Pearson
Edexcel A Level
in History
EXAMPLE COURSEWORK QUESTIONS
Guidance on creating a coursework question
GCE History 2015: Coursework Questions
Contents
Introduction 3
Example Question 1 – end of the Cold War 4
Example Question 2 – Russian rule (1924) 5
Example Question 3 – Russian Revolution 6
Example Question 4 – Papal response to Comnenus 7
Example Question 5 – Appeasement (1937–39) 8
Example Question 6 – impact of New Deal 9
Example Question 7 – nature of Napoleon’s rule 10
Example Question 8 – origins of the First World War 11
Example Question 9 – end of American civil war 12
Example Question 10 – the Holocaust 13
GCE History: Example coursework questions
Introduction
Within this guide is a selection of coursework questions to help you
formulate your question(s).
The GCE A level History specification allows for a free choice of coursework topic
and title. The assessment focus is analysis and evaluation of interpretations and the
choice of topic should be issue-based.
It is permissible for coursework to cover interpretations of a question, problem or
issue related to content covered in the examined components (Paper 1, Paper 2 or
Paper 3); however, coursework must not duplicate coverage of the historical
interpretations section studied by students for Paper 1.
It is also permissible for coursework to cover a new topic area. This could reflect
the interest of individual students or the teaching expertise and resourcing within
centres.
If all students are following an enquiry into the same topic area, then different titles
or the same title may be used for them all, provided their work is individual.
If you would like to have feedback on your coursework proposal, please submit
your query to the coursework advisory service.
© Pearson Education Ltd 2016. Issue 3 3
GCE History: Example coursework questions
Example Question 1 – end of the Cold War
Title
Historians have disagreed about the reasons for the end of the Cold War.
What is your view about the reasons for the end of the Cold War?
Summary of differences in interpretation
The basic discussion will be between those that believe Reagan's policies brought
about the end, compared to those who favour the policies/values of Gorbachev. The
interpretations on the importance of Reagan will vary between authors, from those
who focus on his overstretching of the Soviet economy to those who concentrate
more on his compromising skills after 1984. Other interpretations will consider the
importance of the gerontocracy and the impact of their policies on the Soviet
economy. Other historians have focused on the internal socio-political factors within
the communist system (such as Serhii Plokhy), whilst some have looked at the
influence of other key players especially George Shultz and Shevardnadze.
Relevant publications
Oberdorfer, Dan The Cold War to a New Era (1998)
Matlock, Jack Reagan and Gorbachev: How the Cold War ended (2004)
Schweizer, Peter Victory (1994)
Zubok, V A Failed Empire (2007)
Fischer, Beth Reagan Revival (1997)
Plokhy, Serhii The Last empire (2014)
Brown, Archie The Gorbachev Factor (1996)
BBC Documentary: Summits: the Geneva Summit, Professor David Reynolds
Note: This enquiry may not be combined with option 1E, where the Section C focus
on the Fall of the USSR would involve too great an overlap.
The proposal, although it does not associate the listed works with particular views,
indicates that a debate exists over the proposed issue. As long as the listed authors
are between them associated with the range of views cited in the proposal, it would
appear to offer candidates the required scope to explore interpretations.
This is a current GCE 2008 controversy.
4 © Pearson Education Ltd 2016.
GCE History: Example coursework questions
Example Question 2 – Russian rule (1924)
Title
Historians have disagreed about the extent to which by 1924 the Russian people
had exchanged one authoritarian regime for another.
What is your view about the extent to which by 1924 the Russian people had
exchanged one authoritarian regime for another?
Summary of differences in interpretation
Interpretation one: Tsarist rule was more authoritarian and oppressive than the
Bolshevik regime which succeeded in 1917. Christopher Hill argues that there
was popular support for the regime.
Interpretation two: the Bolshevik regime was more authoritarian and
oppressive than the Tsarist rule. Robert Service argues that the Bolsehvik
regime was more totalitarian than any of the other previous regimes.
Interpretation three: there was continuity between the two regimes and there
was very little degree of change. Richard Pipes argues that Russian society is
dependent on strong control by the state.
Relevant publications
Pipes, Richard Russian Conservatism and Its Critics: A Study in Political Culture
(2007)
Figes, Orlando A People's Tragedy (1997)
Volkogonov, D The Rise and Fall of the Soviet Empire: Political Leaders From Lenin
to Gorbachev (2010)
Schapiro, Leonard The Russian Revolution of 1917: the Origins of Modern
Communism (1986)
Service, Robert The Penguin History of Modern Russia: From Tsarism to the
Twenty-first Century (2015)
Hill, Christopher Lenin and the Russian Revolution (2007)
© Pearson Education Ltd 2016. Issue 3 5
GCE History: Example coursework questions
Example Question 3 – Russian Revolution
Title
Historians have disagreed about the causes of the Russian Revolution (1917).
