Cambridge IGCSE Global Perspectives (0457): Topic: Change in culture and communities — Practice Questions

These are original questions written for Marlbridge, for revision and practice on this content. They are not reproduced past-paper questions, and they do not replicate the exam’s exact structure, question count or mark tariffs — examination boards hold copyright in their own papers. Use these alongside the official past papers from your board or school.

These questions use the topic Change in culture and communities from the Cambridge IGCSE Global Perspectives (0457) syllabus for examination in 2025, 2026 and 2027, Version 2 (published April 2025), sections 2 to 4. Questions 1 to 9 practise Component 1 Written Exam skills; questions 10 and 11 practise planning for Component 2 Individual Report and Component 3 Team Project. Topic knowledge is not assessed: answer only from the fictional sources.

See the study guide, revision notes, IGCSE Global Perspectives hub and 0457 checklist.

Questions

1. Read Source A.

Source A — original text written for Marlbridge. Kelmont, a fictional town, has held a Saturday street market for a century. Last year the town council voted to move the market into a new indoor food hall so that the street can be used for car parking. Rents in the hall are higher, and 9 of the 30 stallholders have said they will close. One trader, Mrs Okafor, said: “This market is the heart of Kelmont. Without it, neighbours will stop meeting each other.” A council spokesperson said: “The hall is warm, dry and modern. Footfall will rise because shoppers can park outside.” A survey carried out for the hall’s developer found that 70% of shoppers prefer indoor markets.

Identify one fact and one opinion from Source A. [2]

2. Using Source A:

(a) Identify one prediction. [1] (b) Explain why the survey finding that “70% of shoppers prefer indoor markets” may not be reliable evidence. [3]

3. Using Source A, explain one cause and one consequence of the change to Kelmont’s market. [4]

4. Read Source B.

Source B — original data written for Marlbridge (fictional). Thornwick is a fictional town. In 2025, 400 residents were surveyed at the town’s shopping centre on a weekday morning about its annual harvest festival.

Age group	Number surveyed	Attended the festival this year	Said “the festival matters to our town”
14–24	80	22	30
25–49	120	54	66
50 and over	200	150	170
Total	400	226	266

Council records (fictional): festival ticket sales were 3200 in 2015 and 2400 in 2025. Over the same period the ticket price rose from 4 to 7 Thornwick crowns. A local newspaper columnist wrote: “These figures prove that young people in Thornwick no longer care about our traditions.”

(a) Calculate the percentage of people aged 14–24 surveyed who attended the festival this year. [1] (b) Evaluate how well Source B supports the columnist’s claim. [8] (c) Suggest how the columnist’s claim could be tested more reliably. [4]

5. Read Source C.

Source C — original text written for Marlbridge. In Arrenland, a fictional country, the government plans that all primary schools will teach only in the national language, ending lessons in regional languages.

The Education Minister: “One shared language helps every child compete for national jobs. Employers tell us that poor national-language skills hold young people back. A nation that speaks together stays together.”

A primary teacher in a region where a regional language is spoken: “Children learn best in the language they speak at home. In my school, pupils taught first in their home language and then in the national language read well in both by age ten. Lose the language and you lose the songs, stories and place names that tie a community together.”

A parent: “I want my daughter to keep our language, but I also want her to get a good job in the capital. Why must we choose?”

A spokesperson for the Linguist Heritage Forum, a fictional international organisation: “Each language that disappears takes with it knowledge that cannot be recovered.”

Using Source C, analyse the personal, local and/or national and global perspectives on this issue. [6]

6. Identify two examples of emotive or persuasive language in Source C and explain the effect of each. [4]

7. Using Source C, evaluate the arguments of the Education Minister and the primary teacher. Which argument is better supported? [12]

8. Using Source A, assess two possible courses of action Kelmont council could take in response to the changes to its market, and recommend one. [12]

9. A student answers a question on Source B by describing festivals from their own country. Explain why this earns little credit in Component 1. [2]

10. You are planning an Individual Report on the topic Change in culture and communities.

(a) Explain why “Change in culture and communities” is not a suitable title for the report. [2] (b) Write a global research question on this topic and explain why it is suitable. [3] (c) Identify one local or national perspective and one global perspective you would research for your question, and a suitable type of source for each. [4]

