Cambridge International General Certificate of Secondary Education

0457 Global Perspectives June 2018

Principal Examiner Report for Teachers

GLOBAL PERSPECTIVES

Paper 0457/11
Written Examination

Key messages

The key messages from this series of examination papers are that candidates:

• demonstrated very good skills of interpretation and analysis

• need to develop skills of evaluation to higher levels
• should use material from sources as evidence to justify their opinions
• should evaluate alternative actions in greater detail assessing potential impact and consequences more
fully.

General comments

The Written Examination consists of compulsory questions based on a range of sources. The sources
present global issues from different perspectives. In June 2018, the paper was based upon source material
related to the topic of Demographic Change. The specific issue explored was about the impact of an ageing
population on society, including economic, educational and social services, culture and family life.

Overall, the quality of work and levels of achievement were good. Many candidates are clearly developing a
very good understanding of different perspectives on global issues and an ability to use reasoning and
evidence to support an opinion or claim. Candidates are also able to analyse evidence in a variety of
different forms. However, some candidates need to develop evaluative skills to higher levels and apply key
concepts in critical thinking to the evaluation of sources.

Candidates responded very well to the source material, especially in the extended response questions, and
engaged enthusiastically with the issue. Candidates were able to explore different perspectives on the issues
raised, particularly in advising governments on priorities in government spending for young and old people.
However, candidates should explore alternative actions in greater detail, assessing potential impact and
consequences in more depth, before reaching a balanced and supported judgement within the conclusion.

Examination technique was usually good. The majority of candidates completed all of the questions within
the time allocated. There were very few rubric errors.

To improve performance further, candidates should be encouraged to:

• justify their opinions with reasons and evidence drawn from the sources including through quotation and
direct reference or citation
• provide explanation to justify opinion rather than simple assertion or description
• evaluate sources and arguments using key concepts in critical thinking like expertise, knowledge claims,
bias, tone, and vested interest
• evaluate alternative actions in greater detail assessing potential impact and consequences more fully.

Comments on specific questions

Question 1

(a) Nearly all candidates correctly identified the trend in world population from Source 1 as either
increasing overall or the number of elderly people increasing more than other age groups, and
therefore gained the maximum of 1 mark for this question.

© 2018
 Cambridge International General Certificate of Secondary Education
0457 Global Perspectives June 2018
Principal Examiner Report for Teachers

Candidates may use their own words, but it was essential for the idea of increasing population
overall or of the elderly to be shown in the response. Answers which were not contained in the
source were not credited.

(b) Almost all candidates were able to identify two reasons for people living longer from Source 2, and
therefore gained the maximum of 2 marks for this question. Most candidates identified cleaner
water and improved healthcare.

Candidates may use their own words in this response.

(c) Most candidates responded well to this question and clearly suggested a reason for people living
longer that, in their opinion, was the most significant. Most candidates chose to discuss cleaner
water and improved healthcare.

The most common justifications given by candidates related to issues of impact, included:

• the number of people affected

• the range of impact e.g. number of countries/businesses/organisations affected
• the depth of impact e.g. how much difference will be made to longevity
• the timescale for making a difference
• costs.

Many candidates showed awareness of the link between cause and effect in this context, as well
as the ‘snowball’ effect of a consequence or cause leading to another. Some discussed a possible
‘vicious circle’.

The strongest answers provided several clear reasons to explain why one reason/cause was more
important than others and gave some evidence to support their judgements. Weaker responses
often simply stated the reason/cause without explanation and tended to rely upon assertion without
evidence or careful reasoning. Some candidates compared the significance of different
reasons/causes, but this was not necessary to gain full marks.

(d) Many candidates responded well to this question and could identify both a local and national
consequence of an ageing population, thereby demonstrating a clear understanding of the
concepts of ‘local’ and ‘national’.

Local consequences of an ageing population most frequently identified by candidates were a need
for more local public transport, social services for the care of the elderly, and places for the elderly
to enjoy social life and entertainment. Some candidates explored the significance of local charities
and political action by the elderly.

Similarly, most candidates identified a national consequence of an ageing population as increased

burdens upon the national economy due to pensions, more tax needed by the government, and
strain on the resources for social services like education and health. Some candidates explored the
impact of ageing populations on the family and traditional ways of life, including political action to
support their interests.

Candidates achieving at higher levels provided a clearly reasoned, credible and structured
explanation. Candidates achieving at the lower levels tended to provide some weak explanation or
asserted opinion about ageing in general without reference to ‘local’ or ‘national’. Some less
successful responses simply listed a range of consequences taken directly from the sources
without any development or explanation.

Question 2

(a) Most candidates were able to evaluate the argument in Source 3 and assess how well the author
supported the view that, ‘More money is needed for the elderly.’

The strengths of the argument most often identified were:

• clear reasoning which was easy to follow

• some research evidence is used

© 2018
 Cambridge International General Certificate of Secondary Education
0457 Global Perspectives June 2018
Principal Examiner Report for Teachers

• uses many examples

• the evidence is generally relevant
• the argument is carefully worded with measured language.

The weaknesses of the argument most often identified were:

• the research evidence is only partly identified – the source and authorship are not referenced
• potential newspaper bias and selectivity
• author unknown – difficult to verify knowledge claims
• level of expertise of the author is not clear – may have poor knowledge claims
• little clear, specific statistical/numerical evidence.

The strongest responses provided clearly reasoned, credible and structured explanation for their
opinions, usually discussing four or more distinct evaluative points. Weaker responses often simply
stated or asserted an opinion.

Some weaker responses analysed and described the arguments and evidence within the source
but did not evaluate or explain why these arguments or types of evidence could be seen as
strengths or weakness. For example, ‘A weakness is that the source was taken from a newspaper.’
This statement does not explain why newspaper sources may not be strong evidence. A better
response would be, ‘A weakness is that the source was taken from a newspaper because
newspapers are often sensationalised to sell more copies and the editors usually support the
political views of the owners. This type of evidence is not strong because it is likely to be biased
and selective.’

Candidates should be encouraged to make a clear and explicit statement about the argument in
the source and justify their opinion using the material in the source as evidence. This means being
willing to quote from or summarise elements of the source.

(b) Candidates who performed well in this question described several methods, sources of information
and types of evidence that could be used to test the claim that, ‘Many people aged over 65 believe
that more money should be spent on their welfare.’ These methods of testing the claim were
carefully explained and clearly related to the claim.

