3(a) Main Annotations Indicative Content A fact is a statement which is true or accurate; can be verified; is objective and proven by research; or similar. Candidates may identify one of the following from Source 4. some cities face lots of problems my friend moved to our nearest city so many…

Global Perspectives · Oct / Nov 2023 · Paper 12 · Question 3

0457

As printed in the paper

The question as text

Study Source 4.

Read automatically from the paper; the printed page above is exact.

Show the answer and mark scheme

3(a)[2]
Main Annotations
Indicative Content
A fact is a statement which is true or accurate; can be verified; is objective and proven by research; or similar.
Candidates may identify one of the following from Source 4.
some cities face lots of problems
my friend moved to our nearest city
so many people were trying to get a job
many cars and people on the streets
he saw a lot of crime
there were many homeless people
he returned to our village last month
he is much happier now
research for the UN confirms this point
other reasonable response
Award 1 mark for correctly identifying a fact from the list above.
Award 1 mark for a response that demonstrates a clear understanding of a fact.
Further guidance –note that the only acceptable answers are listed above. However, candidates may use their own words.
Explain why Juan’s statement might be biased.
3(b)[3]
Main Annotations
Indicative Content
Bias is a tendency or prejudice for or against something; an attitude of strong like or dislike; an unbalanced approach not prepared to consider counter- arguments or other points of view; or similar.
Candidates are likely to identify the following possible reasons for bias from Juan’s statement
refers to his grandparents
details their experience
refers to his and his family’s future living with them
says he will be able to work in their business
mentions he can live with them
Candidates are likely to identify the following evidence of bias from Juan’s statement:
Lack of focus on negative aspects of living in the city
Emotive language
Lack of evidence to support his opinion
Focused only on personal experience
refers to his future
vested interest.
The following levels of response should be used to award marks:
Level 3 (3 marks) Good response
A clear explanation of why the statement may be biased supported with evidence from the statement.
Level 2 (2 marks) Reasonable response
A basic or partial understanding/explanation of why the statement may be biased.
Level 1 (1 mark) Limited response
A Limited explanation of why the statement may be biased.
Level 0 (0 marks)
No relevant response or creditworthy material.
Which argument is more convincing, Elena’s or Juan’s?
3(c)[15]
Your answer should consider both arguments, and you should support your point of view with their words.
You should also consider:
the strength of their reasoning and evidence
their use of language
the different types of information used.
Main Annotations J
Indicative Content
Candidates are expected to evaluate the arguments presented in Source 4 and compare their effectiveness. They should make a supported judgement with some explanation about which person has the most convincing argument.
Candidates may support their judgement by considering:
Strength of reasoning:
logic
structure
balance
claims
Use of language:
tone – emotive, exaggerated, precise
clarity
Evidence:
range of information and depth
relevance
sufficiency – sample
source – media; internet
date – how recent
different types of information – fact, opinion, value, anecdote
testimony – from experience and expert
Sources of bias
local interest
economic
personal values
experience
Likely consequences of the ideas presented
Acceptability of their values to others
how likely other people are to agree with their perspective/view The following levels of response should be used to award marks:
Level 5 (13–15 marks) Very good response
Clear, credible, and well supported points/explanation about which argument is more convincing. Coherent, structured evaluation of both arguments with clear comparison.
The response usually contains three (or more) developed evaluative points and may include some undeveloped points. Material from the sources is used as evidence to support the evaluation; clear reference to the evidence and/or arguments in the source e.g. quotation/summary of ideas.
A clear judgement is reached.
Level 4 (10–12 marks) Good response
Clear, supported points/explanation about which argument is more convincing. Evaluation of both arguments, with comparison.
The response usually contains two (or more) developed evaluative points and may include some undeveloped points. A wide range (four or more) of undeveloped but clearly appropriate points may be sufficient to enter this band at the lower level. Material from the sources is used as evidence to support the evaluation; some reference to the evidence and/or arguments in the source e.g. quotation/summary of ideas.
A judgment is reached.
Level 3 (7–9 marks) Reasonable response
Reasonable points/explanation about which argument is more convincing. Some evaluation of both arguments, with an attempt at comparison or very good evaluation of only one argument. Some judgements and evaluative points are partially supported or asserted.
Usually one (or more) developed evaluative points, possibly with some undeveloped points; three (or more) undeveloped points may be sufficient to enter this band at the lower level. Some material from the sources may be used as evidence to support the evaluation. The response may occasionally lack some clarity and by difficult to follow.
An attempt is made to give a judgement.
Level 2 (4–6) Basic response
Basic points about which argument is more convincing. There may be only one argument considered in any detail, with little attempt at comparison. Judgements and evaluative points are partially supported and lack clarity/relevance at times.
The response usually contains two (or more) undeveloped points.
A basic judgement may be reached.
Level 1 (1–3 marks) Limited response
Limited and unsupported points about which argument is more convincing. The response considers the arguments briefly and/or tangentially. There is little clarity. Answers at this level may repeat source material with little understanding or simply agree/disagree with the arguments presented. The response may not contain any clear evaluative points.
Level 0 (0 marks)
No relevant response or creditworthy material.
Responses that give a very good evaluation of only one argument may achieve Level 3 but no higher.

Practise this paper →

Make a free account to save your answers and see your weak topics and ask the AI why a wrong answer is wrong.