9239_s24_ms_11

Cambridge International AS & A Level
GLOBAL PERSPECTIVES AND RESEARCH 9239/11

Paper 1 Written Exam May/June 2024
MARK SCHEME
Maximum Mark: 45
Published
This mark scheme is published as an aid to teachers and candidates, to indicate the requirements of the
examination. It shows the basis on which Examiners were instructed to award marks. It does not indicate the
details of the discussions that took place at an Examiners’ meeting before marking began, which would have
considered the acceptability of alternative answers.
Mark schemes should be read in conjunction with the question paper and the Principal Examiner Report for
Teachers.
Cambridge International will not enter into discussions about these mark schemes.
Cambridge International is publishing the mark schemes for the May/June 2024 series for most
Cambridge IGCSE, Cambridge International A and AS Level and Cambridge Pre-U components, and some
Cambridge O Level components.
This document consists of 25 printed pages.
© Cambridge University Press & Assessment 2024 [Turn over

9239/11 Cambridge International AS & A Level – Mark Scheme May/June 2024
PUBLISHED
Generic Marking Principles
These general marking principles must be applied by all examiners when marking candidate answers. They should be applied alongside the
specific content of the mark scheme or generic level descriptions for a question. Each question paper and mark scheme will also comply with these
marking principles.
GENERIC MARKING PRINCIPLE 1:
Marks must be awarded in line with:
 the specific content of the mark scheme or the generic level descriptors for the question
 the specific skills defined in the mark scheme or in the generic level descriptors for the question
 the standard of response required by a candidate as exemplified by the standardisation scripts.
Marks awarded are always whole marks (not half marks, or other fractions).
Marks must be awarded positively:
 marks are awarded for correct/valid answers, as defined in the mark scheme. However, credit is given for valid answers which go beyond
the scope of the syllabus and mark scheme, referring to your Team Leader as appropriate
 marks are awarded when candidates clearly demonstrate what they know and can do
 marks are not deducted for errors
 marks are not deducted for omissions
 answers should only be judged on the quality of spelling, punctuation and grammar when these features are specifically assessed by the
question as indicated by the mark scheme. The meaning, however, should be unambiguous.
Rules must be applied consistently, e.g. in situations where candidates have not followed instructions or in the application of generic level
descriptors.
© Cambridge University Press & Assessment 2024 Page 2 of 25

PUBLISHED
Marks should be awarded using the full range of marks defined in the mark scheme for the question (however; the use of the full mark range may
be limited according to the quality of the candidate responses seen).
Marks awarded are based solely on the requirements as defined in the mark scheme. Marks should not be awarded with grade thresholds or
grade descriptors in mind.

PUBLISHED
Social Science-Specific Marking Principles
(for point-based marking)
1 Components using point-based marking:

 Point marking is often used to reward knowledge, understanding and application of skills. We give credit where the candidate’s answer
shows relevant knowledge, understanding and application of skills in answering the question. We do not give credit where the answer
shows confusion.
From this it follows that we:
a DO credit answers which are worded differently from the mark scheme if they clearly convey the same meaning (unless the mark
scheme requires a specific term)
b DO credit alternative answers/examples which are not written in the mark scheme if they are correct
c DO credit answers where candidates give more than one correct answer in one prompt/numbered/scaffolded space where extended
writing is required rather than list-type answers. For example, questions that require n reasons (e.g. State two reasons …).
d DO NOT credit answers simply for using a ‘key term’ unless that is all that is required. (Check for evidence it is understood and not used
wrongly.)
e DO NOT credit answers which are obviously self-contradicting or trying to cover all possibilities
f DO NOT give further credit for what is effectively repetition of a correct point already credited unless the language itself is being tested.
This applies equally to ‘mirror statements’ (i.e. polluted/not polluted).
g DO NOT require spellings to be correct, unless this is part of the test. However spellings of syllabus terms must allow for clear and
unambiguous separation from other syllabus terms with which they may be confused (e.g. Corrasion/Corrosion)
2 Presentation of mark scheme:

 Slashes (/) or the word ‘or’ separate alternative ways of making the same point.
 Semi colons (;) bullet points (•) or figures in brackets (1) separate different points.
 Content in the answer column in brackets is for examiner information/context to clarify the marking but is not required to earn the mark
(except Accounting syllabuses where they indicate negative numbers).

