select and present relevant arguments, evidence and perspectives clearly and with structure

Communication & Collaboration – Cambridge IGCSE Global Perspectives

1. Assessment Overview

Global Perspectives is assessed through three separate components. Each component contributes to the final grade and tests specific Assessment Objectives (AO).

2. Assessment Objectives (AO) – Weightings

3. Official Topic List (choose one for the Team Project)

• Arts in society
• Climate change
• Digital divide
• Education for sustainable development
• Food security
• Gender equality
• Health and well‑being
• Human rights
• Migration
• Plastic pollution
• Poverty and inequality
• Renewable energy
• Technology and innovation
• Urbanisation
• Water scarcity
• … (see Cambridge IGCSE Global Perspectives syllabus for the full list of 20+ topics)

4. Teacher Role & Assessment Rules

• Supervision: Teachers guide students in source selection, ensure the authenticity of work, and monitor collaborative processes.
• Authenticity: All coursework must be the student’s own work. Plagiarism detection tools (e.g., Turnitin) are recommended.
• Moderation: Internal moderation (teacher checks) followed by external moderation by Cambridge ensures consistency across centres.
• Marking grids: Each component has a detailed rubric aligned to the AOs. Teachers should share the grid with students so they know the criteria for each level of achievement.
• Feedback cycles: Provide formative feedback after the research plan, after the first C‑E‑L draft, and before the final submission.

5. Selecting & Evaluating Sources (AO1)

1. Define a focused research question. Phrase it as a clear, answerable statement.
2. Gather a balanced range of sources. Include:
   • Academic journal articles
   • Government or UN reports
   • Statistical databases (World Bank, WHO, etc.)
   • Interviews or primary data
   • Reputable news media and multimedia clips
3. Evaluate each source using the C‑R‑B‑C checklist:
   • Credibility: Who produced it? What are the author’s qualifications?
   • Relevance: Does it address the research question directly?
   • Bias & Perspective: What agenda might influence the information?
   • Currency: Is the data up‑to‑date?
4. Choose arguments that:
   • Answer the question directly.
   • Are underpinned by at least one high‑quality piece of evidence.
   • Represent a distinct perspective (local, national, international or stakeholder).

6. The C‑E‑L Framework (Claim‑Evidence‑Explanation‑Link)

This structure mirrors the language used in the Cambridge mark‑scheme for all components.

7. Reflection (AO2)

• Perspective taking: For each argument ask, “How would someone from a different cultural, economic or political background view this?”
• Justifying personal stance: State your own position and explain, using evidence, why you accept or reject other viewpoints.
• Evaluating the research process: What worked well? What would you change next time? Record these thoughts in a reflective journal (required for the Team Project personal element).

8. Communication & Collaboration (AO3)

8.1 Structuring a Written Response

1. Introduction – Restate the question, outline the line of reasoning, and present a thesis.
2. Body paragraphs – Each paragraph contains a full C‑E‑L block for one argument; separate paragraphs for different perspectives.
3. Counter‑argument – Acknowledge an opposing view, provide evidence, then refute it.
4. Conclusion – Summarise the main points, restate the thesis in light of the evidence, and suggest implications or actions.

8.2 Collaborative Techniques for the Team Project

• Brain‑storming sessions – Record every idea, then vote on the most relevant.
• Role allocation – Typical roles: researcher, data analyst, writer, editor, presenter, reflection lead.
• Feedback loops – Schedule regular peer‑review checkpoints (e.g., after each C‑E‑L draft).
• Digital tools – Google Docs/Sheets, Padlet, Trello, Zoom/Teams; ensure all members have edit access.
• Team Element checklist (Paper 3)
  • Explanation of research design and planning.
  • Evidence of coordinated action (shared data sets, joint analysis).
  • Clear documentation of each member’s contribution.
• Personal Element checklist (reflection paper)
  • What I learned about the topic.
  • How working with the team influenced my thinking.
  • Strengths and areas for improvement in my own collaboration skills.

9. Incorporating Multiple Perspectives (AO2 & AO3)

At least three distinct perspectives must be evident in every piece of work.

• Local community view – Residents, NGOs, small‑business owners.
• National policy view – Government departments, national NGOs, industry bodies.
• International/global view – UN agencies, multinational corporations, foreign governments.
• Stakeholder view (optional) – Consumers, workers, experts.

Use a C‑E‑L block for each perspective and explicitly link the arguments to the central question.

10. Worked Example – Renewable Energy (Three Perspectives)

11. Worked Example – Digital Divide (Three Perspectives)

12. Suggested Diagram – The Communication Cycle

13. Practice Activity – Mini Team Project

Work in groups of four. Choose one of the official Global Perspectives topics (e.g., *Plastic pollution*, *Migration*, *Digital divide*). Assign each member a different perspective (local, national, international, stakeholder).

1. Write a clear research question (e.g., “How does plastic‑bag legislation affect waste management in City X?”).
2. Each member:
   • Finds one high‑quality source that supports their assigned perspective.
   • Creates a C‑E‑L paragraph and records it in the argument table.
3. Combine the four rows into a single table (as shown in the worked examples).
4. Present the table to the class, explicitly highlighting:
   • Similarities and contradictions between perspectives.
   • How the C‑E‑L structure helped stay focused on the question.
5. Finish with a brief reflective paragraph (≈150 words) answering: “What have I learned about the issue and about working with my team?”

14. Summary Checklist (AO3 – Communication & Collaboration)

• Have I defined a focused research question?
• Do I have at least three distinct perspectives?
• Is each argument built using the C‑E‑L framework?
• Is my work logically structured (introduction, body, counter‑argument, conclusion)?
• Have I evaluated sources for credibility, bias, relevance and currency?
• Did I include a personal reflection that links evidence to my own learning?
• Has the team documented each member’s contribution and provided regular feedback?
• Have I checked the relevant marking grid to ensure all criteria are met?