Examiners’ Report

Principal Examiner Feedback

June 2023

Pearson Edexcel International GCSE

Edexcel and BTEC qualifications are awarded by Pearson, the UK’s largest awarding body.
We provide a wide range of qualifications including academic, vocational, occupational and
specific programmes for employers. For further information visit our qualifications websites
at www.edexcel.com or www.btec.co.uk. Alternatively, you can get in touch with us using
the details on our contact us page at www.edexcel.com/contactus.

Pearson: helping people progress, everywhere

Pearson aspires to be the world’s leading learning company. Our aim is to help everyone
progress in their lives through education. We believe in every kind of learning, for all kinds
of people, wherever they are in the world. We’ve been involved in education for over 150
years, and by working across 70 countries, in 100 languages, we have built an
international reputation for our commitment to high standards and raising achievement
through innovation in education. Find out more about how we can help you and your
students at: www.pearson.com/uk

June 2023
Publications Code 4GL1_01_2306_ER
All the material in this publication is copyright
© Pearson Education Ltd 2023
Candidate numbers exceeded 1,000 for the first time in May 2023.
The most noticeable recent improvement has been the quality of the answers written in section A.
Based on this evidence, a growing number of candidates are carrying out rigorous and rewarding
work. Their chosen global citizenship themes are almost always important and worthy ones,
including actions in support of poverty alleviation, care for refugees, equal rights for women and
beach clean-ups. These had been conducted in wide range of global contexts and settings.
Candidates clearly understood the purpose and structure of their activity.
Other noticeable improvements include growing familiarity with the requirements of the 9-mark
questions. These use the resource booklet as a starting point or ‘springboard’ for thinking about key
citizenship issues: candidates are then expected to apply their own knowledge to each discussion
statement. This year, many candidates attained Level 3 by carefully demonstrating their own
understanding of each issue in a balanced and measured way. They showed skill and sound
judgement by constructing answers that provided balanced coverage of two differing viewpoints.
Candidates scoring lower marks across the paper as a whole tended to give insufficient thought to
the meaning and wording of many of the questions. It was typical to see lower-scoring candidates
providing answers with insufficient focus on keywords and phrases such as ‘some individuals’
(question 8) or ‘helped the development’ (question 20a).

