Cambridge A Level Thinking Skills 9694 — 2016 May/June Paper 2 · Variant 1

This document consists of 6 printed pages, 2 blank pages and 1 insert. IB16 06_9694_21/4RP © UCLES 2016 [Turn over *5683625804* Cambridge International Examinations Cambridge International Advanced Subsidiary and Advanced Level THINKING SKILLS 9694/21 Paper 2 Critical Thinking May/June 2016 1 hour 45 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 the questions. The number of marks is given in brackets [ ] at the end of each question.

2 © UCLES 2016 9694/21/M/J/16 1 Study the evidence and answer the questions that follow. Source A News report From Litho Gazette 18 December 2013 In recent weeks, the Gazette has reported increasing numbers of complaints about dogs fouling* the streets in defiance of the law prohibiting owners from allowing this. In response to these complaints, the Litho Town Council has decided to appoint two dog wardens, who will have the power to issue fixed-penalty notices for fines of $50 on anyone who allows their dog to foul the pavement. Some councillors have complained that this will be a waste of money, but the leader of the council says the scheme will be self-financing, because the money raised by the fines will be sufficient to pay the costs of employing the wardens. *fouling: leaving excrement Source B Memo From Head of Environmental Services, Litho Town Council to Dog Wardens 15 February 2015 As you know, your appointment was made on the basis that the income generated by fixed- penalty fines would pay for the cost of your employment. However, the income in recent months has fallen short of the amount required. The overall cost of employing each dog warden has been calculated as $5000 a month. In order to meet these costs, each warden needs to issue 100 fixed-penalty notices a month. In future, the performance of each dog warden will be monitored against this target, and anyone who persistently fails to meet the target will be dismissed. Source C Letter 10 May 2015 Dear Mrs Rush One of our dog wardens has reported that your dog, Toby, fouled the pavement in Manor Road on 3 May 2015. A fixed-penalty notice has been issued, and you must pay $50. Environmental Health Department, Litho Town Council

3 © UCLES 2016 9694/21/M/J/16 [Turn over Source D Letter 12 May 2015 Your letter imposing a fixed penalty fine must be based on a mistake. My dog, Toby, is an elderly, small terrier, who can only walk short distances. On 3 May, he wandered away from me in Litho Park, but a friend found him on the edge of the park and returned him to me. The park is a mile and a half away from Manor Road, and to get there Toby would have needed to cross several busy roads. It is quite impossible that he could have walked to Manor Road, fouled the pavement there and then returned to be found in the park where he had gone missing. I therefore do not intend to pay the fine, which must have been imposed in error. E Rush Source E Letter 14 May 2015 Dear Mrs Rush If you wish to contest the fixed-penalty notice, you will have to appear at the Magistrates’ Court, where the maximum fine under the relevant law is $1000. Environmental Health Department, Litho Town Council Source F Letter 21 May 2015 I enclose a cheque for $50 in settlement of the fixed-penalty fine imposed on my dog, Toby. E Rush (a) Explain the possible significance of Source B in relation to the allegation that Mrs Rush allowed her dog, Toby, to foul the pavement. [2] (b) (i) State and briefly explain one factor which strengthens the reliability of Mrs Rush’s evidence in Source D. [2] (ii) State and briefly explain one factor which weakens the reliability of Mrs Rush’s evidence in Source D. [2] (c) How well does Source F support the dog warden’s claim that Toby fouled the pavement? [3] (d) How likely do you think it is that Mrs Rush allowed her dog to foul the pavement? Write a short, reasoned argument to support your conclusion, with critical reference to the evidence provided and considering a plausible alternative conclusion. [6]

