Mark Scheme

1. (8 marks) Two supported inferences from Source A, each developed with a detail from the source.

• Inference (e.g. "Ordinary families enjoyed a rising standard of living") supported by "the motor car... now stands outside a million modest homes" / "new electric machines".
• Inference (e.g. "Many ordinary people were investing in the stock market") supported by "any clerk with a few dollars may share in the nation's growing fortune".
• Also creditable: consumer goods bought on credit ("easy instalments"); optimism/confidence ("the secret of lasting prosperity").
• 7–8 = two developed inferences, each supported from the source; 4–6 = two inferences with some support, or one developed; 1–3 = a valid comment or copied detail without clear inference.

2. (12 marks) Explain the causes of the Great Depression. Reward developed, accurate reasons, e.g.:

• The Wall Street Crash (Oct 1929) destroyed confidence and wiped out savings and investments.
• Overproduction — factories and farms produced more than could be sold; falling prices, especially for farmers.
• Buying on credit and speculation — people and banks over-borrowed; when the bubble burst, debts could not be repaid.
• Bank failures — banks collapsed, wiping out savings and cutting lending, deepening the slump.
• Unequal distribution of wealth / falling demand; tariffs reducing world trade.
• 10–12 = a developed explanation of several linked causes with accurate knowledge; 7–9 = clear explanation of some causes; 4–6 = some relevant points with limited development; 1–3 = basic/general.

3. (12 marks) Evaluate the usefulness of Sources B and C, using content, provenance (nature/origin/purpose) and own knowledge.

• Source B (worker's memory, 1935): useful for the human impact of the Depression — mass unemployment, poverty, selling possessions, soup kitchens, loss of dignity; matches own knowledge (unemployment reached about 13–15 million). Provenance: a first-hand experience gives authentic emotional insight, though it is one person's view, recalled later, and may be affected by bitterness/memory.
• Source C (FDR speech, 1933): useful for the government's response and aims — "action now", putting people to work, treating it "as we would treat the emergency of a war", seeking "broad executive power" (the New Deal). Provenance: an official statement of intent — useful for what leaders wanted people to believe, but it is persuasive/political and states aims rather than results, so it may exaggerate resolve.
• Together they show the problem (B) and the response (C).
• 10–12 = both sources evaluated using content, provenance and own knowledge with a clear judgement on usefulness; 7–9 = both used with some evaluation; 4–6 = mostly content-based comment; 1–3 = basic.

4. (18 marks) Balanced, supported judgement on whether the New Deal was the main reason for recovery.

• Support (New Deal helped recovery): the "Alphabet Agencies" (e.g. CCC, WPA, TVA) created jobs and public works; reforms of banking (Emergency Banking Act) restored confidence; relief reduced suffering; it restored hope and faith in government.
• Challenge / other factors: recovery was incomplete — unemployment remained high through the 1930s; some argue rearmament and the Second World War (from 1939/41) did most to end unemployment; the New Deal faced opposition and setbacks (e.g. Supreme Court rulings); it was more relief/reform than full recovery.
• Judgement: reward a supported view — e.g. the New Deal was crucial for confidence and relief but did not fully end the Depression, which took the wartime economy.
• Level 4 (15–18): sustained, balanced argument with precise knowledge and a justified conclusion; Level 3 (10–14): developed both sides with a judgement; Level 2 (5–9): some relevant points, limited balance; Level 1 (1–4): basic.

Sample Answers with Examiner Commentary

Question 1 — Sample Answers

Grade A response. "One thing I can infer from Source A is that many ordinary American families enjoyed a rising standard of living during the 1920s. The source says that the motor car, 'once a luxury of the rich, now stands outside a million modest homes', which suggests that consumer goods that had once been unaffordable were now within reach of ordinary people. A second inference is that ordinary people were being drawn into investing in the stock market. The source states that 'any clerk with a few dollars may share in the nation's growing fortune', which implies that even those on modest wages were putting money into shares in the hope of easy profit."

Mark: 8/8. Examiner commentary: A full-mark answer. The candidate makes two clear, valid inferences — a rising standard of living for ordinary families, and ordinary people investing in shares — and, crucially, supports each with a specific, well-chosen quotation from the source and explains what it implies. The question rewards inference (working something out from the source) rather than copying, and this answer develops each inference with evidence, which is exactly what the top of the mark band requires.

Grade C response. "Source A shows that life in the 1920s was good. People had motor cars and radios and new electric machines. It also says the stock market kept climbing."

Mark: 4/8. Examiner commentary: The candidate makes one broad valid inference — that life was good/prosperous — and selects relevant details (cars, radios, the stock market). However, the response largely lists or copies details rather than developing two distinct, supported inferences. To reach the top band, each inference needs to be stated clearly and then backed with a quotation and an explanation of what it suggests — for example, that goods once reserved for the rich were now affordable to ordinary families, or that ordinary people were being tempted into share-buying.

Question 3 — Sample Answers

Grade A response (extract). "Source B is very useful for a historian studying the human impact of the Depression. Its content vividly conveys the suffering — the worker is 'let go' with hundreds of others, walks the streets 'for two years', sells the furniture and even 'the wedding ring', and his children 'queued at the soup kitchen'. This matches what I know: unemployment in the USA rose to around 13 million by 1933, and soup kitchens and breadlines were common. Because it is a first-hand memory, it gives an authentic, emotional insight that official figures cannot. However, it is one man's recollection, recorded in 1935, so it may be coloured by bitterness and the imperfections of memory.

Source C is useful in a different way: it reveals the government's response and Roosevelt's aims. He demands 'action, and action now', promises to 'put people to work' through 'direct recruiting by the Government', and asks for 'broad executive power', which fits my knowledge of the New Deal and its Alphabet Agencies. As a public speech, though, it is persuasive and political — it states what Roosevelt intended and wanted people to believe, rather than proving what was actually achieved, so its usefulness for measuring real recovery is limited. Used together, Source B shows the scale of the problem and Source C the nature of the response, which is exactly why a historian would value both."

Mark: 11/12. Examiner commentary: A strong evaluation that uses both content and provenance for each source and weaves in accurate own knowledge (unemployment figures, the New Deal and its agencies). The candidate judges usefulness rather than merely describing the sources — noting the authentic but subjective nature of the worker's memory and the persuasive, aims-not-results nature of the political speech — and rounds off by explaining how the two are useful in combination. This balanced, evaluative use of content, provenance and knowledge sits at the top of the band.