The SAQs are the easiest portion of the writing examine as all you need to do is answer the question. No really, ONLY answer the question is asking. If you asks you to identify something, simply identify it (1-2 sentences), describe something (2 sentences), explain something (3 sentences). DO NOT WRITE A WHOLE PARAGRAPH FOR EACH LETTER, just unnecessary. 

You have to answer the first and second SAQ on the AP test. Then you will have the option between two SAQs. 

DBQ: 

The most important portion of the writing sections. Worth the greatest number of points and it will take the most time. 25% of your score and 1 hour recommended time. It is similar to the LEQ except your evidence (the majority) comes from the documents. The DBQ is about grouping documents together in themes to support your argument. 

Thesis: Your thesis needs to be historically defensible and have a line of reasoning. Now what does that mean? You are asked to "evaluate the extent" of something... so evaluate it. Does it minimally impact....heavily... both positively and negatively change....allow for faster.....decrease the spread of.....increase the diffusion of... Usually if it ends in "-ly" or you are talking about how something changed it is historically defensible. Then the line of reasoning: for this I often tell you to use "such as" or "as seen through" to introduce this. For example, the 2025 DBQ prompt was "Evaluate the extent to which new transportation and/or communication technologies affected African societies during the period circa 1850 to 1960." My thesis may be, "The new transportation technologies negatively affected African societies as seen through the increased levels European immigration and the increased level of economic exploitation." The line of reasoning are your "groups" from your documents that will frame your paragraphs. The thesis needs to be at the beginning or the end, but most likely the beginning. 

Contextualization: This point comes from talking about a historical process or event that occurs before, during, and/or after. Think about what happened before that LED TO THIS, whatever this may be. Set the scene. Do not start from "the dawn of man" and do not be too general "countries were mad at each other." Try to be at most 50 years away. For example, if my prompt is about the extent to which new technology changed total war in the period 1900-2001, then my context can be about what started WWI and how we have new technologies. "What allowed for new technologies is that the periods of total war come after the industrial revolution, where increased manufacturing ability and electric power had new weapons being able to be manufactured. This is coupled with the militarism, alliances, imperialism, and nationalism that was occurring between countries in Europe and the assassination of Archduke Franz Ferdinand, gave way for these technologies to level destruction hitherto not seen." This has to be more than a phrase or reference, give time and sentences to your contextualization to get the point. 

Evidence: This is what is different from the LEQ. There are 3 Evidence points. Let's talk about the first two. The first two come from using the documents. At the bare minimum to get the two points you need to accurately use four documents out of the seven to support your argument(s). This means if you have two subgroups of arguments you can split up the four... or three and one...or all four documents on one argument. The key is to be as explicit as possible. What I mean is this: "Document 1 is [ describe document 1, what it is and the main idea]. This document supports my argument because it [shows/demonstrates/exemplifies/is an example of/challenges]...." If you do this for four documents as they relate to your argument (everything should always relate back to your arguments, and your arguments are in your thesis) you will get the first two evidence points. The third evidence point is evidence from outside the documents. It has to be any piece of evidence that is related to your argument, in the time frame, and not explicity said in the documents. Think of it as a name drop of something or someone that is relevant to what you are writing about. If I am writing about revolutions after the enlightenment and all my documents are about the American and French, I could write about Simon Bolivar's letter from Jamica and the Haitian revolution as support. This needs to support your argument and be in the time frame. How do I introduce this? Explicitly! "A piece of additional piece evidence that supports my argument is the Haitian Revolution which was a successful slave revolution led by Toussiant L'Ouverture. This supports my argument because it exemplifies the enlightenment idea of abolitionism and the social contract that is enacted as means of supporting the populous to revolt."  

Analysis and Reasoning: There are two points in the analysis and reasoning category. The first is about sourcing a document. What I will say in class is HIPP a document. This is an acronym for: Historical Situation, Intended Audience, Point of View, and Purpose. You need to for at least two documents select one of these elements that you thinks works best for that document and write about it. "To better understand the document, it is crucial to look at the point of view of who wrote it. This document was written by a member of Ghengis Khan's court. This helps me better understand the document because the author may glorify the riches and success of the Mongolian empire as he is a member of the court." Do not write about bias. Every single document has bias, what is the author trying to do: diminish the importance of, vilify, glorify, support, bring light to, detachedly document, or something else? The Historical Situation is similar to context: the context of a letter written just before WWI helps me better understand the urgency of the content written. the intended audience is who the author is writing to, and how might that change our understanding of what the author is writing. The POV I used as the example, but it asks us, who wrote it and why did they write it... knowing that information can change or add a type of bias to the document. The purpose is what the author is trying to do, and explaining how this helps us use this document. Each time you source a document you should write either: "this alters my understanding of the document because" or "this supports my argument because.." YOU MUST EXPLAIN WHY NOT JUST IDENTIFY HOW ONE OF THE ELEMENTS OF HIPP IS IMPORTANT. The third point is the complexity point. Who even knows how to get this. Do not stress about this point first. Here are some things you can do to get the complexity point and I will underline the ones I like: "This may be done in a variety of ways, such as:

 • Explaining multiple themes or perspectives to explore complexity or nuance; OR 

• Explaining multiple causes or effects, multiple similarities or differences, or multiple continuities or changes; OR 

• Explaining both cause and effect, both similarity and difference, or both continuity and change; OR 

• Explaining relevant and insightful connections within and across periods or geographical areas. 

