reflect on and evaluate the effectiveness of collaboration with others (AS Level only)

Resources → Subject Notes → Global Perspectives & Research → Lesson Plan

Reflection in Global Perspectives & Research (AS Level)

1. Why Reflect on Collaboration?

  • Identify strengths and weaknesses in teamwork.
  • Develop concrete strategies for future investigations.
  • Show awareness of ethical, cultural and methodological issues.
  • Demonstrate the ability to evaluate your own standpoint – a core requirement of AO2 (Reflection) in the syllabus.

2. Alignment with the Cambridge International AS & A Level Global Perspectives & Research (9239) Syllabus (2026‑2028)

Syllabus Requirement Covered in These Notes Comments / Gaps
AO2 – Reflection (evaluate own standpoint, impact of research, collaboration, ethical limits) ✔︎ All three sub‑components are addressed with frameworks, checklists and exact wording.
Critical Path – Reflection stage (link to Deconstruction & Reconstruction) ✔︎ Explicitly labelled “Reflection” stage and linked to preceding stages.
Component 3 – Team Project (evaluation of collaboration) ✔︎ Includes criteria table, evidence‑gathering tips and the 30 % weighting. Note: teachers must not give detailed advice on content (see syllabus note).
Key terminology (perspective, assumption, provenance, bias, ethical consideration, argument, premise, counter‑assertion, source reliability, etc.) ✔︎ Glossary now contains *all* required terms.
Word‑count, structure, referencing for the reflective paper ✔︎ Word‑count limit (800 ± 10 %) clarified, exclusion of reference list & transcript noted.
Ethical considerations (limits of learning & research) ✔︎ Expanded with a concrete example (interviewing vulnerable populations).
Connection to the chosen global issue / theme ✔︎ Dedicated subsection explains how every paragraph must refer back to the global issue investigated.
Exact AO2 wording ✔︎ Quoted verbatim at the end of the notes.

3. Key Terminology (Cambridge wording)

Term Definition (Cambridge) How it May Appear in Your Reflection
Perspective A particular way of looking at an issue, shaped by culture, experience and values. “My perspective on climate‑change mitigation shifted after analysing data from low‑income countries.”
Assumption Something taken for granted without proof. “We initially assumed that all participants had equal internet access – this proved false.”
Provenance The origin or source of information or data. “The provenance of the statistical dataset was the World Bank, which ensured reliability.”
Bias A systematic error or prejudice that influences findings. “Our group recognised a confirmation bias towards solutions that were already familiar to us.”
Ethical consideration Any factor that relates to moral responsibility, cultural sensitivity or research integrity. “We obtained informed consent from interviewees and anonymised their responses.”
Argument A claim supported by evidence and reasoning. “Our main argument was that renewable‑energy subsidies reduce poverty in rural areas.”
Premise A statement that forms the basis of an argument. “Premise 1: Access to affordable energy improves education outcomes.”
Counter‑assertion A statement that challenges an argument or premise. “A counter‑assertion raised by a teammate was that subsidies may increase fossil‑fuel dependence.”
Source reliability The degree to which a source can be trusted to provide accurate, unbiased information. “We judged the reliability of the WHO report as high because it is peer‑reviewed and recent.”

4. Evaluation Criteria for Collaboration (linked to AO2 wording)

Criterion (AO2 focus) What to Look For Indicators of Effectiveness
Communication – “evaluate the effectiveness of the collaborative process” Clarity, frequency, openness of information exchange. All members are informed; misunderstandings are resolved quickly; meeting minutes are shared promptly.
Role Allocation – “evaluate the effectiveness of the collaborative process” Distribution of tasks according to skills, interests and workload. Balanced workload; each member has a clearly defined responsibility; roles are documented.
Decision‑Making – “evaluate the effectiveness of the collaborative process” Processes used to reach consensus or manage disagreement. Transparent criteria; decisions recorded; respectful debate; use of voting or ranking when needed.
Time Management – “evaluate the effectiveness of the collaborative process” Planning, meeting deadlines and adapting to setbacks. Milestones met; contingency plans in place; Gantt chart or similar timeline used.
Critical Thinking – “evaluate your own standpoint” Ability to challenge assumptions and integrate evidence. Evidence‑based arguments; willingness to revise ideas; use of peer‑review feedback.
Ethical Awareness – “including ethical considerations and the limits of the learning and research undertaken” Consideration of cultural sensitivity, research ethics and limits of the learning. Respectful handling of data; acknowledgment of contributions; reflection on any ethical dilemmas encountered.

