However source B is not very reliable as it doesn’t tell us where its from of what’s its propose. For example it could be piece propaganda or a family photo, all it tells us it’s a ‘photograph taken in September 1939’. So all I know is it was taken in 1939, therefore it was taken in the middle of the war, so it has a high chance of being a piece propaganda. As the people in the picture are smiling and if you saw this in the war it would strengthen your opinion on evacuation. Therefore would make a good piece of propaganda, this source is not as reliable and not as useful as source C.
Source C is useful as it from a teacher remembering being evacuated with children from her school. It is accurate as it gives a truthful experience of evacuation. This source tells us about the evacuation process, about how mothers weren’t allowed to interfere back they still came along behind. We could also see the same thing from source B that was a typical case of evacuation.
However source C is fairly reliable it’s an interview with a teacher that was evacuated with children from her school and was taken in 1988. If it had taken place sooner it would have been more reliable. It does not tell me the reason why it was done but I don’t think it would have been a piece of propaganda especially in 1988. Also it is reliable because it tells us that mothers were not allowed to walk with their children.
However we can’t actually see the source we can only read it therefore we don’t know exactly what it was like as it is not a detailed source. The source might also be a bit blurred, as teachers have to be over 24 so 49 years later at the age of 75 (at least) her memory might not be reliable. This source is also subjective to what she saying, as she only would have seen it through teacher’s point of view. ‘All you could hear was the feet of the children and a kind of murmur, because the children were too afraid to talk.’
She would really know how the children felt, as she would have been too busy sort out thing as we can see in source B. This makes it lose a bit of its reliability.
Source C is a Teachers description of what happened at the school she worked at. It is a Useful source as gives a description of what happened during the process. It is a reliable source as the teacher was actually there at the time of the evacuation. None of the facts she gives sound incorrect ‘Mothers weren’t allowed with us, but came along behind.’ This was because teachers were in control and parents would interfere and get to emotional.
Source G is extract taken from a novel.
Is it reliable as evidence about evacuees?
Explain your answer using the source and knowledge from your studies.
Even those Source G is fictional it could still be reliable to us as it is a novel as has to be correct, otherwise people would not read it if fact were wrong. This proves that if the novel was inaccurate that people would not read it because it would be unbelievable and would not sell. However as it is a novel some parts will be fiction to give the book a sense of adventure. This proves that the source must have some reliability.
The author can’t over complicate the book as it is for children so it must be simplified and therefore won’t be as detailed. This makes the source more reliable as if it for children, the author would not wont to tell them lies as it would set there minds in the wrong direction.
The source is factual it does agree with my own knowledge because the foster parents thought the evacuees were poor children too poor to have slippers. This was this the case because many evacuees came from poor deprived families, and foster parents were told to expect poor children that wouldn’t be used living with slightly better off families.
The truth, as this source shows was that not all the evacuated children were from poor families. Some children like the two children mentioned source G were from families that did have enough money to get by. This shows research from the author and makes the source seem trustworthy.
It is a novel written by Nina Bowden written in 1973 and so is secondary evidence. This immediately puts the reliability of the source into question because the prime objective of a novel is to sell copies of it and make money. The truth can often be quite a subject, so novel will not always write the whole truth; otherwise few people would not want to read the novel. The novel is based on a true story, which means the writer cannot blatantly lie, because then her for this reason you cannot lie about as evidence. A novel is based on a true story, and then the author will most likely have carried out some research to ensure that the novel is accurate to some degree.
The novel is intended for children. This would certainly effect how it is because children normally have a short attention span and will read anything that isn’t very interesting. This shouldn’t affect the reliability of this source because evacuation an interesting subject secondly, the novel cannot not any complexities that children will not understand. This means that although the source is quite reliable and tells you some of the facts, it can’t tell all facts because this would mean going into to much detail never the less on conclusion I would say that this source is reliable because it is clearly successful. The reconstruction of a source is secondary situation that could well have evidence occurred means that it may not perfectly describe the actual event. This does not mean that source is unreliable because it would still be an accurate account.