11. A team of four notices that older and younger residents in their neighbourhood rarely mix.

(a) Suggest one action the team could carry out. [2] (b) Explain how the team could evidence the action and measure its success. [4] (c) Suggest how the team could divide research and tasks. [2]

Answers

1. Fact: “Last year the town council voted to move the market into a new indoor food hall” (this can be checked) [1]. Opinion: “This market is the heart of Kelmont” [1]. [2] Examiner insight: quote the exact words from the source; a paraphrase can blur a fact into an opinion and lose the mark.

2. (a) “Footfall will rise because shoppers can park outside” [1]. [1] (b) The survey was carried out for the hall’s developer, who has a vested interest in showing support for indoor markets [1]. We are not told how many shoppers were asked, or where and how, so we cannot judge the sample [1]. A general preference for indoor markets does not show that Kelmont shoppers want their own street market moved or stalls to close [1]. [3] Examiner insight: “it might be biased” earns nothing on its own; name who gains and say what the evidence cannot show.

3. Cause: the council decided to move the market to free the street for car parking [1], which shows convenience for drivers was put ahead of the street’s traditional use [1]. Consequence: higher rents mean 9 of the 30 stallholders (30%) say they will close [1], so there will be fewer stalls and, as Mrs Okafor fears, fewer chances for neighbours to meet [1]. [4] Examiner insight: each mark pair needs a point and its development from the source; a one-word cause scores half.

4. (a) 22 ÷ 80 × 100 = 27.5% [1]. [1] (b) Model points (the real exam marks extended answers with levels of response, not point by point): Some support: 14–24-year-olds had the lowest attendance (27.5%), compared with 75% of those aged 50 and over [1]. But 37.5% (30 of 80) of young people still said the festival matters, so “no longer care” is a generalisation [1]. The survey took place at a shopping centre on a weekday morning, when many 14–24-year-olds are likely to be at school or work [1], so the 80 young respondents may not represent young people in Thornwick [1]. Attending one festival is not the same as caring about “our traditions” in general [1]. Ticket sales fell 25% while the price rose 75%, so cost could explain the fall, and sales are not broken down by age [1]. “No longer” claims a change over time, but the survey covers one year only, with no earlier figures by age [1]. Judgement: Source B gives weak support. It shows lower attendance among young people, not that they have stopped caring [1]. [8] (c) Survey a larger sample of young people in several places and at different times [1]. Repeat the same questions in later years to measure change over time [1]. Ask about a range of traditions, not just one festival, and ask why people do or do not attend, for example cost [1]. Use interviews to explore what young people value [1]. [4] Examiner insight: evaluation marks come from linking a weakness to the claim, for example showing why a weekday-morning sample undermines “young people” in particular.

5. Personal: the parent wants her daughter to keep the family language [1] but also to get a good job, showing the issue as a personal dilemma [1]. Local and/or national: the teacher speaks from local classroom experience and values the community’s songs and stories [1], while the Minister takes a national view focused on jobs and unity [1]. Global: the Linguist Heritage Forum sees language loss as a loss to everyone [1], because knowledge held in a language “cannot be recovered” [1]. [6] Examiner insight: “analyse” needs the reason behind each perspective, not just a label of who holds it.

6. “A nation that speaks together stays together” is a slogan with repeated sounds [1]; it appeals to unity and sounds convincing but gives no evidence [1]. “Lose the language and you lose the songs, stories and place names” is an emotive list [1]; it makes the reader feel a sense of loss, but it is a prediction, not a demonstrated effect [1]. [4] Examiner insight: the second mark for each example comes from explaining what the language does to the strength of the argument.

