Citizenship Action: the Actions of Others

Somebody else did it

This section of the exam is different from the rest of the course, and knowing how is worth several marks. It asks about citizenship action taken by other people. Part of it draws on what you have already studied: each of the three themes ends with a key question about how citizens can bring about change in that area, and those are fair game as ordinary content questions. The other part gives you a source about a particular action and asks you to work from it. That is the part worth preparing for, because it is a different skill from anything else on the course. Here is the thing to hold on to. You did not take this action. You were not there. Everything you know about it comes from whatever the exam has put in front of you: a campaign group's own account, a news report, an interview, a photograph, a set of figures. So the first question is not "what did they do?" but "who is telling me this, and why?" That is not cynicism; it is the ordinary care you would take with any evidence. And it leads to the single most useful point in this module: a campaign describing its own success is not a neutral witness. It has every reason to present what it did in the best light, and it will know things a journalist would not. Both of those matter, and a good answer says so before it says anything else.

Words for judging an action

Six terms for talking about somebody else's action precisely. The last three are what separate a description from an evaluation.

Match each source to what it proves

Whose account is this

A source is a campaign group's own newsletter, describing an action they organised and calling it a success. How should you use it?

• As strong evidence of what they intended and did, treated carefully on whether it succeeded, since they are describing their own work
• As a straightforward record of what happened, since they were there
• It cannot be used, because it is biased
• Only for the factual details such as dates and places

Reading an account of an action

There is a reliable order for working through any source, and it is the same order historians and English students use, which is worth knowing because it means you have practised it elsewhere. First, what kind of source is it? A campaign's own account, a news report, an interview, an image, a set of figures. Naming the kind is not a formality: it decides everything that follows. Second, what was it made for? A newsletter exists to inform supporters and attract more. A news report exists to interest readers. An interview exists to give one person's account. Nobody produces a source for the benefit of an examiner. Third, what is it therefore good evidence FOR? This is the useful question. A campaign's newsletter is excellent evidence of their aims, methods and how they want to be seen. A news report is good evidence that something was publicly visible. Fourth, what can it NOT show? A newsletter cannot neutrally establish that the action worked. A photograph cannot show what happened afterwards. A single interview cannot show what everybody affected thought. Fifth, reach a conclusion that uses the source for the thing it can actually support. ⚠️ The test to apply to your own answer is the same one that works everywhere else: a source is not simply reliable or unreliable. It is reliable FOR something, and the mark is in saying what.

Which two can their own report show

A campaign group publishes its own report on an action it took. Select the TWO things that report is genuinely good evidence for.

• What the group was trying to achieve, and why they chose the methods they did
• What the group actually did, in detail, and in what order
• That the action succeeded, since they say it did
• What people who disagreed with the action thought about it

The action in words

This section asks about action taken by other people, so everything you know comes from a _____. What the group was trying to achieve is its _____, while what actually happened is the _____. The difference the action made, and to whom, is its _____. Judging how successful it was, with reasons, is called _____, and it must say what the evidence can and cannot support.

What they wanted, what changed

The two things a question about somebody else's action nearly always wants separated. Confusing them is the commonest way to lose the evaluation marks.

An action, evaluated

Here is a worked answer on an invented example, since your specification allows an illustrative one. The source: a newsletter from a local group who campaigned to keep a community library open. It describes a petition, a public meeting, letters to councillors, and a decision by the council to keep the library open with reduced hours. The newsletter calls the campaign a complete success. A weak answer: "The campaign was a success because the library stayed open." That accepts the source's own verdict and adds nothing. A strong answer: "The newsletter is the group's own account, so it is strong evidence of what they aimed to do and the methods they used: a petition, a public meeting and letters to elected representatives, which are all recognised forms of citizenship action. It is weaker evidence on whether the campaign succeeded, since a group has every reason to present its own work favourably. On the aim, the evidence suggests partial success: the library remained open, which was the central objective, but with reduced hours, which is less than they asked for, so calling it a complete success overstates it. On impact, the source shows the decision but not the reasons behind it, so we cannot tell from this alone how far the campaign caused the outcome rather than coinciding with it; a council report or a councillor's statement would help. A fuller judgement would need a second source, ideally one not produced by the campaign." Notice what that does. It uses the source for what it can support, states clearly what it cannot, distinguishes the aim from the outcome, and says what further evidence would settle it. That last move is available on almost every source question and very few students make it.

How to work through a source

Put the steps of answering a source-based question about somebody else's action into order.

• Identify what kind of source it is, and who produced it
• Ask what it was made for, and who it was made for
• State what it is therefore good evidence for
• State what it cannot show, and why that follows from its purpose
• Separate the aim from the outcome, and judge how far they match
• Reach a conclusion, and say what further evidence would strengthen it

Judge it without overclaiming

Assemble a judgement that uses the source for what it can support.

Taking the claim at face value

Four sentences from answers about a campaign group's own report. Select the ONE that accepts the source's claim without qualifying it.

• The report is the group's own account, so it shows their aims clearly but is not neutral on whether they succeeded.
• The campaign achieved everything it set out to do, because the report says the action was a complete success.
• The library stayed open but with reduced hours, so the aim was only partly achieved.
• A council statement would help establish how far the campaign caused the decision.

Four sources, one action

You are given several sources about the same invented campaign. Decide what each can and cannot establish.

• The first source is a photograph of a public meeting, showing a full hall. What does it establish?
• The second is a local news report of the council's decision. What is it best for?
• The third is an interview with one campaigner describing how the action changed her. What does it show?
• You must now judge how successful the action was. What makes the judgement strong?

Explain and evaluate an action

Using a citizenship action you have studied or an example of your own, explain what those involved did and evaluate how successful it was. Say what your evidence can and cannot show.

• Describe the issue the action was addressing
• Explain what those involved aimed to achieve
• Describe the methods they used, naming recognised forms of citizenship action
• Say what kind of source your information comes from, and what it was made for
• State what that source is good evidence for
• State what it cannot show, and why that follows from its purpose
• Compare the aim with the outcome, and judge how far they match
• Finish by saying what further evidence would strengthen your judgement