What is your view about the cause of the Russian Revolution?
Summary of differences in interpretation
Interpretation one: Liberal view
Interpretation two: Soviet view
Interpretation three: Revisionist view
Relevant publications
Ulam, Adam Bolsheviks: The Intellectual and Political History of the Triumph of
Communism in Russia
Volkogonov, Dmitri Lenin: A New Biography (1994)
Figes, Orlando A People’s Tragedy: the Russian Revolution 1891-1924
Pipes, Richard Edgar The Russian Revolution
Pipes, Richard Edgar The Three Whys of the Russian Revolution
Pipes, Richard Edgar A Concise History of the Russian Revolution (1995)
Service, Robert Lenin: A Biography (2000)
Service, Robert Lenin: A Political Life (1985)
Service, Robert A History of Twentieth Century Russia
Service, Robert A History of Modern Russia: From Nicholas II to Putin
Service, Robert The Bolshevik Party in Revolution 1917-23
Schapiro, Leonard The Origins of the Communist Autocracy (1977)
Fitzpatrick, Sheila The Russian Revolution (1982)
Note: The proposal, although it does not associate the listed works with particular
views, indicates that a debate exists over the proposed issue. As long as the listed
authors are between them associated with the range of views cited in the proposal,
it would appear to offer candidates the required scope to explore interpretations.
6 © Pearson Education Ltd 2016.
GCE History: Example coursework questions
Example Question 4 – Papal response to Comnenus
Title
Historians have disagreed about the significance of the Papal response to Alexius
Comnenus in the years 1095-1120.
What is your view about the significance of the Papal response to Alexius
Comnenus in the years 1095-1120?
Summary of differences in interpretation
Historians have debated that Pope Urban II and his response to Alexius Comnenus
was significant for the following different reasons:
the launching of a war based on religion and pilgrimage
the reduction of conflict between Christians in the west and the changing of
feudal society
the raising of the political status of the Papacy and Pope Urban II
the uniting of the Muslims against Christian invaders
the legacy created by the Crusades.
Relevant publications
Smith, Jonathan Riley The Crusades: A History
Asbridge, Thomas The Crusades: The War for the Holy Land
Asbridge, Thomas The First Crusade: A New History
Tyreman, Christopher Gods War: A New History of the Crusades
Runciman, Steven A History of the Crusades
Philips, Jonathan The Crusades
Note: The proposal, although it does not associate the listed works with particular
views, indicates that a debate exists over the proposed issue. As long as the listed
authors are between them associated with the range of views cited in the proposal,
it would appear to offer candidates the required scope to explore interpretations.
© Pearson Education Ltd 2016. Issue 3 7
GCE History: Example coursework questions
Example Question 5 – Appeasement (1937–39)
Title
Historians have disagreed about the appropriateness of Appeasement as the basis
of British Foreign Policy 1937–1939.
What is your view about the appropriateness of Appeasement as the basis of British
Foreign Policy during 1937–1939?
Summary of differences in interpretation
The controversy centres around the ‘traditional’ approach that Chamberlain’s policy
towards the dictators was inappropriate, that Appeasement rather than avoiding
war actually convinced the dictators that Britain would not fight Nazi aggression,
and as such, rather than restrain Hitler actually encouraged him to embark on a
belligerent foreign policy. This view neglects to assess the practicality of
Chamberlain’s position based upon military, diplomatic and economic considerations
which possibly indicate that there was not a suitable pragmatic alternative to
Appeasement during 1937–39.
Relevant publications
Ferguson, Nail ‘Chapters 9 Defending the Indefensible’ and ‘Chapter 10 The Pity of
Peace’ in The War of the Worlds
Overy, Richard The Road to War: emphasis on imperial past underlying
appeasement
Charmley, John Chamberlain and the Lost Peace: Revisionist viewpoint
Self, Robert Neville Chamberlain and Rearmament: Revisionist viewpoint
Q2 Squared Debates: Did Neville Chamberlain do the Right Thing?
Speakers: Sir Richard Evans, John Charmley, Glyn Stone, Piers Brendon
Godland, Graham Was Britain’s Appeasement Policy a Mistake?
Channel 4 Summit series: Hitler and Chamberlain: The Munich Summit,
Professor David Reynolds, critic of Chamberlain’s policy
Note: This enquiry may not be combined with option 1G, where the content would
involve too great an overlap.