1a Most candidates understood what is meant by primary research. In the context of the
specification, it refers to new information created and curated by the candidates themselves. This
might be data collected using questionnaires, photographs or in-depth interviews carried out with
relevant stakeholders. A minority of candidates wrote wrongly about secondary data sources
including website and magazine articles. Primary research does not always need to be conducted
outside of the classroom. It can be carried out online - interviews can be conducted virtually;
databases can be sampled. Reading somebody else’s article or book is a form of secondary research,
however.
1b Candidates found this task straightforward. Different difficulties were explained ranging from
generic ideas about running out of time or being poorly organised through to points that were highly
specific to the work undertaken. Some excellent answers were written about projects dealing with
personal issues. Candidates advised that researchers should be aware that other people may find it
difficult to speak openly and that great sensitivity is needed when dealing with certain issues.
1c Most candidates had no difficulty in identifying and describing two methods they used to spread
awareness. The most popular themes included the use of social media, posters and school
assemblies. Candidates at the lower end of the mark range tended to simply describe their activities.
In the middle of the range, they typically asserted the methods used were good ones. At the top of
the range, they were able to explain particular strengths. Recurring good themes included the need
to target younger age groups when raising awareness (because younger minds may be less closed to
alternative perspectives and narratives). Many candidates wrote eloquently about design techniques
or content that can be usefully applied to audio or visual media in order to gain an audience’s
attention. Such answers typically scored full marks.
1d The final part of question 1 was challenging for some candidates. They were asked what they had
hoped to achieve - other than raising awareness. Credit was given to answers closely related to
awareness-raising, such as changing people’s behaviour. If raising awareness is the first step then
prompting people to act differently is logically a further step. Depending on the nature of the action,
some candidates additionally wrote about specific goals they had in mind at the outset. Examples
included pledges to actively reduce the amount of litter on beaches or to achieve improved care for
target groups of people. Credit was given to candidates who hoped that their own work might in
some small way tie into a broader global objective, such as improved human rights or the
achievement of a sustainable development goal.
This response securely reached the highest mark band for each part of question 1. It provides
evidence for a rigorous and thoughtful action project with clear aims, objectives and outcomes. In
every respect this is a fine answer that is indicative of excellent out-of-classroom action and in-
classroom teaching and learning.
8 This question panned two different assessment objectives - AO2 and AO3. Interpretive credit was
available for careful use of information from the source booklet. Many candidates took this approach
in at least one of their answers, typically explaining that those US citizens who are most concerned
about climate change issues may feel that they and the rest of the world have benefited from the
election of President Biden. In the second part of the question, candidates were more likely to use a
topical theme of their own, such as conflict, based on their own knowledge and understanding.
Some used historical examples of regime changes that have either worsened or improved
international relationships, such as the rise of Hitler in Germany. Some candidates wrote about
changes over time in US leadership that have affected international relationships centred on the
Middle East, especially Iraq and Iran. A wide range of appropriate examples were seen and credited.
Candidates scoring lower marks wrote in the most generalised terms and were unable to provide any
specific examples to support their points.
9a Candidates scoring full marks identified two appropriate issues that require international
cooperation or legislation. They sensibly named cross-border issues such as the pursuit of
international war criminals, or efforts to stop trade in endangered species. Other high-scoring
responses centred on universal issues of human rights. Candidates who gained fewer marks typically
selected two issues where it was less clear why international laws were needed, for example in
relation to work and pay. International laws are not needed to ensure that citizens of all countries
have equal pay. As with many other questions, there was a strong correlation between the award of
higher marks and the inclusion of supporting evidence and detail by candidates.
9b Answers were credited that named international law-making institutions, or institutions that
enforce international law (and by so doing create new precedents and legal knowledge). Credit was
given for the naming of trade blocs and other international organisations that require members to
adopt common rules, practises and laws, the European Union being a notable example. The United
Nations was not credited, however – it cannot be reasonably characterised as a ‘lawmaking
institution’. Candidates were expected to be familiar with specific legal institutions that are under the
UN umbrella. These are named in the specification and appear in the mark scheme.
10a As might be expected, candidates provided a wide range of examples. Most were political in
character. The misuse of social media to promote fake news was suggested by many candidates,
using contemporary examples of the US, Russia or the UK’s exit from the EU. Lower-scoring answers
sometimes took the form of a short anecdotal description of a celebrity story. Higher-scoring
answers framed the example in a way that made greater use of citizenship concepts and ideas,
including media bias and the encoding of false information.
10b The mark scheme demonstrates that the expectations for this question were relatively
straightforward. Candidates were expected to say where carbon is captured from and where it can
be stored. In other words, the technology aims to take carbon dioxide from the atmosphere and to
store it underground. This statement was sufficient for the award of 2 marks. Only a minority of
candidates scored 2 marks, however. Candidates were typically vague about where the carbon would
be stored. Many gained 1 mark for stating that carbon is taken away from the atmosphere or air.
However, the second part of their answers did no more than to repeat the word ‘storage’.
11
At the upper end of the mark range, candidates scoring top level marks produced substantial
responses that met all three assessment objectives squarely. They applied quite detailed knowledge
of different technologies, or of political and civil actions. They framed the material in a way that
showcased contrasting perspectives appropriately, as required by the instruction to provide reasoned
arguments to support and oppose the statement. Responses in the middle of the mark range
normally met the requirements to provide contrasting arguments and perspectives. However, they
typically lacked much in the way of supporting evidence and were often over-generalised. They
asserted that ‘people’ and ‘countries’ might do more to save energy, yet we’re unable to support this
