What is the best way to go about analysing a primary source?

When attempting a source question, we must take a two-fold approach. The first step is to read it once or twice in order to gauge an overall tone and argument: what, on the whole, is the source trying to say? Next, it is important to reread the source, considering the specific ways by which the author/ producer has served to convey this image/interpretation. When attempting the latter, it is often helpful to use TEACUP: Tone- this is the broad character of the source, whether it be pessimistic or optimistic, longing or hopeful, etc., created by the use of specifically emotive words, in the case of a written source, or perhaps in the use of colours and expressions in the instance of a so-called non-narrative source. Evidence- the specific information which is used in order to illustrate a point is what we call evidence. Once more, this can be written, in both qualitative and quantitative forms, as well as non-narrative, for instance the arrangement of a painting. Argument- this comes back to what we said in the first step: what exactly is the author trying to say by producing their source. What questions are they asking, and what, if any, answers do they provide? Content- While evidence might be used to illustrate a specific point, content is the orbiting information, from which we might also learn about the author's intentions. For instance, a written source might include an aside, in which the author seemingly digresses. Such a digression remains useful for the historian, even if tangential. Usefulness- When we are given a source, there will always be a question set alongside it. The usefulness is the degree to which the source can aid us in answering the set question. This includes the argument it gives, as well as any drawbacks, such as the limited point of view it might represent. Provenance- This is where the source has come from, which might make it more or less useful to the historian. For instance, a diary entry might be more likely to convey the real feelings and attitudes of an author, whereas a speech given to a specific group might see the author adapt his opinions to the context.
The use of TEACUP is therefore a highly illuminating way of approaching a source question at any level of education. It enables the historian to gauge overall tones and arguments, before delving into the specifics to create a convincing case in relation to any exam question.