Cambridge International General Certif icate of Secondary Education

0457 Global Perspectives November 2024

Principal Examiner Report f or Teachers

GLOBAL PERSPECTIVES

Paper 0457/11
Written Paper

Key messages

The key messages f rom this examination series are that candidates were able to:

• Identif y inf ormation and data relevant to an issue.

• Analyse sources to identif y reasons and evidence.

Candidates would benef it f rom f urther guidance in:

• Describing the main elements of a perspective.

• Explaining the strengths and weaknesses of research and evidence.
• Explaining the reasons f or a research design to test a claim.

General comments

The Written Paper consists of compulsory questions based on a range of sources. The sources present
global issues from different perspectives. In November 2024, this paper was based upon source material
related to the topic of Transport Systems. The impact of transport on the environment by pollution was the
issue explored.

It is apparent that many candidates are developing an excellent understanding of causes, consequences and
actions in response to global issues. They can explain their own perspectives and compare these with the
viewpoints of other people and groups. It is also pleasing to see candidates assessing the potential impact
and ef fectiveness of different actions, as well as being aware of the ethical and moral dimension to many
global issues.

Overall, the quality of work and levels of achievement continue to be very good. Candidates understood the
source material in the Insert Booklet very well. They were able to identif y and analyse the main types of
statement, evidence, and reasoning within sources, describing them clearly and accurately. Dif f erent
perspectives were generally well understood and explained with some clarity.

Candidates were usually able to identif y potential strengths and weaknesses of sources and argument.
However, these evaluative points were of ten simply described rather than explained. When evaluating a
source, candidates should explain the significance or impact of the identif ied strength or weakness on the
argument. This involves describing the impact of strengths and weaknesses on the quality of the argument in
terms of critical thinking concepts like reliability, validity, accuracy, representativeness, bias, tone, expertise
and ability to know.

Candidates should explain research designs and choice of research methods, explicitly relating their
research strategy to the claim to be tested. Candidates should explain how the research method will gather
evidence that will enable them to test the claim or answer a research question. Linking the method and
source of evidence to the issue in the claim is vital to reach the higher levels of response.

Candidates generally recognised that opinions should be justified with reasons and evidence. Assertion and
simple description of opinion is generally not suf f icient in responses to most questions. Whilst most
candidates are using material from the sources to support their arguments, for example through summary or
quotation, some would benefit from guidance on how to plan and organise an argument to support a claim or
opinion. Careful planning of lines of argument and essay structure would help in this process. Evidence and
reasons should be clearly and explicitly used to justify the argument clearly. Longer responses should be
caref ully structured.

© 2024
 Cambridge International General Certif icate of Secondary Education
0457 Global Perspectives November 2024
Principal Examiner Report f or Teachers

Some candidates are using their own experience and material encountered in their courses to supplement
material drawn f rom the sources. This is helpful but not necessary to reach the highest levels of response. It
is valuable and encouraged but not essential as the examination primarily tests the ability to use critical
thinking and research skills in the analysis and evaluation of sources and perspectives. It is not necessary to
have studied the topic or issue.

Most candidates showed real interest in the topic and discussed the issues with enthusiasm. Candidates
were able to explore different perspectives on the issues raised, particularly in recommending proposals to
reduce pollution in cities. However, candidates should explain and assess the potential impact and
consequences of the proposals in detail, before reaching a balanced and supported judgement within the
conclusion.

To improve perf ormance f urther, candidates should be encouraged to:

• Describe the main elements of a perspective.

• Explain the strengths and weaknesses of research and evidence.
• Explain the reasons f or a research design to test a claim.
• Plan and organise reasons and evidence with a clear structure when supporting an argument or
opinion.

Comments on specific questions

Question 1

(a) Nearly all candidates correctly identified from Source 1 that the number of cities that monitor air
pollution is 6000, and theref ore gained the maximum of one mark.

(b) Almost all candidates were able to identify two advantages of using electric vehicles from Source 2,
and theref ore gained the maximum of two marks. Most candidates identified not producing exhaust
gas pollution and being less noisy.

(c) Most candidates responded well to this question, identif ying, and justif ying which advantage of
using electric vehicles was the most significant, in their opinion. Most candidates chose to discuss
not producing exhaust gas pollution and being less noisy.

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

• the number of people af f ected

• the ef f ect of pollution on health and the environment
• employment opportunities and economic impact.

The strongest answers provided several clear reasons to explain why the chosen advantage was
more signif icant than others and gave some evidence to support their judgements. Weaker
responses of ten simply stated the advantage without explanation and tended to rely upon
assertion. Some candidates compared the importance of dif f erent advantages but this was not
necessary to gain f ull marks.

(d) Many candidates responded very well to this question and could explain why the problems created
by pollution f rom transport are an important local issue, thereby demonstrating a clear
understanding of the concept of ‘local’.

The reasons given by candidates related mainly to those given within the Sources, including the
impact of education on human rights, employment, economic development, crime, and health.
There was some attempt to explain why these impacts were important to the government at a
national level.

Candidates achieving at higher levels provided a clearly reasoned, credible and structured
explanation. Candidates achieving at the lower levels tended to assert personal opinion about
transport pollution in general, or describe pollution, without ref erence to the ‘local’ element of the
question.

© 2024
 Cambridge International General Certif icate of Secondary Education
0457 Global Perspectives November 2024
Principal Examiner Report f or Teachers

Some candidates simply listed a range of consequences of pollution taken directly f rom the
sources without any explanation or linking to the ‘local’ context. This type of response only reached
the lower levels of response within the mark scheme.

Question 2

(a) Most candidates were able to evaluate the argument in Source 3 and assess how well the author
supported the view that, ‘we need less polluting f orms of transport f or the f uture’ .

The strengths of the argument most of ten identif ied were:

• use of the television programme as evidence

• statistics and data were included as included
• use of rhetorical questions – appeal to emotion
• use of prof essional expertise in evidence and to support the claim
• use of photographic evidence
• suggests alternative transport and action.

The weaknesses of the argument most of ten identif ied were:

• does not give specif ic inf ormation or citation f or the television programme
• little inf ormation or citation about the expert
• lack of evidence to support the increase in cycling and walking
• appeals to emotion reduce conf idence in the argument
• lack of balance
• little consideration of counterarguments.

The strongest responses provided clearly reasoned, credible and structured explanation f or their
opinions, usually discussing a range of distinct evaluative points. Weaker responses of ten simply
stated or asserted an opinion about the source rather than examining strengths and weaknesses
systematically.

Some weaker responses simply described the reasons and evidence within the source but did not
evaluate or explain why the identif ied reason or type of evidence was a strength or weakness.

