gp (essay) 2013 er

RESTRICTEDSingapore-Cambridge General Certificate of Education Advanced Level

H1 8807 General Paper November 2013Examiner Report

GENERAL PAPER

Paper 8807/01

Essay

General comments

The introductions are often very interesting. Vocabulary is often well chosen, though it can be excessive attimes. Similarly, ihere is evidence of controlled complex sentences, but these can be tortuous in places,raising concerns about the potential for future linguistic control. Simple clarity does not necessarily have tomean simplistic expression. Effective anecdotes and quotations are frequently used to exemplify a keyissue. A feature of a number of introductions was a sometimes awkward use of double negatives. Such astylistic feature needs to be handled with great care, as it can blur the clarity of the stance upon which thedevelopment of the argument is based.

The quality of conclusions is somewhat uneven, but the best ones frame the script by referring back to apoint or phrase from the introduction. This reinforces the sense of organisation and planning within thescripts. Weaker ones merely regurgitate the main arguments from each paragraph. New ideas andexamples should certainly not appear. Very long scripts often suffer as a result of rushed and poorlyexpressed conclusions.

The quality of expression in the best scripts is quite outstanding, a dominant feature being the sense of a'personal voice' which carries the argument along. 'Felicitous expression' is evident without beingpretentious and the quality of sentence structure is impressive. However, in weaker scripts there arelinguistic insecurities, for example, verb tenses and agreements and the inappropriate use of the future orconditional tense to introduce examples.

The following points also arise frequently:

e 'Africa' continues to be described as 'a country', immediately undermining the strength of theillustration.

o The definite article is omitted when referring to'the United States / Kingdom / Nations'.r Unclear jargon from Economics is employed without clear explanation: 'opportunity cost'; 'cost-

benefit analysis'; 'economic' and 'economical' are regularly confused.r Vague or awkward phrases were commonplace this year, especially'to stay relevant'and 'modern

world people'. The former needs explanation; the latter needs re-stating.o Others requiring care are: 'lt (There) is no doubt that...'and 'ln (the) light of...'.r The intrusive use of a preposition at the beginning of a phrase (usually'By...'often results in an

ungrammatical construction since a pronoun is also included: 'By helping the UN, it helps the citizensto gain rights'.

Some words continue to be commonly misspelt: millennium, modern, government, scientific, resilience,variations of 'occur' - occurred/occurring.

Some candidates lacked the awareness of different sides of an argument and were unable to meet the basicrequirement of this paper. Balance need not be equally lvgighted between different positions, but it shouldbe present. The organisation of differing viewpoints needs to be handled with clarity.

Whilst the paper is not a test of general knowledge, the quality of examples to illustrate an argument canhave a significant effect on the overall impact of a script. On a positive note, many candidates reveal animpressive knowledge of a wide range of current affairs across a range of subject areas.

Legibility of some scripts is an issue. The problem is compounded when scripts are excessively long.Scripts which exceed the given word limit are not penalised per se, but they do penalise themselves if ideapare difficult to follow, the style is repetitive or verbose, and the content is unfocused, vague or unclear.Quantity cannot compensate for quality. With weaker scripts it is undoubtedly counter-productive.

CAMBRIDGEInternational Examinations o2013


H'1 8807 General Paper November 2013Examiner Report

Comments on specific questions

Question 1

'The world would be a better place if more political leaders were women.' What is your view?

This was not a particularly popular question, but there were some good attempts from candidates whofocused on specific leaders such as Aung San Suu Kyi, Angela Merkel, Margaret Thatcher, lndira Gandhiand a few others. Other responses focused more on stereotypical gender traits. At times, there was a driftinto more feminist issues with a loss of focus on 'political leaders'. Better answers specifically attempted todefine what a 'better place'would be.

There was some confusion in trying to evaluate different gender traits, such as male decisiveness or femalecompassion. However, some responses made the point that a good leader should not be judged accordingto gender characteristics anyway, but the impact of his or her policies on the people in the society.

Some candidates did point out that there are sections of the world where the possibility of seeing morefemale leaders is unlikely as a result of ingrained prejudice.

