Edexcel 1HI0 Paper 2 Section A — Exam Technique

The Period Study "Superpower Relations and the Cold War 1941–91" is assessed in Section A of Edexcel 1HI0 Paper 2. Together with Section B (the British Depth Study), Paper 2 is worth 40% of your GCSE. Section A itself is worth 32 marks and you should spend about 50 minutes on it. The marks come from Assessment Objective 1 (knowledge and understanding) and Assessment Objective 2 (second-order concepts — causation, consequence, significance, change).

This final lesson draws together everything you have learned in the previous nine lessons and gives you the Paper 2 Section A technique you need to turn content knowledge into high-level answers. It covers the three question types, the Edexcel level language the examiners use, a worked Grade 4 / 6 / 9 example on an "importance of two events" Question 3, and the common pitfalls to avoid.

Paper 2 Section A at a glance

Section A of Paper 2 asks you three compulsory questions on the Period Study:

Question	Focus	Marks	AO	Suggested time
Question 1	Explain two consequences of [X]	8	AO1 + AO2	~10 minutes
Question 2	Write a narrative account analysing [Y]	8	AO1 + AO2	~12 minutes
Question 3	Explain the importance of two of the following for [Z]	16	AO1 + AO2	~28 minutes

The total is 32 marks in ~50 minutes. Leave 2–3 minutes at the end to check what you have written.

flowchart TD
  A[50 mins on Section A] --> B[Q1: 10 min, 8 marks, two consequences]
  A --> C[Q2: 12 min, 8 marks, narrative account]
  A --> D[Q3: 28 min, 16 marks, importance of two events]
  B --> E[Introduce, explain, link to event]
  C --> F[Chronology with connectives]
  D --> G[Short-term + long-term + judgement]

Edexcel "Level" language

Edexcel mark schemes reward progression up four or five levels. You should be able to recognise each level and aim at the top.

Level word	What it looks like in an answer
Basic	Simple factual statement, no explanation. "There was an airlift."
Simple	Correct facts, limited linkage. "The airlift delivered food to West Berlin."
Explained	Clear link between event and consequence or cause, supported by specific detail. "Because Stalin blockaded Berlin, the USA organised an airlift which delivered 2.3 million tonnes, saving 2.5 million West Berliners."
Developed	Multiple linked points, precise detail, connections across the course. "...The airlift not only saved West Berliners but was a major propaganda defeat for the USSR, accelerating the formation of NATO in April 1949."
Analytical	Weighs and prioritises causes or consequences, makes a judgement. "...The airlift mattered most for showing that containment would be enforced, which in turn made a formal alliance such as NATO possible."

Writing "analytically" is the single largest jump in marks. It means explicitly weighing factors rather than simply listing them.

Question 1 — Explain two consequences (8 marks)

Question 1 asks you to explain two consequences of a named event. Consequence means something that happened because of, or as a result of, the event.

Structure

• Brief introduction (optional — one sentence identifying the event).
• Consequence 1: identify → explain with specific detail → link back to the event with "because of this" or "as a result".
• Consequence 2: identify → explain with specific detail → link back to the event.

Two paragraphs, each around 80–120 words, is the right shape.

What examiners reward

• Two clearly distinct consequences (not one consequence dressed up twice).
• Each consequence explicitly linked to the event (not simply "and then this happened").
• Precise supporting detail — dates, figures, names.

Common pitfall: conflation

Students frequently give two versions of the same consequence. For example, on the Cuban Missile Crisis:

• "A consequence was that nuclear tensions eased."
• "A consequence was that both sides wanted to avoid nuclear war."

These are the same point. Distinct consequences would be:

• Consequence 1: Installation of the Kremlin–White House hotline in June 1963 to allow direct communication in future crises.
• Consequence 2: Signing of the Partial Test Ban Treaty in August 1963, the first nuclear arms-control agreement.

Question 2 — Analytical narrative account (8 marks)

Question 2 asks for a narrative account analysing how something happened. It typically covers a short period — for example, "Write a narrative account analysing how relations between the superpowers worsened in the years 1947–49" or "analysing the events of the Cuban Missile Crisis".

Structure

• Paragraph 1 — first phase: what happened, why it mattered.
• Paragraph 2 — second phase: what happened next, how it connected to the first.
• Paragraph 3 — third phase: culmination, linked back to the start.

What "analytical" means

An analytical narrative does not simply list events. It uses connectives to make causal links explicit.

• Linking language: "as a consequence", "this led to", "because of this", "building on the previous", "following this".
• Causal chains: each paragraph should end with a reason the next paragraph follows from it.

Common pitfall: pure narrative

A pure narrative reads: "First X happened. Then Y happened. Then Z happened." It earns middle marks at best. To move into the top level, rewrite as: "X happened. As a consequence of X, Y became likely, because ... Once Y had happened, Z became possible, because..."

Worked sketch — worsening superpower relations 1947–49

1. March 1947, Truman Doctrine: US commits $400m to Greece and Turkey, embracing global containment. As a consequence, Stalin saw a direct American challenge to Soviet security.
2. June 1947, Marshall Plan — $13 billion offered. Stalin forbade Eastern European states to accept. Building on the Truman Doctrine, this divided Europe economically. In response, Cominform was founded in September 1947.
3. June 1948, Berlin Blockade — Stalin closed West Berlin after the Western Allies introduced the Deutsche Mark. Following from the economic split, the dispute over Germany became a direct confrontation. The Blockade led to the Berlin Airlift, and the failure of the blockade made NATO possible in April 1949.

Question 3 — Importance of two events (16 marks)

Question 3 is the longest and most important answer on Section A. You are given three events and asked to explain the importance of two of them for a named theme or development. You must choose two and defend that choice.

Structure

• Brief introduction: name the two events you will explain.
• Event 1 — importance: short-term consequences, long-term consequences, judgement.
• Event 2 — importance: short-term consequences, long-term consequences, judgement.
• Brief comparative conclusion: which event was more important, and why.

What examiners reward

• Genuine engagement with "importance" — this means weighing consequences, not narrating events.
• Short-term and long-term consequences for each event.
• Comparative judgement at the end — which event mattered more, with reasons.
• Precise supporting detail for each claim.

Common pitfall: failing to weigh importance

A student who tells the story of each event, without arguing why it mattered, sits in Level 1 or 2 regardless of how much they know. Importance is analytical: "this event mattered because..."