Candidates should be encouraged to make clear and explicit ref erence to the arguments and
evidence in the Source to justify their opinion, thereby using the material in the source as evidence.
This means quoting f rom or summarising relevant parts 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, ‘cycling and walking are becoming
more popular in cities’. The methods of testing the claim suggested were clearly explained and
caref ully related to the claim.

Candidates tended to describe interviews, surveys, and questionnaires with people about the
issue, f or example from different organisations in the local area. Surveys of local people about their
changing use of dif f erent modes of transport were also suggested. Other methods included
consultation with experts, local government, 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, f or example f rom governments, NGOs,
and United Nations organisations. Police, local government transport of f icials and transport
retailers were of ten mentioned.

The strongest responses provided clearly reasoned, credible and structured explanation f or their
suggestions clearly and explicitly related to the claim being tested; weaker responses often simply
stated or listed several methods or sources of evidence but did not explain them fully or make any
link to the claim being tested.

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

© 2024
 Cambridge International General Certif icate of Secondary Education
0457 Global Perspectives November 2024
Principal Examiner Report f or Teachers

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

Question 3

(a) Most candidates correctly identified an opinion from Bina’s statement and explained that opinions
are statements which are subjective points of view or beliefs which cannot be verified and may not
be shared by others.

(b) (i) Most candidates correctly identif ied a f act f rom Ahram’s statement and could explain why the
statement was a fact. A fact is a statement that is true, correct, accurate or can be proven/verif ied.

(ii) Most candidates were able to relate the identified fact to Ahram’s argument that we should find less
polluting ways to travel. However, this question was challenging for some candidates who did not
evaluate the use of the f act as reasoning or evidence within the argument.

The most effective responses explained how the f act related to the argument and explained a
strength and/or a weakness of the f act within this argument.

Centres are encouraged to teach candidates about facts and their use in arguments as evidence
and provide experience of using the term in the analysis and evaluation of sources, alongside other
critical thinking concepts like value judgement, bias, opinion, vested interest, claim and prediction.

(c) Most candidates compared both statements explicitly, Bina’s and Ahram’s, and discussed issues
relating to evidence, language, knowledge claims and expertise. Some candidates also addressed
the reasons and values within each statement. Most candidates suggested that Ahram’s statement
was more convincing than Bina’s 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.

Question 4

In this question, candidates were asked to assess and recommend different proposed actions designed to
reduce pollution in cities. They were expected to justify their views using material drawn f rom the sources as
well as their own experience and evidence.

There were many thoughtful discussions of each proposed action. Some candidates chose to compare all
options, which was a very ef f ective way to structure the argument.

However, some candidates tended to describe their opinions in a generalised and asserted way, comparing
each action without exploring the potential impact on transport pollution.

Most candidates recommended encouraging more walking and cycling.

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 explicitly and frequently linked the argument back to the issue of reducing transport pollution.

Responses at the lower level tended to be generalised, lack relevance to the issue and simply describe their
own opinion about the option or pollution in general. Arguments tended to be unsupported and asserted.
These responses often simply listed ways to reduce pollution rather than explaining why one method/action
was likely to be more effective, have greater impact and other positive consequences, and should theref ore
be recommended.

© 2024
 Cambridge International General Certif icate of Secondary Education
0457 Global Perspectives November 2024
Principal Examiner Report f or Teachers

GLOBAL PERSPECTIVES

Paper 0457/12
Written Paper

Key messages

The key messages f rom this examination series are that candidates were able to:

• Identif y inf ormation and data relevant to an issue.

• Analyse sources to identif y reasons and evidence.

Candidates would benef it f rom f urther guidance in:

• Describing the main elements of a perspective.

• Explaining the strengths and weaknesses of research and evidence.
• Explaining the reasons f or a research design to test a claim.

General comments

The Written Paper consists of compulsory questions based on a range of sources. The sources present
global issues from different perspectives. In November 2024, this paper was based upon source material
related to the topic of Fuel and Energy. The impact of renewable energy projects on the environment was the
issue explored.

It is apparent that many candidates are developing an excellent understanding of causes, consequences and
actions in response to global issues. They can explain their own perspectives and compare these with the
viewpoints of other people and groups. It is also pleasing to see candidates assessing the potential impact
and ef fectiveness of different actions, as well as being aware of the ethical and moral dimension to many
global issues.

Overall, the quality of work and levels of achievement continue to be good. Candidates understood the
source material in the Insert Booklet well. They were able to identif y and analyse the main types of
statement, evidence, and reasoning within sources, describing them clearly and accurately. Dif f erent
perspectives were generally understood and explained.

Candidates were usually able to identif y potential strengths and weaknesses of sources and argument.
However, these evaluative points were of ten simply identif ied rather than explained. When evaluating a
source, candidates should explain the significance or impact of the identif ied strength or weakness on the
argument. This involves explaining the impact of strengths and weaknesses on the quality of the argument in
terms of critical thinking concepts like reliability, validity, accuracy, representativeness, bias, tone, expertise
and ability to know.

Candidates should explain research designs and choice of research methods, explicitly relating their
research strategy to the claim to be tested. Candidates should also explain how the research method will
gather evidence that will enable them to test the claim or answer a research question. Linking the method
and source of evidence to the issue in the claim is vital to reach the higher levels of response.

Candidates generally recognised that opinions should be justified with reasons and evidence. Assertion and
simple description of opinion is generally not suf f icient in responses to most questions. Whilst most
candidates are using some material from the sources as evidence to support their arguments, f or example
through summary or quotation, some would benefit from guidance on how to plan and organise an argument
to support a claim or opinion. Careful planning of lines of argument and essay structure would help in this
process. Evidence and reasons should be clearly and explicitly used to justify the argument clearly. Longer
responses should be caref ully structured.

© 2024
 Cambridge International General Certif icate of Secondary Education
0457 Global Perspectives November 2024
Principal Examiner Report f or Teachers

Some candidates are using their own experience and material encountered in their courses to supplement
material drawn f rom the sources. This is helpful but not necessary to reach the highest levels of response. It
is valuable and encouraged but not essential as the examination primarily tests the ability to use critical
thinking and research skills in the analysis and evaluation of sources and perspectives. It is not necessary to
have studied the topic or issue.

Most candidates showed real interest in the energy topic and discussed the issues with enthusiasm.
Candidates were able to explore different perspectives on the issues raised, particularly in recommending
proposals to increase the use of renewable energy sources. However, candidates should explain and assess
the potential impact and consequences of the proposals in detail, before reaching a balanced and supported
judgement within the conclusion.

