Hello, I'm Mr. Marcher, and thank you for joining me for today's history lesson.

My job today is to help guide you through our history resources in the lesson.

And I'm gonna be working to make sure that by the end of our time together, you can securely meet our lesson objective.

Welcome to today's lesson, which is part of our unit on society in the USA, where we are asking ourselves, how far did American society change after World War II? By the end of today's lesson, you'll be able to evaluate interpretations of experiences of life in post-war America.

There are three keywords which will help us navigate our way through today's lesson.

Those are McCarthyism, communism, and civil liberties.

McCarthyism was the campaign against alleged communists in the USA led by Joseph McCarthy.

Communism is the belief that wealth should be shared equally between people, and the freedom people have to do, think, and say what they want is known as civil liberties.

Today's lesson will be divided into three parts, and we'll begin by focusing on comparing interpretations.

People and historians can form their own views of events from the past.

These views are referred to as interpretations.

It is common for interpretations of history to differ from one person to another.

Historians often compare different interpretations.

It is important to be able to identify and demonstrate the differences between interpretations.

So, we've got two interpretations of our own, A and B, which we can think about.

Both interpretations offer views on people's lives in the USA in the years after the end of World War II.

Interpretation A says, "In some ways, the USA was flourishing, but the country was plagued by serious problems. Poverty, McCarthyism, and a widening generation gap made life for millions miserable," whereas interpretation B says, "For a wide range of Americans, life in the post-war period became more comfortable.

There were new ways for Americans to enjoy themselves and more opportunities to do so." So let's think about what exactly each of these interpretations is saying in a little bit more depth.

We'll begin by thinking about interpretation A.

Now, we can see from interpretation A that it talks about this idea of flourishing, and this acknowledges positive aspects of life in the USA.

However, the interpretation goes on to refer to the country being plagued by serious problems. So actually, we can see interpretation A really emphasising some of the issues which were affecting America after World War II, especially because that language, "plagued," "serious problems," suggests that the negatives in this period really outweighed those positives that did exist.

It goes on to refer to poverty, McCarthyism, and a widening generation gap.

So, this gives the reader the impression that there were political, economic, and social issues at the time, and talks about life for millions being miserable.

So, this is trying to make it clear that many people were affected negatively by issues at the time.

So, let's reflect on everything that we've just heard.

We have a statement on the screen that says interpretation A suggests that there was nothing positive about life in post-war America, but is that statement true or false? Pause the video here and press play when you're ready to see the right answer.

Okay, well done to everybody who said that that statement was false, but we need to be able to justify our response.

So two justifications have appeared on the screen.

The first says that interpretation A acknowledges that there were positives, but emphasises the issues which affected Americans at the time.

The second justification says that interpretation A acknowledges that there were issues, but emphasises the many positive aspects of American lives.

So which one of those two justifications is correct? Pause the video here and press play when you're ready to check your answer.

Okay, well done to everybody who said that the correct justification was A.

Interpretation A acknowledges that there were positives, but also emphasises the issues which affected Americans at the time.

And let's try another question.

Which quote from interpretation A best demonstrates that different types of problems existed in America at the time? Is it that it says "the country was plagued by serious problems," "poverty, McCarthyism, and a widening generation gap," or "made life for millions miserable"? Pause the video here and press play when you're ready to check your answer.

Okay, well done to everybody who said that the best quote for demonstrating there were different types of problems in America at the time was B.

This is because this quote talking about poverty, McCarthyism, and a widening generation gap identifies that there were political, social, and economic issues at the time.

So now we can think about interpretation B in a little bit more depth.

A key insight into the view of interpretation B comes in its first half, where it talks about a wide range of Americans and them being more comfortable.

This tells us that many Americans were benefiting from rising standards of living in the post-war period.

The interpretation also talks about them being able to enjoy themselves and having more opportunities to do so.

This tells us that more people, and new groups, were able to participate in popular culture.

So the impression we get is all quite positive of life in America in the post-war period.

So, let's check our understanding of what we've just heard.

We have a statement on the screen that reads, "Both interpretation A and B offer mainly positive views of life in the USA during the post-war years," but is that statement true or false? Pause the video here and press play when you're ready to see the right answer.