5. Reflective Frameworks – Quick Comparison

Framework Structure Strengths for the 800‑word paper When to Prefer It
Gibbs’ Reflective Cycle 1 Description – 2 Feelings – 3 Evaluation – 4 Analysis – 5 Conclusion – 6 Action Plan Provides a detailed, step‑by‑step guide; easy to map each step to a paragraph; aligns well with AO2 sub‑components. When you need depth and a clear logical flow.
Rolfe’s Framework What? – So what? – Now what? Concise; useful for quick peer‑feedback or when time is limited. When you want a brief reflection or need to fit within a tight word‑count.
Kolb’s Experiential Learning Cycle Concrete Experience → Reflective Observation → Abstract Conceptualisation → Active Experimentation Emphasises the link between experience and future action; good for action‑plan focus. When the project involved a strong practical component (e.g., fieldwork).

6. Step‑by‑Step Reflection Process (Component 3 – Team Project)

  1. Describe the collaborative activity. State the aim, participants, timeline, and the global issue investigated.
  2. Gather evidence. Collect meeting minutes, task logs, peer‑feedback forms, version‑controlled drafts, audio transcripts and the final product.
  3. Analyse using the criteria table. Rate each criterion (Excellent, Good, Needs Improvement) and note specific examples.
  4. Identify patterns. Highlight recurring strengths (e.g., strong communication) or weaknesses (e.g., time‑management lapses).
  5. Develop an action plan. Set SMART goals for the next project and link them to the Critical Path “Reflection” stage.

Suggested timeline (within a 6‑week project):

  • Week 4 – Evidence gathering (1 day) + rating of criteria (1 day).
  • Week 5 – Draft reflective paragraphs (2 days) + peer review (1 day).
  • Week 6 – Finalise reflective paper, check word‑count, add references and transcript (2 days).

7. Sample Self‑Assessment Checklist

Aspect Yes No Comments / Evidence
I contributed ideas that improved the project.
My teammates listened to and considered my input.
We resolved disagreements constructively.
All deadlines were met on time.
We documented our decision‑making process.

8. Guidance on the Reflective Paper (Component 3)

  • Word‑count: 800 ± 10 % words (≈ 720–880). The reference list and any transcript are excluded from the count. Exceeding the limit loses marks.
  • Structure (recommended):
    1. Introduction (≈ 100 words) – state the global issue, your team role and the purpose of the reflection.
    2. Body (≈ 550 words) – follow a chosen framework (e.g., Gibbs). Address each AO2 sub‑component with concrete evidence (minutes, quotes, data).
    3. Conclusion & Action Plan (≈ 150 words) – summarise key findings and set SMART goals for future collaboration.
  • Referencing: Harvard style in‑text citations and a reference list for any external sources. Internal documents (meeting minutes, peer‑feedback forms) should be cited as “Team minutes, 2025”.
  • Transcript requirement: Submit a separate, clearly labelled transcript of any audio‑recorded discussions that are quoted.
  • Teacher guidance note: The syllabus states that teachers must not give detailed advice on the *content* of the reflective paper (e.g., exact wording or model answers). They may, however, provide the framework, word‑count limits and assessment criteria.

9. Connecting Reflection to the Chosen Global Issue

Every paragraph should explicitly link back to the global issue your team investigated (e.g., food security, digital divide, climate change). This demonstrates relevance and satisfies the assessment requirement that the reflection is not generic.

  • Communication: “Cultural differences between team members from Kenya and Canada affected how we exchanged data on food‑security indicators.”
  • Assumptions: “We assumed that all respondents had reliable internet access, which biased our survey on the digital divide.”
  • Ethical awareness: “Interviewing refugees raised confidentiality concerns; we anonymised all transcripts and obtained written consent.”

10. Sample Reflective Excerpt (Annotated)

Gibbs – Evaluation
Overall, our team worked well together, especially in the data‑collection phase where each member took responsibility for a specific region. However, the initial planning meeting revealed an assumption that all members had equal access to high‑speed internet – a bias that delayed the upload of our surveys. This oversight highlighted the importance of checking the provenance of our logistical resources before finalising the timeline.

Marking pointers (AO2)
• Evaluate own standpoint – “I realised my confidence in digital tools masked a lack of awareness about connectivity issues in low‑income contexts.”
• Impact of research – “Investigating the digital divide shifted my perspective from viewing technology as a universal solution to recognising its uneven distribution.”
• Collaboration effectiveness – “Our decision‑making process improved after we introduced a voting system for selecting data‑analysis software, which reduced conflict and increased transparency.”

11. Tips for Effective Reflection

  • Be honest but constructive – focus on learning, not blame.
  • Use specific examples (minutes, quotes, data) rather than vague statements.
  • Link every point back to the assessment criteria and to the global issue.
  • Seek peer feedback on your draft before finalising.
  • After the next project, revisit your action plan and note any progress – you can add this as an addendum for future reflections.

12. Exact Assessment Wording (AO2 – Reflection)

Component 3 – Team Project, AO2 – Reflection:

“Evaluate your own standpoint, the impact of the research on your perspective, and the effectiveness of the collaborative process, including ethical considerations and the limits of the learning and research undertaken.”

This component accounts for 30 % of the total AS Level mark.

Create an account or Login to take a Quiz

37 views
0 improvement suggestions

Log in to suggest improvements to this note.