Question 4: making recommendations

LO: Considering how to tackle the final, longest question of the paper

What recommendation did you make in last term's project about limiting tourist access to a historic site? Why?

What alternative recommendations could be made?

Who should be the ones to make decisions about heritage sites? Local communities, National governments, or International Organisations? Why?

The Question

Study Sources 1–4.
A government report concludes that a historical site is being destroyed by tourists. The following actions are being considered to protect the site for the future:

  • restrict the number of tourists visiting the site
  • increase the cost of transport and entry to the site
  • close the site completely and create a protected area.

Which one of these actions would you recommend to the government, and why? In your answer you should:

  • state your recommendation
  • give reasons to support your choice
  • use the material in the Sources and/or any of your own ideas
  • consider different arguments and perspectives.

What the exam-board wants

Level 5 (20–24 marks) Very good response
Clear, well supported reasoning about the recommended course of action. Different arguments and perspectives are clearly considered.
The response contains a wide range of clearly reasoned points and/or evidence to support the views expressed, with four (or more) developed points, and some undeveloped points.
The response is very well-structured.

What to consider:

  • Remember: local ▶️ national ▶️ global
  • Scale of the problem, and time it could take to fix
  • Range of potential consequences
  • Impact on individuals ▶️ groups ▶️ communities
  • Economics:
    • employment
    • trade
  • Cultural and social changes
  • What barriers/resistances there might be
  • Potential conflicts of interest/power bases
  • Cost of resources and environmental impact