4 © UCLES 2016 9694/21/M/J/16 2 Study the evidence and answer the questions that follow. Source A News report It has been revealed that overweight motorists are more than twice as likely to be killed or seriously injured in road accidents as are lighter people. A study of 26 000 people involved in car crashes found that heavier people were far more at risk. Experts say this could be because overweight people are more likely to suffer from sleep disorders and so are more likely to fall asleep at the wheel. The study took place in Seattle, Washington, in the United States. Source B News report Driving safely and wearing seat belts are two ways to reduce the chance of dying in a car accident. Losing weight might be another one. A recent study, led by Dr Thomas R Rice, of the Division of Environmental Health Sciences at the University of California at Berkeley, looked at whether there was any link between being overweight and the likelihood of dying from injuries suffered in car accidents. “Findings from this study suggest that overweight people are more likely to die from traffic- collision-related injuries than people of normal weight involved in the same sort of collision,” the researchers wrote. Source C Research data Findings from the University of California at Berkeley study underweight overweight Added risk of death in car accidents severely overweight dangerously overweight 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 %

5 © UCLES 2016 9694/21/M/J/16 [Turn over Source D Research report Research has found that overweight people travel farther in their seats before their seat belts engage in the pelvic area during a car crash, compared to normal-weight people. The delay in seat-belt activation is due to an excess of soft tissue in the abdomen, which prevents the belt from gripping the pelvis firmly. The upper body is held firmly, but the lower body is not. This can put intolerable strain on vital organs, leading to an increased risk of serious injury or death. (a) Source A and Source B both claim that overweight people are more likely to die in road accidents than people of average weight. Identify one difference in what they mean by these claims. [3] (b) Source B claims that losing weight may be a good way “to reduce the chance of dying in a car accident.” How well does the graph in Source C support this claim? [3] (c) From the evidence in Source D, it is possible to conclude that overweight people who travel in cars should lose weight. Suggest an alternative conclusion which could be drawn from the same evidence. [3] (d) ‘Overweight people should lose weight in order to avoid being killed in road accidents.’ To what extent do you agree with this claim? Write a short, reasoned argument to support your conclusion, using and evaluating the information provided in Sources A–D. [6]

6 © UCLES 2016 9694/21/M/J/16 3 Read the passage and answer the questions below. 1 Many scientists believe that the universe is infinite. They infer that a very large number of planets have the conditions in which life could develop. One estimate is that over a hundred thousand billion potentially-life-bearing planets exist. It is very likely that there are many alien species which have both the desire to explore the universe and the ability to do so. 2 Since 1984, astronomers from the Search for Extraterrestrial Intelligence (SETI) have been scanning the airwaves looking for radio signals from outer space. They believe they were successful on one occasion. In 2003, they detected signals from an area in space where there are no planets or stars. Since we know of no way in which these signals could have occurred naturally, we can only conclude that someone was deliberately transmitting them from a distant planet in the hope that someone from elsewhere in the universe would reply. 3 Many people have reported seeing unidentified flying objects (UFOs). Some of the reports may have been practical jokes, and others based on genuine mistakes, but the people who have made the reports include airline pilots, military personnel and police officers – people who know what a weather balloon looks like and would not mistake one for a UFO. By far the most likely explanation of these observations is that the UFOs are vehicles containing visitors from other planets. 4 There is also a lot of persuasive evidence that people have been abducted by aliens. Although some of the witnesses may be delusional, most of them seem normal, rational and credible. Since many of those experiences occurred in the daytime, they cannot be explained away as vivid dreams, and the similarities in the accounts of these experiences cannot be mere coincidence. 5 The cumulative evidence is overwhelming that members of other species from distant planets have contacted the Earth on many occasions. Those idiots who refuse to believe this must be motivated solely by prejudice. Their only argument is circular: aliens do not exist; so anyone who claims to have encountered them is either mistaken or lying; therefore there is no evidence that aliens exist. (a) Using the exact words from the passage as far as possible, identify the main conclusion. [2] (b) Using the exact words from the passage as far as possible, identify three intermediate conclusions. [3] (c) Evaluate the strength of the reasoning in the argument. In your answer you should consider any flaws, unstated assumptions and other weaknesses. [5] (d) ‘The inhabitants of Planet Earth should try to contact life in other parts of the universe.’ Write your own short argument to support or challenge this claim. The conclusion of your argument must be stated. Credit will not be given for repeating ideas from the passage. [5]

