Cambridge A Level Global Perspectives and Research 9239 — 2019 May/June Paper 1 · Variant 3

This document consists of 2 printed pages, 2 blank pages and 2 Inserts. DC (JP) 164442/2 © UCLES 2019 [Turn over Cambridge Assessment International Education Cambridge International Advanced Subsidiary and Advanced Level * 9 3 4 2 4 5 9 3 7 0 * GLOBAL PERSPECTIVES & RESEARCH 9239/13 Paper 1 Written Examination May/June 2019 1 hour 30 minutes No Additional Materials are required. READ THESE INSTRUCTIONS FIRST An answer booklet is provided inside this question paper. You should follow the instructions on the front cover of the answer booklet. If you need additional answer paper ask the invigilator for a continuation booklet. Answer all questions. You should spend approximately 10 minutes reading the documents in the Resource Booklet before attempting to answer the questions. This is allowed for within the time set for the examination. Answers should be written in continuous prose. The number of marks is given in brackets [ ] at the end of each question or part question.

2 9239/13/M/J/19 © UCLES 2019 Read the documents in the accompanying Resource Booklet and answer all the questions. Technology and lifestyles 1 Study Document 1. Identify and explain three reasons why technology might replace human workers, as given by the authors of Document 1. You should give three different explanations. [6] 2 Study Document 1. Assess the strengths and weaknesses of the evidence that the authors give in Document 1. [12] 3 Study Documents 1 and 2. The authors of Documents 1 and 2 present different views about the effects of future technology in the workplace. To what extent is the author’s argument in Document 2 more convincing than that of the authors in Document 1? [12] [Total: 30]

3 9239/13/M/J/19 © UCLES 2019 BLANK PAGE

4 9239/13/M/J/19 © UCLES 2019 BLANK PAGE Permission to reproduce items where third-party owned material protected by copyright is included has been sought and cleared where possible. Every reasonable effort has been made by the publisher (UCLES) to trace copyright holders, but if any items requiring clearance have unwittingly been included, the publisher will be pleased to make amends at the earliest possible opportunity. To avoid the issue of disclosure of answer-related information to candidates, all copyright acknowledgements are reproduced online in the Cambridge Assessment International Education Copyright Acknowledgements Booklet. This is produced for each series of examinations and is freely available to download at www.cambridgeinternational.org after the live examination series. Cambridge Assessment International Education is part of the Cambridge Assessment Group. Cambridge Assessment is the brand name of the University of Cambridge Local Examinations Syndicate (UCLES), which itself is a department of the University of Cambridge.

This document consists of 12 printed pages. © UCLES 2019 [Turn over Cambridge Assessment International Education Cambridge International Advanced Subsidiary and Advanced Level GLOBAL PERSPECTIVES AND RESEARCH 9239/13 Paper 1 Written Examination May/June 2019 MARK SCHEME Maximum Mark: 30 Published This mark scheme is published as an aid to teachers and candidates, to indicate the requirements of the examination. It shows the basis on which Examiners were instructed to award marks. It does not indicate the details of the discussions that took place at an Examiners’ meeting before marking began, which would have considered the acceptability of alternative answers. Mark schemes should be read in conjunction with the question paper and the Principal Examiner Report for Teachers. Cambridge International will not enter into discussions about these mark schemes. Cambridge International is publishing the mark schemes for the May/June 2019 series for most Cambridge IGCSE™, Cambridge International A and AS Level and Cambridge Pre-U components, and some Cambridge O Level components.

9239/13 Cambridge International AS/A Level – Mark Scheme PUBLISHED May/June 2019 © UCLES 2019 Page 2 of 12 Generic Marking Principles These general marking principles must be applied by all examiners when marking candidate answers. They should be applied alongside the specific content of the mark scheme or generic level descriptors for a question. Each question paper and mark scheme will also comply with these marking principles. GENERIC MARKING PRINCIPLE 1: Marks must be awarded in line with: • the specific content of the mark scheme or the generic level descriptors for the question • the specific skills defined in the mark scheme or in the generic level descriptors for the question • the standard of response required by a candidate as exemplified by the standardisation scripts. GENERIC MARKING PRINCIPLE 2: Marks awarded are always whole marks (not half marks, or other fractions). GENERIC MARKING PRINCIPLE 3: Marks must be awarded positively: • marks are awarded for correct/valid answers, as defined in the mark scheme. However, credit is given for valid answers which go beyond the scope of the syllabus and mark scheme, referring to your Team Leader as appropriate • marks are awarded when candidates clearly demonstrate what they know and can do • marks are not deducted for errors • marks are not deducted for omissions • answers should only be judged on the quality of spelling, punctuation and grammar when these features are specifically assessed by the question as indicated by the mark scheme. The meaning, however, should be unambiguous. GENERIC MARKING PRINCIPLE 4: Rules must be applied consistently e.g. in situations where candidates have not followed instructions or in the application of generic level descriptors. GENERIC MARKING PRINCIPLE 5: Marks should be awarded using the full range of marks defined in the mark scheme for the question (however; the use of the full mark range may be limited according to the quality of the candidate responses seen).

