Cambridge IGCSE Global Perspectives: Team Project — Revision Notes

Condensed for the final weeks. For the full explanation, use the Team Project study guide.

Mark breakdown — know where the marks actually sit

Collaboration is a sub-strand of the Team Element, not a third category parallel to it — the Team Element is 25 marks across four tables, and the Personal Element is 45 marks across four tables.

Element	Table	Marks	Marked how
Team Element (25)	Explanation of Research and Planning	10	Same mark, every team member
Team Element (25)	Evidence of Action	5	Same mark, every team member
Team Element (25)	Team Collaboration	5	Same mark, every team member
Team Element (25)	Individual Collaboration	5	Individual, varies by member
Personal Element (45)	Evaluation of action and teamwork	10	Individual, per candidate
Personal Element (45)	Reflection on learning	15	Individual, per candidate
Personal Element (45)	Reflection on teamwork	10	Individual, per candidate
Personal Element (45)	Communication	10	Individual, per candidate

25 + 45 = 70. The Personal Element (the Reflective Paper) is nearly two-thirds of the 70-mark component — it is where an individual candidate’s grade is most directly decided, even though the project itself is a team effort.

Hard limits — marks are lost, not deducted, beyond the cap

Item	Limit	What happens if exceeded
Explanation of Research and Planning	300–400 words	No marks beyond word 400
Evidence of Action (video)	10 minutes max	Not marked beyond 10 min
Reflective Paper	750–1000 words	No marks beyond word 1000

These are hard caps, not guidance — a 1400-word Reflective Paper is only ever marked on its first 1000 words. Draft to the limit, not past it.

What actually happens in a Team Project

1. Team (2–5 candidates) selects a topic from the syllabus list and identifies a local issue — a specific local instance of it.
2. Each member researches a different aspect/perspective.
3. Team decides, through discussion, on a course of action.
4. Team plans and carries out that action.
5. Team measures how successful the action was.

The Explanation of Research and Planning is built in three stages across this process (topic/issue identification → plan of action and roles → final review of changes) — it is not written once at the end.

Evidence of Action: the trap that costs marks

Evidence of Action must show what the team actually did — posters, leaflets, web pages, videos, presentations, or event photographs. Research or planning-meeting evidence does not count, even if extensive. This is the most common way teams lose marks on this element despite genuine effort.

The Reflective Paper — three things it must do

1. Summarise the candidate’s own research findings and how the team did/didn’t use them.
2. Reflect on personal learning — about the issue, teamwork, and themselves.
3. Evaluate how effective both the action taken and the candidate’s own collaboration were.

Description of the project alone caps the achievable mark well below the top band — reflection and evaluation are what the mark scheme actually rewards, not a narrative account of events.

Collaboration (10 marks, part of the Team Element) — individually variable

Assessed by teacher observation across the whole project, not from one document. Behaviours examiners look for: clear communication, sharing/developing ideas, agreeing targets and deadlines, solving problems, flexibility, dividing tasks and recognising every member’s contribution, asking for and giving support.

All team members get the same team mark, but individual collaboration marks can and do vary — a candidate contributing little to the collaborative process can lose marks here even when the team’s project itself is strong.

How Component 3 differs from Components 1 and 2

Unlike the Written Exam (Component 1, externally examined) and the Individual Report (Component 2, an independent piece of work), the Team Project is internally assessed and externally moderated, and is the only component with a genuine team element. It also produces the most separate pieces of evidence of any component: a shared Explanation of Research and Planning, shared Evidence of Action, and an individual Reflective Paper per candidate. Marks from Component 2 and Component 3 can be carried forward between series, which is worth factoring into planning when each component is actually sat — a strong Individual Report result banked in one series changes how much pressure sits on the Team Project in a later one.

Exam traps

• Submitting only research/planning-meeting evidence as Evidence of Action, when action evidence specifically is required.
• Writing a Reflective Paper that describes the project rather than reflecting on learning and evaluating effectiveness.
• Exceeding word or time limits, wasting effort that can’t be credited past the cap.
• Assuming Collaboration is automatically shared equally — it is observed and individually variable.
• Leaving the Reflective Paper’s structure to the final week instead of drafting it as reflection happens throughout the project.

Self-test

1. Which element carries the most marks, and why does that matter for an individual candidate’s grade?
2. What happens to marks beyond a component’s word/time limit?
3. Name one thing that does NOT count as Evidence of Action.
4. What three things must a Reflective Paper do, beyond describing the project?
5. Why can two candidates on the same team receive different Collaboration marks?

Answers: 1. The Reflective Paper (45 of 70 marks); because it’s marked individually, it’s where an individual candidate’s grade is most directly determined, unlike the team-marked elements. 2. No marks can be awarded beyond the limit — a paper exceeding 1000 words is only marked on its first 1000. 3. Evidence of research or planning meetings alone, without evidence of the action itself. 4. Summarise research findings and their use, reflect on personal learning, and evaluate the effectiveness of the action and the candidate’s own collaboration. 5. Because Collaboration is assessed via teacher observation of each individual’s behaviour throughout the project, not awarded uniformly to the whole team.