interestingly, the historian’s view in Source E on the surface supports the proposition and gives us a range of evidence. Only Source B questions the assumption in the question and is very important for balancing up the answer. Indeed, this should prompt answers towards bringing in a range of wider knowledge to fully test and thus question the proposition. Last, but not least, answers that consider the dates given in the question should be rewarded highly; peacetime was different to wartime. Success in peacetime was arguably more significant than what could be achieved with the greater opportunities for repression during war.

Each answer has a final mark based on four Assessment Objectives (AO1a, AO1b AO2a and AO2b) worth 10 + 12 + 28 + 20 marks = 70 marks. As the standard of the two answers lies between Level I and Level IV, only the descriptors and marks for these levels are tabulated below.

Marking Grid for Enquiries Question (b)

Assessment Objectives	AO1a - Recall, select and deploy historical knowledge and communicate clearly and effectively	AO1b - Demonstrate understanding of the past through explanation and analysis	AO2a - Analyse and evaluate a range of appropriate source material with discrimination	AO2b - Analyse and evaluate how aspects of the past have been interpreted and represented
Level IA	Uses a range of appropriate historical terms; clearly and coherently structured and communicated answer. 9–10 marks	Consistently relevant and analytical answer; clear and accurate understanding of key concepts and significance of issues. 11–12 marks	Provides a focused comparison of both content and provenance; evaluates qualities and limitations of sources. 26-28 marks	Excellent analysis and evaluation of the interpretation, using all sources and own knowledge to reach a conclusion. 20 marks
Level IB	Uses a range of appropriate historical terms; clearly and coherently structured and communicated answer. 8 marks	Judgements supported by appropriate references to content and provenance; very good understanding of key concepts and significance of issues. 9–10 marks	Provides an effective comparison of both content and provenance; evaluates qualities and limitations of sources. 23-25 marks	Focused analysis and evaluation of interpretation, using all sources and own knowledge to reach a clear conclusion. 17-19 marks
Level II	Uses historical terms accurately; clearly and mostly coherently structured and clearly communicated answer. 7 marks	Good attempt at explanation/analysis but uneven overall judgements; mostly clear understanding of key concepts and significance of issues. 8 marks	Provides a relevant comparison of both content and provenance; evaluation lacks completeness and may be confined to the conclusion or second half of the answer. 20-22 marks	Focused analysis and evaluation of interpretation, using all sources and own knowledge to reach a clear conclusion; some imbalance between use of own knowledge and sources. 14-16 marks
Level III	Uses relevant historical terms but not always accurately or extensively; mostly structured and clearly communicated answer. 6 marks	Mixture of internal analysis and discussion of similarities and differences; uneven understanding of key concepts and significance of issues. 6-7 marks	Provides a comparison; makes limited links with the sources by focusing too much on content or provenance. 17-19 marks	Sound analysis and evaluation; there may be some description and unevenness between use of own knowledge and sources. 11-13 marks
Level IV	Some evidence that is tangential or irrelevant; some unclear, under-developed or disorganised sections but satisfactorily written. 4-5 marks	Mostly satisfactory understanding of key concepts; some unlinked though relevant assertions, description/narrative but without a judgement 4-5 marks	Attempts a comparison but comments are largely sequential; makes few points of comparative provenance or similarity/difference of content. 14-16 marks	Some analysis and evaluation with increasing amounts of description; imbalanced use of own knowledge and sources. 8-10 marks