PUBLISHED
3 Calculation questions:
 The mark scheme will show the steps in the most likely correct method(s), the mark for each step, the correct answer(s) and the mark
for each answer
 If working/explanation is considered essential for full credit, this will be indicated in the question paper and in the mark scheme. In all
other instances, the correct answer to a calculation should be given full credit, even if no supporting working is shown.
 Where the candidate uses a valid method which is not covered by the mark scheme, award equivalent marks for reaching equivalent
stages.
 Where an answer makes use of a candidate’s own incorrect figure from previous working, the ‘own figure rule’ applies: full marks will be
given if a correct and complete method is used. Further guidance will be included in the mark scheme where necessary and any
exceptions to this general principle will be noted.
4 Annotation:
 For point marking, ticks can be used to indicate correct answers and crosses can be used to indicate wrong answers. There is no direct
relationship between ticks and marks. Ticks have no defined meaning for levels of response marking.
 For levels of response marking, the level awarded should be annotated on the script.
 Other annotations will be used by examiners as agreed during standardisation, and the meaning will be understood by all examiners
who marked that paper.

PUBLISHED
Instructions for examiners
The total mark for this paper is 45. Question 1 assesses AO1 skills.
Question 2 assesses AO1 skills. Question 3 assesses AO1 and AO3 skills.
Question 1 is points marked using or . Answers to Question 1 can be brief, using short sentences or bullet points.
Answers to Question 2 and Question 3 should be written in continuous prose.
For Question 2 and Question 3 annotate clearly in the left-hand margin according to the specific instructions provided.
Refer to the marking grid at the end of each question to award a mark based on the annotations for each aspect (e.g. AO1a). Record the mark for
each aspect (e.g. AO1a) in the right-hand marking panel on RM Assessor.
Indicative content or exemplar responses are provided as a guide. Inevitably, the mark scheme cannot cover all responses that candidates may
make for all the questions. In some cases, candidates may make responses which the mark scheme has not predicted. These answers should
nevertheless be credited according to their relevance and quality.
The definition of perspective used in this syllabus is: a perspective is a coherent world view which is a response to an issue. It is made up of
argument, evidence, assumptions and may be influenced by a particular context.

PUBLISHED
Question Answer Marks
1(a) The author of Document A discusses the repression of journalism. 2
Identify two examples of journalists’ actions that have led governments to control journalists, as given by the
author of Document A.
The question assesses AO1.
Answers to Question 1 can be brief, using short sentences or bullet points.
Show a correct answer with  in the text, up to a maximum of [two] marks.
 sharing information with the outer world (China)

 intentionally ridicule and defame the armed forces (Pakistan).
Do not accept:
 the media might expose their mishandling of the Covid-19 crisis (this is the author’s assumption)
 collapse of magazines (government behaviour)
 the government approved the penal code / penalizes journalists (not an action by journalists).

PUBLISHED
1(b) The author of Document B discusses the importance of independent journalism. 3
Identify three ways that independent journalism should be protected, as mentioned by the author of Document B.
The question assesses AO1.
Answers to Question 1 can be brief, using short sentences or bullet points.
Show a correct answer with  in the text, up to a maximum of three marks.
 (Democratic countries must) begin treating attacks on journalists as attacks on democracy/prosecuting attacks with
heavy criminal penalties.
 Governments should be held accountable.
 (Policymakers should) ensure journalism’s economic survival / public funding / an EU wide fund.
 (Democratic governments should) use the upcoming World Press Freedom Conference to start progress globally.
Do not accept:
 Hundreds are dependent on government support (already in place and not support for independent journalists, but
because they are poor).
 Recognise the importance of their work (we, not governments, and not a protection in itself).
 The World Press conference without use / using (on its own it’s not protection).

