For many AP history teachers, the no-stimulus SAQ has been the natural place to begin teaching short-answer writing. Students could focus on three manageable tasks:

• Understanding the historical question
• Recalling a relevant piece of evidence
• Turning that evidence into a clear explanation

They did not also have to interpret a political cartoon, decode an unfamiliar map, identify an author’s argument, or determine how a source connected to outside historical knowledge. The SAQ on the AP World History, AP US History, and AP European History exams changed, so how should we proceed with SAQ instruction going forward?

Now that the no-stimulus SAQ is no longer part of the exam, should teachers stop using it altogether?

What exactly changed about the AP World History SAQ?

Previous Format

Under the previous format, students answered Question 1, Question 2, and either Question 3 or Question 4. The third and fourth questions did not provide a stimulus, allowing students to respond from their historical knowledge alone. The released 2025 exam, for example, gave students a choice between two sets of content-based prompts without an accompanying source.

New format beginning in 2027

Students will now answer:

• SAQ 1: Secondary text source or sources
• SAQ 2: Primary text source
• SAQ 3: Primary or secondary non-text source
• No choice: All three SAQs are required
• Broader coverage: Each SAQ addresses a different historical period

College Board describes the changes as an effort to create a more consistent exam experience while improving focus, transparency, and expectations. Course content itself has not changed.

The change is bigger than simply replacing one no-stimulus question with a visual. The new structure makes the entire SAQ section completely source-based. That means students will need to combine historical content knowledge, prompt interpretation, source analysis, and concise explanatory writing on all three SAQs.

Why the no-stimulus SAQ was such a useful teaching tool

A no-stimulus prompt allows a teacher to isolate the writing skill. When a student produces a weak response, the teacher can more easily diagnose the problem:

• Did the student misunderstand the task verb?
• Did the student lack specific historical evidence?
• Did the student name evidence without explaining it?
• Did the student restate the prompt instead of answering it?
• Did the student write too much without establishing a clear connection?

I prefer to introduce the SAQ using the T-E-A formula with no-stimulus SAQs. T=topic sentence, E=evidence, and A=analysis. It is easier to begin teaching TEA without having to worry about source interpretation. Just because the no-stimulus SAQ isn’t appearing on the exam anymore doesn’t mean we can’t use it as a starting point for isolating SAQ writing skills at the beginning of the year. Removing no-stimulus questions from the exam does not remove their usefulness as instructional scaffolds.

We regularly use exercises that do not perfectly replicate the final assessment. Students may practice writing thesis statements before writing full essays, analyze one DBQ document before working with seven, or identify evidence before constructing an argument. A no-stimulus SAQ can serve the same purpose.

The case for continuing to use no-stimulus SAQs

They reduce cognitive overload

Beginning AP students may be learning unfamiliar historical content, AP task verbs, source analysis, time management, and the TEA structure simultaneously. Removing the source temporarily allows them to focus on what a successful response actually does.

They make feedback more precise

A teacher can evaluate the writing independently from the student’s ability to interpret a difficult source.

They build confidence early

Students are more likely to understand that SAQs are manageable when their first experience is not buried beneath an unfamiliar passage or complex political cartoon.

They help teachers identify content gaps

Because the student must retrieve evidence independently, no-stimulus questions reveal whether students actually know the historical content.

Why teachers should not rely on no-stimulus SAQs for too long

A no-stimulus question teaches only part of the task students will perform in May. If teachers continue using the old format throughout the year, students may become comfortable writing from memory but struggle when they must determine what a source is saying before they can answer the prompt.

Possible problems with overusing no-stimulus questions include:

• Students treating the source as decorative rather than essential
• Students summarizing a source without answering the question
• Students failing to distinguish a source’s argument from their own historical knowledge
• Students becoming dependent on prompts that directly signal the relevant content
• Students having too little practice with maps, charts, artwork, political cartoons, photographs, and other visual sources

No-stimulus questions should be used as practice tasks, not simulation tasks.

A practice task isolates one skill. A simulation task recreates the conditions of the assessment. Students need both, but teachers should be clear about which one they are assigning.

Should teachers begin with full stimulus-based SAQs instead?

Students will ultimately face a source with every SAQ, so early exposure matters. Waiting until the second semester to introduce visual and textual stimuli would leave too little time for students to become comfortable with them. However, “use sources from the beginning” does not have to mean “assign a complete three-part stimulus SAQ during the first week.” That approach can make it difficult to determine why students are struggling. A weak answer might result from:

• Misreading the source
• Misunderstanding the prompt
• Lacking historical knowledge
• Not knowing how to organize a response
• Failing to explain the evidence
• Trying to accomplish too many tasks at once

Students should encounter sources immediately, but teachers can initially separate source analysis from SAQ writing. For example, students might analyze an image during one activity and practice a no-stimulus TEA response during another. The two skills can then be combined once students understand each component.

Here’s how I break down the initial build up to full SAQs as they will appear on the exam:

Stage	Source Provided?	Student Task	Primary Goal
1	No	Write one TEA response	Learn response structure
2	Yes	Analyze or annotate only	Build source-reading skills
3	Yes	Complete a partially scaffolded TEA	Combine source and writing
4	Yes	Answer one full SAQ part independently	Develop independence
5	Yes	Answer all three parts	Practice complete SAQs
6	Yes	Complete mixed, timed SAQs	Simulate the exam

What I am changing in my own AP World History curriculum

• Replacing no-stimulus SAQ assessments with source-based sets
• Adding more visual stimuli, particularly maps, artwork, architecture, and political images
• Including primary and secondary text practice throughout each unit
• Retaining selected no-stimulus prompts as introductory TEA exercises (especially in Unit 1)
• Providing source-analysis scaffolds early in the course
• Revising bell ringers, unit assessments, writing activities, and answer keys to reflect the new structure
• Making sure students practice all three source categories rather than only generic “stimulus SAQs”

I am not deleting every no-stimulus question from my classroom. I am changing its job. Previously, a no-stimulus SAQ might have been both an instructional activity and an exam-format practice question. Going forward, it will be an early writing scaffold, a retrieval exercise, or a diagnostic tool.

Once I am done revising my SAQ bell ringers this summer (2026), I’ll be sending out my list of old no-stimulus SAQs to everyone subscribed to my newsletter (plus I’ll send you my “Roadmap to AP Fluency” cheat sheet)! You can join us here: