Professional Documents
Culture Documents
9980 Example Candidate Responses (For Examination From 2020)
9980 Example Candidate Responses (For Examination From 2020)
Version 1
In order to help us develop the highest quality resources, we are undertaking a continuous programme
of review; not only to measure the success of our resources but also to highlight areas for
improvement and to identify new development needs.
We invite you to complete our survey by visiting the website below. Your comments on the quality and
relevance of our resources are very important to us.
www.surveymonkey.co.uk/r/GL6ZNJB
Would you like to become a Cambridge International consultant and help us develop
support materials?
www.cambridgeinternational.org/cambridge-for/teachers/teacherconsultants/
UCLES retains the copyright on all its publications. Registered Centres are permitted to copy material from
this booklet for their own internal use. However, we cannot give permission to Centres to photocopy any
material that is acknowledged to a third party, even for internal use within a Centre.
Contents
Introduction ........................................................................................................................................................ 4
Research Project ............................................................................................................................................... 6
Example Candidate Response – high ............................................................................................................... 6
Example Candidate Response – middle ......................................................................................................... 38
Example Candidate Response – low............................................................................................................... 57
Example Candidate Responses
Introduction
The main aim of this booklet is to exemplify standards for those teaching Cambridge International Project
Qualification 9980, and to show how different levels of candidates’ performance (high, middle and low) relate
to the subject’s curriculum and assessment objectives.
Research projects have been annotated with clear explanation of where and why marks were awarded or
omitted. This is followed by examiner comments on how the answer could have been improved. In this way,
it is possible for you to understand what candidates have done to gain their marks and what they could do to
improve their research project.
This document provides illustrative examples of candidate work with examiner commentary. These help
teachers to assess the standard required to achieve marks beyond the guidance of the mark scheme.
Past exam resources and other teacher support materials are available on the School Support Hub
www.cambridgeinternational.org/support
Research Project
Sound evaluation of an
argument.
Strong evaluation.
Excellent referencing.
AO2: Reflection – The candidate needed to examine the strengths and limitations of the project in more detail
through reference to specific examples. They also needed to make clearer and more specific references to the
project to explain how their views had changed. Both of these aspects of reflection are needed to contribute to
this objective, hence the mark given was at the top of Level 2.
AO3: Communication – Two factors needed improvement to move from the top of Level 3 (the awarded level) to
Level 4. Firstly, the candidate needed to define the terms ‘truth’ and ‘validity’ and to use them consistently
throughout the response, in the same way that they used other subject-specific vocabulary consistently and
accurately throughout. In addition, the candidate should have used a consistent format of referencing for online
sources in the reference list at the end of the work
This is an example of
evaluation. It could be made more
effective by considering the
possibility that the traditional
systems of measure may not have
been able to keep up with the pace
of change and the sheer volume of
online advertising.
Evaluation was explicit in places but not always effective. The candidate should have built on the effectiveness
of their evaluation of sources by considering counterpoints to their own key points, such as in relation to the
argument that an increasingly aged population will lead to more of the population using traditional rather than
modern media. They could have also evaluated the sources’ relative credibility and reliability.
AO2: Reflection – The candidate offered detailed reflection on the limitations of the project and some reflection
on the project’s strengths. This is Level 3. However, the candidate only offered some limited discussion of
personal views on the topic, which is Level 1, placing the candidate in Level 2 for this aspect overall. To improve
their answer, the candidate needed to state clearly their personal views as they were before carrying out the
project and then to explain what they were at its end, accounting for how and why they changed or remained the
same.
AO3: Communication – The report met elements of the assessment objective quite consistently at Level 2.
There were issues with clarity in places; however the work was fairly clear to follow. The candidate could have
improved their work by proofreading carefully and by using software that checks for spelling and grammatical
mistakes. They could have also improved the structure of the report by signposting more clearly when it was
considering modern and/or traditional media and from which perspective. The candidate needed to use
terminology consistently, as they switched between ‘traditional’ and ‘plain’ media to mean the same thing.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1 For better reference see: P. Frankopan, The Silk Roads. A New History or the
World, London: Bloomsbury, 2015
Pakistan. And so, as the Silk Road took off in the 2nd and
2 (Blystone, Dan. “China And The Maritime Silk Road.” Investopedia, 21 Apr.
