Global Perspectives: The Written Exam — Revision Notes

Condensed for the final weeks. For the full explanation, use the Global Perspectives Written Exam study guide.

What is actually assessed

Skills, not content. Revising facts about a topic is largely wasted; practising the analytical moves is what raises the grade.

The moves: identify perspectives · analyse arguments · evaluate evidence · construct your own reasoning · reflect.

The paper’s structure

Component 1: Written Exam
  1 hour 25 minutes, 70 marks
  FOUR compulsory questions, based on SOURCE documents
  Externally set and marked by Cambridge

Sources: background info + different perspectives on ONE global issue
         may include images and material from varied subject backgrounds

Component 1 sits alongside Component 2 (Individual Report) and Component 3 (Team Project), both coursework-style tasks. All three draw on the same list of broad global-issue topics (such as Climate change, energy and resources, or Migration and urbanisation), but Component 1 alone is the externally-marked written paper. Reading time is built into the overall time allowance, so budgeting time to read every source thoroughly before writing is part of the skill being tested, not a bonus.

The vocabulary — get these precise

Term	Meaning
Perspective	A viewpoint supported by reasons and evidence, held for reasons linked to context
Argument	A conclusion supported by reasons
Evidence	Data, examples or testimony offered in support
Assertion	A claim with no support
Assumption	Something taken for granted but left unstated

A perspective is not just an opinion — it has reasoning behind it.

The three levels

Always consider an issue at personal, national and global level. Moving between them is a marker of a strong answer.

Evaluating a source — six criteria

Criterion	Ask
Credibility	Who wrote it? What expertise?
Bias	Do they gain from this view? Loaded language?
Currency	Recent enough for the claim?
Relevance	Does it address the question?
Corroboration	Do independent sources agree?
Method	Sample size? How was data gathered?

Demonstrate bias by quoting the loaded wording — don’t merely assert it.

Worked example — spotting the hidden assumption

A source states: “Renewable energy investment tripled over the last decade, proving that governments now prioritise fighting climate change above all else.”

Claim       -> governments now prioritise climate change above
               all else
Evidence    -> renewable energy investment tripled

Hidden ASSUMPTION -> increased investment in one area means it is now
                      the TOP priority, ranked above every other goal

Evaluation:
  The evidence (tripled investment) supports a narrower claim -- that
  climate change is being taken more seriously -- but does not, on its
  own, support the much stronger claim that it now outranks every
  other government priority
  No baseline given -- "tripled" from what starting figure?
  No comparison with spending on other priorities is offered

The gap between what the evidence actually shows and what the source claims it shows is exactly what “identifying an assumption” means in practice — the evidence can be entirely accurate while the conclusion drawn from it still overreaches.

Statistics — always interrogate

• What is the sample size and how was it selected?
• Is the sample representative of the claim being made?
• Is the baseline given? (“Doubled” from 2 to 4 is nearly meaningless.)
• Is the comparison fair?

Structuring an extended answer

1. A clear line of reasoning.
2. Source material used as evidence, not summarised.
3. A counter-argument genuinely considered and responded to.
4. A conclusion that follows from the reasoning.
5. Reflection — how and why your view developed. Frequently skipped; it carries marks.

Exam traps

• Summarising a source instead of using it.
• Asserting bias without evidence from the text.
• Treating an assertion as evidence.
• Presenting a counter-argument then ignoring it.
• Staying at one level (usually global) and never reaching personal or national.
• Omitting reflection entirely.

Self-test

1. Distinguish an argument from an assertion.
2. A source says “a survey of 150 people in one town shows the nation supports the policy.” Give two weaknesses.
3. What are the three levels at which issues should be considered?
4. How should you demonstrate that a source is biased?
5. Why is reflection worth writing?

Answers: 1. An argument offers a conclusion supported by reasons; an assertion is a bare claim with no support. 2. The sample is small and geographically narrow (one town), so it cannot support a national claim; no information on how respondents were selected, so it may not be representative. 3. Personal, national, global. 4. Quote the loaded or one-sided wording and explain whose interest that phrasing serves. 5. It is directly credited — it shows awareness that your own view has developed in response to evidence, which is the point of the course.

6. How long is Component 1 and how many marks is it worth?
7. What is a hidden assumption, and how does it differ from stated evidence?

Answers (continued): 6. 1 hour 25 minutes, 70 marks, with four compulsory questions based on source documents. 7. A hidden assumption is an unstated step a source’s conclusion relies on without justifying — unlike stated evidence, which is given directly, an assumption has to be inferred by the reader, and a strong answer makes it explicit before evaluating whether it is reasonable.

For the full explanation, including the paper’s official structure and another fully worked source-evaluation example, see the Global Perspectives Written Exam study guide.