Cambridge IGCSE World History: Component-by-Component Exam Preparation

Cambridge IGCSE History 0470 is assessed through three components, and the third is a choice. Every candidate takes Paper 1 Structured Questions (2 hours, 60 marks, 40%) and Paper 2 Document Questions (1 hour 45 minutes, 40 marks, 30%). For the remaining 30% a centre enters candidates for either Component 3 Coursework (one piece of extended writing, 40 marks, internally assessed and externally moderated) or Paper 4 Alternative to Coursework (1 hour, 40 marks, externally assessed). These notes turn that structure into a preparation plan and complement the site’s content guides for The Nineteenth Century, 1848-1914 and The Twentieth Century, 1919-1989.

Find out which third component you are entered for – it changes everything

Coursework and Paper 4 are worth identical marks and identical weight, but they are prepared for in completely different ways: one is a piece of extended writing produced over time under supervision, the other is a timed, externally assessed paper sat on the day. Exam-preparation priority: establish which route your centre has entered you for at the start of the course, not in the final term. A candidate revising for a timed paper they are not sitting, or leaving coursework under-developed because they assumed there would be an exam, loses 30% of the qualification to an avoidable administrative misunderstanding.

Paper 1 asks two core questions and one depth-study question – and they need different revision

Paper 1’s 60 marks come from two questions on the Core Content plus one question on a Depth Study. That is not a formality: core-content questions range across a broad period, while depth-study questions reward precise detail about a narrower one. Exam-preparation priority: revise the two in different ways. For the Core Content, build chronological outlines that let you place any event quickly in its wider sequence; for the Depth Study, build dense factual notes – names, dates, figures and specific measures – because that is the level of specificity a depth question rewards.

Paper 2 tests what you do with sources, not what you already know

The Document Questions paper supplies its own material. Marks come from interpreting and evaluating what is in front of you, and background knowledge functions as context for that evaluation rather than as the answer itself. Exam-preparation priority: practise with unseen sources under time pressure rather than re-reading familiar ones. The specific habit worth drilling is reading the attribution – who produced the source, when, for whom, and why – before reading the content, because provenance is what makes evaluation possible.

Paper 2’s reading load is easy to underestimate

Paper 2 gives 105 minutes for 40 marks – about 2.6 minutes per mark, against 2 minutes per mark on Paper 1 (120 minutes for 60 marks) – which sounds generous until reading time is counted: a question can include up to seven sources, and the candidate must read and digest them before any writing begins. Exam- preparation priority: rehearse a fixed opening routine – a set number of minutes to read the whole set of sources once, noting attributions, before starting question 1. Candidates who begin writing immediately usually discover a later source contradicts an earlier claim, and lose time revising an answer already written.

For the coursework route, the marks are in redrafting

Component 3 is a single piece of extended writing produced over time. Its great advantage over a timed paper is that a first draft is not the final answer. Exam-preparation priority: budget explicit time for revision of the argument, not just for proofreading – checking that every paragraph advances the specific question set, and that supporting detail is precise rather than general. The most common weakness in extended historical writing is a well-informed piece that narrates rather than argues.

Worked routine: evaluating a source before using it

The routine below is an original model written for this resource, not a reproduction of any official past paper, source booklet or mark scheme.

Step 1 - read the attribution first, not the content:
Who produced this? When? For what audience or purpose?

Step 2 - state what the source says, in your own words:
One sentence. If you cannot do this, you have not understood it yet.

Step 3 - ask what the provenance explains about the content:
Does the author's position, date or intended audience account for
the emphasis, omission or tone you can see in the content?

Step 4 - reach a judgement that is USEFUL, not just sceptical:
"Biased, therefore unreliable" is not an evaluation. A source
produced to persuade is excellent evidence of what its author
wanted an audience to believe -- say what the source is good
evidence FOR, given its provenance.

Step 4 is where the marks concentrate and where answers most often stop short. Dismissing a source as biased treats provenance as a disqualification; using provenance to say precisely what the source can reliably tell a historian is the skill being examined.

Before/during exam checklist

• Before the exams: confirm whether you are entered for Component 3 or Paper 4; revise Core Content as chronological outlines and the Depth Study as dense factual detail; practise Paper 2 technique on unseen sources, not familiar ones; if on the coursework route, budget time for redrafting the argument rather than only proofreading.
• During Paper 1: check whether each question is a core-content or depth-study question and pitch the level of detail accordingly.
• During Paper 2: read all the sources once, noting attributions, before writing anything; read every attribution before its content.
• On any source question: finish the evaluation by stating what the source is good evidence for, given who produced it and why – never stop at calling it biased.

Self-test

1. Why does it matter, early in the course, which third component you are entered for?
2. How should revision for the Core Content differ from revision for the Depth Study?
3. Why should a source’s attribution be read before its content?
4. Why is “this source is biased, so it is unreliable” an incomplete evaluation?

Answers: 1. Because Component 3 Coursework and Paper 4 carry identical weight (30%) but are prepared for in completely different ways – extended writing produced over time versus a timed externally assessed paper – so preparing for the wrong one forfeits 30% of the qualification. 2. Core Content revision should build broad chronological outlines that allow events to be placed in sequence; Depth Study revision should build dense, specific factual detail, because that is what depth questions reward. 3. Because provenance – who wrote it, when, for whom and why – is what makes the content interpretable, and reading content first tends to produce an answer about what the source says rather than what it shows. 4. Because it treats provenance as a disqualification rather than as information: a source written to persuade is strong evidence of what its author wanted an audience to believe, and the marks come from saying what the source is good evidence for.

Written against the assessment overview of Cambridge IGCSE History 0470 (official syllabus for 2024-2026, verified 2026-08-27). Cambridge has since published a later 2027-2028 edition; candidates sitting a series beyond 2026 should check that edition. The source-evaluation routine above is an original model written for this resource, not a reproduction of any official past paper or mark scheme. Always check the current syllabus for your examination year at cambridgeinternational.org.