analyse and evaluate the evidence and reasoning used to support claims, arguments and perspectives

Research, Analysis & Evaluation – IGCSE Global Perspectives (0457)

1. Syllabus at a Glance

Topic List (choose one for all components)

• Climate change and energy
• Biodiversity loss and ecosystem services
• Water scarcity and quality
• Food security and sustainable agriculture
• Plastic pollution and marine litter
• Urbanisation and sustainable cities
• Human health and pandemics
• Gender equality and empowerment
• Economic development and inequality
• Education for sustainable development
• … (full list in the Cambridge syllabus)

Every investigation must be examined through the lens of the UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). Identify which SDG(s) are most relevant and use them to frame the sustainability dimension of your analysis.

2. Key Concepts

• Claim – A statement that something is true or false.
• Argument – A set of premises used to support a claim.
• Perspective – A point of view shaped by cultural, social, economic or personal factors.

3. Types of Evidence

4. Evaluating Evidence (AO1)

1. Credibility / Authority – Who produced it? Are qualifications, institutional affiliation and peer‑review status clear?
2. Relevance – Does it directly address the claim or research question?
3. Bias & Objectivity – Any hidden agenda, commercial interest or cultural bias?
4. Currency – Is the information up‑to‑date for the issue?
5. Sufficiency & Triangulation – Is there enough evidence, and does it come from independent sources that corroborate each other?
6. Purpose & Audience – Inform, persuade, sell? Who is the intended audience?

5. Analysing Reasoning (AO1)

• Check logical consistency – do the premises logically lead to the conclusion?
• Identify common logical fallacies (brief definitions):
  • Appeal to tradition – assuming something is right because it has always been done.
  • False dilemma – presenting only two options when more exist.
  • Hasty generalisation – drawing a broad conclusion from a small sample.
  • Straw‑man – misrepresenting an opponent’s argument to make it easier to attack.
  • Slippery slope – claiming a small step will inevitably lead to extreme outcomes.
• Assess argument strength – are counter‑arguments acknowledged and refuted?

6. Evaluating Perspectives (AO2)

• Culture – how do values, traditions or beliefs shape the viewpoint?
• Ethics – does the perspective respect human rights, fairness and environmental stewardship?
• Economics – are financial interests influencing the stance?
• Stakeholder bias – who benefits or loses?
• SDG linkage – which Sustainable Development Goal(s) are implicated?

7. Research Design Checklist (AO1)

1. Formulate a clear, focused research question.
2. Choose an appropriate methodology (survey, experiment, interview, observation, secondary data analysis).
3. Select a sampling strategy (random, stratified, convenience) and justify it.
4. Collect data systematically; record full source details for citation.
5. Classify each source as primary or secondary.
6. Organise evidence into categories: supporting, opposing, neutral.
7. Apply the evaluation criteria (section 4) to every piece of evidence.
8. Analyse the reasoning behind each argument (section 5).
9. Synthesise findings, noting strengths, limitations and gaps.
10. Draw a balanced conclusion that reflects the overall weight of the evidence.

8. Justifying & Reflecting on Your Own Perspective (AO2)

After analysis, you must justify your personal stance by linking it explicitly to the evaluated evidence and reasoning. Then, reflect on learning.

• Justification checklist
  • State your position clearly.
  • Reference at least three pieces of high‑quality evidence that support it.
  • Explain why alternative evidence is less convincing (e.g., bias, outdated).
  • Connect your view to relevant SDG(s) and to the wider global context.
• Reflection checklist (individual & team)
  • What assumptions did I hold before the research?
  • How has the evaluation of evidence and arguments challenged or confirmed those assumptions?
  • Which perspective now seems most convincing and why?
  • What research, analytical and communication skills have I improved?
  • How did teamwork influence the investigation (division of tasks, peer feedback, conflict resolution)?

9. Communication (AO3 – Individual)

• Written communication – Use a clear structure (introduction, methodology, evidence & analysis, conclusion). Employ linking words (however, therefore, moreover) and academic tone.
• Visual communication – Include tables, charts, diagrams or infographics that are correctly labelled, sourced and referenced.
• Citation – Apply a consistent referencing style (e.g., Harvard) for all sources, both in‑text and in a bibliography.

10. Collaboration (AO3 – Team Project)

• Share evidence sheets and draft sections via a common platform (Google Docs, OneDrive, etc.).
• Give constructive peer feedback using the evaluation criteria.
• Record each member’s contribution (task log, minutes) for the assessment rubric.
• Agree on a presentation format (poster, slide deck, video) and allocate speaking roles.

11. Command‑Word Awareness

12. Practical Example – Plastic Pollution in Oceans

Claim to evaluate: “Single‑use plastic bans will significantly reduce ocean pollution within five years.”

Using the evaluation criteria, students can triangulate the data, note strengths and limitations, identify logical fallacies (e.g., false cause in the industry claim), and construct a balanced conclusion that also links to SDG 14 – Life Below Water.

13. Checklist for Analysis & Evaluation (Exam & Project)

• Is the source reputable, authored by an authority, and up‑to‑date?
• Does the evidence directly support the claim or research question?
• Have I identified any bias (cultural, economic, political) and considered purpose & audience?
• Is the amount of evidence sufficient, and have I triangulated across independent sources?
• Does the reasoning avoid logical fallacies and acknowledge counter‑arguments?
• Have alternative perspectives been examined and linked to relevant SDG(s)?
• Have I justified my own viewpoint with clear links to evaluated evidence?
• Have I reflected on how my perspective has changed and on the teamwork process?
• Is my argument communicated clearly with proper citations and visual aids?

14. Suggested Diagram (Research Flow)

15. Summary

Successful performance in IGCSE Global Perspectives requires a systematic approach:

1. Understand the full syllabus structure (components, weightings, topic list, SDG lens).
2. Design robust research (AO1) and collect diverse primary/secondary evidence.
3. Critically evaluate each source using detailed criteria.
4. Analyse the logical structure of arguments, spotting fallacies.
5. Consider multiple cultural, ethical and economic perspectives, always linking to the SDGs.
6. Justify your own viewpoint with clear evidence (AO2) and reflect on personal and team learning.
7. Communicate findings effectively (AO3 – written, visual, citation) and demonstrate collaborative skills in the Team Project.

Mastering these steps aligns directly with the AO weightings (AO1 ≈ 68 %, AO2 ≈ 15 %, AO3 ≈ 17 %) and equips you to construct well‑supported, balanced arguments on any global issue.