OPVL Source Analysis

Using OPVL With Documents Guide
A Guide for Using Primary Source or Original

Source Documents
OPVL: Origins, Purpose, Values, Limitations
Origin, Purpose, Value and Limitation (OPVL) is a technique for analyzing historical
documents. It is used extensively in the International Baccalaureate curriculum and
testing materials, and is incredibly helpful in teaching students to be critical observers.
It is also known as Document Based Questions (DBQ).
Origin:
In order to analyze a source, you must first know what it is. Sometimes not all of these
questions can be answered. The more you do know about where a document is coming
from, the easier it is to ascertain purpose, value and limitation. The definition of
primary and secondary source materials can be problematic. There is constant debate
among academic circles on how to definitively categorize certain documents and there
is no clear rule of what makes a document a primary or a secondary source.

 Primary – letter, journal, interview, speeches, photos, paintings, etc. Primary

sources are created by someone who is the “first person”; these documents can
also be called “original source documents.” The author or creator is presenting
original materials as a result of discovery or to share new information or
opinions. Primary documents have not been filtered through interpretation or
evaluation by others. In order to get a complete picture of an event or era, it is
necessary to consult multiple—and often contradictory—sources.
 Secondary – materials that are written with the benefit of hindsight and
materials that filter primary sources through interpretation or evaluation. Books
commenting on a historical incident in history are secondary sources. Political
cartoons can be tricky because they can be considered either primary or
secondary.
 Other questions must be answered beyond whether the source is primary or
secondary and will give you much more information about the document that will
help you answer questions in the other categories:
1. Who created it?

2. Who is the author?
3. When was it created?
4. When was it published?
5. Where was it published?
6. Who is publishing it?
7. Is there anything we know about the author that is pertinent to our
evaluation?
Purpose:
This is the point where you start the real evaluation of the piece and try to figure out
the purpose for its creation. You must be able to think as the author of the document.
At this point you are still only focusing on the single piece of work you are evaluating.
 Why does this document exist?

 Why did the author create this piece of work?
 What is the intent?
 Why did the author choose this particular format?
 Who is the intended audience?
 Who was the author thinking would receive this?
 What does the document “say”?
 Can it tell you more than is on the surface?
Value:
Now comes the hard part. Putting on your historian hat, you must determine: Based on
who wrote it, when/where it came from and why it was created … what value does this
document have as a piece of evidence? This is where you show your expertise and put
the piece in context. Bring in your outside information at this point.
 What can we tell about the author from the piece?

 What can we tell about the time period from the piece?
 Under what circumstances was the piece created and how does the piece reflect
those circumstances?
 What can we tell about any controversies from the piece?
 Does the author represent a particular ‘side’ of a controversy or event?
 What can we tell about the author’s perspectives from the piece?
 What was going on in history at the time the piece was created and how does
this piece accurately reflect it?
Limitation:
The task here is not to point out weaknesses of the source, but rather to say: at what
point does this source cease to be of value to us as historians?
With a primary source document, having an incomplete picture of the whole is a given
because the source was created by one person (or a small group of people), naturally
they will not have given every detail of the context. Do not say that the author left out
information unless you have concrete proof (from another source) that they chose to
leave information out.
Also, it is obvious that the author did not have prior knowledge of events that came
after the creation of the document. Do not state that the document “does not explain X”
(if X happened later).
Being biased does not limit the value of a source! If you are going to comment on the
bias of a document, you must go into detail. Who is it biased towards? Who is it biased
against? What part of a story does it leave out? Sometimes a biased piece of work
shows much about the history you are studying
 What part of the story can we NOT tell from this document?
 How can we verify the content of the piece?
 Does this piece inaccurately reflect anything about the time period?
 What does the author leave out and why does he/she leave it out (if you know)?
 What is purposely not addressed?
This is again an area for you to show your expertise of the context. You need to briefly
explain the parts of the story that the document leaves out. Give examples of other
documents that might mirror or answer this document. What parts of the story/context
can this document not tell?

OPVL Source Analysis

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

OPVL Source Analysis

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

OPVL Source Analysis

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Using OPVL With Documents Guide

A Guide for Using Primary Source or Original

 Primary – letter, journal, interview, speeches, photos, paintings, etc. Primary

1. Who created it?

 Why does this document exist?

 What can we tell about the author from the piece?

You might also like