A Guide for Using Primary Source or Original Source Documents
OPVL-Origins, Purpose, Values, Limitations
Origin, Purpose, Value and Limitation (OPVL) is a technique for analyzing historical documents. It is used extensively in the International Baccalaureate curriculum and testing materials, and is incredibly helpful in teaching students to be critical observers. It is also known as Document Based Questions (DBQ).
OPVL can be adapted to be used in any grade. Younger students can answer more concrete, factual questions about a document, while older students have more capacity for abstract reasoning, placing documents in historical context, and drawing conclusions.
Origin:
In order to analyze a source, you must first know what it is. Sometimes not all of these questions can be answered. The more you do know about where a document is coming from, the easier it is to ascertain purpose, value and limitation.
The definition of primary and secondary source materials can be problematic. There is constant debate among academic circles on how to definitively categorize certain documents and there is no clear rule of what makes a document aprimary or a secondary source.
Primary – letter, journal, interview, speeches, photos, paintings, etc. Primary sources are created by someone who is the “first person”; these documents can also be called “original source documents. The author or creator is presenting original materials as a result of discovery or to share new information or opinions. Primary documents have not been filtered through interpretation or evaluation by others. In order to get a complete picture of an event or era, it is necessary to consult multiple--and often contradictory--sources.
Secondary – materials that are written with the benefit of hindsight and materials that filter primary sources through interpretation or evaluation. Books commenting on a historical incident in history are secondary sources. Political cartoons can be tricky because they can be considered either primary or secondary.
Note: One is not more reliable than the other. Valuable information can be gleaned from both types of documents. A primary document can tell you about the original author’s perspective; a secondary document can tell you how the primary document was received during a specific time period or by a specific audience.
Other questions must be answered beyond whether the source is primary or secondary and will give you much more information about the document that will help you answer questions in the other categories.
• Who created it?
• Who is the author?
• When was it created?
• When was it published?
• Where was it published?
• Who is publishing it?
• Is there anything we know about the author that is pertinent to our evaluation?
This last question is especially important. The more you know about the author of a document, the easier it is to answer the following questions. Knowing that George was the author of a document might mean a lot more if you know you are talking about George Washington and know that he was the first president, active in the creation of the United States, a General, etc.
Purpose:
This is the point where you start the real evaluation of the piece and try to figure out the purpose for its creation. You must be able to think as the author of the document. At this point you are still only focusing on the single piece of work you are evaluating.
• Why does this document exist?
• Why did the author create this piece of work? What is the intent?
• Why did the author choose this particular format?
• Who is the intended audience? Who was the author thinking would receive this?
• What does the document “say”?
• Can it tell you more than is on the surface?
If you are teaching at the high school level, try to steer students away from saying “I think the document means this…” Obviously, if students are making a statement it is coming from their thinking. Help them practice saying “The document means this…because it is supported by x evidence.”
Value:
Now comes the hard part. Putting on your historian hat, you must determine: Based on who wrote it, when/where it came from and why it was created…what value does this document have as a piece of evidence? This is where you show your expertise and put the piece in context. Bring in your outside information here.
• What can we tell about the author from the piece?
• What can we tell about the time period from the piece?
• Under what circumstances was the piece created and how does the piece reflect those circumstances?
• What can we tell about any controversies from the piece?
• Does the author represent a particular ‘side’ of a controversy or event?
• What can we tell about the author’s perspectives from the piece?
• What was going on in history at the time the piece was created and how does this piece accurately reflect it?
It helps if you know the context of the document and can explain what the document helps you to understand about the context.
The following is an example of value analysis:
The journal entry was written by President Truman prior to the dropping of the atomic bomb on Japan and demonstrates the moral dilemma he was having in making the decision of whether to drop the bomb or not. It shows that he was highly conflicted about the decision and very aware of the potential consequences both for diplomatic/military relations and for the health and welfare of the Japanese citizens.
Limitation:
This is probably the hardest part, and may be skipped when working with much younger children. The task here is not to point out weaknesses of the source, but rather to say: at what point does this source cease to be of value to us as historians?
With a primary source document, having an incomplete picture of the whole is a given because the source was created by one person (or a small group of people?), naturally they will not have given every detail of the context. Do not say that the author left out information unless you have concrete proof (from another source) that they chose to leave information out. Also, it is obvious that the author did not have prior knowledge of events that came after the creation of the document. Do not state that the document “does not explain X” (if X happened later).
Being biased does not limit the value of a source! If you are going to comment on the bias of a document, you must go into detail. Who is it biased towards? Who is it biased against? What part of a story does it leave out? What part of the story is MISSING because of parts left out?
• What part of the story can we NOT tell from this document?
• How could we verify the content of the piece?
• Does this piece inaccurately reflect anything about the time period?
• What does the author leave out and why does he/she leave it out (if you know)?
• What is purposely not addressed?
This is again an area for you to show your expertise of the context. You need to briefly explain the parts of the story that the document leaves out. Give examples of other documents that might mirror or answer this document. What parts of the story/context can this document not tell?