Question 2

'Unlike the Arts, such as writing or music, Mathematics lacks the capacity for creativity.' How far doyou agree with this statement?

Questions on mathematical topics inevitably attract fewer responses and these tend to be of variable quality.Nevertheless, it is not uncommon to find that quite a good percentage of these are well versed in the topicand can discuss its features with knowledge and a lucidity which makes the argument clear to the non-mathematician.

Furthermore, this particular question, in order to be successful, demanded an awareness of the Arts, andmany scripts showed an impressive range of examples to support the discussion, taken from a widespectrum of the artistic world. Some candidates who chose this topic were sensitive to the claims ofMathematics and were able to provide a coherent line of argument to justify its capacity for creativity.

Question 3

ls there any point in trying to predict future trends?

This was quite a popular choice and many candidates drew upon specific examples to illustrate theirargument: the environment, financial and business areas such as fashion, terrorism as an emerging force aswell as local issues such as immigration and population patterns. Most candidates did pick up on the idea of'trends' which was vital for an effective answer, rather than just referring to one-off or occasional happenings.

Various reasons were given for the value of identifying trends, notably a preparedness to avoid repeatedoutcomes, but also an economic beneflt in foreseeing where the next 'big thing' might appear in the market.

Balanced responses did, however, make the point that predictions cannot always be foreseen or that theycan be false. ln this case, candidates showed some detailed and original examples to support their case.

Question 4

To what extent is it possible 'to make the punishment fit the crime'?

This was not a particularly popular question and it was handled in a variable manner. Nevertheless, therewere some thoughtful responses, although some candidates did use it largely as a platform to discuss thedeath penalty, thus narrowing the range of the discussion considerably.

There was often a consideration of the impracticality of finding a fitting punishment for certain crimes, notablymurder and rape. A like-for-like punishment was clearly seen as impractical in the latter case, while a serialkiller can only die once. Extreme cases of financial fraud were also examined in this light.

CAMBRIDGEInternational Examinations o 2013


H'1 8807 General Paper November 2013Examiner Report

The purpose of punishment was often raised, with deterrence and retribution being mentioned. As a result,the needs of the victims and of the broader society were often considered. Different types of punishment fordifferent types of crimes and age groups were also evaluated by stronger candidates: imprisonment andparole, corporal punishment, community sentences and so on.

The examples tended to be quite standard ones and traditional forms of crime formed the bedrock of everyanswer. There was very little evidence of more recent crimes linked to technology and its impact on the

criminal scene.

Question 5

Discuss the claim that in the modern world people should care more about international thannational issues.

This was usually answered by candidates who had an informed interest in current affairs with good examples

of local and global topics being effectively incorporated into cogent responses. The better answers mingled

national interest and international activities to show an interlinked pattern.

Many candidates drew the distinction between developed and developing countries, the latter needing to

focus on local economic groMh, whilst realising that this is not divorced from broader trends and events.

The argument was also made that international events can be influenced by national decisions, especiallythose taken by the more powerful staies.

lssues which were prominent on an international level were pollution, global warming, terrorism, financial

crises and political developments. At a more local level, immigration and population were frequently raised.

Question 6

How important is it to save plant and animal species which are in danger of extinction?

This was a reasonably popular question and was answered generally in a clear, methodical and exemplifiedway. Examples were variable, with the dodo claiming pride of place. Students usually thought saving

species was important and this was argued in terms of ecosystem balance, medical resources from plants,

the role of plants in absorbing carbon dioxide, educational aspects, human stewardship and animal rights.

Many candidates also emphasised the importance of education and the loss to future generations if certain

species were to become extinct.

Balance was often achieved by reference to the Darwinian concept of the survival of the fittest. A less

convincing argument relied on confidence in genetic engineering to simply reproduce lost species. Dolly the

sheep was often cited here, rarely convincingly.

There was some digression in that candidates, after acknowledging the environmental role of species, wrotegeneral essays about global warming, air pollution, the ozone layer and even littering; they thus did not pay

much attention to the actual question. Others argued convincingly that extinction was a natural process and

that developing countries had more pressing needs than conservation; such an approach was valid but

tended to be self-limiting.