Okay, well done to everybody who said that that statement was false, but we need to be able to justify our response.

So two justifications have appeared on the screen.

The first says that interpretation A suggests many people continued to suffer from a wide range of issues.

The second says that interpretation B suggests that only a small number of people enjoyed rising living standards.

So which one of those two justifications is correct? Pause the video here and press play when you're ready to see the right answer.

Okay, well done to everybody who said that the correct justification was A.

Interpretation A suggests many people continued to suffer from a wide range of issues, so it does not offer a mainly positive view of life in post-war America.

So, we've seen interpretation A and B in a little bit more depth, which means we're ready to answer the following question.

How can you tell that interpretation A and interpretation B have different views on people's lives in the USA in the years after the end of World War II? You should explain your answer based on what it says in both interpretations.

So pause the video here and press play when you're ready to reflect on your response.

Okay, well done for all of your effort on that task.

So I asked you, how can you tell that interpretation A and interpretation B have different views on people's lives in the USA in the years after the end of World War II? And your answer may have included, "Interpretation A suggests that there were many problems which people were affected by in post-war America.

For example, in the interpretation, it says 'poverty, McCarthyism, and a widening generation gap made life for millions miserable.

' By contrast, interpretation B emphasises that American lives were getting better and becoming more comfortable after World War II.

For example, it says, 'There were new ways for Americans to enjoy themselves and more opportunities to do so.

'" So, really well done if your own answer looks something like that.

What's really key is that you're identifying a key view from both interpretations and demonstrating that by selecting a quote from each.

So now we're ready to move on to the second part of our lesson, where we're going to focus on experiences of the post-war period.

Interpretations A and B acknowledged that there were a range of people who lived through the post-war period in the USA.

This means that there are different experiences which may align with each interpretation.

Historians assessing each interpretation may wish to compare their views to some of the major economic, cultural, and political developments of the time.

So let's start by thinking about the post-war economy in the USA.

Average incomes rose for virtually all groups of Americans, including women and African Americans.

For example, women's incomes rose from $980 in 1945 to an average of $1,361 in 1951.

Spending power increased as a result of this.

When people's incomes rose, they were able to buy more.

This included necessities, but also, consumer goods.

In fact, 9 out of 10 Americans owned a TV by the late 1950s.

Even teenagers' average spending rose from $2 per week in the early 1940s to between 10 and $15 per week by 1957.

However, what we must keep in mind is that, whilst on average, incomes and spending were rising, gender and racial inequalities continued.

So, African Americans continued to be paid significantly less than white Americans.

And if we look at the table on the screen, we can see that the same was true between women and men.

A gender pay gap continued.

For example, whilst women's incomes rose between 1945 and 1951, the average income of a woman in 1951 was still less than what the average man had been earning six years before that.

Government support was aimed at vulnerable groups in the post-war period.

For example, $4 billion was provided to support the nine million veterans who'd fought in the Second World War.

Additionally, President Truman almost doubled the hourly minimum wage as part of his Fair Deal to help those who were less well-off in America.

Nevertheless, most of President Truman's Fair Deal was blocked by political opponents, and this meant that issues such as poverty remained very significant in America.

For instance, by 1959, there were 39.

5 million Americans living in poverty, and poverty was also a racial problem.

Whilst 18% of the population of white Americans lived in poverty, for Black Americans, it was 56% of the population which lived in poverty.

In other words, Black Americans were around three times more likely to live in poverty than white Americans.

So let's reflect on everything that we've just heard.

Which of the following groups enjoyed rising incomes after the end of World War II? On our list, we have Black Americans, female adults, male adults, and teenagers.

You should select all of those answers that apply.

So pause the video here and press play when you're ready to check your answers.

Okay, well done to everybody who said that all of the groups shown on our list enjoyed rising incomes after the end of World War II.

In fact, virtually all Americans saw their incomes grow in the post-war period.

And let's try another question.

How many Americans lived in poverty by 1959? Was it less than 395,000, 3.

95 million, or 39.

5 million? Pause the video here and press play when you're ready to see the right answer.

Okay, well done to everybody who said that the correct answer was C, 39.

