Skip to main content
Common Core LiteracyGrades 9–10History & Social Studies

RH.9-10.9: Compare Primary and Secondary Sources

Also written as CCSS.ELA-LITERACY.RH.9-10.9 · Cluster: Integration of Knowledge and Ideas.

All 29 Grades 9–10 Literacy Standards

The Official Wording

Compare and contrast treatments of the same topic in several primary and secondary sources.

Common Core State Standards, Grades 9-10, Reading: History & Social Studies · Read it at the source · Checked October 14, 2026

What RH.9-10.9 Means in Plain English

Ninth and tenth graders set several sources on one historical topic side by side, such as a marcher’s letter, a newspaper editorial and a textbook, and work out where they agree and differ. Three accounts of the 1932 Bonus Army disagree about who the marchers were.

Middle school (RH.6-8.9) related one primary source to one secondary source on the same topic. Ninth and tenth grade widen that to several sources at once. In eleventh and twelfth grade (RH.11-12.9), students build their sources into one coherent account of an event and flag where they contradict each other.

RH.9-10.9 I Can Statements

  • I can compare how several sources treat the same event.
  • I can find where primary and secondary sources agree and differ.
  • I can explain what each source includes, leaves out and why.

RH.9-10.9 Worked Example

Three sources agree on what happened and disagree about who the marchers were, and the weak answer only sorts them into sides.

Read the Story
Source A, from a letter by a marcher camped in Washington, D.C., July 1932 (invented): “We are not beggars and we are not reds. We are men who carried rifles in France, and all we ask is the bonus the government promised us, paid now, while our children are hungry, instead of in 1945, when some of us will be in our graves.”Source B, from a newspaper editorial, July 29, 1932 (invented): “The President acted rightly. A mob that refused every order to leave, with agitators among it who never saw France, could not be allowed to hold the capital hostage. Order has been restored.”Source C, from a modern history textbook (invented): “In the summer of 1932, thousands of unemployed World War I veterans camped in Washington to demand early payment of a bonus due in 1945. On July 28, after police shot two marchers during a clash, President Hoover ordered the army to clear them out.”Source C: “Troops under General Douglas MacArthur, with tanks and tear gas, drove the veterans from the city, and their camp at Anacostia Flats went up in flames. Pictures of soldiers routing veterans hurt Hoover in that fall’s election.”
A short passage written for this page.
Question: Compare how the three sources treat the Bonus Army. Where do they agree, where do they differ, and what does each one include or leave out?
Not Yet“All three sources are about the Bonus Army in 1932. The letter is for the veterans, the editorial is against them, and the textbook is neutral because it is a textbook.”It sorts the sources into sides without a single quotation or point of comparison, and it assumes the textbook is neutral instead of checking what the textbook includes and leaves out.
Meets the Standard“All three agree that veterans came to Washington over the bonus and that the government drove them out. They differ on who the marchers were. The letter insists they are men who ‘carried rifles in France’ and are ‘not reds.’ The editorial calls them ‘a mob’ with ‘agitators among it who never saw France.’ The textbook calls them ‘unemployed World War I veterans’ and does not repeat the charge about agitators. They also differ on the force used. The editorial says only that ‘order has been restored,’ leaving out the tanks, the tear gas and the burning camp the textbook reports. The textbook, written long after, adds the police shooting and the election, which no one could know in July 1932. Only the letter explains why the men wanted the money now: hungry children. The primary sources show what people argued at the time, and the textbook shows what later historians chose to stress.”It compares the sources point by point, who the marchers were and what force was used, quotes each source’s key words, accounts for when each was written, and treats the textbook as making choices too.
Question Stems to Use
What do all the sources agree happened?How does each source describe the marchers? Quote the key word.What does one source report that another leaves out?Which source was written at the time, and which long after? What could each one know?Is the secondary source neutral, or does it make choices too? Which ones?

Common Mistakes with RH.9-10.9

Sorting sources into sides

“The letter is for, the editorial is against, and the textbook is neutral.”

Try this: Have students compare the sources point by point, who the marchers were, what force was used, rather than source by source.

Assuming the textbook is neutral

Treating the secondary source as the final word that settles every disagreement

Try this: Ask what the textbook chose to include and leave out, just as students would ask of the primary sources.

Ignoring when each source was written

Faulting the 1932 editorial for not mentioning the election that fall

Try this: Label each source with its date before comparing, and ask what its author could and could not have known then.

Where RH.9-10.9 Fits

Comes BeforeRH.6-8.9Analyze how a primary and a secondary source on the same topic relate to each other.
AlongsideRI.9-10.9Analyze seminal U.S. documents and how they address related themes and concepts.WHST.9-10.7Research a historical question by pulling several sources into one answer.
Comes NextRH.11-12.9Integrate diverse sources into a coherent account of an event, noting where they disagree.

Practice RH.9-10.9

Quick Check

  1. How does the editorial describe the marchers, and how does the letter answer that?
  2. What does the textbook report that the editorial leaves out?
  3. Why do the marchers want the bonus now instead of in 1945?

RH.9-10.9: Other Names

RH.9-10.9CCSS.ELA-LITERACY.RH.9-10.9

Common Core State Standards © Copyright 2010. National Governors Association Center for Best Practices and Council of Chief State School Officers. All rights reserved. Official wording from the Common Core State Standards PDFs at corestandards.org, last checked October 14, 2026. The explanation, I can statements, example, mistakes and practice on this page are EMStudio’s own, written beside the official wording. They are not part of the standard.