To improve perf ormance f urther, candidates should be encouraged to:

• Describe the main elements of a perspective.

• Explain the strengths and weaknesses of research and evidence.
• Explain the reasons f or a research design to test a claim.
• Plan and organise reasons and evidence with a clear structure when supporting an argument or
opinion.

Comments on specific questions

Question 1

(a) Nearly all candidates correctly identif ied f rom Source 1 that the percentage of the total energy
supply that comes from hydroelectric power in Norway was 45 per cent, and theref ore gained the
maximum of one mark.

(b) Almost all candidates were able to identify two advantages of hydroelectric power f rom Source 2,
and theref ore gained the maximum of two marks. Most candidates identif ied being waste f ree
without polluting emissions and clean drinking water.

(c) Most candidates responded well to this question, identif ying, and justif ying which advantage of
hydroelectric power was the most important, in their opinion. Most candidates chose to discuss
being waste f ree without polluting emissions and sustainability of energy supply.

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

• the number of people af f ected

• the ef f ect on the environment, animal lif e and health of local people
• employment opportunities and economic impact.

The strongest answers provided several clear reasons to explain why the chosen advantage was
more important than others and gave some evidence to support their judgements. Weaker
responses of ten simply stated the advantage without explanation and tended to rely upon
assertion. Some candidates compared the importance of dif f erent advantages but this was not
necessary to gain f ull marks.

(d) Many candidates responded very well to this question and could explain why the development of
hydroelectric power is an important local issue, thereby demonstrating a clear understanding of the
concept of ‘local’.

The reasons given by candidates related mainly to those given within the Sources, including the
impact of the development of hydroelectric power on sustainability, employment, economic
development, the environment and health. There was some attempt to explain why these impacts
were important at a local level.

Candidates achieving at higher levels provided a clearly reasoned, credible and structured
explanation. Candidates achieving at the lower levels tended to assert personal opinion about

© 2024
 Cambridge International General Certif icate of Secondary Education
0457 Global Perspectives November 2024
Principal Examiner Report f or Teachers

hydroelectric or sustainable energy in general, without ref erence to the ‘local’ element of the
question.

Some candidates simply listed a range of consequences of hydroelectric power taken directly f rom
the sources without any explanation or linking to the ‘local’ context. This type of response only
reached the lower levels of response within the mark scheme.

Question 2

(a) Most candidates were able to evaluate the argument in Source 3 and assess how well the author
supported the view that, ‘using renewable energy has improved his business’ .

The strengths of the argument most of ten identif ied were:

• uses personal experience as evidence

• has ability to know
• gives examples to illustrate points
• passionate and enthusiastic tone
• ref ers to research evidence.

The weaknesses of the argument most of ten identif ied were:

• lacks details on experience and where business is

• only one business theref ore a small sample and may not be representative
• no statistical details or data about costs or bills – assertion
• generalises about jobs
• appeals to emotion reduces conf idence in the argument
• lack of balance and little consideration of counterarguments
• potential f or bias due to vested interest.

The strongest responses provided clearly reasoned, credible and structured explanation f or their
opinions, usually discussing a range of distinct evaluative points. Weaker responses of ten simply
stated or asserted an opinion about the source rather than examining strengths and weaknesses
systematically.

Some weaker responses simply described the reasons and evidence within the source but did not
evaluate or explain why the identif ied reason or type of evidence was a strength or weakness.

Candidates should be encouraged to make clear and explicit ref erence to the arguments and
evidence in the Source to justify their opinion, thereby using the material in the source as evidence.
This means quoting f rom or summarising relevant parts 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, ‘ employees are happier in a
sustainable workplace’. The methods of testing the claim suggested were clearly explained and
caref ully related to the claim.

Candidates tended to describe interviews, surveys, and questionnaires with people about the
issue, f or example from different organisations in the local area. Surveys of local workers and the
general public about their experience of sustainable workplaces and pref erences were also
suggested. Other methods included consultation with experts, local government, and employers.
Nearly all candidates suggested secondary research using sources f rom the internet. Many
described the type of source that was likely to be reliable and free from bias or vested interest, f or
example f rom governments, NGOs, and United Nations organisations. Business leaders and
managers, local government officials and trade unions were also mentioned by some candidates.

The strongest responses provided clearly reasoned, credible and structured explanation f or their
suggestions clearly and explicitly related to the claim being tested; weaker responses often simply
stated or listed several methods or sources of evidence but did not explain them fully or make any
link to the claim being tested.

© 2024
 Cambridge International General Certif icate of Secondary Education
0457 Global Perspectives November 2024
Principal Examiner Report f or Teachers

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

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

Question 3

(a) Most candidates correctly identified a prediction from Paolo’s statemen and could explain why the
statement was a prediction. A prediction is a statement suggesting something is likely to happen in
the f uture. Most candidates were able to justif y and explain their judgement convincingly.

(b) Most candidates were able to identify aspects of bias in Adriana’s statement. These candidates
showed understanding of bias as a tendency or prejudice f or or against something, or an
unbalanced approach to an issue, and being not prepared to consider counter arguments or other
points of view.

Most candidates explained that Adriana’s experience of living in the area near the proposed
hydroelectric dam and her vested interest may influence her viewpoint about the project, shape her
perspective on employment opportunities and the environment locally, and encourage her not to
consider other perspectives.

Candidates also raised other issues with Adriana’s statement that might be evidence of bias,
including:

• Unbalanced argument – very little consideration of other perspectives or counterarguments .

• Use of exaggerated language and phrases e.g. ‘The dam will be a disaster f or us!’ .
• Only ref erring to negative aspects of the project.
• Not much evidence.
• Mainly opinion.

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

(c) Most candidates compared both statements explicitly, Paolo’s and Adriana’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.

Question 4

In this question, candidates were asked to assess and recommend different proposed actions designed to
increase the use of renewable energy sources. They were expected to justif y their views using material
drawn f rom the sources as well as their own experience and evidence.

There were many thoughtful discussions of each proposed action. Some candidates chose to compare all
options, which was a very ef f ective way to structure the argument.

© 2024
 Cambridge International General Certif icate of Secondary Education
0457 Global Perspectives November 2024
Principal Examiner Report f or Teachers

However, some candidates tended to describe their opinions in a generalised and asserted way, comparing
each action without exploring the potential impact on the use of renewable energy.

Most candidates recommended building more renewable energy sources.

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 explicitly and frequently linked the argument back to the issue of increasing use of renewable
energy sources.

Responses at the lower level tended to be generalised, lack relevance to the issue and simply describe their
own opinion about the option or renewable energy in general. Arguments tended to be unsupported and
asserted. These responses of ten simply listed ways to increase renewable energy usage rather than
explaining why one method/action was likely to be more ef f ective, have greater impact and other positive
consequences, and should theref ore be recommended.