8 © Pearson Education Ltd 2016.
GCE History: Example coursework questions
Example Question 6 – impact of New Deal
Title
Historians have disagreed about how successful the impact of the New Deal was by
1941.
What is your view about how successful the impact of the New Deal was by 1941?
Summary of differences in interpretation
● The New Deal marked a continuation of the long struggle between public power
and private interests, but Roosevelt moved that struggle to a new level. The
unrestrained power of the business community was finally confronted with an
effective challenge, and what emerged was a system of reformed capitalism,
with far more protection for workers, farmers, consumers, and others than in
the past.
● The New Deal was a halfway revolution that enhanced the positions of some
previously disadvantaged groups (notably farmers and urban workers) but did
little or nothing for many others (such as African-Americans and the urban
poor). However, given the restrictions imposed on it by the period’s political
and ideological realities, the New Deal probably could not have done much
more than it did.
● The New Deal was counter-productive. Federal planning extended the nation’s
economic crisis through erratic policies that unnecessarily tinkered with the
economy and which did not lift the United States out of the Great Depression.
Instead, recovery only came with the abandonment of these policies by the
1940s.
Relevant publications
Adams, D. K. Franklin Roosevelt and the New Deal (Historical Association
Pamphlets, 1979)
Renshaw, P. Franklin D Roosevelt, (Longman, 2009)
Powell, J. FDR’s Folly; How Roosevelt and his New Deal Prolonged the Great
Depression (2005)
Shlaes, A. The Forgotten Man: A New History of the Great Depression (Jonathan
Cape, 2007)
Badger, A. J. FDR, The First 100 Days (A Cohen, 2008)
Badger, A. J. The New Deal: The Depression Years 1933-1940 (Macmillan, 1989)
Kennedy, David M. Freedom From Fear: The American People in Depression and
War 1929-1945 (Oxford 1999)
Conkin, Paul The New Deal (1968, 3rd ed. 1992)
Schlesinger Jr., A. The Age of Roosevelt (1957-1960)
Leuchtenberg, William E. Franklin D Roosevelt and the New Deal (Harper and Row,
1963, new ed. 2009)
Note: The cited works are not associated with particular lines of argument. As long
as the appropriate publications are between them associated with the range of
views cited in the proposal, it would appear to offer candidates the required scope
to explore interpretations.
This is a current GCE 2008 controversy.
© Pearson Education Ltd 2016. Issue 3 9
GCE History: Example coursework questions
Example Question 7 – nature of Napoleon’s rule
Title
Historians have disagreed about the nature of Napoleon Bonaparte's domestic rule
in France.
What is your view about the nature of Napoleon Bonaparte's domestic rule in
France?
Summary of differences in interpretation
Napoleon’s rule of France has provoked great controversy. Historians such as
Andrew Roberts and Vincent Cronin admire Napoleon for his modernising reforms
based on the principles of the French Revolution. Others compare him to the
Enlightened Despots of the eighteenth century. A third group, including Alfred
Cobban, criticise the repressive nature of the regime seeing him as a ruthless
dictator who was far more concerned with self-interest than the good of France.
Historians disagree about the extent of popular support Napoleon enjoyed and how
far he furthered the principles of the French Revolution.
Relevant publications
Cobban, Alfred History of Modern France Vol 2 1799-1871 (1961)
Cronin, Vincent Napoleon (1971)
Crook, Malcolm Napoleon comes to power: Democracy & Dictatorship in
Revolutionary France 1795-1804 (1998)
Ellis, Geoffrey Napoleon Profiles in Power (1997)
Johnson, Paul Napoleon (2002)
Matthews, Andrew Revolution and Reaction: Europe 1789-1849 (2001)
Price, Roger A Concise History of France (Cambridge 1993)
Roberts, Andrew Napoleon (BBC Documentary 2015)
Roberts, Andrew Napoleon the Great (2014)
Rudé, George Revolutionary Europe 1783-1815 (1964)
Wright, D.G. Napoleon and Europe (1985)
Note: Not all the lines of argument are associated with cited works. As long as the
appropriate publications are between them associated with all three views cited in
the proposal, it would appear to offer candidates the required scope to explore
interpretations.
10 © Pearson Education Ltd 2016.
GCE History: Example coursework questions
Example Question 8 – origins of the First World War
Title
Historians have disagreed about the significance of German Imperial ambitions in
the origins of the First World War.
What in your view about the significance of German Imperial ambitions in the
Origins of the First World War?