Candidates tended to describe interviews, surveys and questionnaires with people about the issue,
for example different age groups in different places and cultures. Surveys of local people about the
needs of the elderly were also suggested. Other methods included consultation with experts, social
services and health workers. Nearly all candidates suggested secondary research using sources
from the internet. Many described the type of source that was likely to be reliable and free from
bias or vested interest, for example from governments, NGOs and United Nations organisations.

The strongest responses provided clearly reasoned, credible and structured explanation for their
suggestions clearly and explicitly related to the claim being tested; weaker responses often simply
stated a method or source of evidence but did not explain it fully or make the link to the claim being
tested.

A few candidates responded to the question by describing their opinion on the issue rather than
describing how it could be researched. These responses gained very few, if any, marks.

Candidates should be given regular opportunity to design research strategies to test claims as a
regular part of their learning.

Question 3

(a) Most candidates correctly identified a fact from the source and explained that facts are statements
that are true or correct or can be verified.

Most candidates were able to justify and explain their judgement convincingly.

© 2018
 Cambridge International General Certificate of Secondary Education
0457 Global Perspectives June 2018
Principal Examiner Report for Teachers

(b) Most candidates correctly identified an opinion from the source and explained that opinions are
statements which are subjective points of view or beliefs which cannot be verified and are not
necessarily shared by others.

Most candidates were able to justify and explain their judgement convincingly.

(c) Many candidates correctly identified an example of a vested interest, revealing an understanding
that a vested interest is a strong personal awareness of an issue (involvement/commitment to/view
or similar) because of potential personal advantage or gain, which could be economic, political,
social or other.

Candidates most frequently identified the following examples of vested interest from the source:

• Carla has a vested interest in supporting her grandparents as they pay for her education.
• As a young person, Evy believes that it is the needs of young people that should come first.

The most effective responses tended to quote from the source and clearly describe evidence from
the source to support their interpretation and judgment.

This question was challenging for some candidates who did not understand the concept of vested
interest and were not able to use the idea in the analysis of source material.

Centres are encouraged to teach candidates about vested interest and provide experience of using
the term in the analysis of sources, alongside other critical thinking concepts like value judgement,
bias, fact, opinion and prediction.

(d) Most candidates compared both statements explicitly, Carla’s and Evy’s, and discussed issues
relating to evidence, language, knowledge claims and expertise. Some candidates also addressed
the reasons and values within each statement.

Responses at the highest levels contained well supported judgements about the arguments with a
clear assessment of the value of each statement; this included coherent, structured evaluation of
how well the argument worked with a focus on reasons and evidence, with a range of points about
knowledge claims, consequences and values for both statements. These responses were usually
balanced with a clear conclusion. The statements were also quoted explicitly and material from the
statements was used directly in the response as evidence to support the candidate’s opinion.

At the lower levels of response, the discussion was unlikely to be supported and tended to be
mainly asserted with little clarity of argument. These answers tended to focus on issues rather than
reasons, knowledge claims, evidence, consequences or values. There was very little or no overt
evaluation at the lowest levels of response.

Centres are encouraged to give candidates frequent opportunity to evaluate sources during their
courses. This should involve a consideration of the reasons and evidence used to support the
argument or perspective in the source.

Question 4

In this question, candidates were asked to assess and recommend priority for increased spending by
governments, for either young or old people. They were expected to justify their views using material drawn
from the sources as well as their own experience and evidence.

There were many thoughtful discussions of both options. Some candidates chose to compare both options,
which was a more challenging but at times very effective way to structure the argument.

However, some candidates tended to describe their opinions in a generalised and asserted way, comparing
the position of young and old people without exploring the implications for spending on the specific needs of
both age groups and the impact on society, countries and the world as a whole.

© 2018
 Cambridge International General Certificate of Secondary Education
0457 Global Perspectives June 2018
Principal Examiner Report for Teachers

Weaker answers tended to make statements like:

‘Young people are the future and therefore we should look after their needs. The elderly have had their time,
so it is older people’s turn to have money allocated to them.’

Stronger answers tended to make statements like:

‘Young people have yet to learn the knowledge and skills needed to become adults and for employment.
Governments therefore need to spend money on young people’s education to help them become citizens
and make their contribution to society. This would boost the economy and give tax income to pay for the
healthcare of the elderly. This is suggested by Carla in her statement when she implies that we should help
the elderly by helping the young.’

Responses at the highest levels tended to have well supported, logical reasoning and make clear
judgements about the issue. A clear, balanced assessment or conclusion was also reached. These
responses linked the argument back to the issue of spending priorities explicitly and frequently.

Responses at the lower level tended to be generalised, lack relevance to the issue and simply describe their
own opinion about the option or globalisation in general. Arguments tended to be unsupported and asserted.
These responses often simply listed ways to increase spending for each age groups.

In preparation for this type of question, centres are encouraged to give candidates regular opportunity to
write extended essays in which they contrast and compare different perspectives or potential actions in
response to an issue. In so doing candidates need to analyse and evaluate the strengths and weaknesses of
the reasons and evidence for the perspective or action.

© 2018
 Cambridge International General Certificate of Secondary Education
0457 Global Perspectives June 2018
Principal Examiner Report for Teachers

GLOBAL PERSPECTIVES

Paper 0457/12
Written Examination

Key messages

The key messages from this series of examination papers are that candidates:

• demonstrated very good skills of interpretation and analysis

• need to develop skills of evaluation to higher levels
• should use material from sources as evidence to justify their opinions.

General comments

The Written Examination consists of compulsory questions based on a range of sources. The sources
present global issues from different perspectives. In June 2018, the Paper was based upon source material
related to the topic of globalisation. The specific issue explored was about the impact of globalisation on
social change, including employment, trade, culture and migration.

Overall, the quality of work and levels of achievement were good. Many candidates are clearly developing an
excellent understanding of different perspectives on global issues and an ability to use reasoning and
evidence to support an opinion or claim. Candidates are also able to analyse evidence in a variety of
different forms. However, some candidates need to develop evaluative skills to higher levels and apply key
concepts in critical thinking to the evaluation of sources.

Candidates responded very well to the source material, especially in the extended response questions, and
engaged enthusiastically with the issue. Candidates were able to explore different perspectives on the issues
raised, particularly in advising governments on how to benefit from the opportunities of globalisation.

Examination technique was usually very good. The majority of candidates completed all of the questions
within the time allocated. There were very few rubric errors.

To improve performance further, candidates should be encouraged to:

• justify their opinions with reasons and evidence drawn from the sources including through quotation and
direct reference or citation
• provide explanation to justify opinion rather than simple assertion or description
• evaluate sources and arguments using key concepts in critical thinking like expertise, knowledge claims,
bias, tone, and vested interest.