© 2024
 Cambridge International General Certif icate of Secondary Education
0457 Global Perspectives November 2024
Principal Examiner Report f or Teachers

GLOBAL PERSPECTIVES

Paper 0457/13
Written Paper

Key messages

The key messages f rom this examination series are that candidates were able to:

• Identif y inf ormation and data relevant to an issue.

• Analyse sources to identif y reasons and evidence.

Candidates would benef it f rom f urther guidance in:

• Describing the main elements of a perspective.

• Explaining the strengths and weaknesses of research and evidence.
• Explaining the reasons f or a research design to test a claim.

General comments

The Written Paper consists of compulsory questions based on a range of sources. The sources present
global issues from different perspectives. In November 2024, this paper was based upon source material
related to the topic of Migration. The changing pattern of migration was the issue explored.

It is apparent that many candidates are developing an excellent understanding of causes, consequences and
actions in response to global issues. They can explain their own perspectives and compare these with the
viewpoints of other people and groups. It is also pleasing to see candidates assessing the potential impact
and ef fectiveness of different actions, as well as being aware of the ethical and moral dimension to many
global issues.

Overall, the quality of work and levels of achievement continue to be good. Candidates understood the
source material in the Insert Booklet well. They were able to identif y and analyse the main types of
statement, evidence, and reasoning within sources, describing them clearly and accurately. Dif f erent
perspectives were generally understood and explained.

Candidates were usually able to identif y potential strengths and weaknesses of sources and argument.
However, these evaluative points were of ten simply identif ied rather than explained. When evaluating a
source, candidates should explain the significance or impact of the identif ied strength or weakness on the
argument. This involves explaining the impact of strengths and weaknesses on the quality of the argument in
terms of critical thinking concepts like reliability, validity, accuracy, representativeness, bias, tone, expertise
and ability to know.

Candidates should explain research designs and choice of research methods, explicitly relating their
research strategy to the claim to be tested. Candidates should also explain how the research method will
gather evidence that will enable them to test the claim or answer a research question. Linking the method
and source of evidence to the issue in the claim is vital to reach the higher levels of response.

Candidates generally recognised that opinions should be justified with reasons and evidence. Assertion and
simple description of opinion is generally not suf f icient in responses to most questions. Whilst most
candidates are using some material from the sources as evidence to support their arguments, f or example
through summary or quotation, some would benefit from guidance on how to plan and organise an argument
to support a claim or opinion. Careful planning of lines of argument and essay structure would help in this
process. Evidence and reasons should be clearly and explicitly used to justify the argument clearly. Longer
responses should be caref ully structured.

© 2024
 Cambridge International General Certif icate of Secondary Education
0457 Global Perspectives November 2024
Principal Examiner Report f or Teachers

Some candidates are using their own experience and material encountered in their courses to supplement
material drawn f rom the sources. This is helpful but not necessary to reach the highest levels of response. It
is valuable and encouraged but not essential as the examination primarily tests the ability to use critical
thinking and research skills in the analysis and evaluation of sources and perspectives. It is not necessary to
have studied the topic or issue.

Most candidates showed real interest in the migration topic and discussed the issues with enthusiasm.
Candidates were able to explore different perspectives on the issues raised, particularly in recommending
proposals to encourage migration. However, candidates should explain and assess the potential impact and
consequences of the proposals in detail, before reaching a balanced and supported judgement within the
conclusion.

To improve perf ormance f urther, candidates should be encouraged to:

• Describe the main elements of a perspective.

• Explain the strengths and weaknesses of research and evidence.
• Explain the reasons f or a research design to test a claim.
• Plan and organise reasons and evidence with a clear structure when supporting an argument or
opinion.

Comments on specific questions

Question 1

(a) Nearly all candidates correctly identified f rom Source 1 that the trend in the number of migrants
worldwide was increasing, and theref ore gained the maximum of one mark.

(b) Almost all candidates were able to identify two advantages of global migration from Source 2, and
theref ore gained the maximum of two marks. Most candidates identif ied f illing labour shortages,
cultural diversity and money being sent home by migrants.

(c) Most candidates responded well to this question, identif ying, and justif ying which advantage of
global migration was the most important, in their opinion. Most candidates chose to discuss f illing
labour shortages, cultural diversity and money being sent home by migrants.

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

• the number of people af f ected

• the ef f ect on the economy at home and abroad
• employment opportunities
• multiple positive consequences for migrants and their f amilies in relation to lif estyle and lif e
chances.

The strongest answers provided several clear reasons to explain why the chosen advantage was
more important than others and gave some evidence to support their judgements. Weaker
responses of ten simply stated the advantage without explanation and tended to rely upon
assertion. Some candidates compared the importance of dif f erent advantages but this was not
necessary to gain f ull marks.

(d) Many candidates responded very well to this question and could explain why migration is an
important national issue, thereby demonstrating a clear understanding of the concept of ‘national’.

The reasons given by candidates related mainly to those given within the Sources, including the
impact of migration on sustainability, employment, economic development, the environment, and
local amenities and social services. There was some attempt to explain why these impacts were
important at a national level.

Candidates achieving at higher levels provided a clearly reasoned, credible and structured
explanation. Candidates achieving at the lower levels tended to assert personal opinion about
migration in general, without ref erence to the ‘national’ element of the question.

© 2024
 Cambridge International General Certif icate of Secondary Education
0457 Global Perspectives November 2024
Principal Examiner Report f or Teachers

Some candidates simply listed a range of consequences of migration taken directly f rom the
sources without any explanation or linking to the ‘national’ context. This type of response only
reached the lower levels of response within the mark scheme.

Question 2

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

The strengths of the argument most of ten identif ied were:

• uses expert testimony as evidence

• clear structure
• gives examples to illustrate points
• reasonable tone
• ref ers to research evidence and examples.

The weaknesses of the argument most of ten identif ied were:

• incomplete citation that leaves evidence uncheckable

• no statistical details or data about migration to show extent of issue
• generalises which creates inaccuracy
• some assertion
• appeals to emotion reduces conf idence in the argument .

The strongest responses provided clearly reasoned, credible and structured explanation f or their
opinions, usually discussing a range of distinct evaluative points. Weaker responses of ten simply
stated or asserted an opinion about the source rather than examining strengths and weaknesses
systematically.

Some weaker responses simply described the reasons and evidence within the source but did not
evaluate or explain why the identif ied reason or type of evidence was a strength or weakness.

