Outside evidence vs contextualization

could a topic discussed in contextualization also be used in outside evidence but more specifically or would that be double-dipping?
ex. contextualization: something about how technological innovations helped boost trade
outside evidence: trade was also boosted by technological innovations, such as the Carrick, the fluyt, and the lateen sail.
would that be counted as double-dipping?

I’m not sure THAT would be double dipping, especially if your contextualization brings up different specific evidence points. Also, I usually recommend to my students that their contextualization cover time BEFORE the actual time period of their argument. That way, when they’re using, say, tech innovations, their Outside Evidence is IN period where their contextualization is before.

I hope that helps!

Personally, I’d consider it double dipping, and think it would be better if you use two separate pieces for each point! Also, one thing I did last year on my DBQ was that I made sure I had two or three pieces of outside evidence just in case I missed the point for one of them! (ONLY DO THIS IF YOU HAVE TIME THOUGH!) Also, as Darin said, I used to write my contextualization before my actual argument, so that might be something you would want to consider!

1 Like

so would you recommend talking about what trade was like before the time period or just generally what was happening in that area during that time? sorry i have trouble doing context and outside evidence because i can’t think of what to write that will allow me to connect it back to my thesis…

1 Like

how do you think of outside evidence as you write the dbq? does it just pop into your head because i cant do that… should i make a list of potential outside evidence or try something else im not sure

Exactly! While talking about the stuff that was happening beforehand is good, you still have to be SPECIFIC. If you’re too general, your Contextualization won’t get the point, right? So talking about Trade before time period with specific examples would be good, or just events that led up to the period you’re going to be talking about as well, but keep it specific!

1 Like

Ya! So, for me, incorporating and thinking of Outside evidence was really difficult. So what I did before my test was write out each period and a few different pieces of evidence that was really specific to the time period (that would most likely link to a prompt but not be the prompt itself), and just remembered some of the key points. If you’re not a memorizer like me, that’s completely fine. Just think of it like this: the DBQ is like a puzzle. So think about specific examples related to time periods, so that if those pop up in the test, you’ll have something to start with and build upon! Does that make sense?

1 Like

Indeed! If you follow Heimler’s History on youtube, he has some really great suggestions for how to set up your notes so that you’ve got outside evidence stuff directly at hand.

Haha, I used him too! You could check this video out! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Aix-Go7-Z1I

ok ill give that a try thank you!

lol i saw it too and i made extensive notes but now i dont know how to use them well…

Fiveable Logo

2550 north lake drive
suite 2
milwaukee, wi 53211

✉️ help@fiveable.me

learn

about for students for parents for teachers for schools & districts content team privacy contact

practice

🥇 2020 Fiveable Olympics study plans upcoming events trivia hypertyper resources cram passes

connect

community tiktok discord twitter instagram facebook careers

*ap® and advanced placement® are registered trademarks of the college board, which was not involved in the production of, and does not endorse, this product.

© fiveable 2020 | all rights reserved.