Global Perspectives · May / June 2025 · Paper 12 · Question 3

2069

As printed in the paper

The question as text

Study Source 4. Which argument is more convincing, Fleur’s or Dion’s? Your answer should: • consider both arguments • evaluate their reasoning, evidence and use of language • support your judgement with their words and ideas.

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

Show the answer and mark scheme

Your answer should:

consider both arguments

evaluate their reasoning, evidence and use of language

support your judgement with their words and ideas.

Main Annotations

Tables E and F

Use these tables to give marks for each candidate response.

Table E

Analysis (AO1)

Level

Description

7–8 4

Consistently analytic throughout and fully

supported

Analyses a wide range of aspects of both

arguments.

Frequent use of relevant material taken from the

source.

Clear and explicit comparison of the two

arguments.

5–6 3

Mainly analytic and supported

Analyses a range of aspects of both arguments.

Some use of relevant material taken from the

source.

Clear comparison of the two arguments.

3–4 2

Partly analytic and descriptive with some support

Analyses a limited range of aspects of both

arguments.

Occasional use of material taken from the source.

Implied comparison by simple juxtaposition of the

two arguments.

1–2 1

Descriptive and unsupported

Analyses a limited range of aspects of one

argument.

Little or no use of material taken from the source. 0

No creditable response

Table F

Evaluation (AO1)

Level

Description

7–8 4

Consistently evaluative throughout and fully

explained

Detailed and reasoned explanation of a wide range of evaluative points throughout the response.

Both reasoning and evidence within the arguments in the source are evaluated explicitly.

Clear, supported judgement consistent with the

candidate’s argument.

5–6 3

Mainly evaluative and explained

Reasoned explanation of a range of evaluative

points within most of the response.

Reasoning and/or evidence within the arguments in the source are evaluated.

Judgement generally consistent with the

candidate’s argument.

3–4 2

Partly evaluative with little explanation

A limited range of evaluative points that are mostly descriptive and/or asserted with little explanation.

Reasoning and/or evidence within the arguments in the source are mostly described.

Judgement lacks some clarity and may be partly

inconsistent with the candidate’s argument.

1–2 1

Descriptive without explanation

One or two evaluative points that are asserted,

tangential or not relevant.

The topic or the arguments in the source are

described.

Judgement is unclear and inconsistent with the

candidate’s argument or may not be included.

No creditable response

0 Indicative content

Candidates are expected to evaluate the arguments presented in Source 4. They should make a supported judgement with some explanation about which person has the most convincing argument. Candidates may support their judgement by considering some of the following aspects of the arguments: Use of language:

tone – emotive, exaggerated, precise, measured

clarity

Strength of reasoning:

logic

structure

balance

claims

Evidence:

range of information and depth

relevance

sufficiency – sample size

source – media; internet

date – how recent

different types of information – fact, opinion, value, anecdote

testimony – from experience and expert

Sources of bias or vested interest:

local interest

economic

personal values

experience

Possible consequences of the ideas or actions presented

Acceptability of their values to others:

how likely other people are to agree with their perspective/view Other relevant responses should be credited.

Examples of evaluative points candidates are likely to discuss are outlined as follows.

Argument

Strengths

Weaknesses Fleur

Uses relevant examples

Not much evidence. as evidence.

Mother may be biased.

Passionate about

May be vested interest. subject.

Some assertion.

Clear, logical argument.

Not balanced.

Refers to mother’s

Emotional language. experience as evidence.

Other relevant response.

Some reference to

research.

Measured language.

Other relevant response.

Argument

Strengths

Weaknesses Dion

Balanced argument.

Vague reference to UN

Acknowledges

sustainability goals. counterarguments.

Few examples.

Uses statistical evidence.

Little expert opinion.

Refers to research that is

Some assertion. cited.

Research not

Evidence is used to

referenced.

support argument.

Other relevant response.

Respectful language.

Other relevant response.

AO1 Analysis

AO1 Evaluation

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.