PUBLISHED
Instructions for Question 2
The question assesses AO1 (Research, analysis and evaluation).
Answers should be written in continuous prose. There is no requirement for candidates to use technical terms to access any level and candidates
will NOT be rewarded for their use unless they link them directly to the assessment made.
Annotate clearly in the left-hand margin according to the instructions provided below.
There are three aspects to consider when marking the answer. Annotations for each aspect are listed in increasing order of significance. For
example, in AO1a EG reflects a higher skill than T. This is reflected in the mark tables.
 Identify evidence (AO1a). Candidates should identify a range of types of evidence and give examples. Annotate with T if no example given
or EG if type is given and exemplified.
T Identify type of evidence. (Without an example)
EG Example of type of evidence.
 Analyse strengths and weaknesses of evidence (AO1b). Candidates should analyse both strengths and weaknesses of a range of
evidence used by the author including an explanation. For limited explanation use + for strength and – for weakness. For clear explanation
use EXP.
+ Strength of evidence recognised but with limited explanation.
– Weakness of evidence recognised but with limited explanation.
EXP Strength or weakness of evidence clearly explained.

PUBLISHED
 Evaluate evidence (AO1c). Impact of evidence may be asserted and not explained (A). Evaluation may be attempted but not explained (I
^) [I and ^ are two separate annotations on RM]. Candidates explain the impact of evidence on the author’s argument/perspective [I] and
include a judgement of its effectiveness (I J).
A Impact of evidence is asserted and not explained.
I^ Shows undeveloped point of evaluation. Evaluation attempted but not explained.
I Evaluation of impact of evidence on argument/perspective.
IJ Evaluation of impact of evidence on argument/perspective and includes judgement.

PUBLISHED
Marking Grid for Question 2
Examiners should allocate a mark for each aspect (AO1a, AO1b, AO1c), using the mark descriptors and required annotations.
AO1 Research, analysis and evaluation
AO1a Identify evidence Mark Annotations
Identifies a wide range of different types of evidence with examples. 5 4 EG or more
Identifies a range of different types of evidence with examples. 4 3 EG
Identifies a limited range of different types of evidence with examples. 3 2 EG
Identifies a limited range of evidence, using different types or examples. 2 2T or 1EG
Identifies one type of evidence. 1 1T
Identification of evidence is not present. No creditable material. 0 No T or No EG
AO1b Analyse strengths and weaknesses of evidence Mark Annotations
Analyses strengths and weaknesses of a wide range of evidence with clear explanation. 5 2 + (or more) and 2 – (or more) with 2 or
more EXP
Analyses strengths and weaknesses of a range of evidence with clear explanation. 4 2 + (or more) and 1 – (or more) (or
opposite) with 1 EXP
Analyses strengths and weaknesses of a range of evidence with limited explanation. 3 2 + (or more) and 1 – (or more) (or
opposite) with 0 EXP
Analyses strengths or weaknesses of a range of evidence with limited explanation. 2 [2+] or [2-] or [1+ and 1-]
Explanation of strengths or weaknesses of evidence is limited. 1 [1+] or [1-]
No analysis is present. No creditable material. 0 No + or – or EXP

PUBLISHED
AO1c Evaluate evidence Mark Annotations
Evaluation includes explanation of the impact of evidence on the argument/perspective and 5 2 I (or more) and I J
makes a range of reasoned judgements.
Evaluation includes explanation of the impact of evidence on the argument/perspective and 4 2 I (or more)
makes a reasoned judgement.
Evaluation includes an explanation of the impact of evidence on the argument/perspective. 3 1I
Evaluation is attempted but lacks clarity, and the impact of evidence on the 2 1 I ˄ (or more)
argument/perspective is not explained.
The impact of evidence on the argument/perspective is asserted and not explained. 1 1 A (or more)
No evaluation is present. No creditable material. 0 No A, I^, I or I J
Examiners allocate a mark for each aspect (AO1a, AO1b, AO1c), using the mark descriptors and required annotations.

