HISTORY · IB Diploma Programme
HISTORY/31
HL Depth Studies (one regional option)
History · 2024 · Variant 1
Relative difficulty
Analysis source: International Baccalaureate Organization
Analysis aligned to the official syllabus and assessment design.
3.8 / 5
30
90 min
20th Century World History Topics
Cohort performance
Session statistics from official examination reports
Total marks
30
Duration
90 min
Session difficulty
3.8 / 5
Key examiner messages
Top priorities from the principal examiner before you revise
To reach the top bands (13–15 marks), candidates had to transcend descriptive storytelling.
The markscheme awards high marks to papers that explicitly address the command terms (such as 'To what extent' or 'Evaluate') and present well-substantiated, balanced arguments.
For example, in Topic 10 (Authoritarian States), successful candidates did not merely outline social policies but directly evaluated the significance of change they brought about, contrasting intended outcomes with realities on the ground.
Question difficulty map
How candidates performed on each question in this series
No data available in official reports
Assessment objectives
Skill and AO weighting from official examiner commentary
No data available in official reports
Method marks watchlist
Where working, steps, or method marks were commonly lost
No data available in official reports
Recurring mistakes across years
Themes examiners flag in multiple recent sessions for this subject
No data available in official reports
Question choice intelligence
Mean scores and popularity for optional questions (HKDSE electives)
No data available in official reports
Level exemplars
What candidate scripts at each grade level looked like
No data available in official reports
Grade & admission context
How marks relate to grade thresholds and entry standards
Report type
IB subject report — grade distributions, IA weighting, and HL/SL distinctions
Level 7
Excellent — top band for competitive university offers
Level 6
Very good — strong HL performance
Level 5
Good — solid pass at higher level
Level 4
Satisfactory — minimum for many university credits
Level 3
Mediocre
Level 2
Poor
Level 1
Very poor
Deep insights
What top candidates did
Techniques and approaches examiners rewarded in this series
No data available in official reports
Command word playbook
How to match each command word to the expected response style
No data available in official reports
Time traps
Sections where candidates spent disproportionate time relative to marks
No data available in official reports
Syllabus traceability
Topics linked to questions and mark weighting in this session
Authoritarian states (20th century)
30 marks this session
The Cold War: Superpower tensions and rivalries (20th century)
30 marks this session
Causes and effects of 20th-century wars
30 marks this session
MCQ trap analytics
Commonly chosen wrong options from examiner commentary
No data available in official reports
Topic heatmap across years
Mark concentration by topic and exam year for this subject
Mark intensity
Authoritarian states (20th century)
The Cold War: Superpower tensions and rivalries (20th century)
Causes and effects of 20th-century wars
Authoritarian states (20th century) 2.
Superpower tensions and rivalries (20th century) 2.
Causes and effects of 20th-century wars 2.
Difficulty trend
How session difficulty has shifted across recent years
Paper comparison
Marks and duration breakdown across papers in this session
Paper 2:
Marks you can still earn
Where valid approaches outside the mark scheme may still gain credit
No data available in official reports
Practise what examiners flagged
Target weak topics from this report inside the Revui app
Authoritarian states (20th century)
30 marks this session
Practise in RevuiThe Cold War: Superpower tensions and rivalries (20th century)
30 marks this session
Practise in RevuiCauses and effects of 20th-century wars
30 marks this session
Practise in RevuiSelf-diagnostic checklist
Key actions before you sit this paper — copy and tick off as you revise
- 1Message
To reach the top bands (13–15 marks), candidates had to transcend descriptive storytelling.
- 2Message
The markscheme awards high marks to papers that explicitly address the command terms (such as 'To what extent' or 'Evaluate') and present well-substantiated, balanced arguments.
- 3Message
For example, in Topic 10 (Authoritarian States), successful candidates did not merely outline social policies but directly evaluated the significance of change they brought about, contrasting intended outcomes with realities on the ground.
Teacher briefing pack
One-page session summary for tutors and classroom review
2024 2024
History
To reach the top bands (13–15 marks), candidates had to transcend descriptive storytelling. The markscheme awards high marks to papers that explicitly address the command terms (such as 'To what extent' or 'Evaluate') and present well-substantiated, balanced arguments. For exampl
To reach the top bands (13–15 marks), candidates had to transcend descriptive storytelling.
The markscheme awards high marks to papers that explicitly address the command terms (such as 'To what extent' or 'Evaluate') and present well-substantiated, balanced arguments.
For example, in Topic 10 (Authoritarian States), successful candidates did not merely outline social policies but directly evaluated the significance of change they brought about, contrasting intended outcomes with realities on the ground.
- Total marks
- 30
- Duration
- 90 min
- Session difficulty
- 3.8 / 5
Session analysis
To reach the top bands (13–15 marks), candidates had to transcend descriptive storytelling. The markscheme awards high marks to papers that explicitly address the command terms (such as 'To what extent' or 'Evaluate') and present well-substantiated, balanced arguments. For example, in Topic 10 (Authoritarian States), successful candidates did not merely outline social policies but directly evaluated the significance of change they brought about, contrasting intended outcomes with realities on the ground.
Updated Jun 14, 2026
Paper breakdown
Paper 2:
Top chapters
Examiner notes & key calculations
- Regional Misalignment: Several questions (such as Q1, Q7, Q8, Q9, Q12, Q17) required selecting examples from different regions. Candidates who ignored this constraint capped their maximum achievable band.
- Out-of-Period Evidence: Using 20th-century developments to argue for Early Modern or Medieval states (e.g., in Topic 4 or Topic 5) was a frequent error.
- Pre-prepared Essays: Writing a generic essay on 'reasons for industrialization' rather than specifically addressing the prompt's focus on 'technological developments' (Q13) led to poor alignment with level descriptors.
Exam tips
Paper format
- Duration
- 2h 30min
- Total marks
- 45
Analysis is paraphrased for study purposes. Always verify against the official examiner report and mark scheme.