with more detailed information and examples. Most candidates used their time wisely and provided
answers that were between 1 and 1.5 pages long. It is entirely possible for candidates to score full
marks with just one page of writing - provided it is concise, balanced and well evidenced. Some
candidates did however write excessively long answers of two sides or more, potentially jeopardising
their ability to devote sufficient time to the final question on the paper. Candidates are advised to be
strict with their timing for these 9-mark questions.
18 A recurring feature of answers to this question was most candidates’ inability to identify a reason
other than migration that can result in high-wealth individuals living in a particular country. As a
result, many candidates only gained 3 marks for rather narrow answers that focused on high-wealth
business owners moving to low-income countries where labour costs are low (their first reason) and
perhaps taxes are also low (their second reason). In contrast, candidates scoring full marks were
more likely to additionally make reference to pre-existing wealth inequalities in countries where
ordinary people’s incomes are considerably lower than those of elite groups. The best answers used
some interesting examples, such as economic inequality in the Democratic Republic of the Congo.
19a At the lower end of the mark range, candidates tended to repeat themselves. In both parts of
the answer space, they explained that countries are affected by globalisation in cultural ways that
local people resist. In contrast, near the top end of the mark range, there was greater evidence in
answers of a wider range of applied citizenship concepts and ideas. Typically, a candidate scoring 4
marks wrote about cultural imperialism in the first part of their answer and sovereignty in the second
part of their answer. These answers were more likely to make good use of evidence, for example by
referencing views on Western culture in regional contexts that ranged from northeast Nigeria to rural
Pakistan. A few candidates correctly explained the UK’s decision to leave the European Union as a
manifestation of resistance to globalisation.
19b Most candidates were able to extract the two relevant benefits from source E.
20a This question proved difficult for many candidates who were apparently unfamiliar with some of
the key citizenship concepts that appear in the Specification in the section: ‘The effects of migration
on patterns of identity and diversity.’ Students are meant to study the concepts of community
cohesion and multiple identity.
In the context of this question, it was hoped that candidates would establish a logical connection
between the source material and the concept of multiple identity (which is a core understanding for
citizenship studies). Only a small minority of candidates made this connection by writing about
multiple or dual citizenship, however. Most instead offered a generalised suggestion that people
might be left feeling ‘conflicted’ or ‘changed’ by the experience. Such responses rarely merited the
award of both marks.
20b Most candidates were able to provide an example of an appropriate migration flow in the
context of a named country. At the lower end of the mark range, candidates were more likely to
describe a simple benefit such as the availability of lower-cost labour in certain countries. In the
middle of the mark range, candidates were more likely to focus on remittances being returned to the
source countries that migrants had left. The concept of development did not feature as part of that
answer though, and only two marks were usually awarded. Answers at the top of the mark range
typically made an explicit link between migration and the process of development. For example, high
scoring candidates explained how remittances might be used to further the social development of
source countries by helping family members gain higher education or improved access to health
care, thereby helping to raise a country’s Human Development Index (HDI) score.
21 This item performed very similarly to question 11. The discussion statement was accessible and
very few candidates made errors of interpretation. At the top end of the mark range, excellent
answers argued strongly in favour of the statement by highlighting the greater vulnerability of the
citizens of some global South countries to pressing issues ranging from climate change to conflict.
Personal exposure to risk, these answers argued, inevitably makes people care deeply about the
issues they face each day. High-scoring answers additionally provided a strong counterargument.
Popular counterargument themes included the affluence and education of citizens of wealthy
countries as reasons why some people become involved in charitable or campaigning work.
22a At the upper end of the mark range, candidates were clearly well versed in the importance and
history of human rights. Their answers correctly defined human rights, included key examples and
additionally noted the importance of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. At the lower end of
the marking range, candidates often wrote very little. They merely stated that human rights are
important things that everybody has to have, such as food and drink.
22b Most candidates were able to create an effective and usually topical discussion of the statement,
even if they were able to do little more than consider one or two examples of occasions when
human rights have been threatened. The best answers thought critically about what was meant by
the word ‘role’ and built a strong argument around the importance of media in bringing human
rights abuses into the spotlight in order for government to then take action or introduce legislation.
In other words, there is no simple conclusion to this question, and a more nuanced argument is
ideally required Both media and governments have important but different roles to play.
At the upper end of the marking range, candidates typically made an additional point that
governments ultimately have the most important role in deciding whether or not human rights are
protected - because they also act as regulators for the media and news reporting industries. In other
words, if governments censor media, then human rights cannot be protected.
Another hallmark of high scoring answers was some discussion of how the issues may play out across
state boundaries. In countries where the media are censored, it may fall to the media of other
countries to show the world what is happening. Answers that developed this argument showed
excellent understanding of what ‘global citizenship’ really means.

Closing
Candidates need reminding that grounding arguments in detailed evidence is an essential skill for a
humanities qualification like Global Citizenship.

Typically, a 2- or 4-mark ‘explain’ or ‘suggest’ question focused on a Source will require candidates to
create a ‘blended’ answer which makes use of supporting information from the source and also the
candidate's own knowledge and understanding (AO2) of citizenship concepts, ideas or issues. In
particular, candidates are encouraged to make greater use of subject-specific terminology.

In 9-mark questions, candidates will not gain a top-level mark by only writing about one side of the
argument, no matter how good their points are. Balanced coverage is expected.

In the 15-mark essay, candidates will sometimes provide a good evaluation of the issues but neglect
to use much in the way of supporting evidence. Candidates need clear guidance that there should
be sustained use of supporting evidence throughout their final answer.