7. Model points (marked with levels of response in the real exam); this judges the arguments, not the policy. Minister: the claim is that one shared language helps children compete for national jobs [1]. “Employers tell us” is vague: no employers or figures are given [1]. The reasoning is plausible if jobs need the national language [1]. But ending regional-language lessons is not shown to be needed to improve national-language skills, so the conclusion goes beyond the reasons [1]. “Stays together” is an assertion that appeals to unity without evidence [1]. As the person proposing the plan, the Minister has an interest in it being accepted [1]. Teacher: the claim is that children learn best in their home language [1]. She gives specific evidence: pupils in her school read well in both languages by age ten [1]. But this is one school and her own observation, with no numbers or comparison group [1]. Her work may give her a personal stake [1]. Her evidence also meets the Minister’s aim, because pupils become strong in the national language too [1]. Judgement: the teacher’s argument is better supported, using specific evidence and answering the Minister’s concern, though both need wider data [1]. [12] Examiner insight: a reasoned judgement about which argument is stronger is required; describing both arguments without weighing them stays in the lower levels.

8. Model points (marked with levels of response in the real exam). Action 1: the council lowers hall rents for existing traders for an agreed period [1]. For: it tackles the cause in Source A, since higher rents are why 9 of the 30 stallholders say they will close [1]. Keeping the traders keeps the people who make the market a meeting place [1]. Against: it costs money, and the source gives no figures, so feasibility is unclear [1]. It ignores Mrs Okafor’s point that the street itself matters [1]. Action 2: hold a monthly outdoor Saturday market in the street alongside the hall [1]. For: it keeps the tradition and an open public meeting space [1], at low cost [1]. Against: it conflicts with the council’s aim of freeing the street for parking [1], and it could split shoppers between two sites, harming hall traders [1]. Recommendation: Action 1, because it tackles the cause the source names most directly [1]. Condition: review stall numbers and footfall after a year, because a subsidy may not last [1]. [12] Examiner insight: “assess” means weighing each action’s strengths and weaknesses from the source; a recommendation with no comparison caps the mark.

9. The syllabus states that candidates are not assessed on prior knowledge of the topic or issue in the sources [1]. Marks come from analysing and evaluating the information, evidence and arguments in the sources, so outside description earns little [1]. [2] Examiner insight: every sentence in a Component 1 answer should point back to a source.

10. (a) It is a broad topic, not a question [1]. It names no issue that divides opinion, so it gives no focus for perspectives or a conclusion [1]. [2] (b) Example: “Should governments require schools to teach minority languages?” [1] It is global because many countries face this choice [1]. It divides opinion between those stressing jobs and those stressing a community’s language, and it can be answered with a judgement [1]. [3] (c) Local or national perspective: a national education ministry favouring one shared language [1]; source: a government policy statement or official report [1]. Global perspective: an international organisation concerned about language loss [1]; source: a United Nations or UNESCO publication [1]. [4] Examiner insight: a question with an obvious “yes” limits the perspectives you can explore.

11. (a) A monthly “skills swap” where older residents teach a traditional craft or recipe and younger residents teach phone and online skills [1]. It brings the two groups together, so it acts on the issue directly [1]. [2] (b) Evidence of Action: photographs of the event or a short video (no longer than 10 minutes) [1]. Measure: count how many people from each age group attend [1]. Use a before-and-after survey asking participants how many people from the other age group they know by name [1]. Set a target in advance, such as at least half of participants saying they would return [1]. [4] (c) Each member researches a different perspective, for example older residents, young people, the community centre manager and the local council [1]. Tasks are then shared by skill, such as publicity, booking the venue and running the survey [1]. [2] Examiner insight: the plan should state how success will be measured before the action happens; teams that measure only afterwards struggle to show a difference.

Where marks are usually lost

• Using outside knowledge about a culture instead of the sources in Component 1.
• Calling a source biased without naming the interest or the missing evidence.
• Accepting a survey’s conclusion without checking who was asked, where and when.
• Treating one year’s figures as proof of a change over time.
• Labelling perspectives without explaining the reasons behind them.
• Describing two arguments without judging which is better supported.
• Recommending an action without weighing it against an alternative.
• Choosing a Team Project action with no way to measure success.

Next steps

Try the general Written Exam practice questions, Individual Report practice and Team Project practice. Find your weak skills with our diagnostics, or Book a free trial class.

Official syllabus

Cambridge IGCSE Global Perspectives (0457) syllabus for examination in 2025, 2026 and 2027, Version 2 (published April 2025). Your teacher will confirm which topics your class is using.