Comments on specific questions

Question 1

(a) Nearly all candidates correctly identified the meaning of the term ‘globalisation’ from Source 1 as
‘countries becoming more connected and/or more dependent on each other’, and therefore gained
the maximum of 1 mark for this question.

Candidates may use their own words, but it was essential for the idea of increasing connectedness
and dependency to be shown in the response.

© 2018
 Cambridge International General Certificate of Secondary Education
0457 Global Perspectives June 2018
Principal Examiner Report for Teachers

(b) Almost all candidates were able to identify two causes of globalisation from Source 2, and therefore
gained the maximum of 2 marks for this question. Most candidates identified new technology and
faster communication.

(c) Most candidates responded well to this question and clearly suggested a cause of globalisation
that, in their opinion, was the most significant. Most candidates chose to discuss new technology,
faster communication and improved transport.

The most common justifications given by candidates related to issues of impact, included:

• the number of people affected

• the range of impact e.g. number of countries/businesses/organisations affected
• the depth of impact e.g. how much difference will be made to how connected/dependent
people are globally
• the timescale for making a difference
• costs.

Many candidates showed awareness of the link between cause and effect in this context, as well
as the ‘snowball’ effect of one consequence or cause leading to another. Some discussed a
possible ‘vicious circle’.

The strongest answers provided several clear reasons to explain why one cause was more
important than others and gave some evidence to support their judgements. Weaker responses
often simply stated the cause without explanation and tended to rely upon assertion without
evidence or careful reasoning. Some candidates compared the significance of different causes, but
this was not necessary to gain full marks.

(d) Many candidates responded well to this question and could identify both a local and national
consequence of globalisation, thereby demonstrating a clear understanding of the concepts of
‘local’ and ‘national’.

Local consequences of globalisation most frequently identified by candidates were access to food
from other countries, changes to employment and unemployment, and experience of other
cultures. Some candidates explored migration and new technology, including social media.

Similarly, most candidates identified a national consequence of globalisation as growth in the

national economy, more tax paid to the government, and strain on the resources for social services
like education and health. Some candidates explored the impact of globalisation on traditional
culture and heritage.

Candidates achieving at higher levels provided a clearly reasoned, credible and structured
explanation. Candidates achieving at the lower levels tended to provide some weak explanation or
asserted opinion about globalisation in general without reference to ‘local’ or ‘national’.
Unfortunately, some candidates simply listed a range of consequences taken directly from the
sources without any development or explanation.

Question 2

(a) Most candidates were able to evaluate the argument in Source 3 and assess how well the author
supported the view that, ‘Globalisation is good for everyone.’

The strengths of the argument most often identified were:

• clear reasoning which was easy to follow

• some research evidence is used
• several different types of evidence are used
• the evidence is generally relevant
• the argument is carefully worded in a professional tone with measured language.

© 2018
 Cambridge International General Certificate of Secondary Education
0457 Global Perspectives June 2018
Principal Examiner Report for Teachers

The weaknesses of the argument most often identified were:

• the research evidence is only partly identified – the source and authorship are not always clear
• potential newspaper bias and selectivity
• author unknown – difficult to verify knowledge claims
• level of expertise of the author is not clear – may have poor knowledge claims
• little clear, specific statistical/numerical evidence
• the evidence is not easy to verify/check from the information provided.

The strongest responses provided clearly reasoned, credible and structured explanation for their
opinions, usually discussing four or more distinct evaluative points. Weaker responses often simply
stated or asserted an opinion.

Some weaker responses described the arguments and evidence within the source but did not
evaluate or explain why these arguments or evidence could be seen as strengths or weakness. For
example, ‘A weakness is that the source was taken from a newspaper.’ This statement does not
explain why newspaper sources may not be strong evidence. A better response would be, ‘A
weakness is that the source was taken from a newspaper because newspapers are often
sensationalised to sell more copies and the editors usually support the political views of the
owners. This type of evidence is not strong because it is likely to be biased and selective.’

Candidates should be encouraged to make a clear and explicit statement about the argument in
the source and justify their opinion using the material in the source as evidence. This means being
willing to quote from or summarise elements of the source.

(b) Candidates who performed well in this question described several methods, sources of information
and types of evidence that could be used to test the claim that, ‘Learning about other cultures
makes people more respectful.’ These methods of testing the claim were carefully explained and
clearly related to the claim.

Candidates tended to describe interviews, surveys and questionnaires with people about the issue,
or observation of groups of people with experience of other cultures, for example tourists and
people living in multi-cultural areas. Surveys of local people about crime and race were also
suggested. Some candidates suggested quite elaborate psychological experiments involving pre-
and post-tests. Other methods included consultation with experts, social services and teachers.
Nearly all candidates suggested secondary research using sources from the internet. Many
described the type of source that was likely to be reliable and free from bias or vested interest, for
example from NGOs and United Nations organisations.

The strongest responses provided clearly reasoned, credible and structured explanation for their
suggestions clearly and explicitly related to the claim being tested; weaker responses often simply
stated a method or source of evidence but did not explain it fully or make the link to the claim being
tested.

A few candidates responded to the question by describing their opinion on the issue rather than
describing how it could be researched. These responses gained very few, if any, marks.

Candidates should be given regular opportunity to design research strategies to test claims as a
regular part of their learning.

Question 3

(a) Most candidates correctly identified an opinion from the source, demonstrating an understanding
that opinions are statements which are subjective points of view or beliefs which cannot be verified
and are not necessarily shared by others.

(b) Most candidates correctly identified a prediction from the source, demonstrating an understanding
that predictions are statements that represent claims about the future.

(c) Many candidates correctly explained why Brigita’s statement may be biased against globalisation,
revealing an understanding that bias is prejudice for or against something, an unbalanced
approach or not being prepared to consider counterarguments and other points of view.

© 2018
 Cambridge International General Certificate of Secondary Education
0457 Global Perspectives June 2018
Principal Examiner Report for Teachers

Candidates most frequently commented upon the following aspects of the argument in the source:

• the father’s loss of a job on the farm

• negative experience of migration
• fear of loss of heritage and culture
• impact of migration on local services
• lack of balance in the argument
• failure to consider counterarguments
• emotive, strong language
• lack of evidence to support views expressed
• singular focus on personal experience.

The most effective responses tended to quote from the source and clearly describe evidence from
the source to support their interpretation and judgment.

This question was challenging for some candidates who did not understand the concept of bias and
were not able to use the idea in the analysis of source material.

Centres are encouraged to teach candidates about bias and provide experience of using the term
in the analysis of sources, alongside other critical thinking concepts like value judgement, vested
interest, fact, opinion and prediction.