Question 7

'scientific research into health and diet is unreliable as it so often contradicts itself.' ls this a faircomment?

This question was not generally successfully answered. Often, there was confusion beMeen 'reliability' and

'contradiction'. Most cindidates simply argued that research was reliable if it worked and contradictory if itwent against the main purpose of science in this area, which is to benefit human health. There was littleevidenCe of one approach, for example, to diet, contradicting another one. Nevertheless, such a stance was

accepted, but it did mean that the notion of research contradicting itself tended to be rather simplistic'

Health was covered more broadly than diet, and the concept of research could be quite general and vague.

Successful treatments of diseases such as cancer or heart disease were commonly used as further evidence

for the reliability of the research. GM foods were used as a 'double-edged sword': on the one hand, they had

CAMBRIDGEInternational Examinations @ 2013


H'l 8807 General Paper November 2013Examiner Report

helped to lessen hunger, but on the other they had focused on increased profits for the producers, which rancounter to the principle of research for human welfare. Thus, it was argued, they were both reliable, butcontradictory. Another reason for the latter stance was the desire for researchers to achieve personal fame,with the standard illustration from Asia being employed.

Question 8

How far is increased prosperity for all a realistic goal in your society?

This was a very popular question, answered in most cases with varying degrees of knowledge, precision andsubtlety.

The focus of the question should be on 'prosperity for all' and quite a few did argue this case. They pointedout that there are disadvantaged groups in Singapore, such as the aged, women and the disabled, and thatthe government has taken steps to raise the standard of living of these groups through measures such asminimum wage legislation, retraining, education etc. lmmigration was a common theme and a contradictoryone. Whilst some recognised that immigrants are less prosperous, the majority saw these immigrants as amain cause of the poverty of the indigenous groups; thus the desired prosperity for all could only beachieved by curbing immigration.

There was some discussion on the relative wealth of the ethnic groups of Singapore with reference to specialprojects and organisations to raise the levels of specific groups. Some negative stereotyping was referred toin these arguments. However, a number of candidates ignored the 'for all' idea and just wrote aboutincreased prosperity at the macro national level through industrialisation, trade and business legislation. ltmust be said that candidates who did include 'prosperity for all' often ignored 'increased prosperity'; therewas a sense of dividing the national cake more equitably rather than the idea of having a larger cake. Someable candidates saw a paradox here, because, if the whole national cake does not get bigger, increasedprosperity for one group might mean decreased prosperity for another.

Meritocracy was often given as a reason why everyone has the opportunity to increase his/her prosperity, butthere was also an increasing awareness that such a principle has drawbacks as well as benefits. Whathappens if you are not able to rise according to merit, for either personal or social reasons? The concept ofincreased prosperity for all is not then applicable.

It might also be said that the word 'prosperity' was not defined. Whilst most took it to mean material well-being and greater wealth, some argued in terms of social and ethnic harmony and happiness. This oftenresulted in a tangential argument. There is a case for 'thinking out of the box', but in this situation the term isquite self-evident.

Question 9

Consider the view that spoken language is more important than the written form.

This was answered by relatively few candidates. Attempts to distinguish between the two forms weremuddled. Most responses seemed to lack a planned and coherent line of discussion in mind before theystarted.

Spoken language was given priority because we do more of it, and from an early age. Political speecheswere frequently given as evidence, without the realisation that the vast majority of them begin life in thewritten form. There was some very convoluted discussion of the primacy of speech because it is

accompanied by tone, gesture and body language. lt was also commonly claimed that spoken language cangenerate emotion, which writing cannot. This is hardly a defensrble position.

Some candidates recognised the benefits of writing in legal terms: permanence, the ability to analyse andexamine it closely. These were important features of business and the legal system in particular.

Occasional scripts mentioned the nostalgic value of love letters. There was some confusion about whethermodern forms of communication in texts, for example, were spoken or written, since they did not have toconform to the conventions of writing. This was a profitable area for discussion, if handled with care.