Candidates should be encouraged to make clear and explicit ref erence to the arguments and
evidence in the Source to justify their opinion, thereby using the material in the source as evidence.
This means quoting f rom or summarising relevant parts 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, ‘migrants bring economic benef its
to their host country’. The methods of testing the claim suggested were clearly explained and
caref ully related to the claim.

Candidates tended to describe interviews, surveys, and questionnaires with people about the
issue, f or example from different organisations in the local area. National surveys of local people
and the general public about their experience of migration were also suggested. Other methods
included consultation with experts, local government, 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 f rom governments,
NGOs, and United Nations organisations. Business leaders and managers, local government
of f icials and immigration authorities were also mentioned by some candidates.

The strongest responses provided clearly reasoned, credible and structured explanation f or their
suggestions clearly and explicitly related to the claim being tested; weaker responses often simply
stated or listed several methods or sources of evidence but did not explain them fully or make any
link to the claim being tested.

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

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

© 2024
 Cambridge International General Certif icate of Secondary Education
0457 Global Perspectives November 2024
Principal Examiner Report f or Teachers

Question 3

(a) Most candidates correctly identified an opinion from Harry’s statement and could explain why the
statement was an opinion. An opinion is a subjective point of view or belief s which cannot be
verif ied, and may not be shared by others.

(b) Most candidates correctly identified a prediction from Erin’s statemen and could explain why the
statement was a prediction. A prediction is a statement suggesting something is likely to happen in
the f uture.

(c) Most candidates were able to identif y aspects of bias in Erin’s statement. These candidates
showed understanding of bias as a tendency or prejudice f or or against something, or an
unbalanced approach to an issue, and being not prepared to consider counter arguments or other
points of view.

Most candidates explained that Erin’s experience of living in a small community impacted by
migration and her vested interest in maintaining access to education, health care and employment
opportunities may inf luence her viewpoint about migration and encourage her to be negative,
unbalanced and not to consider other perspectives.

Candidates also raised other issues with Erin’s statement that might be evidence of bias, including:

• unbalanced argument – little consideration of other perspectives or counterarguments

• use of exaggerated/emotive language and phrases e.g. ‘Politicians around the world’ …; and
‘More and more migrants …’
• only ref erring to negative aspects of the project
• mainly opinion that provides weak evidence and may be challenged by others
• some assertion without evidence to justif y.

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

(d) Most candidates compared both statements explicitly, Harry’s and Erin’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.

Question 4

In this question, candidates were asked to assess and recommend dif f erent proposed actions to a
government designed to encourage migrants to come and work in their country. They were expected to
justif y their views using material drawn f rom the sources as well as their own experience and evidence.

There were many thoughtful discussions of each proposed action. Some candidates chose to compare all
options, which was a very ef f ective way to structure the argument.

However, some candidates tended to describe their opinions in a generalised and asserted way, comparing
each action without exploring the potential impact on the use of renewable energy.

© 2024
 Cambridge International General Certif icate of Secondary Education
0457 Global Perspectives November 2024
Principal Examiner Report f or Teachers

Most candidates recommended giving f inancial support f or businesses to employ migrants, mainly
discussing the benef its to the economy, the businesses and migrants.

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 explicitly and frequently linked the argument back to the issue of encouraging migration f or work.

Responses at the lower level tended to be generalised, lack relevance to the issue and simply describe their
own opinion about the option or migration in general. Arguments tended to be unsupported and asserted.
These responses of ten simply listed ways to increase migration rather than explaining why one
method/action was likely to be more effective, have greater impact and other positive consequences, and
should theref ore be recommended.

© 2024
 Cambridge International General Certif icate of Secondary Education
0457 Global Perspectives November 2024
Principal Examiner Report f or Teachers

GLOBAL PERSPECTIVES

Paper 0457/02
Individual Report

Key messages

• Candidates should f ormulate a question that f ocusses on one global issue.

• The candidate’s response must present different perspectives on their chosen issue.
• Candidates should analyse the causes and consequences of their chosen issue.
• Candidates should evaluate the individual sources they use.
• Candidates should clearly cite all their sources.
• The Individual Report should be an independent piece of coursework.
• Teachers and candidates should keep in mind the distribution of marks through the mark scheme and
ensure that the f ocus of dif f erent sections ref lects this.

General Comment

Successful work for this component is well-structured and logical, and explicitly presents several dif f erent
well-supported perspectives, including at least one global and one national perspective on the issue
identified in their question. It shows clear evidence of research, with accurate citation of sources used.

Successful candidates analyse and explain the causes and consequences of the issue identif ied in their
question. Successful candidates provide full details of their proposed course of action, including details of
how the course of action would be implemented and the possible impact on the issue.

Stronger candidates reflect on their own perspective and how this has been impacted by their f indings and
by others’ perspectives. They answer their question and remain f ocused throughout on the central issue.

Some candidates formulated complex questions that caused them difficulty in controlling their work. These
questions sometimes included more than one issue, leading to less depth and detail on each. Some
candidates included a section of reflection on what they might do differently in future. Please note that is not
required, attracts no credit, and uses up space that would be better used in developing other criteria.

Comments on specific Assessment Criteria

Assessment Objective 1: Research, Analysis and Evaluation:

The strongest work responds to a clear question about a single global issue. This enables candidates to
present clear global perspectives, national perspectives, and their own perspective on this issue.

Clear, direct, issue-based questions allow candidates to be clear about their topic and issue, to focus on that
throughout and to identif y dif f erent views.

Successf ul questions this session included:

• Is AI beneficial for education?
• Is it ethical to continue the development of AI technology?
• Should capital punishment be abolished?
• Can fast fashion be truly sustainable?
• Does foreign aid help or hinder the development of countries?
• Is the gender pay gap in sports justified?
• Should transgender people be allowed to compete in sports in their preferred gender
category?

© 2024
 Cambridge International General Certif icate of Secondary Education
0457 Global Perspectives November 2024
Principal Examiner Report f or Teachers

Some candidates formulated work without a clear research question, where there was no identif iable issue
issue in their question. They asked general topic questions and then wrote about 2 or 3 dif f erent issues in
their response. In many cases, these ‘issues’ could usef ully have been presented as consequences of a
central issue.

There was a significant minority of candidates who did not address an issue at all in their response. The
majority of these gave a description of e.g. the perfume industry, but did not explain why there might be a
problem.

There were several reports without any research question and some with no title or topic. This has a clear
impact on their success, as the mark scheme is based on the premise that the candidate has researched an
issue and is answering a research question by exploring different perspectives and coming up with their own
response because of all the research done.

Information from different perspectives:

The strongest work shows a clear understanding of perspectives.