(d) Most candidates compared both statements explicitly, Brigita’s and Davor’s, and discussed issues
relating to evidence, language, knowledge claims and expertise. Some candidates also addressed
the reasons and values within each statement.

Responses at the highest levels contained well supported judgements about the arguments with a
clear assessment of the value of each statement; this included coherent, structured evaluation of
how well the argument worked with a focus on reasons and evidence, with a range of points about
knowledge claims, consequences and values for both statements. These responses were usually
balanced with a clear conclusion. The statements were also quoted explicitly and material from the
statements was used directly in the response as evidence to support the candidate’s opinion.

At the lower levels of response, the discussion was unlikely to be supported and tended to be
mainly asserted with little clarity of argument. These answers tended to focus on issues rather than
reasons, knowledge claims, evidence, consequences or values. There was very little or no overt
evaluation at the lowest levels of response.

Centres are encouraged to give candidates frequent opportunity to evaluate sources during their
courses. This should involve a consideration of the reasons and evidence used to support the
argument or perspective in the source.

Question 4

In this question, candidates were asked to assess several options for action by governments to benefit from
the opportunities of globalisation. They were expected to justify their views using material drawn from the
sources as well as their own experience and evidence.

There were many thoughtful discussions of all three options. However, most candidates argued for either
allowing more people to migrate to the country or training in information technology. Some candidates chose
to compare all three options, which was a challenging but at times very effective way to structure the
argument.

Responses at the highest levels tended to have well supported, logical reasoning and make clear
judgements about the issue. A clear, balanced assessment or conclusion was also reached. These
responses linked the argument back to the issue of increasing the benefits of globalisation explicitly and
frequently.

Responses at the lower level tended to be generalised, lack relevance to the issue and simply describe their
own opinion about the option or globalisation in general. Arguments tended to be unsupported and asserted.
These responses often simply listed ways to increase globalisation.

© 2018
 Cambridge International General Certificate of Secondary Education
0457 Global Perspectives June 2018
Principal Examiner Report for Teachers

In preparation for this type of question, centres are encouraged to give candidates regular opportunity to
write extended essays in which they contrast and compare different perspectives or potential actions in
response to an issue. In so doing candidates need to analyse and evaluate the strengths and weaknesses of
the reasons and evidence for the perspective or action.

© 2018
 Cambridge International General Certificate of Secondary Education
0457 Global Perspectives June 2018
Principal Examiner Report for Teachers

GLOBAL PERSPECTIVES

Paper 0457/13
Written Examination

Key messages

The key messages from this series of examination papers are that candidates:

• demonstrated very good skills of interpretation and analysis

• need to develop skills of evaluation to higher levels
• should use material from sources as evidence to justify their opinions .

General comments

The Written Examination consists of compulsory questions based on a range of sources. The sources
present global issues from different perspectives. In June 2018, this paper was based upon source material
related to the topic of Employment. The specific issue explored was about the impact of robotics and
automation on work, including employment, trade, culture and leisure.

Overall, the quality of work and levels of achievement were good. Many candidates are clearly developing an
excellent understanding of different perspectives on global issues and an ability to use reasoning and
evidence to support an opinion or claim. Candidates are also able to analyse evidence in a variety of
different forms. However, some candidates need to develop evaluation skills to higher levels and apply key
concepts in critical thinking to the evaluation of sources.

Candidates responded very well to the source material, especially in the extended response questions, and
engaged enthusiastically with the issue. Candidates were able to explore different perspectives on the issues
raised, particularly in advising governments on how to improve employment for local people.

Examination technique was usually very good. Most candidates completed all of the questions within the
time allocated. There were very few rubric errors.

To improve performance further, candidates should be encouraged to:

• justify their opinions with reasons and evidence drawn from the sources including through quotation and
direct reference or citation
• provide explanation to justify opinion rather than simple assertion or description
• evaluate sources and arguments using key concepts in critical thinking like expertise, knowledge claims,
bias, tone, and vested interest.

Comments on specific questions

Question 1

(a) Nearly all candidates correctly identified a type of work using robots from Source 1 as car making
or testing samples in laboratories, and therefore gained the maximum of 1 mark for this question.

Candidates may use their own words in this response. Answers which were not contained in the
source were not credited.

(b) Almost all candidates were able to identify two benefits of new technology in the workplace from
Source 2, and therefore gained the maximum of 2 marks for this question. Most candidates
identified two of the following benefits:

© 2018
 Cambridge International General Certificate of Secondary Education
0457 Global Perspectives June 2018
Principal Examiner Report for Teachers

• costs are saved

• quality is improved
• fewer workers are needed
• businesses will be more profitable
• people will no longer need to do routine work
• people will work shorter hours

Candidates may use their own words in this response.

(c) Most candidates responded well to this question and clearly suggested, in their opinion, an
important benefit of new technology in the workplace. Most candidates chose to discuss lower
costs, improved quality, more profits and more interesting work. Some candidates discussed
shorter working hours and more time for leisure and holidays.

The most common justifications given by candidates related to issues of impact, including:

• the number of people affected

• the range of impact e.g. number of countries/businesses/organisations affected
• the depth of impact e.g. how much difference will be made people at work
• the timescale for making a difference
• costs

Many candidates showed awareness of the link between cause and effect in this context, as well
as the ‘snowball’ effect of a consequence or cause leading to another. Some discussed a possible
‘vicious circle’.

The strongest answers provided several clear reasons to explain why one benefit was more
important than others and gave some evidence to support their judgements. Weaker responses
often simply stated the benefit without explanation and tended to rely upon assertion without
evidence or careful reasoning. Some candidates compared the significance of different benefits,
but this was not necessary to gain full marks.

(d) Many candidates responded well to this question and could identify both a local and national
consequence of new technology in work, thereby demonstrating a clear understanding of the
concepts of ‘local’ and ‘national’.

Local consequences of new technology in work most frequently identified by candidates were more
profitable local businesses, the reduction in routine and unskilled work, and more time for families
to have leisure and holidays. Some candidates explored working hours and new technology,
including the development of new types of work and employment.

Similarly, most candidates identified a national consequence of new technology in work as growth
in the national economy, more tax paid to the government, and improvements in social services like
education and health. Some candidates explored the impact of new technology in work on poverty
and development.

Candidates achieving at higher levels provided a clearly reasoned, credible and structured
explanation. Candidates achieving at the lower levels tended to provide some weak explanation or
asserted opinion about globalisation in general without reference to ‘local’ or ‘national’. Less
successful responses simply listed a range of consequences taken directly from the sources
without any development or explanation.