2015)
Thereby the ancient Silk Road offered much more than After some more description, the
silk to people, just as today's globalization offers both candidate draws a comparison
between the historic situation and
promise and threat to each of us. the present day.
5 Siervo, Pauline. “Lanzhou New Area: From Chinese Ghost City to Urbanized Area.
“Yibada English, Yibada English, 24 Mar.2017,
en.yibada..com/articles/198770/20170324/Lanzhou-new-area-chinese-ghost-
city-urbanized.htm.
9 Griffiths, James. “Just What Is This One Belt, One Road Thing Anyway?” CNN,
India, Indonesia, Italy, Japan, Mexico, Republic of Korea, Russian Federation, Saudi
Arabia, South Africa, Spain, Turkey, the United Kingdom and the United States.
12 World Tourism Organization and World Travel & Tourism Council (2013), The
and India.13
exchange.htm.
Thereby, it can be predicted that when the Silk Road The candidate implies here that
the present actions are legitimated
starts to be put into practice, it will result in more by historical experiences, which is
exchange of ideas, cultures & technology. As there was a an analytical point.
massive fusion of different cultures in the past, it can be
estimated that more innovative things are yet to happen.
3.3 Environment
4.2 Tourism
18 with regards to the UNWTO “Silk Road Action Plan 2016/2017”, Vision, Page
10
Corporate lives
issue:11
GDP Impacts
20 Ylander “The Impact of ‘One Belt, One Road’ and its Effects on GDP Growth in
China”
This response was an example of how a well-written piece of work may not show the range of skills required by
the assessment objectives. It also demonstrated the misuse of the research log as an appendix to extend the
word count of the assignment. This is not the purpose of the research log and a research log used in this way
will not add to the marks earned for the other assessment objectives.
AO1: Research, analysis and evaluation – The assignment received marks in Levels 1 and 2. In terms of
research, the candidate needed to justify their choice of question. The candidate referred to the scope of the
question in the research log, however there was no serious attempt to justify its choice. They needed to ensure
that they engaged with sources as evidence in order to answer the question, rather than as a means of
describing the situation. In this sense, the sources were only broadly related to the question. In the research log,
the candidate acknowledged the value of consulting academic sources only to a limited extent. The candidate
could have improved this by justifying why this is the case.
The research log should have recorded planning and reflected the fact that the candidate had been using it on
an ongoing basis, but the candidate’s log gave ‘little evidence of the research process’. The candidate should
have formally identified the research methods in use and justified their choice of these.
The candidate met elements of the assessment objective at Level 2 quite consistently for analysis. The
candidate needed to use evidence more to answer the question and to make links back to the question based
on this analysis. In terms of evaluation, there was explicit evaluation of at least one source, however the
candidate needed to discuss the strengths and weaknesses of the research methods in some detail, and this
was absent from the report. The candidate should have evaluated a range of sources explicitly and effectively.
This required the candidate to consider the relative merit of the different sources to some extent.
AO2: Reflection – The candidate only included their limited reflection on a strength or limitation of the project in
considering its scope within the research log. This did not contribute to the marks for this assessment objective,
as it should have been present in the main report. To improve their answer the candidate needed to include
reflection on the strengths and limitations of the project explicitly and in detail within the project report itself. The
candidate’s personal views on the topic were unclear; the candidate should have indicated how and why their
views had changed or developed through carrying out the project. This information was absent, resulting in a
zero mark for this assessment objective.
AO3: Communication – The assignment was clear to read and well structured, apart from the use of the
research log as an extension to the project report. The candidate could have improved the structure further by
addressing some of the other assessment objectives and by linking points and evidence back to the question.
Nonetheless, the candidate wrote each paragraph clearly and the paragraphs were constructed and ordered
appropriately to build up to the finished report. The report included a lot of description, however this was
assessed under the other assessment objectives in terms of, for example, analysis and evaluation. Overall,
communication was good.