7 © UCLES 2016 9694/21/M/J/16 BLANK PAGE

8 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 International Examinations Copyright Acknowledgements Booklet. This is produced for each series of examinations and is freely available to download at www.cie.org.uk after the live examination series. Cambridge International Examinations is part of the Cambridge Assessment Group. Cambridge Assessment is the brand name of University of Cambridge Local Examinations Syndicate (UCLES), which is itself a department of the University of Cambridge. © UCLES 2016 9694/21/M/J/16 BLANK PAGE

® IGCSE is the registered trademark of Cambridge International Examinations. This document consists of 8 printed pages. © UCLES 2016 [Turn over Cambridge International Examinations Cambridge International Advanced Subsidiary and Advanced Level THINKING SKILLS 9694/21 Paper 2 Critical Thinking May/June 2016 MARK SCHEME Maximum Mark: 45 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 will not enter into discussions about these mark schemes. Cambridge is publishing the mark schemes for the May/June 2016 series for most Cambridge IGCSE®, Cambridge International A and AS Level components and some Cambridge O Level components.

Page 2 Mark Scheme Syllabus Paper Cambridge International AS/A Level – May/June 2016 9694 21 © Cambridge International Examinations 2016 1 (a) Explain the possible significance of Source B in relation to the allegation that Mrs Rush allowed her dog, Toby, to foul the pavement. [2] It suggests a possible motive for a dog warden to have made a false allegation [1] in order to increase the income from fines/protect his employment [1]. (b) (i) State and briefly explain one factor which strengthens the reliability of Mrs Rush’s evidence in Source D. [2] • As Toby’s owner [1], she has good ability to know his age and state of health [1]. • Because her claims about the dog’s age and health can easily be checked [1], she is unlikely to risk making untrue statements [1] and thereby getting herself into worse trouble [1]. • Mrs Rush admits that she lost sight of Toby [1], even though she has a vested interest to claim that he was in her sight the whole time [1]. • Her evidence is plausible/coherent [1], because if she was where she says she was and if Toby’s condition is what she says it is, and the route from the park to Manor Road is as dangerous as she says it is, it is very unlikely that he could have travelled to Manor Road and back [1]. (ii) State and briefly explain one factor which weakens the reliability of Mrs Rush’s evidence in Source D. [2] • She has a vested interest to misrepresent the truth [1] in order to avoid paying the fine [1]. • Because Toby was lost for a time [1], she has poor ability to see whether he fouled the pavement or not [1]. (c) How well does Source F support the dog warden’s claim that Toby fouled the pavement? [3] Not very well (neither well nor badly) [1]. Mrs Rush could be paying because she knows or suspects that the accusation is true [1]. The letter does not suggest that she is paying under protest [1]. Alternatively, she could be paying because she cannot prove it is not true/is not confident of receiving a fair trial [1] and she cannot risk incurring a heavier fine [1] or because she wants to avoid the time and stress of attending court [1].

Page 3 Mark Scheme Syllabus Paper Cambridge International AS/A Level – May/June 2016 9694 21 © Cambridge International Examinations 2016 (d) How likely do you think it is that Mrs Rush allowed her dog to foul the pavement? Write a short, reasoned argument to support your conclusion, with critical reference to the evidence provided and considering a plausible alternative conclusion. [6] Level 3 5–6 marks A strong answer, which provides a reasoned argument including thorough evaluation of all or most of the evidence to support an acceptable conclusion in terms of probability and evaluates the plausibility of at least one alternative conclusion. Level 2 3–4 marks An answer which evaluates some of the evidence, draws an acceptable conclusion in terms of probability and may mention the plausibility of at least one alternative conclusion. Level 1 1–2 marks A weak answer, which refers to some of the evidence, possibly including a simple evaluative comment. The conclusion may be unstated or over-stated. Level 0 0 marks No credit-worthy material. Indicative content The possibilities are: • Toby really did foul the pavement on Manor Road when he had run away. • Mrs Rush was present when Toby fouled the pavement on Manor Road. • The dog warden made a mistake. • The dog warden made a false accusation. Candidates may argue in favour of any of these. As explained in the answer to part (a), Source B provides a possible motive for the dog warden to have made a false accusation. As explained in the answers to part (b), Mrs Rush is in a better position than the dog warden to know what happened, but she has a VI to lie about it. The fact that Mrs Rush eventually paid the fine (Source F) is very weak evidence of her guilt, since fighting the case in court would run the risk of incurring a much heavier fine.