5 million Americans were still living in poverty by 1959.

Although incomes were rising, this did not mean that all groups were well-off, and there were still significant inequalities in America, many people living in poverty, and women and African Americans not experiencing the same levels of prosperity as white Americans and as men.

So now we can reflect on post-war culture.

High levels of radio and TV ownership gave most Americans access to entertainment at home.

44 million Americans were able to watch a single broadcast of the TV show "I Love Lucy" in 1953.

Three years later, in 1956, over 1/3 of all Americans watched a single televised performance by Elvis Presley.

Rock and roll music and films, such as "Rebel Without a Cause," became very popular in the post-war period, especially with teenagers.

Popular rock and roll lyrics often referenced sex, drinking, and gangs.

Teenagers were attracted to the rebelliousness of this new culture.

As a result, many older Americans worried about a growing generation gap between themselves and teenagers, and worried about the negative influence of developments in popular culture.

For instance, Frank Sinatra, a famous musician, claimed that rock and roll music led to almost totally negative and destructive reactions in young people.

So, let's check our understanding of what we've just heard about post-war culture.

We have a statement on the screen that says rock and roll was not popular with all Americans.

Is that statement true or false? Pause the video here and press play when you're ready to see the right answer.

Okay, well done to everybody who said that that statement was true, but we need to be able to justify our response.

So two justifications have appeared on the screen.

The first says that rock and roll was very popular with teenagers, but many older Americans feared it was a bad influence.

And the second says that rock and roll was very popular with older Americans, but many teenagers considered it boring.

So which one of those two justifications is correct? Pause the video here and press play when you're ready to see the right answer.

Okay, well done to everybody who said that the correct justification was A, rock and roll music was very popular with teenagers, especially because of its focus on ideas of rebelliousness, but many older Americans feared that it was a bad influence for these very same reasons.

And let's try another question.

Which of the following allowed many Americans to enjoy entertainment at home in post-war America? Was it cheap cinema tickets, the emergence of new music genres, or widespread TV ownership? Pause the video here and press play when you're ready to see the right answer.

Okay, well done to everybody who said the correct answer was C.

Widespread TV ownership allowed many Americans to access entertainment at home.

In fact, by the late 1950s, 9 out of 10 American households owned their very own TV.

And so, finally, we can think about post-war politics in the USA.

A second Red Scare began in the USA as World War II ended.

This was a period of paranoia about communist threats, and this fear became very widespread.

The House Un-American Activities Committee, or HUAC, President Truman's Loyalty Programme, and McCarthyism all investigated millions of Americans suspected of having links to communism.

Paranoia led to many people falling under suspicion and being treated unfairly.

Members of the LGBTQ+ community fell under particular suspicion, often because it was believed these people might want to hide their identity, and that this could be used by communists to blackmail them.

Civil liberties like freedom of thought and expression were not respected as a result of the Red Scare.

The Hollywood Ten, a group of leading Hollywood writers and producers, were blacklisted, as were many others, because of the suspicion that they might be communists.

And some of those who were accused by Senator Joseph McCarthy even died by suicide because of the negative social pressures involved in investigations during the Red Scare.

So, let's make sure we have a secure understanding of everything we just heard.

What was there widespread fear of during the Red Scare? Pause the video here and press play when you're ready to check your answer.

Okay, well done to everybody who said that the correct answer was communism.

There was widespread fear of communism during the Red Scare.

And let's try another question.

I want you to identify two consequences experienced by victims of McCarthyism and the Red Scare.

So you need to choose from execution, torture, job loss, and suicide.

So which two of those answers are correct? Pause the video here and press play when you're ready to check your answers.

Okay, well done to everybody who said that the correct consequences were job loss and suicide.

There were many people who were blacklisted because of the investigations which took place during the Red Scare.

This included the Hollywood Ten, who, by being put on a blacklist, were barred from any other jobs in Hollywood, and some of the victims of McCarthyism even committed suicide because of the intense social pressures they were put under during investigations.

So, let's remind ourselves, we had two interpretations, A and B, that we saw earlier on in today's lesson, both of which offered views on people's lives in the USA in the years after the end of World War II.

