2025 Cambridge IGCSE History (0470) 模拟试题及答案详解

A model response should identify at least four key points about the Refugees Commission:
1. It was led by the Norwegian explorer and diplomat Fridtjof Nansen.
2. It successfully repatriated around 400,000 prisoners of war to their home countries after the First World War.
3. It created the 'Nansen Passport', the first internationally recognized travel document for stateless persons and refugees.
4. It organized relief, housing, and employment for refugees fleeing the Russian Civil War and the Greco-Turkish War of 1922.

Award 1 mark for each relevant point described, up to a maximum of 4 marks:
- Led by Fridtjof Nansen (1 mark).
- Repatriated/returned around 400,000 prisoners of war (1 mark).
- Created the 'Nansen Passport' for stateless refugees (1 mark).
- Assisted Russian refugees fleeing the civil war/revolution (1 mark).
- Provided camps, food, and clothing to refugees from the Greco-Turkish War in 1922 (1 mark).
- Worked alongside charities and Red Cross to find jobs and homes for refugees (1 mark).

A model response should identify at least four key points about the terms regarding the Rhineland:
1. The area was permanently demilitarized.
2. Germany was prohibited from placing or maintaining military forces or fortifications in the zone.
3. Allied troops occupied the Rhineland to guarantee German compliance.
4. The occupation was scheduled to last for 15 years (though Allied troops withdrew early).
5. The Rhineland remained under German sovereignty and was not stripped away from Germany's borders.

Award 1 mark for each relevant point described, up to a maximum of 4 marks:
- The Rhineland was permanently demilitarized (1 mark).
- Germany was not allowed to station troops or build fortifications in this area (1 mark).
- Allied armies occupied the area (1 mark).
- The Allied occupation was set to last for 15 years (1 mark).
- The area remained under German political control/sovereignty (1 mark).
- Demilitarization was designed to provide France with security against future German aggression (1 mark).

To gain full marks, candidates must explain two distinct reasons why the League succeeded in this instance:

1. **The Nature of the Disputants (Small Powers):** Unlike the Corfu Incident of 1923, which involved a major power (Italy), both Greece and Bulgaria were minor European states. They lacked the military or economic strength to resist international pressure, and neither had a powerful ally on the League Council to veto or obstruct proceedings. This made them highly compliant to the League's directives.

2. **Decisive Action and Direct Threats:** The League Council acted rapidly and cohesively under the leadership of Britain and France. They ordered an immediate ceasefire and the withdrawal of Greek troops. Crucially, they backed up these demands with a credible threat of economic sanctions and potential naval blockades, leaving the Greek government with no choice but to back down.

Table A: Marks for AO1 and AO2

**Level 4 (6 marks):** Explains two reasons.
- Both reasons explained clearly with precise contextual details (e.g., referencing the threat of sanctions, the speed of Britain/France, and the contrast with major powers like Italy in Corfu).

**Level 3 (4–5 marks):** Explains one reason.
- 4 marks for a clear explanation of one reason.
- 5 marks if the single explanation is strongly supported by specific contextual knowledge.

**Level 2 (2–3 marks):** Identifies or describes valid reasons but does not explain.
- One Level 2 mark for each identification (e.g., 'Greece and Bulgaria were small countries', 'The League threatened to use economic sanctions', 'The British and French leaders acted very quickly', 'Neither country had a major power supporting them').

**Level 1 (1 mark):** Writes about the topic but does not address the question directly.
- Generalised assertions (e.g., 'The League was set up to keep the peace and this was an example of them doing their job successfully').

**Level 0 (0 marks):** No creditable response.

Candidates should explain two key reasons for the regime's focus on youth:

1. **Securing the Future of the 'Thousand-Year Reich':** The Nazis believed that long-term political survival depended on the absolute loyalty of the next generation. Indoctrinating young minds through modified school curricula (focusing on racial science and militarism) and the Hitler Youth ensured that children grew up accepting Nazi ideology as absolute truth, ready to serve as fanization soldiers (boys) or produce healthy Aryan children (girls).

2. **Eradicating Competing Influences (Family and Church):** Totalitarian control required the loyalty of children to belong to Hitler first, before their families or religious institutions. By filling young people's schedules with Nazi activities, the regime actively undermined traditional parental and Christian church influence, turning children into loyal informers who would sometimes even report their own parents to the Gestapo.