PUBLISHED
2 Assess the strengths and weaknesses of the evidence used by the author of Document A to support their 15
argument about press freedom.
In your answer, include the impact of the evidence on the author’s argument.
Indicative content
Only reward assessment of types of evidence. Do not reward references to date or place of publication /
components or structure of argument / language or tone.
No set answer is expected, and examiners should be flexible in their approach. Candidates may include some of the
following indicative content.
Strengths
 [Example only]
The author has a relevant and credible (+) provenance as a journalist based in Balochistan and majoring in mass
communication (EG). This means he has expertise and firsthand experience (ability to see) of modern issues in
journalism which adds weight to the factual and historical evidence provided in the article (EXP). The author’s proximity
to events gives the reader confidence that evidence such as relevant dates and the details about the actions taken by
the PTI in Pakistan is correct and understood by the author (I).
 Evidence and examples provided are relevant, explained and support the author’s argument.
 Figures quoted from Freedom Network Pakistan are precise and corroborate the author’s view that the issue of press
freedom and violence against journalists is revisiting the country under the PTI regime.
 Evidence from research (Gohdes and Carey) supports the argument.
 Historical evidence is provided to support the claim that the situation has been bad in Pakistan over the years and
continues to be a growing issue.
 Recent evidence – measures enforced as part of the Covid-19 pandemic support the view that journalists face arrest
(China) / are not allowed to accurately report (Pakistan).
 Precise figures/statistics from World Press Freedom Index 2021.

PUBLISHED
2  The author provides background information on the austerity measures taken by the PTI to contextualise the
financial hit on the press in Pakistan.
 Sources (WPFI 2021, FNP report) are provided for much of the evidence, lending weight to the argument.
 Range of sources – evidence provided from government report, WPFI, FNP, author uses a number of sources of
evidence to build his argument.
Weaknesses
 Some weakly supported statements or implications (suggests the authorities fear ‘unnecessary’ advertisements,
implying a deliberate removal of finance from Herald and Newsline).
 Some unsourced figures / rounded figures / vague references to source (arrest of journalists in China, ‘A report’).
 Main thrust of argument about reduction of human rights is unexplained and no evidence provided.
 Key sources (Gohdes and Carey), whose research underpins the argument, are named but no further information
about their provenance is provided.
 Limited Global view – evidence is limited to China and Pakistan – does not support the view that there will be more
repression and in turn a deterioration of human rights / the experience in these limited countries does not reflect the
experience of journalists worldwide.
 Selective choice of sources – Freedom Network Pakistan has evidence that contradicts WPFI for the same time
period, the author may have used this information as it supports his viewpoint more / author is a freelance journalist
subject to censorship and so presents evidence that only shows censorship in a negative light.
 Unknown provenance of sources – we do not know whether the organisations that are cited are respected,
independent or trustworthy.
 Old evidence – Gohdes and Carey was published in 2017 – may be considered to not be current data, and less
relevant.

PUBLISHED
Instructions for Question 3
The question assesses AO1 (Research, analysis and evaluation) and AO3 (Communication).
Answers should be written in continuous prose. There is no requirement for candidates to use technical terms to access any level and candidates
will NOT be rewarded for their use unless they link them directly to the assessment made.
A perspective is made up of argument, evidence and assumptions and may be influenced by a particular context.
Annotate clearly in the left-hand margin according to the instructions provided below.
There are five aspects to consider when marking the answer. Annotations for each aspect are listed in increasing order of significance. For
example, in AO1a C reflects a higher skill than K. This is reflected in the mark tables.
 Identify and compare key components of arguments (AO1a). Candidates should identify a range of key components of arguments from
both documents. Annotate with K if key component is identified for one document and C if key component is compared for both documents.
K Identification of key component of argument for one document.
C Comparison of key components from both documents.
 Analyse and compare perspectives (AO1b). Candidates should analyse by identifying, describing and explaining the perspectives given in
both documents. Identification only (P ^), identification with limited description (P), comparing and describing in both documents (PD)
and comparing and explaining in both documents (PE).
P^ Identification of perspectives with no description.
P Identification of perspectives with limited description.
PD Analyses by comparing and describing perspectives in both documents.
PE Analyses by comparing and explaining perspectives in both documents.