These connections should clearly relate to an argument that responds to the prompt. May demonstrate a complex understanding through effective use of evidence relevant to an argument that addresses the prompt. 

This may be done in a variety of ways, such as:

 • Effectively using seven documents to support an argument that responds to the prompt; OR

 • Explaining how the point of view, purpose, historical situation, and/or audience of at least four documents supports an argument that responds to the prompt; OR

 • Using documents and evidence beyond the documents effectively to demonstrate a sophisticated understanding of different perspectives relevant to the prompt 

The last three are already doing the things you need to do..just a more, and you will have the time to do this. If you want a counterargument you must devote a paragraph to it to get the point. Focus on the most amount of points you can get. 

The LEQ is the long essay portion on the exam with no stimulus. No documents or images. This essay should answer the prompt and be framed around one of our historical reasoning skills: Continuity and Change over time, cause and effect, or comparison and contrast. The Graphic in the first section helps detail the organization of the essay in regard to these.

First Two Sections are the same as DBQ:

Thesis: Your thesis needs to be historically defensible and have a line of reasoning. Now what does that mean? You are asked to "evaluate the extent" of something... so evaluate it. Does it minimally impact....heavily... both positively and negatively change....allow for faster.....decrease the spread of.....increase the diffusion of... Usually if it ends in "-ly" or you are talking about how something changed it is historically defensible. Then the line of reasoning: for this I often tell you to use "such as" or "as seen through" to introduce this. For example, the 2025 DBQ prompt was "Evaluate the extent to which new transportation and/or communication technologies affected African societies during the period circa 1850 to 1960." My thesis may be, "The new transportation technologies negatively affected African societies as seen through the increased levels European immigration and the increased level of economic exploitation." The line of reasoning are your "groups" from your evidence that will frame your paragraphs. The thesis needs to be at the beginning or the end, but most likely the beginning. 

Contextualization: This point comes from talking about a historical process or event that occurs before, during, and/or after. Think about what happened before that LED TO THIS, whatever this may be. Set the scene. Do not start from "the dawn of man" and do not be too general "countries were mad at each other." Try to be at most 50 years away. For example, if my prompt is about the extent to which new technology changed total war in the period 1900-2001, then my context can be about what started WWI and how we have new technologies. "What allowed for new technologies is that the periods of total war come after the industrial revolution, where increased manufacturing ability and electric power had new weapons being able to be manufactured. This is coupled with the militarism, alliances, imperialism, and nationalism that was occurring between countries in Europe and the assassination of Archduke Franz Ferdinand, gave way for these technologies to level destruction hitherto not seen." This has to be more than a phrase or reference, give time and sentences to your contextualization to get the point. 

Evidence:  There are two evidence points. Your evidence comes straight from the dome. You need at least two pieces of evidence. Think about what is relevant and answers the prompt, if your evidence doesn't answer the prompt it does not matter. The 2025 LEQ prompt was: "In the period circa 1200 to 1450, Buddhism, Hinduism, and Confucianism included ideas about social structures, gender roles, and political authority that influenced societies across Asia. Develop an argument that evaluates the extent to which one or more of these belief systems shaped societies and/or political systems in Asia during this period." My evidence, if I wrote about Confucianism, could be about imperial bureaucracy, filial piety, foot binding, civil service exam, the spread of it to Korea and Japan. The way to introduce this is simple, explicitly! "One piece of evidence is...(explain what it is in DETAIL)...This evidence supports my argument about the way Confucianism drastically shaped Asian society because....." It is always in twos. Description + Analysis (Way it supports argument).

Analysis and Reasoning: There are two points in this category. The first point comes from framing your essay in one of the historical reasoning skills. Look at the graphic for a better understanding with organizational strategies. The second is the complexity point. I will post them all here and highlight the ones I like: 

-Explaining multiple themes or perspectives to explore complexity or nuance; OR 

§ Explaining multiple causes or effects, multiple similarities or differences, or multiple continuities or changes; OR 

§ Explaining both cause and effect, both similarity and difference, or both continuity and change; OR 

§ Explaining relevant and insightful connections within and across periods or geographical areas. These connections should clearly relate to an argument that responds to the prompt.

 A response may demonstrate a complex or nuanced understanding through effective use of evidence relevant to an argument that addresses the prompt. This may be done in a variety of ways, such as: 

§ Explaining how multiple pieces of specific and relevant evidence (at least four) support a nuanced or complex argument that responds to the prompt; OR 

§ Using evidence effectively to demonstrate a sophisticated understanding of different perspectives relevant to the prompt. This complex understanding must be part of the argument and may be demonstrated in any part of the response. While it is not necessary for this complex understanding to be woven throughout the response, it must be more than merely a phrase or reference.