Summary of differences in interpretation
There are a multitude of differing interpretations as demonstrated below:
● Gerhard Ritter - Germany was defensive like much of Europe
● Fischer - German Aggression
● Fischer - German foreign policy and German domestic tension
● AJP Taylor - War by timetable: No one particularly wanted war, however
mobilised quickly as a deterrent. Generals created grand timetables
● Hillgruber - war was due to encirclement
● Erdman - Germany slipped into war
● Austria were to blame.
● Due to Russian mobilisation.
Relevant publications
Johl, James Origins of the First World War (2006)
Fischer, Fritz Germany's aims in the first world war (1968)
Henig, Ruth Origins of the First World War (2001)
Taylor, AJP War by timetable, how the first world war began (1969)
Joll, James 1914 debate continues (1966)
Clark, Christopher Lecture: Sleep walkers, how Europe went to war in 1914 (2014)
Note: This is a current GCE 2008 controversy.
© Pearson Education Ltd 2016. Issue 3 11
GCE History: Example coursework questions
Example Question 9 – end of American civil war
Title
Historians have disagreed about why the Union defeated the Confederacy in the
American Civil War.
What in your view about why the Union defeated the Confederacy in the American
Civil War?
Summary of differences in interpretation
● That the Union defeated the Confederacy due to its greater economic and
industrial strength.
● That the Confederacy lost due to internal divisions in the Confederacy.
● That the Union won due to more effective military leadership.
● That the Union won due to more effective political leadership.
Relevant publications
Current, Richard N. ‘God and the Strongest Battalions’ in Why the North won the
Civil War, ed. David Herbert Donald (2005)
Potter, David M. ‘Jefferson Davis and the Political Factors in Confederate defeat’ in
Why the North won the Civil War, ed. David Herbert Donald (2005)
McPherson, James M. Battle Cry of Freedom (1988)
Sewell, Richard H. A House Divided (1988)
Williams, David A People's History of the Civil War (2005)
Brogan, Hugh The Penguin History of the USA (1999)
Note: The cited works are not associated with particular lines of argument. As long
as the appropriate publications are between them associated with the range of
views cited in the proposal, it would appear to offer candidates the required scope
to explore interpretations.
This is a current GCE 2008 controversy.
12 © Pearson Education Ltd 2016.
GCE History: Example coursework questions
Example Question 10 – the Holocaust
Title
Historians have disagreed about the extent to which the Holocaust was a long-term
plan.
What is your view about the extent to which the Holocaust was a long-term plan?
Summary of differences in interpretation
● Intentionalist interpretation that the Holocaust was predetermined
o Hildebrand and Andreas Hillgruber: Hitler's unique and direct authorship
going back to the earliest years as Mein Kampf was the blueprint
o Fleming and Dawidowicz: Hitler was key and committed to the Holocaust
from the start of his career)
● Extreme structuralist interpretation that the Holocaust arose due to the failure
of emigration and the impact of war.
o Mommsen and Broszat: the turning to genocide as such was something
new resulting from the years 1939–41.
● Moderate structuralists interpretation advocating gradualism
o Schleunes: no direct path and lack of clear directions
o Kershaw: twisted road
o Aly: bureaucracy
Relevant publications
Hildebrand, Klaus The Third Reich (1984)
Fleming, Gerald Hitler and the Final Solution (1992)
Schleunes, Karl A. The Twisted Road to Auschwitz: Nazi Policy Toward German
Jews, 1933–39 (1990)
Berghahn, V R Modern Germany (1982)
Peukert, Detlev Inside Nazi Germany (1982)
Goldhagen, Daniel Jonah Hitler’s Willing Executioners (1996)
Kershaw, Ian Hitler (2000)
Dawidowicz, Lucy The War against the Jews 1933–45 (1975)
Mayer, Arno J. Why did the Heavens Not Darken: the Final Solution in History
(1988)
Aly, Gotz Final Solution (1999)
Aly, Gotz and Heim, Susanne Architects of Annihilation (2003)
Browning, Christopher The Origins of the Final Solution (2005)
Longrich, Peter The Unwritten Order: Hitler’s Role in the Final Solution (2005)
Farmer, Alan ‘Hitler and the Holocaust’ in History Today, Issue 58 (Sept 2007)
Note: If you are planning to combine this with Paper 1G, please bear in mind that
students must avoid overlap with the controversy in their selection of works and
discussion of issues. The roots of policy might involve some commonality of reading
for both areas as the focus of the controversy is not exclusively international
relations; it involves an understanding of Hitler’s ideas and his role in the shaping
of Nazi foreign policy.
© Pearson Education Ltd 2016. Issue 3 13