How should we approach this question? You've got an hour. Let's look at the first five minutes.First, circle on the command term. "To what extent" questions are tricky. They requires you to argue the relative significance of one factor over another. But focusing on the command term sets out your essay's parameters, and helps structure...Your argument! Second, identify your argument in relation to this question. If pressed for time, stick with your gut feeling. You've got several options with an "extent" question: great extent, moderate extent or little/no extent. My advice? Steer clear of "moderate extent" answers. In this case, let's say our argument is: "The United States did not win the Cold War. In fact, Gorbachev orchestrated the end of the conflict."Third, spend some time thinking about a structure. Divide your big argument into several sub-arguments. You may wish to organise them thematically or chronologically. Remember to signpost in your introduction. It may help to sketch an outline. In this case, let's say you divide your reasons into political, economic, military and societal/cultural factors. This is simplistic but works every time.Finally, identify the general and specific counter-arguments to your own argument. Make sure these arguments are well-integrated. Mention a counter-narrative in your introduction and bring it up throughout to question the validity of your own argument. Showing awareness of historiography is crucial. In this case, a clear counter-narrative is the traditional Western argument that the US won the Cold War, hands down.With all this in mind, you're ready to start writing. Refer closely to your outline, and remember: quality over quantity!