© 2018
 Cambridge International General Certificate of Secondary Education
0457 Global Perspectives June 2018
Principal Examiner Report for Teachers

Question 2

(a) Most candidates were able to evaluate the argument in Source 3 and assess how well the author
supported the view that, ‘Robots will mean better working lives for people in the future.’

The strengths of the argument most often identified were:

• clear reasoning which was easy to follow

• interesting and stimulating introduction/hook
• uses many examples
• some research evidence is used
• positive language and tone
• the evidence is generally relevant
• based on some expert opinion
• the argument is very positive and optimistic about the future

The weaknesses of the argument most often identified were:

• the research evidence is only partly identified – the source and authorship are not always clear
• potential newspaper bias and selectivity
• author unknown – difficult to verify knowledge claims
• level of expertise of the author is not clear – may have poor knowledge claims
• mainly assertion with very little evidence
• little clear, specific statistical/numerical evidence
• the evidence is not easy to verify/check from the information provided

The strongest responses provided clearly reasoned, credible and structured explanation for their
opinions, usually discussing four or more distinct evaluative points. Weaker responses often simply
stated or asserted an opinion.

Some weaker responses described the arguments and evidence within the source but did not
evaluate or explain why these arguments or evidence could be seen as strengths or weakness. For
example, ‘A weakness is that the source was taken from a newspaper.’ This statement does not
explain why newspaper sources may not be strong evidence. A better response would be, ‘A
weakness is that the source was taken from a newspaper because newspapers are often
sensationalised to sell more copies and the editors usually support the political views of the
owners. This type of evidence is not strong because it is likely to be biased and selective.’

Candidates should be encouraged to make a clear and explicit statement about the argument in
the source and justify their opinion using the material in the source as evidence. This means being
willing to quote from or summarise elements of the source.

(b) Candidates who performed well in this question described several methods, sources of information
and types of evidence that could be used to test the claim that, ‘In the future we will work shorter
hours.’ These methods of testing the claim were carefully explained and clearly related to the claim.

Candidates tended to describe interviews, surveys and questionnaires with people about the issue,
or observation of groups of people at work using new technologies, for example using robots in
automated factories. Surveys of local people about their experience of change at work were also
suggested. Other methods included consultation with experts, especially economists and
employers. Nearly all candidates suggested secondary research using sources from the internet.
Many described the type of source that was likely to be reliable and free from bias or vested
interest, for example sources produced by international organisations like the United Nations and
the World Bank.

The strongest responses provided clearly reasoned, credible and structured explanation for their
suggestions clearly and explicitly related to the claim being tested; weaker responses often simply
stated a method or source of evidence but did not explain it fully or make the link to the claim being
tested.

A few candidates responded to the question by describing their opinion on the issue rather than
describing how it could be researched. These responses gained very few, if any, marks.

© 2018
 Cambridge International General Certificate of Secondary Education
0457 Global Perspectives June 2018
Principal Examiner Report for Teachers

Candidates should be given regular opportunity to design research strategies to test claims as a
regular part of their courses.

Question 3

(a) Most candidates correctly identified a prediction from the source, demonstrating an understanding
that predictions are statements that represent claims about the future.

(b) Most candidates correctly identified a fact from the source, demonstrating an understanding that
facts are statements which are true or correct or which can be verified.

(c) Many candidates correctly identified a value judgement from the source, revealing an
understanding that value judgements are statements or claims based on subjective views or beliefs
about morality or ethics, what is right and wrong.

Candidates most frequently identified the following examples of value judgements in the source:

• the gap between rich and poor will grow; this is wrong
• it is right that wealth is used to create new jobs/better working conditions/reduce working
hours
• many international organisations want work and income shared fairly.

The most effective responses tended to quote from the source and clearly describe evidence from
the source to support their interpretation and judgment.

Centres are encouraged to teach candidates about value judgements and provide experience of
using the term in the analysis of sources, alongside other critical thinking concepts like bias, vested
interest, fact, opinion and prediction.

(d) Most candidates compared both Knut’s and Saga’s statements explicitly and discussed issues
relating to evidence, language, knowledge claims and expertise. Some candidates also addressed
the reasons and values within each statement.

Responses at the highest levels contained well supported judgements about the arguments with a
clear assessment of the value of each statement; this included coherent, structured evaluation of
how well the argument worked with a focus on reasons and evidence, with a range of points about
knowledge claims, consequences and values for both statements. These responses were usually
balanced with a clear conclusion. The statements were also quoted explicitly and material from the
statements was used directly in the response as evidence to support the candidate’s opinion.

At the lower levels of response, the discussion was unlikely to be supported and tended to be
mainly asserted with little clarity of argument. These answers tended to focus on issues rather than
reasons, knowledge claims, evidence, consequences or values. There was very little or no overt
evaluation at the lowest levels of response.

Centres are encouraged to give candidates frequent opportunity to evaluate sources during their
courses. This should involve a consideration of the reasons and evidence used to support the
argument or perspective in the source.

© 2018
 Cambridge International General Certificate of Secondary Education
0457 Global Perspectives June 2018
Principal Examiner Report for Teachers

Question 4

In this question, candidates were asked to assess several options for action by governments to improve
employment for local people. They were expected to justify their views using material drawn from the
sources as well as their own experience and evidence.

There were many thoughtful discussions of all three options. However, most candidates argued for spending
more money on education and training of employees to improve skills. Some candidates chose to compare
all three options, which was a challenging but at times very effective way to structure the argument.

Responses at the highest levels tended to have well supported, logical reasoning and make clear
judgements about the issue. A clear, balanced assessment or conclusion was also reached. These
responses linked the argument back to the issue of improving employment for local people explicitly and
frequently.

Responses at the lower level tended to be generalised, lack relevance to the issue and simply describe their
own opinion about the option or employment in general. Arguments tended to be unsupported and asserted.
These responses often simply listed ways to increase employment.

In preparation for this type of question, centres are encouraged to give candidates regular opportunity to
write extended essays in which they contrast and compare different perspectives or potential actions in
response to an issue. In so doing candidates need to analyse and evaluate the strengths and weaknesses of
the reasons and evidence for the perspective or action.

© 2018
 Cambridge International General Certificate of Secondary Education
0457 Global Perspectives June 2018
Principal Examiner Report for Teachers

GLOBAL PERSPECTIVES

Paper 0457/02
Individual Report

Key messages

• It is essential that both teachers and candidates are familiar with and fully understand the assessment
criteria, which can be found on the Teacher Support website.
• The choice of question must provide opportunities for candidates to develop global and national/local
perspectives on a global issue from the eight topics stated in the syllabus for this component.
• The choice of question must also provide opportunities for candidates to meet all the assessment
criteria.
• Candidates were most successful when they focused on one issue that needs resolving and this issue
was clearly expressed in their question.
• Candidates should be encouraged to use (but not exceed) the full word count (2000 words) to aid depth
of analysis and evaluation.

