Assessment Paper 2

Duration: 1 hour 45 minutes   Maximum mark: 30  

Paper 2 is the same for SL and HL and is an extended response paper. The weightings are here.

The paper has two sections, and candidates answer one question from each. Section A includes questions from each of the thematic studies. Section B includes integrating questions, which allows and requires candidates to make connections across the three thematic studies as well as the core topics.

The ability to synthesize elements from the course prescribed content, key concepts and diverse contexts in an integrated way is particularly important in this paper. Even where the key concepts are not explicitly mentioned in a question, candidates should demonstrate a conceptual understanding of global politics. In their responses, candidates are invited to draw on the complexities of any relevant political concepts, depending on the arguments they put forward.

Marks are awarded for demonstrating relevant knowledge and understanding of political concepts and prescribed content, sustaining arguments, and referring to specific relevant examples and cases. Candidates are expected to examine diverse perspectives through: consideration of different views on the question; consideration of claims and counterclaims; or evaluation of the arguments they propose and the examples they use to support them.

Paper 2 essays are marked using a best-fit approach to markbands. Examiners use these alongside a paper-specific markscheme. 

0: The work does not reach a standard described by the descriptors below.

1–3: The response shows limited understanding of the demands of the question.

• The arguments are poorly structured and unclear.

• There is little relevant knowledge present.

• The response is descriptive or is based on unsupported generalizations.

4–6: The response shows some understanding of the demands of the question.

• The response is structured to an extent, but the organization lacks clarity or coherence.

• There is limited justification of the claims presented.

• Some relevant knowledge is present.

• Some examples are mentioned, but they are not developed, or their relevance is unclear.

• Diverse perspectives are not identified.

7–9: The response indicates an understanding of the demands of the question, but these demands are only partially addressed.

• The response presents an adequate structure and organization. Arguments are clear and coherent.

• Most of the main claims are justified.

• Relevant and accurate knowledge is present.

• Supporting examples are partly developed.

• Diverse perspectives are identified, but not explored.

10–12: The response indicates that the demands of the question are understood and addressed.

• The response is well structured and organized. Arguments are clear, coherent and well supported.

• All of the main claims are justified.

• Relevant and accurate knowledge is demonstrated throughout the response.

• Supporting examples are adequately developed.

• Diverse perspectives are explored.

13–15: The response indicates that the demands of the question are understood and addressed, and that possible implications are considered.

• The response is well structured, balanced and effectively organized. Arguments are clear, coherent and compelling.

• All of the main claims are justified and evaluated.

• Relevant and accurate knowledge is used effectively throughout the response.

• Supporting examples are effectively developed.

• Diverse perspectives are explored and evaluated.