Table A: Marks for AO1 and AO2

**Level 4 (6 marks):** Explains two reasons.
- Both reasons explained clearly with precise contextual details (e.g., details of the Hitler Youth, the League of German Maidens, curriculum changes, or the concept of total loyalty to the Führer over family).

**Level 3 (4–5 marks):** Explains one reason.
- 4 marks for a clear explanation of one reason.
- 5 marks if the single explanation is strongly supported by specific contextual knowledge.

**Level 2 (2–3 marks):** Identifies or describes valid reasons but does not explain.
- One Level 2 mark for each identification (e.g., 'They wanted to prepare boys to be soldiers', 'They wanted to breed a pure Aryan race', 'They wanted to stop parents from teaching children anti-Nazi views', 'They wanted to replace religious youth groups').

**Level 1 (1 mark):** Writes about the topic but does not address the question directly.
- Generalised assertions (e.g., 'Hitler knew that children were the future of Germany so he wanted them to behave well').

**Level 0 (0 marks):** No creditable response.

To a large extent, the League of Nations was highly successful in its social and humanitarian work during the 1920s, achieving far more in these fields than in its political peacekeeping endeavors. Agencies like the Refugee Organisation and the Health Committee made profound differences to millions of lives across Europe and beyond.

On the one hand, there is strong evidence to support the statement. The Refugee Organisation, led by Fridtjof Nansen, performed brilliantly in the aftermath of the First World War. It successfully repatriated approximately 425,000 prisoners of war to their home nations and introduced the 'Nansen passport', which allowed stateless refugees to cross borders safely. Furthermore, the Health Committee made immense progress in fighting deadly diseases. It worked closely with non-member states like Soviet Russia to prevent a major typhus epidemic from spreading westward across Europe, and it established international campaigns to research and combat malaria, leprosy, and yellow fever. Additionally, the Slavery Commission achieved significant success by securing the liberation of over 200,000 enslaved people in Sierra Leone and putting pressure on countries like Abyssinia to abolish slavery.

On the other hand, there were clear limitations to the League's success in these fields. The International Labour Organisation (ILO) faced significant resistance when it tried to introduce progressive labor reforms. For example, its attempt to establish a maximum 48-hour working week was rejected by several member states, including Britain, because governments feared it would hurt their domestic industrial competitiveness. Moreover, many of these humanitarian agencies were chronically underfunded, which severely limited their reach during major crises, such as the Greek-Turkish refugee crisis of 1922. The League could also only make recommendations; it had no power to compel sovereign nations to adopt its guidelines on social welfare or health standards.

In conclusion, while the League's humanitarian work was constrained by lack of funding and enforcement powers, it was still highly successful. Unlike its political efforts, which were repeatedly undermined by the self-interest of major powers, the League's social agencies successfully fostered genuine international cooperation and saved or improved millions of lives in the 1920s.

Level 5: Explains both sides and supports a valid judgement on 'how far'. (10 marks)
Candidate provides at least one clear, developed explanation for both sides (successes and failures of the League's social/humanitarian agencies) and reaches a balanced, substantiated conclusion.

Level 4: Explains both sides. (7–9 marks)
Candidate explains both the successes and the failures/limitations of the League's social/humanitarian work. (7 marks for one explanation on each side; 8–9 marks for additional developed points).

Level 3: Explains one side. (4–6 marks)
Candidate explains only the successes (e.g., detailing the work of Nansen's Refugee Organisation or the Health Committee) OR explains only the failures (e.g., the ILO's struggle to implement the 48-hour workweek and funding issues).

Level 2: Identifies or describes valid points; addresses the question but does not explain. (2–3 marks)
Candidate lists relevant facts without developing them into historical explanations. (e.g., 'They set up the Nansen passport and freed slaves, but they did not have enough money.')

Level 1: Writes about the topic but does not address the question. (1 mark)
Candidate writes general information about the League of Nations or the 1920s without addressing social and humanitarian work.

Level 0: No creditable response. (0 marks)

To a considerable extent, Nazi policies towards young people were highly successful, as they allowed the regime to systematically control and indoctrinate a generation of Germans. However, complete success was undermined by growing disillusionment and the emergence of active youth opposition groups.