Page 4 Mark Scheme Syllabus Paper Cambridge International AS/A Level – May/June 2016 9694 21 © Cambridge International Examinations 2016 2 (a) Source A and Source B both claim that overweight people are more likely to die in road accidents than people of average weight. Identify one difference in what they mean by these claims. [3] Source A argues that overweight people are more likely to cause a serious road accident than less heavy people [1], whereas Source B argues that overweight people who are involved in a serious road accident [1] are more likely to die than less heavy people who were involved in an equivalent accident [1]. Allow for 1 mark: Source A refers to motorists, whereas Source B considers both drivers and passengers. (b) Source B claims that losing weight may be a good way ‘to reduce the chance of dying in a car accident.’ How well does the graph in Source C support this claim? [3] Partially/not very well (neither well nor badly) [1]. It does support this claim in the case of overweight people (allow supports only in the case of severely and dangerously overweight people) [1], but not in the case of people whose weight is considered normal [1]. Since underweight people are at enhanced risk, they should certainly not lose weight [1]. Give the judgment mark if two judgments are given – one for overweight people (well) and one for others (badly). (c) From the evidence in Source D, it is possible to conclude that overweight people who travel in cars should lose weight. Suggest an alternative conclusion which could be drawn from the same evidence. [3] Car designers should re-design [1] safety features, especially seat belts [1] in order to make them suitable for a wider range of body sizes/overweight people [1]. Award 1 mark for marginal conclusions such as ‘overweight people should not wear seat belts’, ‘overweight people should not travel in cars’ or ‘overweight people should take greater care to avoid accidents.’

Page 5 Mark Scheme Syllabus Paper Cambridge International AS/A Level – May/June 2016 9694 21 © Cambridge International Examinations 2016 (d) ‘Overweight people should lose weight in order to avoid being killed in road accidents.’ To what extent do you agree with this claim? Write a short, reasoned argument to support your conclusion, using and evaluating the information provided in Sources A–D. [6] Level 3 5–6 marks A reasoned argument, which uses and evaluates all or most of the evidence provided. Level 2 3–4 marks A simple argument, which uses and/or evaluates evidence. Level 1 1–2 marks A weak answer, which makes some correct reference to evidence but consists of opinion and/or assertion rather than argument or an argument which makes no reference to evidence. Level 0 0 marks No credit-worthy material. Indicative Content • Source A claims on the basis of a large sample that overweight motorists are at a significantly enhanced risk of being involved in a fatal accident, but the suggested explanation is speculative. • Sources B and C show that overweight people are at greater risk of death than less heavy people involved in an equivalent accident. • Source D offers a plausible explanation of why overweight people might be at enhanced risk. • So overweight people could presumably reduce their risk of death in a road accident by losing weight, but they would not eliminate it altogether. • So the claim is overstated, but a weaker version is supported by the evidence.

Page 6 Mark Scheme Syllabus Paper Cambridge International AS/A Level – May/June 2016 9694 21 © Cambridge International Examinations 2016 3 (a) Using the exact words from the passage as far as possible, identify the main conclusion. [2] 2 marks: The cumulative evidence is overwhelming that members of other species from distant planets have contacted the Earth on many occasions. Accept version starting at ‘members…’. 1 mark: Paraphrase of the 2-mark answer. (b) Using the exact words from the passage as far as possible, identify three intermediate conclusions. [3] 1 mark for each of the following, to a maximum of 3: • It is very likely that there are many alien species which have both the desire to explore the universe and the ability to do so. • (we can only conclude that) someone was deliberately transmitting them [radio signals] from a distant planet in the hope that someone from elsewhere in the universe would reply. • By far the most likely explanation of these observations is that the UFOs are vehicles containing visitors from other planets. • There is also a lot of persuasive evidence that people have been abducted by aliens. • Those idiots who refuse to believe this must be motivated solely by prejudice. Allow one additional element or one significant omission in each case. If more than three answers are offered, mark the first four only.