With the person next to you, start drafting up a response

# Global Perspectives - Assessment Preparation **LO:** To consider how we can prepare for the upcoming assessment <task> Summarise the skills you think are required to succeed as a **global perspectives** student <challenge> How does these differ from Science? Or English? --- ## The Paper - Four non-fiction sources, often including graph data and tables - Four sections: - Q1 + 2: analysis and evaluation - Q3: source criticality - Q4: overview of all - Sources and questions will be about a single topic that affects the world in a number of ways - *economically, socially, politically, environmentally, culturally.* - Testing your skills of *analysis and evaluation*: considering the causes and consequences of the topic discussed --- ## Q1A) *Identify* the trend in the number of people travelling by air between 1990 and 2020 shown in Source 1. ### Source 1: Table |Year|Air passengers (billions.) | |:--:|:--:| |1990|1.1| |2000|1.8| |2010|2.6| |2020|3.8| --- ## Q1B) Identify two causes for the change in the number of international passengers. ### Source 2: Magazine Extract > International travel is rapidly changing and with this there will be consequences – economic, social and cultural. For example, technological change has enabled larger and more fuel-efficient ships to be built. As a result, the transportation of people by ship has increased. Improvements in technology are also taking place in other forms of international transport. > At the same time, people in many parts of the world are becoming richer and enjoying higher levels of education. In addition to this the media and the internet have increased awareness of other cultures and different environments. For example television documentaries about world wildlife are shown in many countries. > All of these reasons mean that people are more interested in international travel and holidays than in the past. --- ## Q1C) Which cause of the change in the number of international passengers do you think is the most important? Explain **why**. Consider what you've looked at in source A and source B! ### A good answer will include... > Clearly reasoned explanation explicitly linked to a cause with one developed point or three relevant but undeveloped points. ### A bad answer will include... > Limited explanation. Explanation is not linked to a cause explicitly. --- # Continuing the paper LO: To build strategies to tackle the GP paper <task> 'Air travel is a bad thing for the planet.' Write three bullets *disagreeing* with this statement. <stretch> Re-read the sources from yesterday --- ## Q1D) Explain one global and one local consequence of the change in the number of people travelling by air. <columns> > Local impact could include.... > - ? > Global impact could include.... > - ? </columns> Try to think in terms of *environmental*, *economic*, *cultural*, *social* and *political* factors --- ## Source 3 - website promoting tourism > ### International travel has benefits >International travel has many benefits, including trade and tourism. We should celebrate the opportunities that international trade and tourism bring to everyone. >Trade between nations is increasing. The United Nations provides many statistics that prove this point. It now costs less to travel long distances than in the past. This brings new wealth and prosperity by providing employment to many people. Governments also have more income from taxes to spend on health and education. >Tourism is wonderful. We can have holidays in different countries and learn about other cultures. This encourages tolerance and respect for other perspectives and ways of life. I have seen this in my work as a manager in the tourist industry. --- ## 2a) How well does the author use evidence to support the claim that ‘international travel has many benefits’? *START* by writing down the evidence they use, and *THEN* judge the strength/weakness of the evidence accordingly. |STRENGTHS|WEAKNESSES| |:--:|:--:| | Some evidence is effective because... | Other evidence is less effective because... | --- # Analysing Evidence LO: to consider how we criticise and evaluate sources in the exam <columns> <task> What makes a source trustworthy? - Popularity? - Provenance? - Format? Write down a general rule for evaluating reliability. </task> <challenge> Do you agree with this statement? > "Real journalism is publishing something that somebody else does not want published. The rest is just advertising." > > George Orwell </challenge> </columns> --- ## 2a) How well does the author use evidence to support the claim that ‘international travel has many benefits’? <task> *START* by writing down the evidence they use, and *THEN* judge the strength/weakness of the evidence accordingly. </task> - Where does the info come from? What **citations**? - Are there any solid numbers? - Are there facts/statistics, or is it anecdotes and description? - Could the source be biased? |STRENGTHS|WEAKNESSES| |:--:|:--:| | Some evidence is effective because... | Other evidence is less effective because... | --- > ### International travel has benefits (from a pro-tourism website) >International travel has many benefits, including trade and tourism. We should celebrate the opportunities that international trade and tourism bring to everyone. >Trade between nations is increasing. The United Nations provides many statistics that prove this point. It now costs less to travel long distances than in the past. This brings new wealth and prosperity by providing employment to many people. Governments also have more income from taxes to spend on health and education. >Tourism is wonderful. We can have holidays in different countries and learn about other cultures. This encourages tolerance and respect for other perspectives and ways of life. I have seen this in my work as a manager in the tourist industry. - Where does the info come from? What **citations**? - Are there any solid numbers? - Are there facts/statistics, or is it anecdotes and description? - Could the source be biased? --- > ### "It now costs less to travel long distances than in the past." ## 2b) How could you test this claim? You may consider the types of information, sources of evidence or methods you might use **Qualitative** and **Quantitative** --- # Q3 - Opinions and Angles LO: To consider how we can analyse biases and evaluate efficacy of arguments <task> Which of these is a more compelling argument, and why? >A) I say should ban pineapple on pizza because it is revolting and horrible. >B) High levels of sugar and acidity in food can be damaging to health; therefore we should ban pineapple on pizza. >C) More than 400 million pizzas are eaten every week; pineapple toppings are not sustainable and should be banned. </task> <br> --- ## Reading Source 4 <task> 1. What prediction is made in the text? 2. Why might Donna be biased? 3. Identify one opinion in Miguel's statement, and explain *why* this is an opinion (and not a fact!) </task> --- ![bg cover opacity:20%](https://images.unsplash.com/photo-1562937778-deb2b7bf3eb2?crop=entropy&cs=tinysrgb&fit=max&fm=jpg&ixid=M3w1Njk0Mzh8MHwxfHNlYXJjaHw3fHxjYXN0bGVzJTJGfGVufDB8MHx8fDE3MTY5NTM3MTJ8MA&ixlib=rb-4.0.3&q=80&w=1080) # Evaluating Arguments LO: to tackle the penultimate question of the paper. <task> Why might a source be biased? List as many reasons as you can think of. </task> <challenge> Do you agree with the below statement? Why, why not? > Only trust the media who are obvious about who they're biased towards. </challenge> --- > **Q4-d)** Which argument is more convincing, Miguel’s or Donna’s? >Your answer should consider both arguments, and you should support your point of view with their words. > You should also consider: > - the strength of their reasoning and evidence > - their use of language > - different types of information. | Miguel | Donna | | :---: | :---: | | Strengths... | Strengths... | | Evidence... | Evidence... | --- <columns> <div> ### Miguel - Personal opinions shared, using a personal and relatable tone - Does not appear to be selling or working with any other organisations (unlike Donna!) - Discusses both advantages and disadvantages, suggesting balanced point of view - Use of emotive language shows a personal connection, which can be more compelling - References the experiences of others (his mother) </div> <div> ### Donna - Pictorial/photographic evidence is used, illustrating the points she makes about damage to the site - Links her points to other examples of similar tourist sites damaged by tourists - References her expertise and credentials as someone working in this area - Discusses stakeholders (e.g. local residents) - Limited to no emotive vocabulary - largely rational and evidence-based </div> </columns> ---