Edexcel A level History · Paper 2 · Option 2E.1
Edexcel Mao's China Source Question Guide: How to Reach Level 5 on the 20-Mark Section A Question
Section A of Paper 2 is where the best-prepared students pull furthest ahead. This guide shows you exactly what the two-source question rewards, how to judge value and weight, how to apply provenance and context, and how to use the sources together so that no strand holds your answer down.
What the question asks and how long you have
Paper 2 for Option 2E.1 (Mao's China, 1949–76) lasts 1 hour 30 minutes, is worth 40 marks and counts for 20% of your A level.
Section A is one compulsory question (Question 1) on two linked sources, worth 20 marks and assessed on AO2. Allow about 45 minutes, including reading and planning. The stem is always the same:
How far could the historian make use of Sources 1 and 2 together to investigate [enquiry]? Explain your answer, using both sources, the information given about them and your own knowledge of the historical context.
Notice that every enquiry is narrower than its topic. Past enquiries have included the impact of the people's communes on the lives of Chinese peasants and the reaction in China to the death of Mao. Your whole answer must serve that enquiry, not the topic in general.
What Level 5 rewards
Level 5 (17 to 20 marks) is judged across three strands. Weakness in any one of them pulls the whole answer down.
1. Inference
Both sources interrogated with confidence and discrimination, separating information from claim or opinion.
2. Context
Knowledge that illuminates or shows the limits of the content, with secure understanding of the values and concerns of the society.
3. Evaluation and weight
Valid criteria fully applied, so that weight and degree of certainty decide the judgement.
Value is always value for this enquiry, and it comes from provenance as well as content. Never dismiss a source as "biased", "unreliable" or "unimportant": every source is valuable for something. Ask instead: valuable as evidence of what, and how much weight can it bear?
Weight is how much of your judgement can safely rest on a piece of evidence. Grade parts of a source, not the whole. An official report can bear near certainty for what the Party wanted reported, and only tentative weight for what was actually produced. Build weight from the author's position, purpose and audience, not from a list of what is missing.
A step-by-step method
- Read the captions first. "The information given about" the sources is the caption. Note nature, origin, purpose, audience and date relative to the events described, then predict each source's stance.
- Separate information, claim, opinion and inference. Information is fact the author had little reason to distort; a claim serves the source's purpose; an opinion praises, blames or judges motives; an inference is what you can deduce that the source does not state.
- Apply provenance, never bolt it on. Provenance earns credit only when it explains the content. End every provenance point with a "so": so this claim is likely to be inflated, so this admission carries weight.
- Use context that touches a phrase. Context serves the source: it confirms a claim, challenges it, explains a phrase or shows its limits. Use the three-beat context sentence: point to a specific phrase, add a precise fact, date or figure, then say whether it confirms, challenges, explains or limits, and what that does to the weight.
- Use the sources together. At Level 5 each source should change how you read the other (see below).
- Judge how far, with certainty graded. Separate the secure from the tentative.
Using the sources together
Using the sources together "at some point" is the floor, not the method. "Both sources agree that the campaign was important" adds almost nothing. Together means a specific point of agreement or disagreement, explained, with a consequence for weight. Four methods work:
- Corroboration: sources of different origin agree on a specific point. This raises certainty, most of all when the authors had opposite motives.
- Contradiction, explained: the sources disagree, and provenance or date explains why, showing which source bears more weight on which aspect.
- Complementary coverage: each covers a different aspect of the enquiry, so together they reach further than either alone.
- Official against ground-level, or change over time: the official version is set against lived experience, or the dates show development.
Worked example (adapted from the A*/A Exam Masterclass)
Enquiry: the impact of land reform. Source 1 is by a work-team leader writing for a Party newspaper in 1951; Source 2 is by the son of a rich peasant family.
Example: Source 1 suggests that land reform gave poor peasants real economic gains, since it describes fields, oxen and tools being measured and shared out. This is consistent with the Agrarian Reform Law of June 1950, under which land was redistributed to roughly 300 million peasants by 1952. However, the author led a work team and wrote for a Party newspaper in 1951, so he had every reason to present the campaign as orderly and lawful. The source can therefore bear considerable weight on what the reform redistributed, but much less on how it was carried out. Source 2, written by the son of a rich peasant family, fills exactly that gap by describing the violence of the struggle meetings. Together, the sources allow the historian to investigate both the gains and the cost of land reform with some confidence.
It makes an inference, tests it with context, applies provenance with a "so", grades weight by aspect and uses Source 2 to fill a gap.
Common mistakes that cap the mark
- Paraphrasing the sources. Turn every quoted phrase into a "this suggests" point about the enquiry.
- Bolt-on provenance. Apply each provenance point to a specific claim in the source.
- Floating context. Long descriptions of linked events gain little; use precise knowledge to test specific lines.
- Listing omissions. An omission counts only when you can show intention: the author knew the fact and wrote around it.
Your Section A checklist
- Introduction names the enquiry, values each source in a phrase and states your line of judgement.
- At least two reasoned inferences per source, tied to the enquiry.
- Every context point touches a phrase; every provenance point ends in a "so".
- Three paragraphs: Source 1, Source 2, then the sources together, with a weight sentence in each.
- Conclusion opens "In conclusion," or "To conclude,", answers "how far" and separates the secure from the tentative.
- No source dismissed as biased, unreliable or unimportant.
- Five minutes kept at the end (minutes 40 to 45 of the paper) to check your answer against the enquiry, provenance and weight before you move to Section B.
Next, read our Section B essay guide, or browse every free guide on the A level History hub. Teachers can see site licences and class sets on our schools page.
Master both sections of Paper 2
Mao's China, 1949–76: The A*/A Exam Masterclass explains Paper 2 and Level 5, maps nine years of past questions, and teaches Section A and Section B with two full-mark exemplars each.
Get the Mao MasterclassFrequently asked questions
How long should I spend on the Section A source question?
About 45 minutes, including reading and planning. A good split is 10 minutes to read and plan, 30 minutes to write and 5 minutes to check your answer against the enquiry, provenance and weight.
Can I say a source is biased?
Avoid it. Every source is valuable for something. Instead, explain what the author's position and purpose make the source valuable for, and how much weight each part of it can bear for the enquiry.
Do I need a separate paragraph using the sources together?
The mark scheme rewards qualities, not paragraph counts, but a third paragraph on the sources together makes sure that strand is never thin. Cross-reference in your first two paragraphs as well.
Get Fluent Now is independent and not endorsed by or affiliated with Pearson Edexcel. Example answers are written by Get Fluent Now and have not been marked by an awarding body.