IB History Paper 1 Explained: Expert Tips and Sample Answers
The IB History Paper 1 is a deceptive exam. While many, both students and teachers, believe that, as a source-based paper, it is less challenging than Paper 2 or Paper 3, Paper 1 often proves a significant stumbling block. This blog seeks to break down the components of the IB History Paper 1 examination, offering greater insight into what students can expect and how best to prepare and shore up marks during the exam.
Please note: the IB History curriculum has gone through a significant update for students sitting their examinations in 2028 and beyond. This post will outline both the current requirements and those of the new curriculum.
The IB History Paper 1 Examination
For those sitting their exams in 2027, the IB History Paper 1 is a one hour examination that is weighted at 30% for Standard Level and 20% at Higher Level. The Paper 1 consists of four source-based questions related to the student’s prescribed topic. These topics are as follows:
Military leaders (Genghis Khan c1200–1227; Richard I of England 1173–1199)
Conquest and its impact (The final stages of Muslim rule in Spain; The conquest of Mexico and Peru 1519–1551)
The move to global war (Japanese expansion in East Asia 1931–1941; German and Italian expansion 1933–1940)
Rights and Protest (Civil rights movement in the United States 1954–1965; Apartheid South Africa 1948–1964)
Conflict and intervention (Rwanda 1990–1998; Kosovo 1989–2002)
The updated course, the first assessment of which will take place in 2028, is somewhat different. While the paper remains weighted at 30% for SL and 20% for HL, the exam will be 1 hour and 15 minutes in length. Additionally, students will answer only three questions on their prescribed topic. The topics have also undergone a change:
Climate and innovation (Norse exploration circa 982–1020; The Aztec Empire circa 1428–1469)
Independence and identity (The Haitian Revolution circa 1780–1825; Kenyan independence 1945–1978)
Political and economic transitions (The Meiji Restoration 1853–1894; The Russian Federation 1985–1999)
Conflict and displacement (Post-war displacement in Europe 1945–1960; Indochina refugee crisis 1975–1990)
Protest and change (Feminism in the USA 1960–1979; Revolution in Tunisia 1989–2015)
How Paper 1 Is Marked
With the recent update to the IB History curriculum, the way in which Paper 1 is marked has also changed.
For students sitting their exam in 2027, the first question is divided into parts a) and b) and will test understanding of two of the sources. This question requires short answers, with parts a) and b) valued at 5 marks in total. The second question, worth 4 marks, asks students to analyse the value and limitations of one of the sources in relation to its origin, purpose, and content. For question three, worth 6 marks, IB History learners complete a compare and contrast task, suggesting what two of the sources reveal to a historian studying a particular aspect of the topic under examination. Finally, question 4, weighted at 9 marks, takes the form of a mini-essay, in which candidates will use information from the supplied sources, plus their own knowledge to respond to a prompt. To receive the highest possible marks IB History candidates must make clear references to the supplied sources as evidence to support the analysis, while also demonstrating accurate and relevant ‘own knowledge’ that is effectively synthesised with the source material.
In the case of the new curriculum, with first assessment in 2028, the marking breakdown is somewhat different. The questions on the new paper, numbered 1-3, are worth 6 marks, 6 marks, and 12 marks, respectively. Here, each question requires students to deal not only with the content of the sources but also with an overarching ‘inquiry question’, which is started at the beginning of the paper. Therefore, to gain the highest marks possible, IB History candidates must not only analyse each source and draw out the relevant information as it relates to the requirements of the question, but also link this information to the broader inquiry question. So, while there may be one less question on the new IB History Paper 1 exam, that does not make the new specification any easier.
Paper 1 Sample Questions and Responses
Below are a number of sample texts and IB-level questions related to them. Readers should be aware that these sources, questions, and responses reflect the older specification. Consequently, they are suitable for current IB History students who are sitting their exam in 2027.
Sample Source 1
Alan Sharp, a professor of International History, writing in the article ‘The Big Four: Peacemaking in Paris in 1919’ in the British journal History Review (2009).
One of the strange features of the settlement was that it left defeated Germany no longer hemmed in [encircled] by great powers as it had been in 1914 and hence, potentially, in a stronger position. Whilst Germany in 1919 might be temporarily weakened by its losses and the terms of the treaty, the only great power with whom it now shared a common border was France, which had been weakened by spending a much greater proportion of its young men to gain victory. Whereas German industry was untouched and its debts internal, France faced the immense expense of restoring the devastated battlefields of the Western Front and repaying loans to America and Britain. In place of Austria-Hungary and Russia, Germany now found itself surrounded by weaker states.
