How to get an A* in A-Level History

A-Level History is among the more argument-driven subjects on the curriculum. The students who reach A* are not necessarily those who know the most dates. They are the ones who can build a sustained argument across a 25-mark essay and defend it against the most obvious counter-arguments.

The other thing top candidates have is a feel for historiography. They know that historians disagree about why the French Revolution happened, why Hitler came to power, why the Cold War ended. Engaging with that disagreement, rather than presenting the past as settled, is one of the clearest signals to an examiner that you are working at the top band.

This guide explains the AQA 7042 structure, the topics that pay off most in exams, the technique that separates a B from an A*, and the NEA habits that quietly shape whether your investigation sits at the top of the mark range or in the middle.

For AQA History (7042), the A* boundary is set on raw marks each year and tends to land around 80 percent of the total raw marks. The qualification is marked out of 200 in total (80 plus 80 plus 40), so you typically need around 160 out of 200 across the qualification, with strong performance in both written papers and a substantial NEA score above 32 out of 40.

The NEA carries 20 percent of the total grade, and like other A-Levels with a coursework component, it can lift a borderline candidate into A* if managed properly. Conversely, a weak NEA can prevent strong written paper scores from translating into the top grade.

In the written exams, the top grade rewards three things. The first is sophisticated argument with a clear and defended line of reasoning. The second is precise factual support, with names, dates, and specifics rather than generalised assertion. The third is engagement with interpretations and sources, treating them as historical artefacts to be evaluated rather than information to be summarised.

AQA History is assessed through two written papers at the end of Year 13 and a historical investigation (NEA) completed during the course. The two papers usually pair a breadth study with a depth study, though the precise content depends on the options chosen by the school.

Each written paper includes a source or interpretations question and two essay questions chosen from a small selection. Paper 1 favours questions that span the full period of the breadth study, while Paper 2 typically zooms in on a defined chronological window of 25 to 50 years. The NEA is a self-directed investigation of a question that spans roughly 100 years and integrates the analysis of differing interpretations.

Even though questions vary across exam series, the assessment objectives stay constant. AO1 covers knowledge and argument, AO2 covers source evaluation, and AO3 covers historical interpretations. The A* boundary is shaped as much by the balance between these as by which specific topic comes up.

That said, certain question types reliably appear. The breadth paper often includes a question about change and continuity across a long period, a question about turning points, and a question about the influence of a particular factor (economic, political, religious, social) on broader change. Preparing model arguments for each of these in your specific period pays off in any year.

On the depth paper, expect questions on the causes of major events, the success or failure of particular leaders or policies, and the relative significance of different actors. Source questions on this paper tend to focus on usefulness and reliability for a specific enquiry, so practise applying source criteria to short extracts under timed conditions.

For the interpretations question, you need to know the historiographical debate within your period. Schools of thought (revisionist, structuralist, post-revisionist, Marxist) are the bones of these questions. Knowing two or three named historians and what they argue gives you ready-made evaluative material in the exam.

Argument is the heart of A-Level History. The A* mark scheme uses words like "sophisticated", "sustained", and "own judgement". To meet those criteria you need an explicit line of argument from the introduction to the conclusion, with every paragraph contributing to it rather than offering parallel information.

A structure that tends to work well is a clear introduction stating your position, three to four paragraphs each making a substantial point with precise evidence, a counter-argument paragraph that you address rather than ignore, and a conclusion that defends your judgement against the strongest opposing view. This is the difference between a list of points and an argument.

For source questions, the technique is content, provenance, and context combined into a judgement about utility. Weak answers describe what a source says. Strong answers explain why this particular source, written by this person, at this time, in this format, is or is not useful for the specific enquiry in the question. The provenance must do analytical work.

For interpretations questions, you must engage with the historian's argument, not just the topic. Identify the specific claim, the kind of evidence they use, what they emphasise and what they downplay, and where their argument sits in the broader historiographical landscape. Then judge how convincing it is on the basis of your own knowledge.

Active recall is the engine. Build flashcards for key dates, individuals, events, and the core claims of named historians. The aim is to free up your working memory in the exam so you can spend it on argument rather than retrieval.

Past papers come next. History mark schemes are unusually explicit about what counts as Level 5 reasoning, so they reward slow, careful self-marking. Pick a question, plan it for ten minutes, write it for 35, then spend half an hour comparing your answer to the published mark scheme and a top-band exemplar if you can find one.

Examiner reports are the third tool. AQA publishes detailed reports flagging the same recurring weaknesses, including narrative rather than argument, vague chronology, and ignored counter-arguments. Reading two or three reports tells you exactly what to fix.

For the NEA, the discipline is different. The investigation needs to span roughly 100 years, engage seriously with two or three contrasting historians, and reach a clear judgement supported by primary evidence. The introduction and conclusion are where most NEAs lose marks, so write them last and tighten them ruthlessly.

If you start in earnest in January of Year 13, six months is enough time to lift a B candidate to A*. The plan below assumes around eight to ten hours of weekly History revision in addition to lessons, with the NEA largely complete by Christmas.

January is for chronological consolidation. Build a full timeline for each paper, then write one-page summaries of every major event, individual, and turning point. The goal is to be able to recall any year on the timeline and immediately produce three substantive points about it.

February is for historiography. Identify two or three named historians for each major debate in your period and learn what they argue and why. Make a side-by-side comparison sheet you can revise from. This is the work that lifts your interpretations answers most directly.

March is for essay technique. Move into past papers, focusing on the 25-mark essays. Aim for two timed essays per week with thorough self-marking. Rewrite weak paragraphs rather than just noting that they were weak.

April is for full papers. Use the Easter break to complete at least two full past papers per paper type under timed conditions. Practise the source and interpretations questions under tight time limits, because they are often where weaker candidates lose pace.

May is for refinement. Focus on the topics you scored worst on, redo essays, and read AQA examiner reports. In the final week before each exam, scale back to light recall, brief plan-writing practice, and proper rest.