9777_w10_ms_1

7/30/2019 9777_w10_ms_1

1/5

UNIVERSITY OF CAMBRIDGE INTERNATIONAL EXAMINATIONS

Pre-U Certificate

MARK SCHEME for the October/November 2010 question paper

for the guidance of teachers

9777 GLOBAL PERSPECTIVES

9777/01 Paper 1 (Written Paper), maximum raw mark 30

This mark scheme is published as an aid to teachers and candidates, to indicate the requirements ofthe examination. It shows the basis on which Examiners were instructed to award marks. It does notindicate the details of the discussions that took place at an Examiners meeting before marking began,which would have considered the acceptability of alternative answers.

Mark schemes must be read in conjunction with the question papers and the report on theexamination.

CIE will not enter into discussions or correspondence in connection with these mark schemes.

CIE is publishing the mark schemes for the October/November 2010 question papers for most IGCSE,Pre-U, GCE Advanced Level and Advanced Subsidiary Level syllabuses and some Ordinary Levelsyllabuses.

7/30/2019 9777_w10_ms_1

2/5

Page 2 Mark Scheme: Teachers version Syllabus Paper

Pre-U October/November 2010 9777 01

UCLES 2010

NB: The AOs are inter-dependent and it is thus not feasible to see them discretely so the marking ofall answers will be holistic.

AO1Analysis andevaluation ofarguments

Critical analysis and evaluation of argument structure: to understand and apply the language of reasoning; to analyse the structure of argument, by identifying the

conclusion, reasons (premises), assumptions and any counter-argument;

to assess the technical strength/weakness of the argument bytesting the acceptability, relevance and sufficiency of thepremises to support the conclusion.

AO2Analysis andevaluation of

contexts

Situating the argument in its context: identify and evaluate the use of key expressions and ideas,

clarifying them as needed; assess the credibility of sources (collected by the candidate); identify alternative/rival perspectives and assess their

relationship to the case presented; identify desirable ends/outcomes from which to judge rival

perspectives.

AO3 Communication

Presentation, communication and collaboration: use language and other appropriate media to convey complex

concepts and ideas with clarity; establish a context or framework of understanding sufficient for

audiences to understand and respond to the presentation; demonstrate ability to create a coherent and well-elaborated

personal perspective and articulate its relationship to alternativeperspectives.

7/30/2019 9777_w10_ms_1

3/5



UCLES 2010

1 What does the author of Document 1 think that the USA today could learn from wartimeGermanys energy policy? [2]

The author suggests that the USA could see how Germany was able to utilise synfuels developedfrom coal and that this offers the best way forward for supplying fuel needs, particularly for

transport. They might point to the success of this policy and suggest the US should therefore seeit as viable for their own circumstances. Candidates can also be credited if they mention that theUSA could see the advantage of being independent of foreign supplies.

2 (a) Summarise the main evidence given in Document 1. [4]

In order to access the higher marks candidates must make use of the whole document. Ifthey concentrate only on the evidence put forward on wartime Germany the maximum markavailable is 2 as they will not have considered the main evidence.

It is likely that answers will consider the success of Hitlers policy of blitzkrieg in the early

stages of World War II and link this to the heavy reliance upon coal.

There may be some consideration of the other forms of energy used to power areas of lifeapart from transport.

There may be some consideration of the declining oil reserves in key area, which support theargument for the need to find an alternative.

There may be some consideration of the costs of producing oil from the alternatives.

Award a maximum of two marks for the summary of any piece of evidence, depending uponhow well it is developed or one mark for each piece of evidence that is briefly explained.

(b) Evaluate the strengths and weaknesses of the evidence in Document 1. [10]

Responses should focus on both the strengths and weaknesses of the argument put forwardin Document 1. However, at Level 1 it is likely that candidates will consider only theweaknesses. In order to achieve Level 3 candidates must consider both the strengths andweaknesses. At Level 2 there is likely to be imbalance, with most of the answer focusing onthe weakness of the reasoning, although some answers may focus largely on the strengths.However, an answer that focuses ONLY on the strengths or weaknesses can still achieveLevel 2 if the evaluation is strong.

7/30/2019 9777_w10_ms_1

4/5



UCLES 2010

Level 3810 marks

Sustained evaluation of strength and weaknesses of reasoning andevidence, critical assessment with explicit reference to how flaws andcounter argument support the claim.