General comments

For this component, candidates identify a global issue drawn from one of the eight topics listed in the
syllabus and carry out research on a question based around this issue. This research should explore a range
of information sources from different perspectives (global and national/local) and viewpoints within these
perspectives. Candidates must also analyse the causes and consequences of the identified issue and
compare these to identify and explain which is the most significant and why. Candidates must then propose
a course of action to help improve or resolve their chosen issue, drawing on the analysis undertaken.
Candidates also need to evaluate some of the individual sources of information they have used and reflect
on how their personal perspective has been impacted by their research from different perspectives on the
issue. They should also cite any sources of information used in their essay and include a reference list at the
end of their report after the word count.

Candidates produced interesting work on a wide range of different issues, including issues to do with belief
systems, sustainability and the digital world. The comments in this report are organised around the
assessment criteria used to externally mark the component.

Comments on specific questions

Assessment Objective 1: Research, Analysis and Evaluation

Information from different perspectives

The most successful reports focused on a particular issue within the chosen topic and selected and
presented information that genuinely represented different perspectives (global and national/local) on the
issue. These perspectives were mostly drawn from secondary research though some candidates presented
information from a local perspective drawn from primary research. When doing this, candidates should
ensure that they cite and reference this research as they would secondary research. They should also
analyse and explain the data they have collected, presenting it as a local perspective on the issue. There is
no need to include questionnaires as appendices.

The very best reports developed a clear global perspective on the issue drawn from their research. This was
usually in the form of a clear, well-researched viewpoint from a group, organisation or institution with
influence that spreads beyond any one country and was supported by other examples of the same viewpoint
to develop the perspective. Examples included viewpoints from specific governmental bodies and charities

© 2018
 Cambridge International General Certificate of Secondary Education
0457 Global Perspectives June 2018
Principal Examiner Report for Teachers

such as the World Wild Fund for Nature (WWF) and the United Nations (UN). Further evidence was then
given to confirm this global perspective. One successful example for a global perspective starts:

‘Ban Ki-moon said (2011) that humans cause the greatest harm to biodiversity. To support this, biodiversity
has declined by more than a quarter in the last 35 years, and the Living Planet Index (LPI) shows a 52% loss
between 1970 and 2010.’

Less successful responses often presented information about the issue/topic drawn from different countries,
but this information was not clearly from different perspectives. Candidates need to show that they can
research a range of information relevant to their question ensuring that different perspectives are expressed
and developed. The language needed for candidates to express different perspectives, includes, ‘according
to «’, ‘«thinks/believes/feels that «’ etc. For example, to express a clear national perspective, one
candidate wrote:

‘Kenya, unlike these countries, feels differently about this situation and has taken a different route
altogether. The Kenyan government has been working with the WFP to enable the country to produce its
own food by engaging in programmes and activities that support poor smallholder farmers.’

Analysis and comparison of causes and consequences

The most successful reports clearly focused on an issue and this focus allowed a clear analysis and
comparison of the causes and consequences of this issue. The title of the report indicated this. For example,
‘Is Nuclear power a better or worse alternative to other means of energy production?’ This title allowed for
not only cause and consequence, but also for comparison. For example:

‘According to a lab director at Oak Ridge National Lab (2018), the fly-ash in the smoke that is released from
coal plants causes the total radiation levels of the area around the plant to rise tremendously. This reaches
levels that are about a hundred times higher than that of a nuclear power plant.’

‘As the evidence I have found shows, using nuclear power for energy is definitely superior to using coal, but
ultimately not as superior to using renewable energy. The difference lies in the sustainability of renewable
energy; that is that it can run almost forever, while we will eventually run out of uranium to power potential
nuclear plants.’

In less successful reports, the issue under investigation was often unclear and therefore candidates were
unable to explain and compare the causes and consequences of the issue under discussion. In other cases
the candidates tried to address too many issues to be able to analyse them all in adequate depth within the
specified word count. A minority of candidates discussed both causes and consequences. Some limited
themselves by their choice of question, which referred to ‘impacts/effects’ of an issue only in the title.

Some reports successfully identified causes and consequences of the issue in question but did not make
comparisons. Candidates should be encouraged to give reasons why one cause/consequence is more
significant than another. For example, this comparison by one candidate was well thought-out:

‘It is clear that the tax dodging by ultra-rich individuals and multinational companies makes it harder than
ever for the poorest in the world to improve their lives. Oxfam estimates that Africa loses about $14bn
(£10bn) in tax revenues annually – enough money to pay for healthcare that could save 4 million children’s
lives a year and employ enough teachers to get every African child into school if only these multinational
companies would pay the taxes they owe.’

Courses of action

In successful reports, candidates proposed a well-developed course of action, outlining how this course of
action might help to resolve the issue in practice. For example, one candidate suggested:

‘Countries should invest in more personnel in the parks to provide security and use more current technology
like computer chips to help trace the animals. Having large signs everywhere saying this would deter
poachers from trying to poach animals from these parks. Community participation in the protection of wild
animals like in the case of Kenya is also very important; this is because most of the poachers use local
community members, and sometimes the security officers in the parks are paid to carry out poaching. The
community can make local law enforcement aware of anyone they suspect taking payment for helping
poachers and fine them so that they soon realise it’s not worth their while and poaching decreases.’

© 2018
 Cambridge International General Certificate of Secondary Education
0457 Global Perspectives June 2018
Principal Examiner Report for Teachers

In the most successful reports, the proposed course of action was related directly to the analysis of the
causes or consequences of the issue. That is to say, the candidates drew on their analysis of the causes of
the issue to propose a way to resolve it, or their analysis of the most significant consequences in order to
propose a way to avoid these consequences.

While most candidates were able to offer some suggestions for courses of actions, many candidates
proposed a number of brief and undeveloped suggestions which were unrelated to their analysis of the
issue. Some candidates made future predictions rather than suggested courses of action, so were unable to
gain credit for their work for this criterion.

Evaluation of sources

A common misconception for evaluation was to address it generally: and this tended to involve ‘reliability’ or
‘date issues’. For example, ‘I used reliable sources although some were out of date.’ This example does not
show that the candidate understands the term ‘reliability’ and is not specific to one source.