9239/13 Cambridge International AS/A Level – Mark Scheme PUBLISHED May/June 2019 © UCLES 2019 Page 3 of 12 GENERIC MARKING PRINCIPLE 6: Marks awarded are based solely on the requirements as defined in the mark scheme. Marks should not be awarded with grade thresholds or grade descriptors in mind.

9239/13 Cambridge International AS/A Level – Mark Scheme PUBLISHED May/June 2019 © UCLES 2019 Page 4 of 12 Question Answer Marks Guidance Note The mark scheme cannot cover all points that candidates may make for all of the questions. In some cases candidates may think of very strong answers which the mark scheme has not predicted. These answers should be credited according to their quality. If examiners are in any doubt about an answer they should contact their Team Leader or Principal Examiner. For answers marked by levels of response: (a) Mark grids describe the top of each level. (b) To determine the level – start at the highest level and work down until you reach the level that matches the answer. (c) To determine the mark within the level, consider the following: Descriptor Award mark Consistently meets the criteria for this level At top of level Meets the criteria but with some slight inconsistency Above middle and either below top of level or at middle of level (depending on number of marks available) Just enough achievement on balance for this level Above bottom and either below middle or at middle of level (depending on number of marks available) On the borderline of this level and the one below At bottom of level Assessment Objectives for Global Perspectives AO1 Research, analysis and evaluation • analyse arguments to understand how they are structured and on what they are based • analyse perspectives and understand the different claims, reasons, arguments, views and evidence they contain • synthesize relevant and credible research / text in support of judgements about arguments and perspectives • critically evaluate the strengths, weaknesses and implications of reasoning in arguments and overall perspectives • critically evaluate the nature of different arguments and perspectives • use research / text to support judgements about arguments and perspectives

9239/13 Cambridge International AS/A Level – Mark Scheme PUBLISHED May/June 2019 © UCLES 2019 Page 5 of 12 Question Answer Marks Guidance 1 Identify and explain three reasons why technology might replace human workers, as given by the authors of Document 1. You should give three different explanations. Credit 2 marks each, up to 6 marks, for each correct developed explanation. Credit correct versions of the following: • Robots and intelligent machines can perform routine jobs more cheaply √ (R). So it is more productive for businesses to use machines rather than human workers / won’t need to hire as values of human labour falls / will use more machines as value of human labour falls √ • In the virtual economy computers / robots do business only / work only with other computers / robots.(R) √ This is because human beings are not necessary for this process / Humans are no longer needed as computers can simply communicate with themselves. √ • The smart machines can do some jobs better than humans / outperform humans.(R) √ This is because they have high IQs / greater information storage capacity / better skills / do jobs people cannot. √ Explanations may be treated as identification where appropriate. Credit 1 mark where only the reason is given • Robots and intelligent machines can perform the tasks more cheaply. √ • In the virtual economy computers do business only with other computers. √ • The smart machines can do some jobs better than humans. √ 3 × (1+1) Credit 0 marks • for a paraphrase of the first paragraph which sets the scene without explanation • for simply giving examples e.g. The Sedasys machine sedates patients. • for answers taken from the candidate’s own knowledge. • for answers with no creditworthy material.

9239/13 Cambridge International AS/A Level – Mark Scheme PUBLISHED May/June 2019 © UCLES 2019 Page 6 of 12 Question Answer Marks Guidance 1 Or Where the correct reason and explanation is wholly taken from the text without any synthesis.