On the one hand, the regime's control over the education system and youth organizations was highly effective. Schools were thoroughly Nazified: teachers had to join the Nazi Teachers' League, and the curriculum was redesigned to promote Nazi ideology. History lessons emphasized German greatness and the 'stab-in-the-back' myth, biology lessons taught racial purity and eugenics, and physical education was expanded to prepare boys for military service. Outside school, the Hitler Youth (HJ) and the League of German Girls (BDM) became compulsory in 1939. These organizations successfully fostered a strong sense of comradeship, national pride, and loyalty to Adolf Hitler among millions of teenagers, preparing boys for the armed forces and girls for motherhood.

On the other hand, Nazi youth policies faced clear limitations and resistance. As membership in the Hitler Youth became mandatory, the early excitement of camping and sports gave way to boring military drills and strict discipline, leading to widespread disillusionment and apathy among teenagers. Furthermore, some young people actively rebelled against the regimented Nazi lifestyle. Groups like the 'Swing Youth' openly rejected Nazi values by listening to American jazz, wearing Anglo-American clothing, and accepting Jewish peers. More actively political were the 'Edelweiss Pirates', working-class teenagers who dropped out of school, beat up Hitler Youth patrols, and even assisted anti-Nazi saboteurs during the war. This shows that the regime was never able to achieve absolute control over the minds of the entire younger generation.

In conclusion, Nazi policies towards youth were highly successful in mobilizing the vast majority of German children to serve the state's military and ideological goals. Nevertheless, this success was not complete, as evidenced by the growing resentment towards mandatory youth group meetings and the brave non-conformity of rebel youth movements.

Level 5: Explains both sides and supports a valid judgement on 'how far'. (10 marks)
Candidate provides at least one clear, developed explanation for both sides (successes of Nazification/youth groups and the limitations/rebellion of German youth) and reaches a balanced, substantiated conclusion.

Level 4: Explains both sides. (7–9 marks)
Candidate explains both the successes and the failures/limitations of Nazi youth policies. (7 marks for one explanation on each side; 8–9 marks for additional developed points).

Level 3: Explains one side. (4–6 marks)
Candidate explains only the successes (e.g., school curriculum changes, popularity of early Hitler Youth activities, indoctrination) OR explains only the failures/limitations (e.g., Edelweiss Pirates, Swing Youth, weariness of military drill).

Level 2: Identifies or describes valid points; addresses the question but does not explain. (2–3 marks)
Candidate lists relevant facts without developing them into historical explanations. (e.g., 'The Hitler Youth was made compulsory and taught boys to march. Some groups like the Swing Youth listened to jazz and did not join.')

Level 1: Writes about the topic but does not address the question. (1 mark)
Candidate writes general information about Nazi Germany or Hitler's rise to power without addressing youth policies.

Level 0: No creditable response. (0 marks)

To gain full marks, candidates should describe at least four distinct changes made to the school curriculum under the Nazi regime. Key elements include: rewriting history textbooks to focus on German nationalist pride, militarism, and the 'stab-in-the-back' theory; introducing racial science (Rassenkunde) in Biology to teach Aryan supremacy and promote antisemitic views; significantly increasing physical education classes to ensure boys were fit for the army and girls were healthy for motherhood; shifting girls' education toward domestic studies, such as home economics, needlework, and child care; using Geography to explain the necessity of 'Lebensraum' (living space) and to point out land lost in the Treaty of Versailles.

Award 1 mark for each relevant point described, up to a maximum of 4 marks. Points may include: History lessons focused on German greatness, the rise of the Nazi Party, and the unfairness of the Treaty of Versailles. Biology lessons included 'racial science' (Rassenkunde) to teach Aryan superiority and classification of races. Physical Education was prioritized (taking up to two hours a day) to build physical fitness. Girls were taught domestic science, needlework, and cookery to prepare them for domestic roles. Geography lessons focused on 'Lebensraum' (living space) and lost German territories. Religious education was marginalized or phased out. Chemistry and Physics lessons were sometimes adapted to have military applications.

One key reason Goebbels established the Reich Chamber of Culture was to achieve 'Gleichschaltung' or coordination of cultural life. By making membership of the Chamber compulsory for anyone working in journalism, radio, literature, music, fine arts, theater, or cinema, the Nazis could control who was allowed to produce art. If an artist's work did not promote Nazi values or was considered 'degenerate' (Entartete Kunst), Goebbels could refuse or revoke their membership, effectively banning them from working. Another important reason was to enforce anti-Semitic and anti-communist policies within the cultural sphere. The Chamber systematically excluded Jewish people and political dissidents from these professions. This ensured that German cultural output was entirely purged of Jewish or modernistic 'degenerate' influences, leaving only art that glorified the Aryan race, family, and the state.