Note: For Global Perspectives, a perspective is always based on a view, opinion, or attitude: on what
people think or feel about the issue. It is not enough to present general information, f acts and f igures on a
topic f rom dif f erent parts of the world.

For this component, a global perspective is a supported view about a global issue raised in the
question. It should be clear whose perspective this is – a quote f rom the relevant person or organisation
should be attributed to them, or the candidate should draw together supporting information and attitudes to
tell us explicitly who, or which group of people has this perspective. In all cases, inf ormation should be
presented to explain the perspective and support it.

Successful work included paraphrased and/or direct quotes showing a clear global perspective. A global
perspective should be clearly identif ied as such and include an opinion:

Many international environmental NGOs and intergovernmental organisations oppose the continuation of
factory farms. For instance, Regeneration International, a worldwide NGO that raises awareness about the
impacts of factory farming, argues that less money should be invested into factory farms from governments
as it impacts the climate and global environmental health. This argument is further supported by the UN
Environment Programme, an Intergovernmental organisation, which examines solutions to overcome the
detrimental impacts of factory farms…

Similarly, a national perspective is a national viewpoint on the issue presented, or an opinion/f eeling
about/attitude to the national situation. Again, it should be clear whose perspective is being presented, either
by paraphrasing or quoting the person/s or organisation/s with clear attribution. There should be evidence of
the perspective and supporting inf ormation to explain it:

‘…As of 2012, 41 per cent of Uruguayans believed that elders should be taken care of by their families and
only 26 per cent believed that support must be provided by relatives with State support. In 2015, Uruguay
declared care a human right and implemented a national integrated care system aiming to help elders build
healthy emotional attachments… ‘

Some work included a section labelled Global perspective in which views f rom dif f erent countries were
presented. However, no global view was presented, and the different national views were not drawn together
to f orm a global view. This work can only be credited as National perspectives.

Some weaker work did not present different perspectives on the issue, but instead presented information
about different places. This was sometimes labelled as Global or National Perspective though there were no
perspectives presented. In these cases, candidates described actions taken by a government, f or example,
or provided relevant statistics without telling us what anyone thought or felt about the issue. Others did not
present any perspectives or opinions apart f rom the candidate’s own views and these were sometimes
unsupported, with no relevant information or evidence, meaning that the report read as an unresearched
opinion piece.

© 2024
 Cambridge International General Certif icate of Secondary Education
0457 Global Perspectives November 2024
Principal Examiner Report f or Teachers

Some weak work presented a general topic with 2 or 3 sub-topics (often labelled Issue 1, Issue 2, Issue
3). This work did not present perspectives explicitly and (because it was dealing with multiple topics) did not
deal with the required criteria in any depth or detail.

Analysis of causes and consequences:

Most candidates explained the consequences of their chosen issue. Where their issue was clear, they were
able to discuss causes of the issue, explaining in some detail: Where candidates had not identif ied a global
issue, or where they wrote descriptive essays, they f ound it dif f icult to identif y or explain any causes or
consequences.

Weaker work showed a lack of research into the causes or reasons for their issue. This work tended to start
with the issue and only consider its impacts or consequences. In some cases these were separately sub -
headed as causes and consequences, but both sections presented only consequences.

Course(s) of Action:

The strongest work had a developed and focused course of action. The candidate explained the course of
action: its implementation (e.g. who would do it and details of how it would be done) and gave a clear
explanation of the likely impact of the course of action.

Note: It is acceptable for candidates to consider courses of action that have been successful elsewhere and
apply them to their own country.

Weaker work described solutions already in place but did not develop these to explain how these solutions
might be applied to their specif ic issue or in other countries. Some candidates either explained how the
course of action might be implemented or what its impact might be – but not both. Others provided a detailed
course of action that was not clearly linked to the issue they were considering.

The weakest work provided a list of actions that might be taken, but with no f urther details.

Evaluation of sources:

The strongest work showed clear evaluation of sources used. Candidates evaluated the sources using
dif ferent criteria and with an explanation of the impact of the quality of sources on the candidate’s thinking, or
work.

The evaluations made should be explained. Candidates should consider why their evaluation is relevant and
explain how they come to a conclusion about their source and what the impact is on the evidence,
perspective or the candidate’s view.

Some candidates provide a generalised evaluation of their research, without any evaluation of individual
sources. In these cases candidates’ comments are sometimes relevant but they are descriptive rather than
evaluative; general and unexplained; and not specif ic to one source. It is not clear, f or example, which
sources were biased and which unbiased, how the candidate knows this and why it might matter.

Some candidates did not attempt to evaluate any of their sources at all, or merely listed what inf ormation
they had f ound in each source.

Assessment Objective 2: Reflection:

The strongest work had a clear section of reflection on the candidate’s own perspective, on their research
f indings and on the perspectives they had explored. The candidate clearly explained how their own
perspective had developed, been changed, or impacted by others’ perspectives and by the information they
had gained about the issue. It included a clear conclusion/answer to their question based on research
f indings and other perspectives. Some strong candidates reflected throughout and then drew their reflections
together at the end coming to a logical and supported conclusion.

Weaker work simply provided a general conclusion, with no personal reflection on findings, perspectives, or
the issue. Some of the weakest work lost contact with the question and the issue and simply summed up a
descriptive essay.

© 2024
 Cambridge International General Certif icate of Secondary Education
0457 Global Perspectives November 2024
Principal Examiner Report f or Teachers

Assessment Objective 3: Communication:

Structure of the report:

Candidates are required to write their report in essay form. Their argument should be planned and logical
and f ollow a clear structure to answer their question. They should include all required criteria. They can write
between 1500 and 2000 words, and they are advised to use the f ull word count.

Candidates should be aware of all the required criteria and the weight of marks carried by each skill. Where
a skill carries 10 marks for example, they should expect to write much more than f or a skill carrying only 5
marks.

Some of the work seen this session was well-structured and the strongest work was cohesive and logical.

The strongest work was easy to f ollow and provided a clear structured argument with an introduction
outlining the global issue, addressing all the required criteria and ending with a ref lective conclusion. It used
the f ull available word count. This work started with dif f erent perspectives on the issue and kept those
f ocussed throughout. The candidate kept control of their argument and did not lose contact with their
question, the central issue, or their research f indings.

As in previous sessions, weaker work lacked focus. It tended to select several separate issues and present
general inf ormation about those, making it diff icult to f ollow any central argument. It sometimes included
inf ormation that was not relevant to the question. It tended to move around from one topic to another instead
of developing a central argument.