Question: What, according to the source, were the consequences of the Treaty of Versailles for Germany? [3]
Sample Response
According to Source B, the consequences of the Treaty of Versailles for Germany were threefold. First, due to the damaging effects of war, Germany was no longer ‘hemmed in’ by great powers and was potentially in a more advantageous position. Second, Germany’s border neighbour, France, was exhausted by its actions to ‘gain victory’ during the war. Finally, the Treaty left Germany only ‘temporarily weakened’ by its terms, as well as the losses it accrued during the war.
This response addresses the question directly, while also adeptly using quotations and following a clear and concise structure. For this, an IB History student would receive full marks.
Sample Source 2
The source below is a diplomatic memo to President Woodrow Wilson by US foreign policy advisor Edward M. House (May 1914).
The situation is extraordinary. It is militarism run stark mad. Unless someone acting for you can bring about a different understanding, there is some day to be an awful cataclysm. No one in Europe can do it. There is too much hatred, too many jealousies. Whenever England consents, France and Russia will close in on Germany and Austria. England does not want Germany wholly crushed, for she would then have to reckon alone with her ancient enemy, Russia; but if Germany insists upon an ever increasing navy, then England will have no choice. The best chance for peace is an understanding between England and Germany in regard to naval armaments and yet there is some disadvantage to us by these two getting too close.
Question: How useful is this source to historians studying the causes of the First World War? Answer this question considering the values and limitations of the origin, purpose, and content of the source. [4]
Sample Response
This source is a diplomatic memo written in May 1914 by US foreign policy advisor Edward M House to President Woodrow Wilson. Its purpose is to detail challenges facing European diplomacy.
A value of the origin is that it is a contemporary primary source that can be used by historians to gain insight into how professional diplomats understood the challenges facing Europe in 1914. A limitation of the origin is that as it was written by an American diplomat, key information may have been excluded due to distance from the events taking place in Europe.
A value of the purpose is that as a diplomatic memo it should provide a clear and concise overview of all relevant factors as it is designed to brief the President on key issues. A limitation of the purpose is that the focus of the text is such that points irrelevant to the United States would be left out.
A value of the content is that House includes information about a variety of European countries and what the conflicts are between them, both current and historical. A limitation of the content is that no specific details are given to offer greater insight into why certain countries are at odds with each other.
Here, the student produced a clear and coherent response, addressing all aspects of the question and would receive full credit for their work.
Sample Source 3
Stephen H. Roberts, an Australian historian, writing after his visit to Nazi Germany in the academic book The House That Hitler Built (1937)
Italy and Germany have been flung together by a general antagonism to their foreign policies. Mussolini has steadily supported Hitler in his treaty-breaking... The two governments were shown to have a certain identity of views on such matters as Spain, Russia, and rearmament; but the Axis remained very uncertain...
The basic truth is that the Germans have little faith in Italy’s fighting power, and they feel that events in Spain support their estimate. Moreover, the two countries are in harmony only because of their common enemies. Their policies conflict in so many essentials, and difficulties are avoided only by not being mentioned. Central Europe is a permanent barrier between them, so much so that it is difficult to envisage an Italo-German bloc based on a permanent identity of interests, however much their present isolation may force the two countries together... Yet it would be erroneous to preclude any possibility of united action between the two on such general grounds. An immediate threat might draw them together, despite Mussolini’s critical estimate of Hitler, and despite the German feeling about the Italians.
The Italians are not popular in Germany, but Germany is not in a position to pick and choose her friends, and she at least knows that Mussolini believes in the efficacy of swift blows and will not hesitate to use force in settling international disputes. The understanding between the two totalitarian States then, however uneasy it may be, dominates international affairs for the moment.
Reynolds M Salerno, an historian specialising in international history, writing in the book Vital Crossroads: Mediterranean Origins of the Second World War, 1935–1940 (2002).
Hitler’s determination to rearm and to revise the terms of [the Treaty of] Versailles inspired Mussolini to revitalise Fascist foreign policy and to reconsider his strategy for imperial expansion. He wanted to integrate Fascist Italy’s ideological motives with its strategic objectives. Although Fascist Italy retained its strategic and economic interests in southern and east‐central Europe, Mussolini increasingly appreciated that an extensive Italian empire in the greater Mediterranean region could exist alongside a German‐ dominated continent but would directly conflict with British and French vital interests. The possibility of becoming a strategic and ideological partner with Nazi Germany, which could challenge Britain and France to the north and help Italy achieve its imperial ambitions to the south, steadily encouraged Mussolini ...
