9489 · Cambridge International AS Level
9489/21
Paper 2
History · June 2025 · Variant 1
Relative difficulty
Analysis source: Cambridge Assessment International Education
Analysis aligned to the official syllabus and assessment design.
3.5 / 5
100
180 min
Source evaluation and balanced causal explanation across the European, American, and International pathways.
Cohort performance
Session statistics from official examination reports
Total marks
100
Duration
180 min
Session difficulty
3.5 / 5
Key examiner messages
Top priorities from the principal examiner before you revise
In Paper 1, the highest marks are allocated to Part (b) (25 marks), which requires candidates to evaluate how far a set of four sources supports a historical claim (e.g., the blame for the Franco-Prussian War or the finality of the Dred Scott decision).
To access Level 4 and 5, candidates must go beyond grouping sources into 'support' and 'challenge' columns; they must actively evaluate the provenance, motive, and context of the sources.
For instance, recognizing that Ribbentrop's 1946 memoir was written while on trial for war crimes is crucial to understanding his motive to portray Hitler as peaceful.
Question difficulty map
How candidates performed on each question in this series
No data available in official reports
Assessment objectives
Skill and AO weighting from official examiner commentary
Skill weighting
Shows the skill mix this paper tested most heavily.
Source
Weight: 8100%Analysis & Evaluation
Weight: 788%Historical Evaluation
Weight: 675%Causal Analysis Explanation
Weight: 450%Knowledge & Understanding
Weight: 225%Context
Weight: 113%
Method marks watchlist
Where working, steps, or method marks were commonly lost
No data available in official reports
Recurring mistakes across years
Themes examiners flag in multiple recent sessions for this subject
No data available in official reports
Question choice intelligence
Mean scores and popularity for optional questions (HKDSE electives)
No data available in official reports
Level exemplars
What candidate scripts at each grade level looked like
No data available in official reports
Grade & admission context
How marks relate to grade thresholds and entry standards
Report type
Cambridge Principal Examiner Report — component performance and international standards
Level A
Approx. 61% of maximum mark
Level B
Approx. 52% of maximum mark
Level C
Approx. 46% of maximum mark
Level D
Approx. 40% of maximum mark
Level E
Approx. 34% of maximum mark
Deep insights
What top candidates did
Techniques and approaches examiners rewarded in this series
No data available in official reports
Command word playbook
How to match each command word to the expected response style
Give reasons and link mechanism to outcome; each point needs a because/so chain.
Match the expected response style for “far” questions.
Match the expected response style for “contrast” questions.
Match the expected response style for “extent” questions.
Time traps
Sections where candidates spent disproportionate time relative to marks
Min per mark: 2
Min per mark: 2
Min per mark: 1.8
Min per mark: 1.5
Min per mark: 1.5
Syllabus traceability
Topics linked to questions and mark weighting in this session
European option: Modern Europe, 1750–1921
33 marks this session
American option: The history of the USA, 1820–1941
33 marks this session
International option: International history, 1870–1945
34 marks this session
MCQ trap analytics
Commonly chosen wrong options from examiner commentary
No data available in official reports
Topic heatmap across years
Mark concentration by topic and exam year for this subject
Mark intensity
European option: Modern Europe, 1750–1921 (Papers 1 and 2)
American option: The history of the USA, 1820–1941 (Papers 1 and 2)
International option: International history, 1870–1945 (Papers 1 and 2)
International option: International history, 1870–1945
European option: Modern Europe, 1750–1921
American option: The history of the USA, 1820–1941
Difficulty trend
How session difficulty has shifted across recent years
Paper comparison
Marks and duration breakdown across papers in this session
Paper 1 Document Question (11):
Paper 2 Outline Study (21):
Marks you can still earn
Where valid approaches outside the mark scheme may still gain credit
No data available in official reports
Practise what examiners flagged
Target weak topics from this report inside the Revui app
European option: Modern Europe, 1750–1921
33 marks this session
Practise in RevuiAmerican option: The history of the USA, 1820–1941
33 marks this session
Practise in RevuiInternational option: International history, 1870–1945
34 marks this session
Practise in RevuiSelf-diagnostic checklist
Key actions before you sit this paper — copy and tick off as you revise
- 1Message
In Paper 1, the highest marks are allocated to Part (b) (25 marks), which requires candidates to evaluate how far a set of four sources supports a historical claim (e.g., the blame for the Franco-Prussian War or the finality of the Dred Scott decision).
- 2Message
To access Level 4 and 5, candidates must go beyond grouping sources into 'support' and 'challenge' columns; they must actively evaluate the provenance, motive, and context of the sources.
- 3Message
For instance, recognizing that Ribbentrop's 1946 memoir was written while on trial for war crimes is crucial to understanding his motive to portray Hitler as peaceful.