Level 4: Explains two reasons. (6 marks) Level 3: Explains one reason. (4-5 marks: 4 marks for one explanation, 5 marks for explanation supported by specific contextual knowledge). Level 2: Identifies or describes valid reason(s); addresses the question but does not explain. (2-3 marks: One mark for each identification, e.g. to control all cultural and artistic life; to exclude Jewish people and political opponents; to promote Nazi propaganda; to censor degenerate art). Level 1: Writes about the topic but does not address the question. (1 mark) Level 0: No creditable response. (0 marks)

**(a) Role of the NS-Frauenschaft:**
* The NS-Frauenschaft was the official women's wing of the Nazi Party, led by Gertrud Scholtz-Klink.
* Its primary purpose was to promote the Nazi ideal of womanhood, particularly the focus on domesticity, motherhood, and family life.
* It organized classes, lectures, and courses to teach women home management, cooking, hygiene, and child-rearing.
* It published a weekly propaganda magazine (*NS-Frauen-Warte*) and encouraged women to buy German-made goods to support national self-sufficiency (autarky).

**(b) Why policies toward women's employment changed after 1937:**
* **Rearmament and the Four-Year Plan:** As Germany rapidly prepared for war, heavy industrial production surged, creating a major national labor shortage. The regime could no longer afford to keep women entirely out of the workplace.
* **Conscription of Men:** The introduction of compulsory military service drew hundreds of thousands of men out of civilian jobs. Women were needed to fill these vacancies, especially in agriculture, transport, and administrative services.
* **Onset of War:** With the outbreak of WWII, mobilising women for war work became an absolute necessity to maintain the home front economy.

**(c) Evaluative Essay Evaluation:**
* **Arguments for Propaganda:** The regime heavily relied on propaganda (such as campaigns emphasizing the domestic ideal of 'Kinder, K''uche, Kirche', radio broadcasts, and mothering courses) to alter social expectations. Education was reformed to direct girls toward domestic sciences, embedding these values early on.
* **Arguments for Other Methods (Financial Incentives & Coercion):** On the other hand, practical legal and financial measures were exceptionally powerful. The Law for the Encouragement of Marriage (1933) offered interest-free marriage loans to couples if the wife agreed to leave work. The Mother's Cross medal legally and socially elevated large families. Conversely, coercive laws directly barred women from professional roles, such as judges, civil servants, and medical practitioners, forcing them back home.

**Part (a)**
* Award 1 mark for each relevant, accurate point up to a maximum of 4 marks.
* Points must relate specifically to the role, activities, or leadership of the NS-Frauenschaft.

**Part (b)**
* **Level 4 [6 marks]:** Explains two or more reasons. (e.g., explains both the labor shortages caused by the Four-Year Plan and the onset of conscription).
* **Level 3 [4–5 marks]:** Explains one reason with historical depth.
* **Level 2 [2–3 marks]:** Identifies reasons but fails to explain them (e.g., 'Germany needed more workers for the war effort').
* **Level 1 [1 mark]:** Writes general, unspecific points about women or employment.
* **Level 0 [0 marks]:** No creditable response.

**Part (c)**
* **Level 5 [10 marks]:** Explains both sides of the argument and provides a clear, substantiated judgment on 'how far' propaganda was the most important method compared to incentives/legislation.
* **Level 4 [7–9 marks]:** Explains both sides of the argument (at least one explanation for propaganda and one for other methods like marriage loans, legal bans, etc.).
* **Level 3 [4–6 marks]:** Explains only one side of the argument (either the role of propaganda or other methods).
* **Level 2 [2–3 marks]:** Identifies valid methods but does not provide structured explanations.
* **Level 1 [1 mark]:** Writes about the topic generally without addressing the specific prompt.
* **Level 0 [0 marks]:** No creditable response.

Level 1: Paraphrases the sources without explaining the disagreement (1-2 marks).
Level 2: Identifies that they disagree but lacks developed explanation (3-4 marks).
Level 3: Explains the disagreement using specific details from both sources (5-6 marks).
Level 4: Explains the disagreement by analyzing the purpose/context of the authors (e.g., Lytton Commission upholding League principles vs. Japanese representative defending aggression to an international audience) (7-8 marks).