As Nazi Germany had influenced Fascist foreign policy, Italy’s Mediterranean ambitions motivated a reconsideration of German strategy. The basis of Hitler’s foreign policy was the concept of a central European economic bloc with Germany at its core. Mussolini’s Mediterranean ambitions and willingness to challenge Britain and France worked to Germany’s strategic advantage: an Anglo‐French‐Italian tension or conflict in the Mediterranean would facilitate Germany’s military conquest of Central and Eastern Europe. For this strategic reason as well as the close ideological affinities [connections] between German National Socialism and Italian Fascism, Hitler supported and demonstrated extraordinary loyalty to Mussolini before and during the war.
Question: Compare and contrast what Sources 1 and 2 reveal about German and Italian foreign policies. [6]
Sample Response
Both Source 1 and 2 agree that Mussolini supported Hitler’s revision of the World War I treaties. In Source 1, it states that Mussolini ‘steadily supported Hitler in his treaty-breaking’. Source 2, in comparison, notes that ‘Hitler’s determination’ to break the post-War treaties was an inspiring thing to Mussolini. Furthermore, both sources suggest that Germany and Italy had enemies in common in regard to their foreign policy. For example, in Source 1 it says specifically that the two countries were drawn together because of their ‘common enemies’, while Source L notes that both Germany and Italy were in conflict with ‘Britain and France’.
However, Source 1 and 2 contrast when it comes to claiming that Italy and Germany were together mainly because of their common enemies, Source 2 claims they had ideological affinities. Source 1 says that the two countries were drawn together ‘only’ because of the enemies they had in common. However, Source 2 claims that Mussolini believed that an ‘Italian empire could exist alongside a German‐ dominated continent’. Furthermore, while Source 1 highlights the conflicting interests between German and Italian foreign policies, Source 2 claims that German policy could be beneficial to Italy. Source 1 states that ‘it is difficult’ to imagine an ‘Italo-German bloc based on a permanent identity of interests’. On the other hand, Source 2 states that Mussolini’s wanting to ‘challenge Britain and France worked to Germany’s strategic advantage’. Finally, Source 1 claims Germany did not like Italy, but Source 2 states that Hitler supported and was loyal to Mussolini. Source 1 states that ‘Germans have little faith in Italy’s fighting power’. Meanwhile, Source 2 claims that Hitler ‘demonstrated extraordinary loyalty to Mussolini’.
Once more, the student meets the requirements of the questions. They break up the information across two paragraphs, making the text easier to digest, and, crucially, quote throughout.
Tips for IB History Paper 1
Although the requirements for the old and new specifications are different, certain tips remain relevant for all students.
It is important that IB History candidates familiarise themselves with the act of reading and analysing sources. Often, this is overlooked in school, with greater emphasis placed on the essay writing that features in Papers 2 and 3. However, History Paper 1 is a key component of the examination and can often help candidates set a pace for the upcoming papers. Put simply, a strong performance on Paper 1 can translate into greater confidence moving into the later exams. So, IB learners must ensure that attention is paid to source analysis. This can be achieved by engaging with past papers and history textbooks, which typically contain source-based tasks.
The Paper 1 exam is tightly timed, for both the new and old curriculum, so IB candidates should work to refine their examination skills. This means working under a clock and honing their analytical and writing abilities under exam-style conditions. Initially, this will be challenging. Most likely, students will not complete all the questions in the appointed time. It is important to keep working at it, however. By refining exam techniques early, candidates will feel more confident and composed on test day.
Lastly, IB History students, whether at SL or HL, must read widely. Candidates are expected to utilise their own knowledge when responding to certain questions on both the old and new spec. papers. If unsure where to start, ask your teacher for recommendations. These can be IB or even A-Level textbooks, as well as journal articles, and history books.
IB History Support with BartyED
IB History is, indeed, a challenging subject. It requires not only considerable amounts of revision and memorisation, but also the ability to produce short form and long form responses, handle sources and analyse historiography. Consequently, IB History candidates can often feel overwhelmed.
At BartyED, our team of expert IB History tutors are here to help. We have guided countless students through the IB History curriculum, including supporting the IB History Internal Assessment and IB History Extended Essay. So, if you or your child could benefit from the expertise of one of our IB History tutors, reach out today by phone, email, WhatsApp, or via the form below.
Frequently Asked Questions
-
Paper 1 is weighted at 30% at Standard Level and 20% at Higher Level.
-
For the older specification, Paper 1 is a one hour examination. For those sitting the new specification, with the first exam in 2028, the paper is 1 hour and 15 minutes.
-
Yes, it has. In fact, the entire IB History course has undergone significant changes. Students should be aware of these before beginning their student as confusion can occur if they are unsure which curriculum they are studying. All relevant information on the new IB History course can be found on the IB website.