9239/13 Cambridge International AS/A Level – Mark Scheme PUBLISHED May/June 2019 © UCLES 2019 Page 7 of 12 Question Answer Marks Guidance 2 Assess the strengths and weaknesses of the evidence that the authors give in Document 1. Use the levels based marking opposite to credit marks. No set answer is expected and examiners should be flexible in their approach. Candidates may include some of the following: Strengths The following strengths of evidence all strengthen the support for the authors’ conclusion that machine intelligence will leave people without employment: • Uses evidence from sources expert in their fields – Henry Adams, Foxconn’s CEO, US FDA, UK National Academy of Science which increases its authority. • Uses a range of global evidence – Foxconn in China, US FDA, and UK NAS, which gives some international support for the claims. • Uses precise, relevant statistics – from Henry Adams to support historic technological progress, from Foxconn to support the speed of technology. • Uses relevant examples – to illustrate present replacement of workers – Foxconn’s projected addition of 1 million robotic workers; Sedasys machine replacing anesthesiologists; computers outperforming radiologists. • Uses historical perspective in the evidence – from Henry Adams about historic technological progress, which gives context to judge the significance of more rapid rise in the new technology. • Uses evidence to challenge possible criticisms – of doubt at the speed of workers being replaced; that technological progress has created new opportunities for employment; that smart machines can have an IQ above a person of average intelligence. This gives the appearance of a balanced argument. 12 Use the levels based marking grid below and the indicative content in the left-hand column to credit marks. For each bullet give a level (that can include split levels e.g. L2 / L1) to inform the overall level and mark within the available range. These should be placed at the end of the answer with the overall level in the right-hand margin. (Use X for Level 0) Note: Level 3 involves the impact of the evidence upon the claim – a key characteristic There is no requirement to use technical terms to access any level and candidates will NOT be rewarded for their use unless they link them directly to the assessments made. Level 3 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 the strengths or weaknesses of the evidence, although both are present / identified. Note: maximum 6 marks if both not present. • Assessment identifies strength or weaknesses of evidence with little explanation.

9239/13 Cambridge International AS/A Level – Mark Scheme PUBLISHED May/June 2019 © UCLES 2019 Page 8 of 12 Question Answer Marks Guidance 2 • Expertise of the authors to produce informed evidence – both authors have experience in the high-technology industry and business which is likely to help them to make informed judgements that can be trusted. • Vested interest of authors – to produce accurate evidence, as both authors are writers in the public eye so need to report accurately to maintain public confidence. Weaknesses The following weaknesses of evidence all weaken the support for the authors’ conclusion that machine intelligence will leave people without employment: • Uses unsourced key evidence – computer memory increase at 60% a year, semiconductor technology at a rapid rate for more than 50 years, which limits the authority of the evidence. • Much of the argument relies on projections from evidence – By 2025 these machines will have an IQ greater than 90% of the U.S. population and over ten years would put another 50 million jobs within reach of smart machines. Speculations can be inaccurate as circumstances change. • Uses evidence that relies on trends continuing – By 2025 «would put another 50 million jobs within reach of smart machines. If there is a ceiling to the intelligence that machines can be developed to have, this would weaken the predicted evidence of 50 million jobs being potentially replaced. • Uses a limited perspective of evidence – drawn only from the developed world US, UK and China. It does not discuss areas where wages are cheaper or where technology has not reached. • 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. • Assessment, if any, is simplistic. • Evidence may be identified and weaknesses may be named. • Communication is limited – response may be cursory or descriptive. Credit 0 marks where there is no creditable material. Use X in the levels summary

9239/13 Cambridge International AS/A Level – Mark Scheme PUBLISHED May/June 2019 © UCLES 2019 Page 9 of 12 Question Answer Marks Guidance 2 • Uses evidence that may not be typical – limited to two economies that are experts in technology, the US and China. If these are not typical of other economies, such as developing economies, it limits the support for humans without employment. Similarly these economies have a plentiful workforce. If other countries have dwindling workforce the impact would not have a major effect. • Uses examples that may not be typical – If the examples from anesthesiology and radiology are not typical of other areas of medicine, it limits the support for leaving humans without employment. • The evidence presented in predictions contains assumptions – that the job done by the million Foxbot robots could have been done by the same number of human workers; that the current rate in the rise of machines’ IQ can continue. • Bias – Both authors write in the area of high-technology and business, so there may be a natural bias towards the importance of developments in this field which would lead them to overestimate the significance of its effects and produce higher figures in their predictive evidence.