Choosing Primary Sources
When choosing primary sources for your classroom, keep the following in mind:
• Reading Level – Will your students be able to understand the material? Remember that you CAN choose elements that are above their level, but make sure they are short and that you provide a lot of support on those sources.
• Interest – What is the topic of the primary source? Is it something that can relate to the unit you will teach? Is it something that the students can relate to or form their own opinion about?
• Variety of Sources – When using groups of documents, it is helpful to choose them from
a variety of sources: journal entries, newspaper articles, political cartoons, art, music, speeches, published and unpublished works.
• Accessibility – How easy is it to access the documents? Will you view them online?
Must you travel to see the document? Can you re-create the document via photocopy or photograph?
• Length – How long will it take the students to read and analyze the document? If it is very long, it may be harder to find the central reason you chose it.
• Varied Perspectives – When using a group of documents, be sure that you are providing
a healthy representation from all sides of the issue. You can use a document that is overtly biased as long as you provide the challenging viewpoint. Encourage your students to create their own stance based on a fair assessment of all sides of an argument.
• Intended Purpose – How will you be using the document in your classroom? Does the document lend itself to that purpose? If you will be using documents to create a mock trial or oral presentation, be sure to give students documents with enough information for them to form a supported opinion.
Sample
Source Analysis Worksheet
Background Information (Origin/ Purpose):
What kind of source is it? Diary, Propaganda, speech, political cartoon, record… Does this particular type of media or writing require special consideration?
Part of a documentary film or TV series undertaken together by the BBC and PBS. Uses earlier film but means it can only take what was available- sometimes of rather poor quality- often black and white. This one episode covers the whole of WWII- hardly able to discuss all relevant matters in one approximately 50 minute show. Another episode is given to covering the holocaust, the following to dealing with the bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki and the beginning of the Cold War.
Who wrote/produced the source? What important information about the person’s background, position, or experience is important to understanding the source? Are they representative of a group (race, gender, nationality, class, political party, religious affiliation, social group…)?
Western historians and TV producers. Zvi Dor-Ner an Israeli-born American with many other TV credits often of an historical nature was the producer.
When was it written? Was it produced immediately after an event or much later? What needs or pressure would the author have been expected to be addressing or responding to?
Produced in the late 90’s it uses many earlier film pieces and photos from the time and also includes multiple interviews from many participants or eyewitnesses to the events from many areas (China, Germany, Japan, Korea…) 26 episodes in series. Released in 1998.
Why was it produced and for whom? Who was the original or target audience? What benefit could the author hope to gain from it?
Focus on common people as opposed to leaders; a social history showing the role and experience of the regular person who lived and fought in WWII. Made for many audiences so potentially not wanting to offend any in particular.
Value and Limits:
What is the main message of the source? Quote key words, phrases or note important details, recurring themes to prove point.
This episode focuses on “total war” going into the toll on civilians in terms of bombing, propaganda, social changes…
Shows escalation and role of changing technology and industrialization to create more widespread carnage among “innocents” who it also reveals were not opposed to the conflict as long as it didn’t do them harm. Many eyewitness’ accounts but of limited duration and to tell the story from one main perspective- WWII sucked.
What important information does the source provide on events, their causes or significance?
Shows development in weapons and refugees, bombing of cities, human labor/ slave labor, fear and pain of war among civilians… Also propaganda and mobilization of population for war effort.
How does the source help us understand the thoughts or feelings of a significant figure or group from the past?
This is really its most important contribution. Multiple eyewitness accounts but many in translation and again of short duration/ clipped. Usually told in the voice of the victim but it does show for example Goebbels riling up the Germans for total war.
What information do we need to gain a more complete picture? Is there any information or opinion in the source that could be contested?
People who supported war effort. Percentage of total population affected and costs versus other wars in history.
Draw connections between O/P and V/L:
How does an understanding of who produced the source or why help you recognize its value or limits?
An American and British enterprise it would not likely paint the British and Americans as the aggressor or in the worst light though some would see the American use of the nuclear bomb and fire bombing in Japan and in Germany as the worst “crimes” committed in the war- not making light of the holocaust or “trouble” Germany brought to the USSR or Japan did to China for instance. Shows Western bias or concern for changing role of women and minorities as a result of the war.
How might knowing when a source was produced or where affect its value or limits?
A later view of WWII which means the West is now allied to its previous enemies this might greatly affect how it portrays the Japanese and Germans. It also seems to paint the USSR in less than positive light- perhaps deserved but again possibly a result of the Cold War. That said it also means all these countries were open to taking part and allowing for more complete and open talk about the past.
How does the type of the source affect its value or limit?
Made for the general public and many audiences it tends to not want to apportion blame and to make everything equal.
Do some groups deserve more blame and did they by starting the violence deserve what they got? Not very technical in terms of strategy and weapons/ tactics. Talks about escalation but doesn’t get very specific. Leans less on expert advice or explanation and more on raw emotional appeal of one account after another leaving the audience interested and aware but not very well informed or critical.
|
Mexico's Political Situation (Help)
Reply With Quote
Originally Posted by Owlkur