PUBLISHED
 Evaluate arguments (AO1c). Candidates should aim to evaluate key components of arguments with clearly illustrated and balanced
reference to both documents. Evaluation may be unsupported (asserted) (ND). Evaluation includes illustration with reference to both
documents (EVAL).
ND Unsupported or undeveloped evaluation of a key component of argument.
EVAL Evaluation of key components of argument.
 Judgement about argument and perspective (AO1d). Candidates should aim to give a reasoned and supported answer which includes
intermediate conclusions and a main conclusion. The judgement may be unsupported (U ^ or U), partly supported (J ^) or clearly
reasoned and supported (J).
U^ Unsupported judgement – stated only
U Unsupported judgement – with reasoning
J^ Partly supported judgement – with reasoning
J Supported judgement – with reasoning
 Communication (AO3) A candidate should aim to produce a clearly expressed, well-structured and logical argument that is focused
throughout on the question.
Structure should include introduction, clear paragraphs and conclusion, and should flow and answer the question. Each paragraph should
follow on logically and contain a separate point. Each new idea should be clearly indicated – preferably in a new paragraph.
“Logical” means that it is easy to follow the argument as there are no sudden changes of direction leading to confusion in the reader.
No annotation is required except NAQ to show not linking to the question. The mark should be selected by using the guidance that
follows the mark tables. Choose the most appropriate descriptor in the marking grid.
NAQ Not answering the question

PUBLISHED
Marking grid for Question 3 – AO1 Research, analysis and evaluation
AO1a Identify and compare key components of arguments Mark Annotations
Compares a wide range of key components of arguments from both documents. 5 3 C or more
Compares a range of key components of arguments from both documents. 4 2C
Compares a limited range of key components of arguments from both documents. 3 1C
Identifies key components of arguments with no comparison. 2 2 K or more
Limited identification of key components of arguments with no comparison. 1 1K
No identification of arguments. No creditable material. 0 No K, C
AO1b Analyse and compare perspectives Mark Annotations
Analyses by comparing and explaining the perspectives given in both documents. 5 1 PE or more
Analyses by comparing and describing the perspectives given in both documents. 4 1 PD or more
Identifies and compares both perspectives but with limited description. 3 2 P (one for each Doc)
Identifies one perspective but with limited description. 2 P
Identifies one perspective with no description. 1 P^
No identification of perspectives. No creditable material. 0 No P^, P, PD or PE

PUBLISHED
AO1c Evaluate arguments Mark Annotations
Evaluation of key components of arguments is illustrated by clear, balanced reference to 5 4 or more EVAL (2 or more for each Doc)
both documents.
Evaluation of key components of arguments is illustrated by clear reference to both 4 3 or more EVAL (2 or more for one Doc
documents but lacks balance. and one for the other Doc)
Evaluation of key components of arguments with limited reference to both documents. 3 2 EVAL / 1 EVAL and 1 ND (both Docs)
Evaluation of arguments is unsupported (asserted) but refers to both documents. 2 2 ND refers to Doc A and Doc B
Evaluation of arguments is unsupported (asserted) and only refers to one document. 1 1 ND
No evaluation is present. No creditable material. 0 No ND or EVAL
AO1d Judgement about argument and perspective Mark Annotations
Judgement is clearly reasoned and supported. Includes intermediate conclusions and a 5 J or J ^ intermediate and J in the final
main conclusion. conclusion
Judgement is clearly reasoned and supported. Includes either intermediate conclusion(s) 4 J intermediate or in the final conclusion
or a main conclusion.
Judgement is reasoned but is only partly supported. Includes either intermediate 3 J ^ intermediate or in the final conclusion
conclusion(s) or a main conclusion.
Judgement is reasoned but not supported. 2 U
Judgement is stated without reasons or support. 1 U^
No judgement is made. No creditable material. 0 No U^, U, J^ or J