So, for task B, I want you to provide three examples which support the views given in interpretation A and to provide three examples which support the views given in interpretation B.

So, pause the video here and press play when you're ready to reflect on your responses.

Okay, well done for all of your effort on that task.

So I asked you to provide three examples which supported the views given in interpretation A, and three examples which supported the views given in interpretation B.

And your answers may have included the examples which supported the views in A, 39.

5 million Americans lived in poverty by 1959, the Red Scare led to restrictions on freedom of speech and expression, and older Americans feared rock and roll encouraged violence.

Meanwhile, for interpretation B, the three examples you provided may have included average incomes rose for almost all groups, the emergence of rock and roll was popular with teenagers, and 9 out of 10 Americans owned a TV.

So, really well done if your own answers look something like those.

And now we're ready to move on to the third part of today's lesson, where we're going to focus on evaluating interpretations.

Historians often have to evaluate interpretations.

This involves considering how convincing they are.

To evaluate an interpretation, a historian must compare its views to their own contextual knowledge.

This allows a historian to consider how accurate and representative the views in an interpretation may be.

It is possible that different interpretations of the same period or event can be accurate.

Historians may reach different conclusions depending on what their particular focus is.

Studying different groups of people or alternative aspects of life from the same period may inform very different interpretations of that time.

So, let's reflect on what we've just heard.

We heard a statement on the screen that reads, "If historians make different interpretations of the same time period, only one can be considered accurate." So is that statement true or false? Pause the video here and press play when you're ready to see the right answer.

Okay, well done to everybody who said that that statement was false, but we need to be able to justify our response.

So two justifications have appeared on the screen.

The first says that interpretations may differ if historians choose to focus on different groups or aspects of life.

And the second says that so long as it comes from a professional historian, every interpretation must be considered correct.

So which one of those two interpretations is correct? Pause the video here and press play when you're ready to see the right answer.

Okay, well done to everybody who said that the correct justification was A, interpretations may differ if historians choose to focus on different groups or aspects of life.

This is why differing interpretations of the same time period may still both be accurate.

By comparing an interpretation to their own contextual knowledge, historians might conclude that the views in an interpretation are accurate and therefore convincing, inaccurate and therefore not very convincing, subjective or partial, i.

e.

, that they only represent the views or experiences of specific people or groups, and so that they're not completely convincing.

So, let's reflect on what we've just heard.

I want you to write the missing words from the following sentence.

Historians can compare the views in an interpretation to their own blank, blank to evaluate how convincing they are.

You may want to keep in mind that exam questions often ask you to use this too.

For example, a question might say, "Explain your answer using interpretations A and B and your," blank, blank.

So what are the missing words? Pause the video here and press play when you're ready to reflect on your response.

Okay, well done to everybody who said that the missing omitting words were contextual knowledge.

Historians can compare the views in an interpretation to their own contextual knowledge to evaluate how convincing they are.

So, we've got interpretation A back up on the screen, the interpretation of the view on people's lives in the USA in the years after the end of World War II.

So it says, "In some ways, the USA was flourishing, but the country was plagued by serious problems. Poverty, McCarthyism, and a widening generation gap made life for millions miserable." So if we were to evaluate interpretation A, we might come up with a response that looks something like Lucas'.

Lucas says, "Interpretation A is convincing because it emphasises how many Americans struggled during the post-war period.

It says that 'poverty, McCarthyism, and a widening generation gap made life for millions miserable.

' Indeed, by 1959, 39.

5 million Americans lived in poverty.

Even amongst those who were more privileged, the Red Scare was able to destroy careers and lives.

For instance, Joseph McCarthy's untruthful allegations disgraced many people, leading to job losses and even pushing some victims to die by suicide.

This shows that several issues made life incredibly difficult for a wide range of Americans after World War II." This evaluation of interpretation A provided by Lucas is really strong.

So we're gonna think about some of the different elements that make his interpretation so impressive.

One of the things that stands out straightaway in Lucas' answer is that he very clearly summarises the view in interpretation A.

He talks about how it emphasises how many Americans struggled.

And Lucas also makes sure to provide a quote for the interpretation.

He doesn't just assert that it has this view.