CAMBRIDGEInternational Examinations @2013


Hl 8807 General Paper November 2013Examiner RePort

Question 10

Why should we be concerned with current affairs when most of them will soon be forgotten?

This proved to be a moderately popular question. lt was never answered weakly and rarely answered in an

outstanding way. Responses were rather narrow and predictable but apt. ln fact, some of the arguments

strongly resembled those provided for Question 3. The first issue was how to define 'current affairs'' There

was a problem on occasion with the time frame, but 'affairs' refers primarily to the affairs of humans and a

number of candidates took off to discuss global warming, sea level rises and natural disasters as well as the

affairs of animals. These arguments are iot fully apt, uiless _the input of society into the natural phenomena

is stressed and the nu*"*irthy aspects "te

Uiougnt out. Others went to the micro scale rather than the

global and discussed current affairs in the family ani friendship circles. This is a very restrictive approach'

It was, however, acceptable to deal with celebrity gossip and sporting events; the ephemeral nature of these

happenings was normally brought out. tne anter candidates contiasted this 'celeb news' with the rather

meatier news regardint'terrorilt, diplomacy and territorial disputes' To ignore these events would be

myopic. lt is possible, 6ut unlikely, tnut tn"." events will soon be forgotten' but the impact they have on the

future cannot be ignored. The jut"st canJloatei, accepting this, brought the future. and the past into the

essay - just as the current affairs of yesteryear strongly aff6cted the problems of today, so will the current

affairs of today determine the issues faced by posterit!.' Thus, in the main, concern with current affairs was

seen as justified.

Question 11

,Education should only be concerned with what is useful in life'' Discuss'

This was one of the most popular questions. lt brought out many differing responses' Most answers

transcended the utilitarian view that the dominant aim of 6ducation was to get a good job' often exploring the

concept of life-long skills and the importance of studying a range of subjects as part of a holistic education'

Students then becom" Lquippeo wiin culturat insighi aio a nroaoer awareness of the world around them'

Moreover, the idea of what is',useful' was examinJo, maxing the point that such an idea changes with time

and circumstances.

Moderate responses tended to list different subjects or subject areas to evaluate their 'usefulness' or

otherwise. The arts versus the sciencer pi*ioi,o an obvious contrast here. However, whilst such an

approach is not irrelevant, it is not very subtle or insightful'

Many candidates argued for the importance of moral values and moral education, although some of the

reasons given for tflis were not always Oir""tfy attributable to education' For instance' the scientists

mentioned in Question 7 were frequently quot"o'ut examples of educated people who lacked morals' The

extent to which this was a specific failure oi tnuil. education is not entirely convincing. Examples of attempts

to remedy such a shortcoming were plentiful'

Yet again, a distinction was often drawn between developing societies which need to concentrate on

prag;ific'"kitts and those which can aspire to higher levels in Maslow's hierarchy of needs'

Question 12

How far, in your society, should unpopular views be open to discussion?

The topics which were seen as 'unpopular' tended to be racial and religious issues, population and

immigration and the status of people with unconventional sexual orientations. The context of the discussion

in favour of limiting debate was usually an awareness of past social unrest between differing racial groups'

Virtually everyone felt that such events should be avoided at all costs' Nevertheless' there was also an

argument about not simply ignoring discontent in these areas. lt was considered vital to ensure that avenues

ar6 available where consideied and rational discussion can take place.

Another strand in the need to allow open discussion centred upon the status of ,singapore as a.mode.rn

country which should be on a par with oi6"i tuio. states when freedom of speech is involved' Thus' the

need to shake off the image of the,nanny state'was seen as.vital. lssues such as gay rights, for example,

are now part of the daily conversation in ,iJO"u"Loped countries, even though disagreement still exists'

CAMBRIDGEInternational Examinations

a2013

\RESTRICTED

Singapore-Cambridge General Certificate of Education Advanced LevelHl 8807 General Paper November2013

Examiner Report

I.frequently, indicating the depth of feeling and the need to

hi',id to be reached in an amicable way which is at least$proval.ii;r' :'

:ii l

CAMBRIDGEInternational Examinations .o 2013