Global Perspectives · Oct / Nov 2023 · Paper 11 · Question 2
0457
As printed in the paper
The question as text
Study Source 3.
Read automatically from the paper; the printed page above is exact.
Show the answer and mark scheme
2(a)[6]
What are the strengths and weaknesses of the argument supporting this claim?
Main Annotations
Indicative Content
Candidates are likely to discuss the following evaluative points relating to Source 3.
Strengths:
experience of the author in educationfocus on the future and the countryincrease in transport links means safety for the childrenstates the benefits of access to educationuse of an expert opinion (professor)prospect of better examination resultsother reasonable responseWeaknesses:
no personal details about education experienceno specific details of the professors’ experienceno citation or referencingpotential bias of politician as authordoes not discuss counter-argumentsdoes not consider costs of technologyother reasonable responseDiscussion of the arguments/reasons and the evidence in the Source should both be credited.
The following levels of response should be used to award marks:
Level 3 (5–6 marks) Good response
Clearly reasoned and credible evaluation.
Usually, two (or more) developed points clearly linked to the issue, with some other undeveloped points; or a wide range (four or more) of undeveloped points.
Evaluation is clearly focused on the evidence and arguments, their strengths and/or weaknesses and the way they are used to support the claim. There is usually some clear reference to the evidence and arguments in the source e.g. quotation/summary
Level 2 (3–4 marks) Reasonable response
Reasonable evaluation mainly focused on the evidence and arguments, their strengths and/or weaknesses, and the way they are used to support the claim; there may be some lack of clarity and the answer may be difficult to follow at times.
Usually, the response contains one (or more) developed point(s), with some other undeveloped points. Some (two or more) undeveloped points may be sufficient to reach this level.
Level 1 (1–2 marks) Limited response
Limited evaluation which is often unsupported and asserted. The response is often unclear, tangential, and generalised. Usually contains one or two undeveloped points. Answers at this level may repeat source material with little understanding.
Level 0 (0 marks)
No relevant response or creditworthy material.
Further guidance –if the claim is implicit then the response is unlikely to be awarded above Level 2.
‘Children who use technology for education get better exam results.’
2(b)[8]
How could you test this claim? You may consider the types of information, sources of evidence or methods you might use.
Main Annotations
Indicative Content
Candidates are likely to discuss the following ways to test the claim stated in Source 3.
Possible types of information:
compare statistics/information on achievementdata from school authoritiesindividual testimony or personal experience from teachers and learnersmaterial from schoolsother reasonable responsePossible sources of information:
national and local governments and their departmentsinternational organisations, e.g. United Nations; UNESCOexperts in educationresearch reportspressure groups, charities and NGOsmedia and the internetother reasonable responsePossible methods:
review of secondary sources/literature/research/documentsinterview relevant expertsinternet searchquestionnairessurveysother reasonable responseThe following levels of response should be used to award marks:
Level 4 (7–8 marks) Very good response
Clearly reasoned, credible and structured explanation of a range of ways to test the claim. The response usually contains three (or more) developed points and may contain some undeveloped points.
The response is clearly and explicitly related to testing the claim.
Level 3 (5–6 marks) Good response
Reasoned and mainly credible explanation of ways to test the claim. The response usually contains two (or more) developed points and may contain some undeveloped points.
The response is explicitly related to testing the claim.
Level 2 (3–4 marks) Reasonable response
Some reasoning and explanation of ways to test the claim. The response usually contains one (or more) developed point(s), and/or a few undeveloped points. There may be some lack of clarity and the answer may be difficult to follow at times.
The response is related to testing the claim.
Level 1 (1–2 marks) Limited response
Limited explanation of ways to test the claim. The response usually contains one or two simple, undeveloped and asserted points.
There is little relevance in the response to testing the claim or the methods, sources and types of information are generally not appropriate for the claim being tested.
Level 0 (0 marks)
No relevant response or creditworthy material.
If the response lists or describes methods, sources and types of data without linking to the issue/context, then it should not be placed above Level 2. Identify one prediction from Ajay’s statement. Explain why this is a
Make a free account to save your answers and see your weak topics and ask the AI why a wrong answer is wrong.