He also demonstrates it by providing a specific quote.

Lucas' answer then moves on to providing his own contextual knowledge.

For example, he talks about 39.

5 million Americans living in poverty, about Joseph McCarthy's allegations leading to job losses, and some people dying by suicide.

This is really good because it allows Lucas to demonstrate what he knows about this topic.

Because his answer is part of an evaluation, just providing that contextual knowledge wouldn't be enough to really thought about how convincing is our interpretation.

What's good about this response is that Lucas moves on to explain the relevance of the contextual knowledge which he's provided.

So because he knows that 39.

5 million Americans lived in poverty, that there were job losses and suicides during the period of McCarthyism and the Red Scare, Lucas is able to say that all of this shows that there were several issues that made life incredibly difficult for a wide range of Americans, and by that, he implies that interpretation A is quite convincing.

So, thinking about everything that we've heard and seen so far, what should historians do when providing contextual knowledge to evaluate an interpretation? Should they explain what quotes for the interpretation mean? Should they list as many facts and details as they know about the topic in question, or should they selectively provide examples which are relevant to the view in the interpretation? Pause the video here and press play when you're ready to see the right answer.

Okay, well done to everybody who said that the correct answer was C.

Like we saw in Lucas' answer, the contextual knowledge you provide as part of an evaluation should include selectively provided examples, and they should be clearly relevant to what it is that the interpretation itself was saying.

So, let's just remind ourselves, we had our two interpretations, A and B.

We've seen them quite a few times during today's lesson, and we know that both interpretations offer views on people's lives in the USA in the years after the end of World War II.

For task C, firstly, I want you to write one paragraph to explain why the views of interpretation B could be considered convincing.

You should explain your answer based on your contextual knowledge and what it says in the interpretation.

And then, for the second part of task C, I want you to tell me which interpretation, A or B, gives the more convincing opinion about people's lives in the USA in the years after the end of World War II.

You should again write one paragraph to explain your judgement.

So, pause the video here and press play when you're ready to reflect on your responses.

Okay, well done for all of your effort on that task.

So, firstly, I asked you to write one paragraph to explain why interpretation B's view could be considered convincing.

So, your answer could have included, "Interpretation B is convincing as it highlights the rising prosperity and new cultural activities which Americans were able to enjoy.

The interpretation says that 'there were new ways for Americans to enjoy themselves and more opportunities to do so.

' The experience of teenagers in post-war America supports this view.

Teenagers' average spending rose from $2 per week in the early 1940s to between 10 and $15 by 1957, meaning they had a greater ability to enjoy themselves.

Teens also enjoyed new developments in popular culture, including the emergence of rock and roll music, which emphasised themes of rebelliousness, which appealed to teenage audiences." So, well done if your own response looked something similar to that model paragraph we've just seen.

And then for the second part of task C, I asked you which interpretation, A or B, gives the more convincing opinion about people's lives in the USA in the years after the end of World War II.

And I asked you to write one paragraph to explain your judgement.

So your answer could have included, "Both interpretation A and B correctly reflect the experiences of millions of Americans.

During the post-war period, Americans experienced both rising levels of prosperity and comfort and significant economic and political challenges.

Indeed, though many Americans enjoyed rising incomes, tens of millions continued to live in poverty, and inequality persisted.

Furthermore, the Red Scare showed that Americans' civil liberties could suffer regardless of whether they were rich or poor.

In this sense, interpretation A is more convincing than B because it acknowledges a wider range of experiences of the post-war period than interpretation B does." So, again, really well done if your own response looks something like that model answer we've just seen.

So now we've reached the end of today's lesson, which puts us in a good position to summarise our learning about change in post-war America.

We've seen that although many Americans enjoyed a more comfortable lifestyle after World War II, this was not the case for all.

Cultural changes brought new ways for Americans to enjoy leisure time, but also led to tensions between teenagers and older generations.

And at the same time that economic prosperity brought comfort and security to the lives of many, fears of communism unsettled Americans while McCarthyism ruined lives.

So, really well done for all of your effort throughout today's lesson.

It's been a pleasure to help guide you for our resources, and I look forward to seeing you again in future.

(no audio).