Global Perspectives · May / June 2021 · Paper 12 · Question 2
2069
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]
Main Annotations
Indicative content
Candidates are likely to discuss the following evaluative points relating to Source 3:
Strengths:
Uses a source as evidence – OECD.Uses expert source – OECD.Logical argument linking education to employment and inequality.Uses first-hand, personal experience – lived in poverty as a child.Recent – up to date.Other reasonable response.Weaknesses: •
Some assertion.
Some appeal to emotion.Little factual/statistical evidence.Doesn’t acknowledges counter arguments.Small sample/case study – may not be representative of others.Other reasonable response.The following levels of response should be used to award marks: Level 3 (5–6 marks) Good response
Clearly reasoned, credible and structured 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 reasoning and/or evidence, its strengths and weaknesses and the way it is used to support the claim.
Level 2 (3–4 marks) Reasonable response
Reasonable evaluation mainly focused on the evidence, its strengths and/or weaknesses, and the way it is used to support the claim. The response may usually contain one (or more) developed point(s), with some other undeveloped points. Some (two or more) undeveloped points may be sufficient to enter this level.
Level 1 (1–2 marks) Limited response
Limited evaluation which is often unsupported and asserted. The response may be tangential, partial, generalised and lack clarity. It contains one or two undeveloped points only. It usually contains one undeveloped point only. Answers at this level may repeat source material with little
understanding.
Level 0 (0 marks)
No relevant response or creditworthy material
2(b)[8]
Main Annotations
Indicative content
Candidates are likely to discuss the following ways to test the claim stated in Source 3.
Possible types of information:
Statistics/information on attitudes of people in poverty to employment.Data from social surveys.Individual testimony or personal experience.Material from organisations that work with people in poverty and the development of employment opportunities.oOher relevant response.Possible sources of information:
National and local governments and their departments.International organisations, e.g. United Nations; UNESCO.Experts in employment and poverty.Research reports.Pressure groups, charities and NGOs.Media and the internet.Other relevant response.Possible methods:
Review of secondary sources/literature/research/documents.Interview relevant experts, people in poverty.Internet search.Questionnaires.Surveys.Other relevant response.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 range of undeveloped points. The response may lack clarity at times.
The response is implicitly related to testing the claim and may be a list of methods, sources and types of information.
The response is related to testing the claim only implicitly.
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.
Further Guidance
Responses that do not link explicitly to the issue/context and are simply a list of research methods/sources/types of information should not score higher than Level 2.
Make a free account to save your answers and see your weak topics and ask the AI why a wrong answer is wrong.