PUBLISHED
AO3 Communication
Communication Mark Guidance
Produces a clearly written, well-structured and logical argument that is focused throughout 5 Meets the descriptor – and contains no
on the question. NAQ
Produces a clearly written, well-structured argument that links to the question. 4 Meets the descriptor
Produces a clearly written argument with uneven structure that links to the question. 3 Meets the descriptor
Produces an argument that lacks clarity and structure and does not always link to the 2 Meets the descriptor
question.
Communication is cursory or descriptive and lacks structure. 1 Meets the descriptor
No creditable material. 0 Meets the descriptor – NAQ throughout
Examiners should allocate a mark for each aspect (AO1a, AO1b, AO1c, AO1d and AO3), using the mark descriptors and required
annotations.
Guidance for awarding marks for AO3 in Question 3.
Note: ‘clearly written’ refers to the content and the ease of being able to follow the candidates’ argument. It should be thought of as: “clearly
expressed”.
The quality of handwriting should not be considered as a factor when awarding marks. This is not what clearly written means in the
descriptors.
If a candidate made little attempt to answer the question and had lots of NAQ (e.g. was very descriptive or wrote an essay on their own opinion of
the subject matter) the maximum score is 2 marks.
If a candidate wrote very little/wrote in bullet points/has limited content that addresses the question the maximum score is 2 marks.
If a candidate makes no attempt to develop an argument at all, the maximum score is 1 mark.
If a candidate wrote in continuous prose, expressed themselves clearly and addressed the question, start at 3 marks – then consider if it better fits
the descriptions above or below 3 marks. If the answer was not clearly expressed or focussed mainly on one document, it lacks clarity and has
uneven structure and may only be worth 2 marks.
If the answer has an introduction, clear paragraphs, considers both documents in a balanced way, reaches a judgement and generally links to
the question it could be worth 4 marks.
If the answer contains the criteria for 4 marks above, is logical and has no irrelevant content (No NAQ) it could be worth 5 marks.

PUBLISHED
3 The authors of the two documents present different arguments and perspectives on press freedom. 25
Evaluate the arguments of the authors of both documents. In your answer, consider their perspectives and include
a reasoned judgement about whether one argument is stronger than the other.
No set answer is expected, and examiners should be flexible in their approach. Candidates may include some parts of the
following indicative content.
Indicative content – perspectives (AO1b)
A perspective is made up of argument, evidence and assumptions and may be influenced by a particular [global] context.
The perspective is the overall point the author is making / what the author is writing about / the overall argument the author
is making. It gives an overview.
(The other AO1 aspects consider the key components of argument, evaluation and judgement, and so the individual
components of the authors’ argument.)
Annotate with (P^) the stem from the questions (The author of Document A discusses the repression of journalism. / The
author of Document B discusses the importance of independent journalism. / Both documents are about press freedom).
Document A writes about freedom of the press being at risk (P^). Document B writes about attacks on independent
journalists / journalism (P^).
Document A has a view that journalistic freedom is being restricted through violence and economic restriction, and views
this as harmful to human rights (P). Document B’s perspective is that independent journalism is essential but is repressed
by government and law enforcement and must be protected as their work is important (P).
PD and PE require analysis by comparing and describing perspectives for both documents. It requires comparison, which
may be implied if documents are considered separately. The following examples are candidate responses.
Doc A argues that violence against the press needs to be taken seriously as it suppresses the voice to the people and
shows how the Pakistani government is fearful of the press reporting their mishandlings of Covid -19. This evidence
strengthens the conclusion that the press needs to be protected so the people can hear the truth. Doc B draws similar
conclusions and shows how the US government wanted to supress the voice of the protesters by not allowing journalists to
cover their story. This strengthens the argument by showing the need for the reforms suggested later in the document and
supports the conclusion that the free press is needed as it was proven the government tries to suppress information from
the public(PD).

PUBLISHED
3 ‘The documents are about how journalism is being targeted and silenced. Doc A deals more with in what ways they are
being targeted showing specific examples of government restriction and is primarily talking about Pakistan censorship. Doc
B is focused on how Covid -19 restrictions effected independent journalism. Doc A’s author has an expertise in mass
communication, is speaking to an Asian audience as the newspaper is published in Asia and its purpose is to inform people
how journalists have been unfairly treated. Doc B’s author is also an expert in their topic, is speaking to a global audience
as the newspaper reaches to readers to other countries with its purpose being to encourage people to support journalists
and how they can do that..’ (PE)
Indicative content – Arguments

