To explain a response, name the challenge, state what was done, say why that action fitted, and point to evidence. The “why it fitted” sentence is what turns a name into an explanation.
This lesson follows grouping challenges. For the general evidence method, see using evidence in KBAT responses.
What is the four-part frame?
Use this order for each challenge.
- Challenge: what the problem was.
- Response: what was done about it.
- Reason: why that action suited the problem.
- Evidence: a named policy, agreement or account that shows it happened.
Four short sentences are enough for each point in an essay.
Worked example: an invented case
The case is invented for practice. A federation finds that children in distant villages cannot reach school.
- Challenge: distant villages lacked schools, so children missed education.
- Response: the government started a school-building programme in those villages.
- Reason: building schools where children lived removed the travel barrier, which was the direct cause of the problem.
- Evidence: the programme’s annual report lists the new schools opened each year.
Notice that the reason refers back to the cause in the challenge. The response is judged against the need, not in isolation.
A named response against an explained one
| Answer | Quality |
|---|---|
| “The government built schools.” | Names a response only |
| “The government built schools in distant villages, because travel was the barrier, and the annual report lists the schools opened.” | Names, matches the need and cites evidence |
The second answer is longer, but each added clause earns its place.
The mistake that costs marks
A typical error is to attach a famous response to the wrong challenge. If a response solves an economic problem, do not offer it as an answer to a security problem.
A second error is leaving out the reason. Writing “a plan was introduced” without saying why it suited the problem leaves the explanation incomplete.
Check yourself
Invented case: a region’s farmers cannot sell their produce because roads are poor. The government repairs the roads. Write the four-part frame.
Answer
Challenge: poor roads stopped farmers from reaching markets.
Response: the government repaired the roads linking farms to towns.
Reason: better roads removed the barrier to selling produce, which was the cause of the lost income.
Evidence: a road-works record showing the repaired routes and dates.
What to study next
Continue with short-term and long-term effects. The evidence-to-explanation planner follows the same frame.
For teacher support, see online one-to-one Sejarah tuition.