Internal Assessment: Turning a Topic into a Historical Investigation
An HL student is drafting the 2,200-word historical investigation. The proposed question is: 'How did propaganda affect Nazi Germany?' The plan of investigation says the investigation will cover 1933–45 and will show that propaganda was effective. The two sources are a school textbook published in 2015 and a website called 'History Learning Site'. The summary of evidence is a six-hundred-word narrative of Nazi propaganda, from Goebbels's appointment as Minister of Propaganda to the Hitler Youth and the 1936 Olympics. The evaluation of sources reads: 'The textbook is reliable because it was published by a major publisher. The website is unreliable because anyone can put information on the internet.' The analysis explains that Goebbels used posters, radio and rallies. The conclusion states: 'Propaganda had a big effect on the German people.' The teacher says the investigation is 'a topic, not an enquiry' and that the source evaluation would not reach the higher bands.
1. Rewrite the research question so that it is focused and historically debatable, and explain how each change improves the investigation.
Read the worked answer
Why the original fails: 'How did propaganda affect Nazi Germany?' has no time boundary, no place, no policy focus and no historical controversy. 'Affect' is too vague to answer: affect whom, in what respect, and measured how? The plan also assumes the conclusion ('propaganda was effective') instead of investigating it, and the source base is too thin to support a 2,200-word enquiry.
Rewrite: 'To what extent did the 1936 Berlin Olympics improve Nazi Germany's image in the British press?' This is focused: a single event, a single year, a named audience and a clear debate. 'To what extent' forces a judgement rather than a description. It is answerable with accessible sources: British newspapers from 1936, the official Olympic report, and Nazi propaganda material. It also connects intention to reception, which is the heart of a propaganda investigation.
Other acceptable rewrites: 'How effectively did Nazi propaganda between 1933 and 1936 portray the Hitler Youth as a patriotic duty?' or 'To what extent did the Nazi regime's anti-Semitic propaganda after 1935 shape public responses to the Nuremberg Laws in Berlin?' The test is not the wording alone. Each version must have a bounded case, a source base that can be handled in 2,200 words, and a genuine 'to what extent' tension. A question that can be answered by summarising a textbook is not an investigation; it is a topic.
2. Replace the source evaluation with a proper evaluation of two appropriate sources, and explain how the evaluation should connect to the research question.
Read the worked answer
Choose sources that can bear the weight of the question. For the Olympics question, one source could be the official Nazi Olympic report or pamphlet from 1936, and the other a British newspaper article from the same period, for example from The Times or the Manchester Guardian. The evaluation should use origin, purpose, value and limitation, and it must connect to the enquiry.
Model evaluation: The official Olympic report was produced by the Nazi state to present the Games as a success and to project an image of order and hospitality. Its value is that it shows the image the regime intended to create and the language it used; its limitation is that it is promotional and cannot show how British readers responded. The British newspaper article was produced for a domestic readership, with its own editorial stance. Its value is that it offers evidence of how the Games were reported and received in Britain; its limitation is that one article reflects a particular paper's line and may repeat official claims.
Why this is better: 'Published by a major publisher' is not an evaluation; it says nothing about what the source can be used for. The replacement evaluates usefulness for the specific question rather than making a general claim about reliability. It also explains why two sources are enough: one establishes the propaganda intention, the other tests reception. The evaluation should end by stating what the source pair can and cannot prove, which is exactly what the investigation's analysis needs.