Global Perspectives · Oct / Nov 2023 · Paper 12 · Question 2

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:

Weaknesses:

Discussion 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.

‘Cities have become more polluted.’

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:

Possible sources of information:

Possible methods:

The 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 fact from Elena’s statement. Explain why this is a fact.