Teacher briefing pack
One-page session summary for tutors and classroom review
June 2025 2025
History
In Paper 1, the highest marks are allocated to Part (b) (25 marks), which requires candidates to evaluate how far a set of four sources supports a historical claim (e.g., the blame for the Franco-Prussian War or the finality of the Dred Scott decision). To access Level 4 and 5, c
In Paper 1, the highest marks are allocated to Part (b) (25 marks), which requires candidates to evaluate how far a set of four sources supports a historical claim (e.g., the blame for the Franco-Prussian War or the finality of the Dred Scott decision).
To access Level 4 and 5, candidates must go beyond grouping sources into 'support' and 'challenge' columns; they must actively evaluate the provenance, motive, and context of the sources.
For instance, recognizing that Ribbentrop's 1946 memoir was written while on trial for war crimes is crucial to understanding his motive to portray Hitler as peaceful.
- Total marks
- 100
- Duration
- 180 min
- Session difficulty
- 3.5 / 5
Session analysis
In Paper 1, the highest marks are allocated to Part (b) (25 marks), which requires candidates to evaluate how far a set of four sources supports a historical claim (e.g., the blame for the Franco-Prussian War or the finality of the Dred Scott decision). To access Level 4 and 5, candidates must go beyond grouping sources into 'support' and 'challenge' columns; they must actively evaluate the provenance, motive, and context of the sources. For instance, recognizing that Ribbentrop's 1946 memoir was written while on trial for war crimes is crucial to understanding his motive to portray Hitler as peaceful.
Updated Jun 12, 2026
Paper breakdown
Paper 1 Document Question (11):
Paper 2 Outline Study (21):
Top chapters
Exam structure insights
Marks by chapter
See where the marks were concentrated so revision time goes to the highest-value topics.
Mark accessibility
Estimate which marks were basic, mid-level, or high-difficulty.
75% within easy or medium reach
Command word frequency
Spot common command words so answers match the expected response style.
Question type mix
Compare the mark share of each paper section and question type.
P2 Part (b) Evaluative Essay
40·9·40%
P1 Part (b) Source Evaluation
25·3·25%
P2 Part (a) Explanatory Essay
20·9·20%
P1 Part (a) Source Comparison
15·3·15%
Study ROI
Bigger bubbles recur more often; higher bubbles carry more marks, helping you rank revision priorities.
Time vs marks
Compare marks with suggested time allocation to plan exam pacing.
Paper 1 Part (a)
0.50 m/minPaper 1 Part (b)
0.67 m/minPaper 2 Part (a) Qu…
0.57 m/minPaper 2 Part (b) Qu…
0.67 m/minPaper 2 Part (a) Qu…
0.50 m/minTotal marks
85
Total time
155 min
Avg pace
0.55
Next-year prediction
Topics worth watching next year, with the reason shown directly below each bar.
Paper 1 European Option: Italian Unification (1815-71)
85%85%
Paper 1 American Option: The Kansas-Nebraska Act and Compromise of 185
80%80%
Paper 2 Russian Revolution: The Provisional Government
75%75%
Where the Marks Are
In Paper 1, the highest marks are allocated to Part (b) (25 marks), which requires candidates to evaluate how far a set of four sources supports a historical claim (e.g., the blame for the Franco-Prussian War or the finality of the Dred Scott decision). To access Level 4 and 5, candidates must go beyond grouping sources into 'support' and 'challenge' columns; they must actively evaluate the provenance, motive, and context of the sources. For instance, recognizing that Ribbentrop's 1946 memoir was written while on trial for war crimes is crucial to understanding his motive to portray Hitler as peaceful.
Examiner notes & key calculations
- Formulaic Source Evaluation: Many candidates write that a source is 'biased' or 'unreliable' simply because of its origin (e.g., 'Source A is a German cartoon and is therefore biased'). Examiners look for how the source's purpose and context affect its utility and weight as evidence.
- Sequential Comparison in Paper 1 Part (a): A common error is summarizing Source B and then summarizing Source C, rather than directly comparing and contrasting their views on a specific point (e.g., the strength of Prussia).
- Narrative Over Analysis in Paper 2: In causal questions (Part a, 10 marks), candidates often write a long story of 'what happened' rather than clearly identifying and explaining the key factors (such as the 1884–85 Berlin Conference parameters or the reasons behind bank failures after the Great Crash).
Exam tips
Paper format
- Duration
- 1h 45min
- Total marks
- 60
- Weighting
- 60%
- Question types
- P2 Part (a) Causal Explanation, P2 Part (b) Evaluative Essay
Analysis is paraphrased for study purposes. Always verify against the official examiner report and mark scheme.