No set answer is expected, and examiners should be flexible in their approach. At each point of comparison, candidates
may argue that either Document is stronger, or they are equally strong. Candidates may include some of the following
indicative content.
[Example only] (all annotations are given to show progression. In practice K and ND would not be needed here):
Provenance – The author Leon Willems (Doc B) (K) has status and experience as Director of Free Press Unlimited, with
access to information via the global reach of his organisation (ND). This strengthens his provenance because we trust that
he has the skills and experience to present accurate information and to understand fully the global nature of the issue
(EVAL). Whereas the author of Doc A Ayaz Khan, who is also a journalist, (C) has less clear status and appears to have
more limited access to information, concentrating mainly on Pakistan where he lives and works (ND). His provenance is not
as strong as he may have a bias towards the situation as it affects him as a journalist in Pakistan (EVAL). This makes
Document B stronger in terms of provenance because the author shows the issues are worldwide problems and so makes
the scope of the argument much wider (J^).
Global scope – Though Doc A refers to global attacks on freedom of expression and gives an example of China, there is a
focus on Pakistan and most information relates to Pakistan. This weakens Khan’s argument as compared to Doc B where
Willem presents us with information and examples from a wide range of countries around the world.
Evidence – Both documents present sourced and relevant evidence to support their claims. However, Doc A is slightly
stronger in terms of a larger proportion of sourced evidence, and includes the names of individuals, organisations and
publications impacted. As Doc B does not name any individuals impacted and provides more unsourced evidence,
Document A is strengthened in comparison.

PUBLISHED
3 Language style – Both arguments have a mainly formal, well-expressed style of language, and both have an equal level of
use of emotive language such as ‘shocking’ to strengthen the emotional impact of their arguments. In terms of language
style, both documents are equally strong.
Use of balanced evidence / Counter argument – Though Doc A presents a picture of the negative impact of the
measures taken by PTI on two magazines, Khan does balance this with the positives of the PTI drive to stabilize the
economy, giving 3 examples of helpful measures taken. This strengthens the argument in Doc A compared to Doc B which
only presents press-freedom violations and does not provide balance via a counter argument.
Relevant examples – Both authors present a wide range of relevant examples to support their arguments, making them
both equally strong in this aspect.
Recent documents – Doc A was published in 2021 and Doc B in 2020 so although B is slightly older both may be
considered to be up to date.

PUBLISHED
3 Indicative content – Judgement
Candidates may introduce their answer with an unsupported judgement as to which, if any argument is stronger (U^).
Judgement will normally occur at the end of a point, especially as an intermediate judgement at the end of a paragraph.
Use U^ or U, for unsupported judgements and where the candidate refers to one document only.
J^ and J are used when an answer directly refers to both documents and answers the question by including a reasoned
judgement about whether one argument is stronger than the other.
The candidate may come to the conclusion that Doc A is stronger as it has more detailed descriptions of the situation in
Pakistan and the way repression of journalists has developed over many years, with a range of corroborating evidence from
different sources. The author of Doc B may have used their wider global reach to select isolated examples that only support
their view which may not show that the problem is consistent and ongoing (J).
The candidate may conclude that Doc B is stronger as the author is more credible, with stronger expertise and status and
with a position that gives him knowledge and access to information on a global scale. The author of Doc B considers the
particular impact on women, not considered in Doc A. Although the author in Doc A has a greater ability to see as they are
based in Pakistan, they may lack the experience to be able to select appropriate evidence (J).
The candidate may conclude that both authors have experience in the field and that though their perspectives are different,
and their focus is on different aspect of the issue, they both agree that press freedom is a serious issue and that something
must be done about attacks on journalists. These elements and the fact that both provide some sourced and some
unsourced evidence make the documents different but equal in strength (J).

PUBLISHED
Annotation Meaning
Correct, creditworthy point. Used in Question 1 only.
Incorrect point. Used in Question 1 only.
T Identify type of evidence (without an example).

Used in Q2 (AO1a).
EG Example of type of Evidence. Used in Q2 (AO1a).
+ or - Strength or weakness of evidence recognised but with limited explanation. Used in Q2 (AO1b).
EXP Strength or weakness of evidence clearly explained. Used in Q2 (AO1b).
A Impact of evidence is asserted and not explained.

Used in Q2 (AO1c).
^ Shows undeveloped point. Added to other annotations (EVAL, P, J and U in Q2 and Q3).
I Evaluation of impact of evidence on argument/perspective. Used in Q2 (AO1c).
J Added to I to show the inclusion of a judgement. Used in Q2 (AO1c).
K Identification of key component of argument.

Used in Q3 (AO1a).
C Comparison of key components from both documents. Used in Q3 (AO1a).
P Identification of perspectives with limited description.

