Assessment Paper 3 (HL only)

Duration: 1 hour 30 minutes     Maximum mark: 28     Weighting: HL only 30%

This is a stimulus-based paper related to the HL extension syllabus (global political challenges). This means it has one source.

Candidates must respond to three questions drawing from their researched case studies. 

The paper is 28 marks and is 30% of your final grade.

Question 1   -   3 marks

Question 2   (a)  4 marks

Question 2   (b)  6 marks

Question 3    -  15 marks

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

1–2 The demands of the question are partially addressed.

• The response is mostly descriptive.

• Some knowledge of the political issue is demonstrated, but it is not all relevant or accurate.

3–4 The demands of the question are addressed.

• The response provides a clear analysis of a political issue.

• Relevant and accurate knowledge of the context is demonstrated.

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

1–2 A recommendation is presented, but it is vague or unclear.

• The recommendation does not clearly address the identified political issue.

3–4 An adequate recommendation is presented.

• The recommendation addresses the identified political issue.

• Possible challenges or implications are not considered.

5–6 A clear and well-supported recommendation is presented.

• The recommendation addresses the identified political issue effectively.

• Possible challenges, implications or unintended consequences are considered.

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 arguments lack 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 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.