9239/13 Cambridge International AS/A Level – Mark Scheme PUBLISHED May/June 2019 © UCLES 2019 Page 10 of 12 Question Answer Marks Guidance 3 The authors of Documents 1 and 2 present different views about the effects of future technology in the workplace. To what extent is the author’s argument in Document 2 more convincing than that of the authors in Document 1? No set answer is expected and examiners should be flexible in their approach. Candidates may include some of the following: More Convincing • Weakens the more sweeping statement of Davidow & Malone (Doc1) – Nohara’s conclusion (Doc 2) that robots aren’t a threat in Japan weakens Davidow & Malone (Doc1) more general conclusion about leaving humans in general without employment. • More personal first hand evidence – Nohara (Doc 2) uses the experience and views of two workers who welcome the technology and businesses currently using the technology; whereas Davidow & Malone (Doc1) provide a more theoretical argument. • Depends less on speculation – Nohara (Doc 2) looks at what is actually happening in Japan as well as predictions; whereas Davidow & Malone (Doc1) base their argument about intelligent machines upon speculation. • More immediate evidence – Nohara (Doc 2) argues about the effects in Japan now with a 5 year plan; whereas Davidow & Malone (Doc1) use projections by 2025, based on trends in increased intelligence in smart machines continuing at the same rate. 12 Use the levels-based marking grid below and the indicative content in the left-hand column to credit marks. For each bullet give a level (that can include split levels e.g. L2 / L1) to inform the overall level and mark within the available range. These should be placed at the end of the answer with the overall level in the right-hand margin. (Use X for Level 0) There is no requirement to use technical terms to access any level and candidates will NOT be rewarded for their use unless they link them directly to the assessments made. Level 3 9–2 marks • The judgement is sustained and reasoned throughout. • Alternative perspectives have sustained assessment. • 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.

9239/13 Cambridge International AS/A Level – Mark Scheme PUBLISHED May/June 2019 © UCLES 2019 Page 11 of 12 Question Answer Marks Guidance 3 Less convincing • Less global – Davidow & Malone (Doc1) put forward a more general argument; whereas Nohara (Doc 2) considers particular workforce situations which are specific to Japan and may not be representative of elsewhere in the world. • Less consideration of the counter arguments – Davidow & Malone (Doc1) directly respond to four possible criticisms about speed, other human opportunities, impossibility of smart advances and estimates; whereas Nohara (Doc 2) responds only to the issue of predicted unemployment. • Less expertise – Davidow & Malone (Doc1) have experience as authors in high-technology and business; whereas Nohara (Doc 2) is an economics reporter who may therefore not see the wider global picture. Neither more or less convincing because the same • Both look at how machines affect production positively – Nohara (Doc 2) in manufacturing and Davidow & Malone (Doc1) in manufacturing and through smart machines in medicine. • Both look at the increased use of intelligent machines – Nohara (Doc 2) in Japan and Davidow & Malone (Doc1) in China, the US and UK • Both present clear arguments – with a specific conclusion and a structure of reasons. • Both provide sourced evidence – relevant examples and statistics from authorities. Level 2 5–8 marks • Judgement 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 1–4marks • Judgement, if present, is unsupported or superficial. • Alternative perspectives have little or no assessment. • Evaluation, if any, is simplistic / undeveloped. • Relevant evidence or reasons may be identified. • Communication is limited. Response may be cursory. Credit 0 marks where no creditable material. Use X in the levels summary.

9239/13 Cambridge International AS/A Level – Mark Scheme PUBLISHED May/June 2019 © UCLES 2019 Page 12 of 12 Question Answer Marks Guidance 3 Neither more or less convincing because different • Different perspectives – Nohara (Doc 2) argues that the technology assists the workforce; whereas Davidow & Malone (Doc1) argue that this technology replaces the workforce. Both could be true in different areas of the world. • Different workforce perspectives – Nohara (Doc 2) argues from the perspective of Japan with a dwindling workforce; whereas Davidow & Malone (Doc1) argue from the perspectives of the US and China which have large workforces. • Different perspectives in time – Nohara (Doc 2) argues about the impact of a specific 5 year plan; whereas Davidow & Malone (Doc1) argue about things that might happen in general by 2025. Judgement Candidates should critically assess perspectives and the use of examples and evidence in order to reach a judgement. In doing this they might conclude that Nohara’s argument (Doc 2) is stronger because of more first-hand views and a firmer view on what is actually happening in Japan, which weakens the more sweeping conclusion of general risk in Davidow & Malone (Doc1)’s conclusion. Alternatively, they might conclude that overall, despite Davidow & Malone (Doc1)’s more sweeping conclusion, the argument has a wider global scope based on their expertise in business and technology. Credit should be given to any alternative judgement on the basis of the assessment and reasoning e.g. they might conclude that both arguments are equally convincing.