Global Perspectives · May / June 2022 · 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]
‘We can improve transport in our cities.’
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:
Many examples.Clear.Logical.Relevant.Uses some evidence – interest group, university research and personal testimony/opinion.Acknowledges some counter arguments.Other reasonable response.Weaknesses:
Some assertion.Some appeal to emotion.Little factual/statistical evidence.Some exaggeration.Small sample from non-expert.Potential newspaper bias/editing.Other reasonable response.The following levels of response should be used to award marks:
Level 3 (5–6 marks) Good response
Clearly explained and credible evaluation of the argument/evidence; 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.
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.
Level 2 (3–4 marks) Reasonable response
Some evaluation of the argument/evidence, its strengths and/or weaknesses, and the way it is used to support the claim. The response usually contains one (or more) developed point(s), with some other undeveloped points. Some (two or more) undeveloped points may be sufficient to enter this 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. Level 1 (1–2 marks) Limited response
Limited evaluation of the argument/evidence which is often unsupported and asserted. The response may be tangential, partial, generalised and lack clarity. It usually contains one or two undeveloped points 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]
‘Many people would like to travel by electric bus and tram.’
How could you test this claim?
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 transport.Government transport plans and papers.Data from social surveys.Individual testimony or personal experience.Material from government/organisations/businesses that promote/support transport issues.Other relevant response.Possible sources of information:
National and local governments and their departments.International organisations, e.g. United Nations; UNESCO.Experts in transport.Research reports.Businesses, 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.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.
The response is implicitly related to testing the claim.
Level 1 (1–2 marks) Limited response
Limited explanation of ways to test the claim. The response 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.