Highly effective, accurate and clearly expressed explanation and reasoning;clear evidence of structured argument/discussion, with conclusionsreached/explicitly stated in a cogent and convincing manner.

Level 247 marks

Some evaluation of strengths or weaknesses of reasoning and evidence,but evaluation may focus on one aspect; assessment of flaws etc may notlink clearly to the claim.

Effective and generally accurate explanation and reasoning; some evidenceof structured argument/discussion; conclusions may not be explicitly statedor link directly to the analysis.

Level 113 marks

Little or no evaluation of strengths and weaknesses, although flaws etc maybe identified.

Level of communication is limited, response may be cursory or descriptive;communication does not deal with complex subject matter.

Candidates might refer to some of the material used in 2 (a) but should also take notice ofthe author and his purpose. Candidates should also pay attention to the language used inDocument1. Candidates might consider the sources used to support the argument as theyare both from sources that would support the use of hydrocarbons, such as Exxon Mobil andthe Oil and Gas Journal. However, they might also question the evidence put forward in

support of such claims as neither offer precise examples or evidence to show that fossil fuelsor hydrocarbons are the only source available in great enough supply, it is simply asserted.

Candidates might also comment on reference to the evidence of costs, how reliable arethey?

Candidates may refer to many of the sweeping and unsupported statement put forward inDocument1. What is the scale of the hydrocarbons available?

They might consider whether the example of the Second World War has any relevance todayin the current economic situation. Some might also doubt the figures given as Germany diduse oil from Russia, Romania etc.

There might be some discussion as to the suggestion that synfuels are suited for transportand that the author is not suggesting that they will solve all issues.

Some answers might suggest that one of the strengths of the evidence is the reference toareas where oil production is in decline.

7/30/2019 9777_w10_ms_1

5/5



UCLES 2010

3 To what extent do the perspectives in Document 2 challenge or reinforce those putforward in Document1? [14]

Level 31014 marks

Sustained evaluation of strength and weaknesses of reasoning and evidence,critical assessment with explicit reference to how flaws and counter argument

support the claim.

Highly effective, accurate and clearly expressed explanation and reasoning;clear evidence of structured argument/discussion, with conclusionsreached/explicitly stated in a cogent and convincing manner.

Level 259 marks

Some evaluation of strengths and weaknesses of reasoning and evidence,but evaluation may focus on one aspect; assessment of flaws etc may not linkclearly to the claim.

Effective and generally accurate explanation and reasoning; some evidenceof structured argument/discussion; conclusions may not be explicitly stated or

link directly to the analysis.

Level 114 marks

Little or no evaluation of strengths and weaknesses, although flaws etc maybe identified.

Level of communication is limited, response may be cursory or descriptive;communication does not deal with complex subject matter.

Responses should focus on key reasons and evidence in both documents in order to comparealternative perspectives and synthesise them in order to reach a reasoned judgement. In order toassess whether Document 2 challenges or reinforces Document 1 candidates should consider

not only the content of the Documents, but critically assess the arguments put forward through aconsideration of issues such as purpose and language.

At Level 1 there will be very little comparison of the passages or evaluation and candidates maysimply describe the documents or identify areas of similarity and difference. At Level 2 there willbe some evaluation and comparison, but it will be either poorly developed or limited in the areascovered. At Level 3 candidates will reach a sustained judgement about whether the reinforcementor challenge is effective. In order to do this they will have covered a significant range of issues,and evaluated them clearly.

Candidates may reach the judgement that, taken together, the two documents offer differentperspectives, but still reach the same conclusion that the supply of fossil fuels is in decline and an

alternative needs to be found. Answers may then suggest that because both authors reach thesame conclusion, but from different angles, the overall credibility of the argument of each article isaugmented. However, it is likely most will see that the solution suggested in the passages differs.

Candidates may point to the different perspectives put forward on the availability of hydrocarbonsas Document 2 does not believe that there is sufficient available to solve the problem or at areasonable cost, unlike Document 1.

Document 2 also takes the argument further and considers the impact that the change will have.It does mention the environmental impact, which is not considered in Document 1. Document 2also raises problems associated with renewable energy and therefore offers a more balancedperspective. Document also puts forward other solutions, such as the cutback in consumption.

Candidates should critically assess the use of examples and evidence in order to reach a judgement.