Used in Q3 (AO1b).
PD Analyses by comparing and describing perspectives in both documents. Used in Q3 (AO1b).
PE Analyses by comparing and explaining perspectives in both documents. Used in Q3 (AO1b).
ND Unsupported evaluation of argument. Used in Q3 (AO1c).

PUBLISHED
Annotation Meaning
EVAL Evaluation of argument in both documents.

Used in Q3 (AO1c).
U Unsupported judgement. Used in Q3 (AO1d).
J Supported judgement. Used in Q3 (AO1d).
Not answering the question.
Repetition. When repeating a point as a summary or simply stating another example that does not develop the evaluation.
SEEN To show that answers/pages have been assessed.
On Page Comment. Used where necessary to clarify a decision.
? Unclear point.

9239_s24_ms_11

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

9239_s24_ms_11

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

9239_s24_ms_11

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Cambridge International AS & A Level

GLOBAL PERSPECTIVES AND RESEARCH 9239/11

This document consists of 25 printed pages.

© Cambridge University Press & Assessment 2024 [Turn over

GENERIC MARKING PRINCIPLE 1:

Marks must be awarded in line with:

GENERIC MARKING PRINCIPLE 2:

GENERIC MARKING PRINCIPLE 3:

Marks must be awarded positively:

GENERIC MARKING PRINCIPLE 4:

© Cambridge University Press & Assessment 2024 Page 2 of 25

GENERIC MARKING PRINCIPLE 6:

© Cambridge University Press & Assessment 2024 Page 3 of 25

1 Components using point-based marking:

From this it follows that we:

2 Presentation of mark scheme:

© Cambridge University Press & Assessment 2024 Page 4 of 25

© Cambridge University Press & Assessment 2024 Page 5 of 25

Answers to Question 2 and Question 3 should be written in continuous prose.

© Cambridge University Press & Assessment 2024 Page 6 of 25

1(a) The author of Document A discusses the repression of journalism. 2

The question assesses AO1.

Answers to Question 1 can be brief, using short sentences or bullet points.

Show a correct answer with  in the text, up to a maximum of [two] marks.

 sharing information with the outer world (China)

© Cambridge University Press & Assessment 2024 Page 7 of 25

1(b) The author of Document B discusses the importance of independent journalism. 3

The question assesses AO1.

Answers to Question 1 can be brief, using short sentences or bullet points.

Show a correct answer with  in the text, up to a maximum of three marks.

© Cambridge University Press & Assessment 2024 Page 8 of 25

Instructions for Question 2

The question assesses AO1 (Research, analysis and evaluation).

T Identify type of evidence. (Without an example)

EG Example of type of evidence.

+ Strength of evidence recognised but with limited explanation.

– Weakness of evidence recognised but with limited explanation.

EXP Strength or weakness of evidence clearly explained.

© Cambridge University Press & Assessment 2024 Page 9 of 25

A Impact of evidence is asserted and not explained.

I^ Shows undeveloped point of evaluation. Evaluation attempted but not explained.

I Evaluation of impact of evidence on argument/perspective.

IJ Evaluation of impact of evidence on argument/perspective and includes judgement.

© Cambridge University Press & Assessment 2024 Page 10 of 25

AO1 Research, analysis and evaluation

AO1a Identify evidence Mark Annotations

Identifies a wide range of different types of evidence with examples. 5 4 EG or more

Identifies a range of different types of evidence with examples. 4 3 EG

Identifies a limited range of different types of evidence with examples. 3 2 EG

Identifies a limited range of evidence, using different types or examples. 2 2T or 1EG

Identifies one type of evidence. 1 1T

Identification of evidence is not present. No creditable material. 0 No T or No EG

AO1b Analyse strengths and weaknesses of evidence Mark Annotations

Explanation of strengths or weaknesses of evidence is limited. 1 [1+] or [1-]

No analysis is present. No creditable material. 0 No + or – or EXP

© Cambridge University Press & Assessment 2024 Page 11 of 25

Evaluation includes an explanation of the impact of evidence on the argument/perspective. 3 1I

No evaluation is present. No creditable material. 0 No A, I^, I or I J

© Cambridge University Press & Assessment 2024 Page 12 of 25

 Evidence from research (Gohdes and Carey) supports the argument.