Page 7 Mark Scheme Syllabus Paper Cambridge International AS/A Level – May/June 2016 9694 21 © Cambridge International Examinations 2016 (c) Evaluate the strength of the reasoning in the argument. In your answer you should consider any flaws, unstated assumptions and other weaknesses. [5] Marks for each evaluative point as follows, up to a maximum of 5 marks: 2 marks: Valid evaluative point, clearly expressed. 1 mark: Weak attempt at a valid evaluative point. Paragraph 1 • This paragraph assumes that an actual infinite is a coherent concept. [It may be unlikely that candidates will make this philosophical point, but since it is such an important weakness in the reasoning, it must be credited if anyone does say it.] • Assumption: that the cited estimate of the number of planets suitable for life to develop is not eccentric/would be accepted by experts as reasonable. • Assumption: that intelligent life has actually developed on some of the planets which have the right conditions for it. Paragraph 2 • Weak support: a single piece of evidence from thirty years of listening provides very weak support for the claim. In fact, the paucity of evidence would give better support to a claim that beings from distant planets are not trying to contact us. • Incoherence (non sequitur): the origin of the radio signals in part of the universe where there are no planets does not appear to support the conclusion that they derive from a distant planet. • Appeal to ignorance: the third sentence assumes that if ‘we’ do not know how the radio signals could have occurred naturally, there is no such way. This may be expressed as an assumption. Do not credit an assumption that the cause of the signals must be alien life. • Assumption: that anyone transmitting from a distant planet would not be ‘natural’. • Vested interest: because the astronomers are committed to finding extra-terrestrial life, they have a VI to make the most of any evidence, however intrinsically weak it may be. Paragraph 3 • Restricting the options: the reasoning in this paragraph implies that the only object which could be mistaken for a UFO is a weather balloon. This may be expressed as an assumption. Paragraph 4 • Assumption: that it is not possible to have vivid dreams in the daytime. • Assumption: that witnesses have not copied or imitated one another’s testimony. Paragraph 5 • There is a problem of meaning with the term ‘contacted’ in the claim (MC) ‘members of other species from distant planets have contacted the Earth on many occasions’: by and large the Earth is unaware of having been contacted. • The second sentence is an argumentum ad hominem, attacking the intelligence and motivation of the author’s opponents instead of their arguments. • The third sentence is a straw man: many of those who do not believe in UFOs and alien abduction have better arguments than this to support their views.

Page 8 Mark Scheme Syllabus Paper Cambridge International AS/A Level – May/June 2016 9694 21 © Cambridge International Examinations 2016 (d) ‘The inhabitants of Planet Earth should try to contact life in other parts of the universe.’ Write your own short argument to support or challenge this claim. The conclusion of your argument must be stated. Credit will not be given for repeating ideas from the passage. [5] Level 3 4–5 marks Developed, coherent argument. Reasons strongly support conclusion. Development may include intermediate conclusion or apt examples. Simply structured argument – 4 marks. Effective use of IC etc. – 5 marks. Level 2 2–3 marks A simple argument. One reason + conclusion – 2 marks. Two or more separate reasons + conclusion – 3 marks. Level 1 1 mark Some relevant comment. Level 0 0 marks No relevant comment. Maximum 3 marks for wrong conclusion or if conclusion is implied but not stated. No credit for material merely reproduced from the passage. Specimen level 3 answers Support (117 words) Although it is not certain that intelligent life exists on any other planet than this one, it is at least fairly likely. And the potential benefits to be gained from making contact are great. If aliens are hostile towards us or afraid of us, we can reassure them that we mean them no harm. If they want to be friends with us, we can probably help each other in many ways. It is unlikely that the problems which harm or threaten them are the same ones which we find hard to resolve, and so we can share solutions and resources. Therefore the inhabitants of Planet Earth should try to contact life in other parts of the universe. Challenge (101 words) The evidence for the existence of intelligent life anywhere other than on Planet Earth is very thin. Even if such beings do exist, they would have to be very advanced in order to receive communications from Earth and to reply to them. Since we do not know the alien language, we know neither how to send messages which could be understood on other planets, nor how to interpret any response we may receive. These barriers to communication are too great to be overcome. Therefore the inhabitants of Planet Earth should not try to contact life in other parts of the universe.