Successful reports explicitly evaluated some of the individual sources of information used, using evaluative
terms they have become familiar with while studying Global Perspectives such as ‘bias’, ‘vested interest’,
‘valid’, ‘reliability’, ‘fact’, ‘opinion’, ‘prediction’ and ‘value judgment’. The most successful reports developed
their evaluative points; for example, explaining why the source they used might be biased. For example:

‘One of the sources used was from SCMP (South China Morning Post) which is a major newspaper company
in Hong Kong and they are very unlikely to falsify their information. On the other hand they can be a little
biased towards the legalisation as they have to appeal to younger readers, but I doubt that this affects the
overall message the newspaper is trying to send.’

Candidates should use evaluative terms and show their understanding of the term in relation to individual
sources used in their report.

Some candidates interpreted ‘evaluation’ as evaluation of their own research methods, and in some cases
evaluation of their group work, or evaluation of how much they had enjoyed the experience or how hard they
had worked. This is a misunderstanding of the assessment criteria required for this component.

Assessment Objective 2: Reflection

Justification of personal perspective

The most successful reflection came from candidates who were able to reflect on how their personal
perspective on the issue had changed or developed as a result of their research and the perspectives they
had explored. Some candidates talked generally about how their view on the issue had changed, without
directly linking this to the research they had conducted. The least successful reports simply offered a
personal opinion on the issue. For example with simple statements such as: ‘I think something has to be
done about it.’

Candidates should be encouraged to answer their question in a way which explicitly justifies and delves into
their personal perspective. For example:

‘Before conducting this research, I thought that sustainable development would not bring any great impacts
to society. However, my view has changed after reading a few articles and news regarding the effect of
sustainable development on society. In my opinion, I think that the Clean Water Act should be deemed as a
success as it has brought positive impacts socially, environmentally and to the economy. We can see that
the Clean Water Act has affected the national and global economy and thus the standard of living. I have
also learnt that society, the environment and the economy are actually interconnected. Improving the
environment will also affect society and the economy. Therefore, I believe that when the three core elements
of sustainability are applied, sustainable development can affect standard of living.’

© 2018
 Cambridge International General Certificate of Secondary Education
0457 Global Perspectives June 2018
Principal Examiner Report for Teachers

Assessment Objective 3: Communication

Structure of the report

On the whole, reports were well-structured and easy to follow. Most candidates used sub-headings to
structure their report; however in less successful responses the sub-headings sometimes had little
connection to the discussion contained under them. For example, many reports included the headings
‘global perspective’ and ‘national perspective’, but did not give these perspectives in the text which followed.
Often, candidates provided information about different countries under these headings. Some candidates
also presented their research in report style, with lists and bullet points which sometimes restricted the depth
of analysis and interrupted the flow of the arguments presented.

In the most successful reports, each section followed effectively from the last, with headings relating clear to
the text and markers like, ‘Firstly’, ‘Secondly’, ‘However’ and ‘In conclusion’ used to signpost key aspects of
the report.

Clarity of arguments, perspectives and evidence

In the most successful reports, arguments, perspectives and evidence were clear and easy to follow. This
criterion does not assess grammar, spelling, or written English, but rather how candidates are able to
communicate the ideas, perspectives, viewpoints, and research they have conducted. Where arguments
were confused or difficult to follow, marks at the lower end of the mark range were awarded. This criterion,
together with the criterion for structure of the report has implications for planning and centres are advised to
guide candidates how to plan and structure their arguments to make their reports a cohesive and logical
whole. Candidates should also use quotes sparingly and only to support the points that they make in their
own words.

Citation and referencing

In the most successful reports, each source consulted was referenced, including author, date, title of
publication, and if an online source, with the website address and date accessed. In-text or footnote citations
were also used for direct quotations and where the ideas of others had been paraphrased.

In less successful reports, citations were incomplete and candidates failed to attribute where their evidence
or quotations were from. Reference lists were sometimes attempted, but included just a list of web
addresses.

Many reports fell short of specified word count (1500 to 2000 words) and in most cases these reports lacked
detailed analysis and so were unable to meet the assessment criteria. Centres should advise candidates to
use the full word count. The reference list does not need to be included in the word count.

© 2018
 Cambridge International General Certificate of Secondary Education
0457 Global Perspectives June 2018
Principal Examiner Report for Teachers

GLOBAL PERSPECTIVES

Paper 0457/03
Team Project

Key messages

● Marking and moderation can only take into consideration a single outcome and explanation and
therefore candidates should not submit additional evidence of work for example planning documents;
supplementary outcomes, etc.
● All members of a team must be awarded the same marks for the Team Elements (Outcome,
Explanation and Collaboration).
● Candidates should be advised that they need to carry out their research into the topic first and then use
their findings to decide on an aim and an Outcome.
● Before embarking on their Reflective Paper, candidates should give careful consideration as to what
objective measure(s) they might use to judge how successful or otherwise their Outcome has been in
achieving the project aim, so that they can provide evidence to support their comments in their
evaluation of the Outcome.
● Candidates must be made aware of the fact that the Reflective Paper requires them to present their own
research findings which means that although the group may work collectively for much of the time, it is
expected that individual team members will each carry out some part of the overall group research so
that they have something to present.
● Candidates should be encouraged to keep an ongoing reflective log of their own ways of working and
their work as a part of the team to help them to reach balanced evaluations with evidence for their
reflective paper.

General comments

Candidates chose a variety of issues on which to focus their projects. Under the topic of water, food and
agriculture, some candidates focused on the problem of beach pollution and organised beach clean-up
activities, while others looked at ways of reducing air pollution resulting from traffic congestion. Under the
topic of disease and health, some teams focused on raising awareness about the increase in eating
disorders, while others looked at combatting obesity by producing a global healthy eating cookbook. Under
the topic of sport and recreation, some teams focused on bringing sporting activities to a local group of
refugees, while others looked at developing and promoting exercise programmes that would encourage
candidates to exercise more regularly. Outcomes were varied and included promotional videos; School
activities; handbooks and leaflets; fundraising events; posters etc.

Team Elements: Outcome and Explanation and Teamwork

AO3 Communication: Outcome and Explanation

In the Team Project component, it should be the team’s interest in an issue that drives their research. The
team’s overall research findings (made up of clearly identifiable individuals’ personal research findings)
should lead to an aim, which might be to make others aware of an issue or address a problem. It is this
desire to make others aware/teach others, or address a problem, that leads to the production of the
Outcome. The Outcome is the means by which the message is conveyed to others, or the means by which
the problem is solved. It should be informed by key aspects of the team’s research but should not be about
the gathering of research or other activities relating to the project process. Interviews carried out to gather
views/perspectives are not an Outcome in themselves. The Outcome should be such that candidates are
able to gather some objective evidence to show how far it was successful/not successful in meeting the
project aim. The process of how initial research led to identification of the project aim and the development of
the project Outcome should be made clear in the Explanation. There should be evidence that different
cultural perspectives have been taken into account in the Outcome and some discussion of how the research
into these different perspectives has informed the Outcome should be part of the Explanation.