The weakest work of ten provided a series of headings with some facts and figures on the topic area, with no
clear f low of any argument and sometimes with no reflection or conclusion. Some appeared to have copied
and pasted sections from different sources, with no apparent connection between the different paragraphs or
with the question or issue.

Some work was structured via headings perhaps based on a template. However, nothing below the headings
was relevant. It appeared that these candidates simply did not understand what they had to do, or what the
headings meant.

Some work showed little evidence of any research; the candidate simply wrote a general philosophical
argument, or opinion piece. This was particularly common in essays on Belief Systems and the Family,
where candidates started with their own point of view and, as in past sessions, wrote only about that.

Some work presented was clearly based on the requirements of some other subject. We saw some
Sociology essays, Philosophy essays and others. This is an inappropriate approach as it leads to
inf ormative, descriptive essays and generally means that the requirements for a Global Perspectives essay
at this level are not met. The structure and headings bear no relation to the skills criteria for this component.

Clarity of arguments, perspectives, and evidence:

The strongest work clearly identif ies the required skills and presents the criteria f or this component in
separate paragraphs, or by using sub-headings. It is clear that the candidate understands what they are
doing and presents the required elements explicitly.

The weakest work shows little awareness of the requirements for this component. Candidates at this level
have clearly done some research, but they write very general essays without providing evidence of the
specif ic skills required f or Global Perspectives Individual Report.

Some candidates simply present information they have gained from primary and secondary research and do
not process or discuss it at all. Some candidates only present their own opinion on a general issue with no
evidence of research or others’ perspectives.

Citation and referencing:

All candidates should understand the need for complete in-text attribution. They should be aware that if
they present material as their own when they have f ound it in other sources, this is plagiarism. Where
candidates quote directly from sources, this should be in the f orm of short quotes, clearly attributed, and
most of the material in their work should be their own.

© 2024
 Cambridge International General Certif icate of Secondary Education
0457 Global Perspectives November 2024
Principal Examiner Report f or Teachers

There is no one f ixed method of citation or ref erencing f or this component. Any clear and consistent
method is acceptable.

In-text citation: Candidates may use bracketed citations, or numbering, or in-text ref erencing, to indicate
where they have used sources. They must include complete ref erences somewhere in their work, either
f ootnotes, endnotes, or in-text ref erences. (For ease of reading and control of word count, numbers or
brackets are more manageable).

References: Ref erences f or books or magazines should include author, date, and title of publication.
Ref erences for online materials should include at least the f ull URL (leading to the document, not just to a
website) and date of access (retrieval date).

The f ull ref erence list/footnotes/endnotes should be clearly linked to the in-text attribution. Candidates should
use one clear, consistent, and logical method (one set of numbers, or alphabetical order). References should
be clearly organised and easy to f ind.

Please note that when candidates quote sources found within material from other sources, they do need to
ref erence the quoted sources as well. It should be possible for the reader to find a ref erence for every person
or organisation quoted in the essay.

Please note that there is no requirement for the candidate to evaluate their own work or to suggest possible
improvements for f uture research. As the candidates have only 2000 words to cover a wide range of criteria
in some depth, this should be discouraged. There is no credit for self-evaluation, describing skills learnt, or
f or outlining f urther research.

© 2024
 Cambridge International General Certif icate of Secondary Education
0457 Global Perspectives November 2024
Principal Examiner Report f or Teachers

GLOBAL PERSPECTIVES

Paper 0457/03
Team Project

Key messages

• Teachers are encouraged to steer candidates away from topics/issues that could be sensitive locally.
• Teams need to identif y an aim that can be met e.g. raising awareness about the issue.
• The outcome should demonstrate how the Team met their aim.
• The Ref lective Paper requires candidates to present their own research findings and cite their sources.
• Candidates should use examples f rom their team project when they are ref lecting on the strengths,
weaknesses, benef its and challenges of the dif f erent aspects of the marking criteria.
• All members of a team must be awarded the same mark for the team elements (Outcome, Explanation
and Collaboration).

General comments

Team Projects:

The most successful projects involved a focus on an issue of local concern and changing the behaviour or
perception of others in relation to the issue. Candidates chose a variety of issues on which to f ocus their
projects. Under the topic of disease and health, some teams f ocused on raising awareness about mental
health issues.

Outcomes were varied and included school assemblies, f undraising events, leaf lets and posters. Some
teams who had made websites realised too late that these did not make it easy to gather evidence f or
evaluating the success in meeting their aim. Those who handled this most successfully used the process of
adapting their plans as part of their evaluation.

It was clear that most candidates had freedom when deciding on an aim and when designing an Outcome.
Locally important issues made research and activities easier to organise, and easier to give everyone in the
team a specif ic role and responsibility through which to evaluate their skills.

Less successful projects tended to give general inf ormation about a topic or an issue, without explicitly
ref erring to different cultural perspectives, or perspectives in dif f erent parts of the world on the issue. The
evaluations of these team projects sometimes made it clear that candidates had been but little involved in
choice of topic or team members.

Some Team Projects f or this November series showed an Explanation that f it the new 2025 syllabus
requirements f or Explanation of Research and Planning. These tended to be organised thus:

Teams stated a topic they want to f ocus on, and the local issue they wished to improve.

Which aspect of the issue each team member researched: perspectives on it, what other places/people were
doing about that issue. In the Explanation of Research and Planning teams said what they had f ound f rom
research that explains the value of their Action.

Af ter discussing research findings, teams gave some ref lection on this learning about an Action and how it
helped with the local issue. They gave detailed planning of that Action, including individual roles and
responsibilities. They described how they planned to gather evidence about how successful they have been.
Af ter the Action was completed, candidates recorded any changes that had to be made.

© 2024
 Cambridge International General Certif icate of Secondary Education
0457 Global Perspectives November 2024
Principal Examiner Report f or Teachers

Reflective Papers:

The most successf ul Ref lective Papers were well organised according to the criteria f ound in the mark
scheme: How far did the Outcome meet the team’s aim? How effective were my working processes? How
could the Outcome and my work processes have been improved? How effective was our team in completing
the project? How well did I work as a team member? What have I learned about the issue, other people’s
perspectives on it, and my skills in project/ teamwork? What were my research f indings, in summary?

The most successful evaluations consistently used evidence/examples from the team project to explain their
ref lections and evaluations of the dif f erent criteria.

Candidates should keep an ongoing log of their own ways of working and their work as a part of the team as
they will need these details to evidence their evaluations and reflections: examples do make a dif f erence to
marks available. They should note both what was a strength/benef it and what was a challenge/weakness,
and what impact this had on the project.

