Component/Paper 1 Global Perspectives NIS October 2012

Component/Paper 1 Global Perspectives NIS October 2012 © University of Cambridge International Examinations

This Paper 1 will last for 1 hour and 40 minutes. • You will be asked to answer structured questions based on two sources. • Please do all the questions (deconstruct) from Document 1 first. • Questions will require both short and longer responses. • When you have completed document 1 then you can go on to Document 2.

Document 2 is for comparison purposes. Only complete the deconstruction of document 2 according to the instructions. (comparing document 2 to document 1)

You will not be assessed on your knowledge and understanding of the specific issues represented in the stimulus material. Instead, you will be assessed on your thinking and reasoning skills focused mainly on analysing and evaluating arguments, evidence and contexts.

Deconstruction Analyse and evaluate conclusions, arguments, reasoning or claims 1. Question about understanding of the text 2 (a). Summarize the main evidence given. 2 (b). Evaluate the strengths and weaknesses of the evidence. 3. How does the perspective in Document 2 support or refute the argument in Document 1?

Reconstruction • Analyse the evidence provided (i. e. RAVEN knowledge) to determine if it supports the conclusions, arguments, reasoning or claims made. • Evaluate the reliability and credibility of sources

Question breakdown • Q 2 (a) • Students identify two examples or pieces of evidence (2 marks). • It is critical that what you offer is actually an example or evidence and not merely a statement taken from the text. • This is a ‘point’ mark scheme, not a best fit. • You do not need to give any explanation for your choices. • One mark is awarded for each correctly identified reason up to a maximum of two.

Question 2(b) for teachers • Candidates may use a variety of criteria to evaluate the evidence and no set criteria are to be expected. • At the higher levels candidates may consider both the strengths and weaknesses of the evidence, although it is likely that most answers will focus on the weaknesses. • In evaluating this evidence candidates might consider whether any statistics are reliable or representative and whether they support the claim. • At the higher levels candidates do need to link their evaluation to the actual question set. • Award a maximum of three marks for identifying the evidence and a maximum of three marks for the evaluation of the evidence. • Candidates should go beyond simple evaluative comment!

Question 2(b) Evaluate the strengths and weaknesses in the reasoning (9)

Key concepts – Critical Assessment • At the highest level this will be explained rather than asserted • Goes beyond one aspect • Is explicit • The view is structured • Evaluate strengths and weaknesses • Identify flaws • Assess the use of analogy • Assess any counter argument Evaluate strengths or weaknesses in the reasoning by identifying flaws and showing how far they weaken reasoning

This is a level of response mark scheme • What is required is SUSTAINED evaluation, not just comments • There should be a BALANCE between strengths and weaknesses – i. e. both should be taken into account – there is not an expectation that they will be equally balanced • The reasoning should be highly effective, accurate and clearly expressed • There should be a STRUCTURE • There should be convincing JUDGEMENT

What does this mean? • Sustained evaluation – not just intermittent critical comment or description • There should be some attempt to consider both strengths and weaknesses – though the aim is deconstruction, this does not mean total demolition • Consideration of flaws and reference to the language of criticism are important, but candidates should not apply critical terms mechanically; they should be explained and used • Effective explanation and reasoning means that there is some developed explanation and the view convinces. “The argument is weak because it appeals to history” isn’t convincing – why is the appeal to history unconvincing? • Why is the analogy unconvincing?

Is this better? The author appeals to history, but this may not be valid. What applied to one period may not be true of today. The Victorian reforms applied to one country and were undertaken in a different context. The author is applying changes in one developed country to changes in different, less developed countries in an international not a national context. .

Effective reasoning and judgements • Assertions do not convince • Assumptions do not convince • Prejudice does not convince • There should be a judgement and not merely a resume of the points in the argument • The answer should be organized and not merely a series of observations • The conclusion should follow from the points made

Rules for the Exam • No cell phone use. • No use of dictionaries or any other materials. • Bring pen to write with, no corrector • No talking, marks will be lowered if student is cheating or distracting others from working at any time during the test. • Bring a book to read if you finish early. • Raise your hand if you have any questions during exam. • Exam will begin right when class starts, do not be late.