© 2018
 Cambridge International General Certificate of Secondary Education
0457 Global Perspectives June 2018
Principal Examiner Report for Teachers

The following example is drawn from the work of a team who chose the topic of Language and
Communication for their project, which focused on the importance of an ability to communicate in English as
a requirement in business. The team carried out research among mother tongue language speakers in
nearby towns and villages to gather different perceptions on the importance of English as a universal
language of communication in the world of work. During their research, they identified a group of non-English
speaking young workers who wanted to sell a product to a wider national audience and to tourists but who
did not have the communication skills to do so. The team’s aim then became to devise a means by which
this group of workers could carry out the business of promoting and selling their product more effectively. To
achieve this aim, the team produced an Outcome in the form of a manual which contained a variety of
business situations in which the workers might expect to interact in a language other than their own dialect to
promote and sell their product. The manual was produced in three languages: the local dialect; the national
language and English. This is an example of a team project that addresses a specific problem and tries to
solve it.

AO3 Collaboration: Teamwork

Assessment of performance in this criterion is based on evidence gathered during teacher observations of
group work in progress. All members of a team must be awarded the same mark for this criterion.

Personal Element: Reflective Paper

AO1 Research, Analysis and Evaluation

AO1 requires evaluation of how successfully the Outcome achieved the project aim: an objective measure
that shows what parts of the aim were met and what parts were not. For instance, in the case of the example
given above, after the manual had been produced, the team sought feedback on its usefulness by
interviewing the workers and some of their customers which, individually, they then used to inform their
evaluation of the project Outcome and make suggestions for improvement in their Reflective Papers. Where
an aim is to raise awareness about an issue, a survey of the target audience before and after the awareness-
raising session could show how far the Outcome was successful in achieving the aim. This latter can also
then lead on to suggestions of ways in which the Outcome could be improved to better meet the project aim.

Work process analysis is about the individual’s work process and not the group’s. Individual work process
encompasses elements such as personal time management; the effectiveness of personal research methods
and the usefulness of findings to the project overall. Again, strengths should be balanced with limitations and
should be explained using developed examples with suggestions for improvement arising from the limitations
identified. For instance, a candidate might say ‘I was researching into water pollution and I made use of a
few general websites about the importance of water. However, later I found that there were specialist
journals on environmental issues relating to water pollution, and I would have gained more relevant
information if I had used some of these.’ Suggestions for improvement to both the Outcome and own work
processes need to be adequately developed if they are to score well.

AO2 Reflection

AO2 requires candidates to reflect on the overall benefits and challenges of working in a group situation, as
opposed to working alone and they need to provide specific examples drawn from their experience to
illustrate what they mean. For instance, a candidate might comment that sharing work out allows a group to
achieve more in a shorter space of time; or that it provides a greater pool of skills to draw on (giving
examples from this project experience). However, they might further comment that, if they were working
alone, the overall standard of the work might have been higher because of their personal work ethic e.g.
sustained commitment, or greater engagement with the topic as a result of personal rather than group
choice.

Evaluation of strengths and weaknesses as a team member is concerned with those things the individual
does that either move the team forward or hold it back. It is about the individual’s impact on the team as a
whole. For instance, a candidate might say, ‘I am a very shy person and not a confident speaker, so I let the
others do all the interviewing and this meant it took much longer than it should have, leaving us short of time
to develop our Outcome’. Alternatively, a candidate might say, ‘I am really interested in making videos and
am familiar with many different types of software, so I was able to use my expertise to make the video quite
quickly, which gave each of us more time to work on our Reflective Papers.

© 2018
 Cambridge International General Certificate of Secondary Education
0457 Global Perspectives June 2018
Principal Examiner Report for Teachers

In reflecting on what they have learned about different cultural perspectives, candidates should not just
consider what they have learned, but should think about whether and how their learning has made them
think differently about those cultures or has changed what they do or how they behave; in other words, what
impact this learning has had on them. For instance, from research into water shortages a candidate may
have learned that actions in cities and towns affect water availability across the whole country, leading to a
determination to save water by turning off the tap when cleaning teeth, or showering for a shorter time, and
encouraging friends and family to do the same.

There are two elements to reflecting on overall personal learning. Candidates should consider what they
have learned about the issue the group has investigated, as well as what personal or practical skills they
have developed through doing the project. For instance, having investigated the issue of food poverty in their
country, a candidate might conclude that while there is enough food for no-one to go hungry, food wastage is
a major issue and that there should be more effective means to distribute food that is still edible but is
currently wasted. On learning of personal or practical skills, a candidate might say, ‘I worked with a team that
gave a presentation to a year group of 100 children and I learned to overcome my fear of public speaking
because I knew the team were relying on me’; or ‘I learned how to use video editing software to help my
team produce an effective Outcome and I will be able to use this skill in future projects’.

AO3 Communication

AO3 requires the Reflective Paper to flow meaningfully with signposting and linking making sense of the flow
of ideas. For instance, it should not be difficult to follow which paragraphs are about own work processes and
which are about strengths and limitations of working as a team member.

It is expected that each member of the team will have been involved in some personal research towards to
the work overall. These personal research findings need to be clearly flagged up in the Reflective Paper. For
instance, through a combination of primary and secondary research, one team member might have found out
what diseases were prevalent in their local area; their causes and possible methods of prevention; while
other team members looked into the situation nationally and internationally so that they could make
comparisons and draw conclusions. The Outcome in this case might be a series of posters targeted at a
particular audience aimed at raising awareness about a disease and stopping its spread. The candidate who
had researched the situation locally would then explain what they had found out about their local situation
and how this was reflected in the Outcome.

It is expected that each member of the team will have been involved in personal research contributing to the
overall project. In the most successful reporting, candidates’ personal research findings were made clear in
the Reflective Paper. Where this research involves secondary sources, these sources must be cited and
referenced. This should be in a consistent format, including author, date, title, url, date accessed, etc.

Teacher Assessment

The Individual candidate Record Cards (ICRC) must be completed by teachers and NOT candidates
themselves. Teachers are requested to confine their comments to the ICRC and not to annotate the work
itself or include additional School-produced assessment documents. Teachers are reminded that they must
include comments on the ICRC to support/explain the marks awarded and they should use the wording from
the AO level descriptors when formulating these supporting comments.

© 2018