Megan Smoot 4th Quarter Project 5/1/19 AS Global Paper 1 Megan Smoot 4th Quarter Project 5/1/19

Basics of Paper 1 Paper 1 is your only written AS Global Exam Paper 1 is an hour and a half Paper 1 contains 3 parts Paper 1 is worth 30% of your total score Basics of Paper 1

Mark Scheme for Top Levels of Question 2 Level 3( 8–10 marks) • Both strengths and weaknesses are assessed. • Assessment of evidence is sustained.  • Assessment explicitly includes the impact of specific evidence upon the claims made. • Communication is highly effective – explanation and reasoning accurate and clearly expressed. Level 2 (4–7 marks) • Answers focus more on either strengths or weaknesses, although both are present.  • Assessment identifies strength or weakness with little explanation. • Assessment of evidence is relevant but generalized, not always linked to specific evidence or specific claims.  • Communication is accurate – explanation and reasoning is limited, but clearly expressed.  Mark Scheme for Top Levels of Question 2

Mark Scheme for Top Levels of Question 3 Level 3 (10–14 marks) • The judgement is sustained and reasoned with conclusions made throughout. • Both authors’ perspectives are assessed throughout. • Critical evaluation is of key issues raised in the passages and has explicit reference. • Explanation and reasoning is highly effective, accurate and clearly expressed. • Communication is highly effective – clear evidence of a structured cogent argument with conclusions explicitly stated and directly linked to the assessment.  Level 2 (5–9 marks) • Judgement is reasoned.  • One document is assessed explicitly; the other only by implication.  • Evaluation of a range of issues is present but may not be fully supported. • Explanation and reasoning is generally accurate. • Communication is accurate – some evidence of a structured discussion although conclusions may not be explicitly stated, nor link directly to the assessment. Mark Scheme for Top Levels of Question 3

Skills Needed for Paper 1 Deconstruction Analysis Validation Evaluation Use of Fallacies Skills Needed for Paper 1

Skills Needed for Paper 1 Explained List pros and cons of each source  Annotate reasons and examples List fallacies used in each source Deconstruction Explain why each point is a pro or con and the importance of the source using it with analysis words Analysis Using evaluative language, determine if overall the source is strong or weak and give reasons why Evaluation  Use the RAVEN exercise Educational background of the source Vested interest of the source Aim of the source List any fallacies the source uses Validation  Skills Needed for Paper 1 Explained

List of Common Fallacies to Utilize in Argument Weak analogy Straw man Slippery slope Generalization Inconsistency Correlation without causation Circularity Appeal to popularity Bandwagon effect Appeal to history Ad hominem Appeal to authority List of Common Fallacies to Utilize in Argument

How to Answer Question 2 • Make sure your argument is two sided​  • Be careful to be sure of the question, does it say argument or evidence? Argument includes evidence, source, argument, everything but evidence is only about the examples, studies, case studies, nothing else ​ • These articles have positives and negatives don’t decide on just one side ​ • Balance your answer. ​ • Use examples  and then analyze them.​ • Use fallacies with examples, name it or describe it but then analyze it ​ • Make sure you have at least 4-6 examples to analyze on both sides Take about 30 minutes How to Answer Question 2

Set up your paper into three sections:  where the article they select is more convincing, where it is less convincing, and they have the same qualities / use examples from both articles Create judgements throughout, you may run out of time if you wait until the end Just as in question #2 evaluate everything from source, evidence, and argument Take about 45 minutes How to Answer Question 3 

Rubric for Paper 1

Rubric for Question1 a&b If the question asks to identify: Examiners should be aware that candidates are asked only to identify ways and not explainor evaluate them. Therefore they should not expect lengthy responses. Candidates are not expected to put the ways into their own words and may simply copy the ways from the Document; however examiners should ensure that all the ways given in the response are taken from Document 1. Credit 1 mark for a correct version of the following, up to 2 marks: Rubric for Question1 a&b If the question asks to identify and explain. If the question asks to identify and explain. Examiners should be aware that this question carries only 4 marks and should not expect a lengthy answer. Examiners should ensure that the ways given are taken from the Document, rather than own knowledge. Credit up to 4 marks for two correct answers. Credit 1 mark each for a simple identification of a benefit and a second mark if this is correctly explained.

Use the levels based marking grid below and the indicative content to credit marks. 9–12 marks Both strengths and weaknesses of evidence are assessed. Assessment of evidence is sustained. Assessment explicitly includes the impact of specific evidence upon the claims made. Communication is highly effective – explanation and reasoning accurate and clearly expressed. Level 2 5–8 marks Answers focus more on either strengths or weaknesses of evidence, although both are present. Assessment identifies strength or weakness of evidence with little explanation. Assessment of evidence is relevant but generalised, not always linked to specific evidence or specific claims. Communication is accurate – explanation and reasoning is limited, but clearly expressed. Level 1 1–4 marks Answers show little or no assessment of evidence. Assessment of evidence if any is simplistic. Evidence may be identified and weakness may be named. Communication is limited – response may be cursory or descriptive. Award 0 where there is no creditable material. Rubric for Question 2

Use the levels based marking grid below and the indicative content to credit marks. 9–12 marks The judgement about relative strength is sustained and reasoned. Alternative perspectives have sustained assessment. Critical evaluation of key issues is raised in the passages and has explicit reference. Explanation and reasoning is highly effective, accurate and clearly expressed. Communication is highly effective – clear evidence of a structured cogent argument with conclusions explicitly stated and directly linked to the assessment. Level 2 5–8 marks Judgement about relative strength is reasoned. One perspective may be focused upon for assessment. Evaluation is present but may not relate to key issues. Explanation and reasoning is generally accurate. Communication is accurate – some evidence of a structured discussion, although conclusions may not be explicitly stated, nor link directly to the assessment. Level 1 1–4 marks Judgement, if present, is unsupported or superficial. Alternative perspectives have little or no assessment Evaluation, if any, is simplistic. Answers may describe a few points comparing the two documents. Relevant evidence or reasons may be identified. Communication is limited. Response may be cursory. Rubric for Question 3

Night Before Success on Paper 1 Review fallacies Review analytical and evaluative language  Decide to not t stop writing until time runs out  Success on Paper 1  Night Before