Comments on specific questions

Team Elements: Outcome, Explanation and Collaboration

AO3 Communication: Outcome and Explanation

The Explanation is a planning document: it informs the reader about the Team’s aims, plans for research into
the issue and perspectives on it, and plans for an activity. It gives decisions about an Outcome that will be
developed to inf orm others, and details of how the team will measure its success. If the aim is to raise
awareness, it is clear about the audience f or their event.

The Explanation should not contain team members’ research findings.

An example of the beginning of an Explanation of Research and Planning:

‘In this project, our goal is to let more people know the benefits of exercise and encourage them to exercise.
In today’s society, electronic products have become one of the indispensable necessities for people, thus
causing them to ignore the daily needs of the real world and keep themselves healthy. So we hope that more
people will take up more exercise. In this project, we chose to use PPT to make it happen.’

The Team has learned f rom research into perspectives and the issue. The aim is clear. The Outcome gives
evidence of the activity that has been developed to help the team to meet their aim. The Outcome must be fit
f or purpose. If it meant to raise awareness of an issue, then a presentation or a poster is appropriate.

This team goes on to give details of the plan.

‘The team’s plan is that D will provide evidence of perspectives from interviews and photographs of activities,
while B who is good with tech will turn it into an appealing PP. D has to have completed his work by the 14 th
so that B can have the PP ready for a trial run by the 21 st. L getting approval for us to present to our year,
and he is organising the room. We need the smart board and microphone.’.

AO3 Collaboration

Teachers must award a mark f or how well the team have worked together to complete the project. All
members of the team must be given the same mark and teachers should consider how well team members
have worked together over the course of the project, including how well they have communicated with each
other, solved problems, resolved conflict and divided work f airly between the team. This mark should be
inf ormed by teacher observation of teamwork and questioning of team members individually and collectively.

Teachers must award a mark for how well the individual worked in the team to complete the project. The
same method and criteria should be applied.

Personal Element: Reflective Paper

© 2024
 Cambridge International General Certif icate of Secondary Education
0457 Global Perspectives November 2024
Principal Examiner Report f or Teachers

AO1 Research, Analysis and Evaluation

Evaluating the Outcome:

Candidates must ask themselves how far the Outcome helped them to achieve their aim. The evidence that
they have can be f rom a variety of sources. If the team is raising awareness about an issue:

1 Candidates can have a set of questions to ask their audience before the action and the same set asked
af ter the action. These can then be compared to show which parts of their aim had been met and which
had not. Candidates can then ask how their Outcome could be improved to minimise these
weaknesses.
2 Candidates can ask verbal questions to their audience about what has been learned about the issue,
and what could have been improved. They can compile the team’s f indings and show which parts of
their Outcome were successf ul in meeting their aim, and where it had missed its mark.

Suggestions made about improving the Outcome should come f rom a weakness that was f ound in the
analysis of the data.

AO2 Reflection

Reflecting on Teamwork:

The question candidates must ask is: How effectively did our team work to produce our Outcome or meet our
aim? They must then use evidence to explain both the benefits and challenges of teamwork, reflecting on the
impact on the team’s aim or the Outcome. Evidence could come from the log they have kept on what went
well and what proved to be a challenge, or it could come from team discussions, reflecting on how decisions
were made, how much in line with each other they were, how effectively they planned. In the latter case, their
interpretation and writing must be their own, as this is an individual piece of work.

An example of a reflection on teamwork where benefits and challenges are explained, and their impact on
the project considered:

‘We had been well organized and worked together well, but actually done too much research and had to cut
our findings down. This was difficult as we had the pressure of finishing all this by the deadline. We had a
meeting and made another plan, for how to finish this and any other tasks on time. Everyone in the team
actively participated and we soon made great progress. We would not have finished this task on time if we
did not unite. None of us had taken of the role of leader, we were all equals, and all wanted to complete a
successful project. Everyone participated equally. But sometimes this meant things like planning meetings
took longer as everyone had their voice and was equally heard, and it could be difficult to reach decisions
and conclusions. It made us slow at times and less efficient.’

Reflecting on being a team member:

Candidates must ask themselves how well they supported the team, and how far they were supported by the
team.

The strengths of being a team member include giving support to the team. This can come f rom:

1 listening to others, and helping develop others’ ideas, as well as f rom contributing their own ideas
2 supporting team members who are struggling with an aspect of their teamwork, or asking f or help f rom
others
3 meeting deadlines so that the Outcome was ready to be tried out bef ore a presentation event
4 passing inf ormation to others about a part of your work that is just not possible to achieve.

Weaknesses in team members can include:

1 taking control of the project and making an Outcome yourself

2 ignoring the schedule of events and taking your time doing your task, holding up the f inished product
3 not of f ering ideas or helping to clarif y the ideas of others
4 not turning up to take your part in an event.

© 2024
 Cambridge International General Certif icate of Secondary Education
0457 Global Perspectives November 2024
Principal Examiner Report f or Teachers

AO3 Communication

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 summarised in the Ref lective Paper.

For example:

‘From my own research, sports around the world vary in importance. Some countries like China and Japan
do not prioritize sports but more on academic education. While most of the western countries see the
importance of a healthy body and healthy mind, some focus on sports like the USA. Many people in the USA
prefer to do sports over their education and as they want to follow their passion. They can get into university
on sports scholarships. While China and Japan prefer to mainly focus on the education that boosts economic
activity such as business, science, engineering and ICT. I believe however there should be a balance
between sports and education as sports benefits your physical health and helps your mind to work
effectively.’

‘From my team’s research findings, there are different perspectives on the issue, and these did change what
we were planning on saying. It seems that gym workouts are becoming unpopular because they can damage
some muscle groups while not strengthening others. We were careful to only showcase exercise that had
small, repetitive activities to prevent this. Another thing we learned was that it is not always the children who
do not like sport, but they are made to do extra study at home and they have no time left to enjoy sport. Out
presentation was planned to be telling people off for being lazy, but this made us change our approach so
that we could show how you can do small exercises while you are working. ’

Notice how this candidate has used learning and research f indings to develop the project.

This assessment objective requires reflective reports to f low meaningf ully with signposting and linking to
make clear the aspects of the criteria being evaluated or ref lected upon, their benef its/strengths and
challenges/weaknesses/limitations. For instance, it should not be dif f icult to f ollow which paragraphs are
evaluating the Action and which are ref lecting on the candidate’s role in the project.

Many candidates benefit from being offered a template with heading or questions on to guide their report.
This has no impact on marks available.

Where this individual research has involved secondary research, candidates must include citation and
ref erencing. This referencing should be included in the Ref lective Paper and detail the author, date, title,
URL and date accessed f or all sources used, in a consistent f ormat.

© 2024