Award up to 8 marks:
- 1-2 marks for basic comprehension or paraphrasing of one or both sources.
- 3-4 marks for identifying disagreements (e.g., on self-defence or the creation of Manchukuo) without full explanation.
- 5-6 marks for clear comparison of the points of disagreement using direct quotes or close paraphrase of both sources.
- 7-8 marks for explaining why they disagree, using historical context (Japan's invasion in 1931, the Lytton Report of 1932) and the differing motives of the League of Nations and the Japanese government.

Level 1: Writes about the Manchurian crisis generally without addressing the source's purpose (1-2 marks).
Level 2: Explains what the source says about avoiding sanctions (3-4 marks).
Level 3: Explains the context of November 1931 (the Great Depression, lack of appetite for war) as the reason for publication (5-6 marks).
Level 4: Explains the publisher's purpose (to influence public opinion and government policy to protect British economic and military interests) (7-8 marks).

Award up to 8 marks:
- 1-2 marks for identifying general points about the Manchurian crisis.
- 3-4 marks for explaining the content of the editorial (opposition to economic sanctions and military conflict).
- 5-6 marks for linking the editorial to the historical context of November 1931 (the impact of the Great Depression on Britain, the desire for peace, and the distance of Manchuria).
- 7-8 marks for fully explaining the editorial's purpose (e.g., to pressure the British government to adopt a policy of non-intervention and to prioritize domestic economic recovery over League of Nations commitments).

Level 1: Answers 'yes' or 'no' based on simple assertions without source details (1-2 marks).
Level 2: Compares the differences in content between the private letter and the public speech (3-4 marks).
Level 3: Evaluates the sources in context (public diplomacy vs. private realism) to explain the difference (5-6 marks).
Level 4: Reconciles the sources, explaining that while Source D shows he did not believe in the League's effectiveness, Source E was a necessary public relations exercise, thus proving he was publicly misrepresenting his true cabinet policy (7-8 marks).

Award up to 8 marks:
- 1-2 marks for simple assertions or copying source text without comparison.
- 3-4 marks for identifying the contradiction between his private skepticism (Source D) and public support (Source E).
- 5-6 marks for explaining why there is a difference, referencing the different audiences (cabinet colleague vs. Parliament/public) and the political necessity of pretending to support the League.
- 7-8 marks for evaluating how far this constitutes 'lying' (e.g., showing that while his public statements about 'working for peace' were technically true, his commitment to the Covenant was a deception because he privately refused to enforce it).

Level 1: Describes surface features of the cartoon (e.g., soldier, diplomats) (1-2 marks).
Level 2: Explains a sub-message (e.g., Japan did not respect the League, or diplomats were trying to be peaceful) (3-4 marks).
Level 3: Explains the cartoonist's big message: mocking/criticizing the cowardice and appeasement of Britain and France in the face of Japanese aggression (5-6 marks).
Level 4: Integrates the context of March 1933 (Japan's withdrawal from the League after the adoption of the Lytton Report) to explain the cartoon's satirical purpose (7-8 marks).

Award up to 8 marks:
- 1-2 marks for basic description of cartoon elements.
- 3-4 marks for identifying a basic message (e.g., Japan is ignoring the League's rules).
- 5-6 marks for explaining the main message, focusing on the criticism of British and French weakness and active appeasement ('polishing the boots') of the aggressor.
- 7-8 marks for linking the message to the specific historical context of March 1933, when Japan ignored the Lytton Report, walked out of the League, and the League failed to take any active enforcement measures.

Level 1: Writes a simple assertion about trust based on his position (e.g., 'he was there, so he knows') (1-2 marks).
Level 2: Explains his message (blaming member states rather than the League itself) (3-4 marks).
Level 3: Evaluates the source using historical knowledge (e.g., confirming British/French reluctance to act due to depression and empire) to argue he is trustworthy (5-6 marks).
Level 4: Evaluates the source by considering his purpose and perspective as former Secretary-General writing post-WWII (desiring to defend the concept of international organization and shift the blame away from the League's secretariat) (7-8 marks).

Award up to 8 marks:
- 1-2 marks for simplistic assertions about trust/honesty.
- 3-4 marks for explaining Avenol's argument (that the Covenant was sound but the member nations lacked the political will to enforce it).
- 5-6 marks for cross-referencing Avenol's claims with historical knowledge (e.g., confirming the lack of action by Britain and France during the crisis, which makes his account credible).
- 7-8 marks for a sophisticated evaluation of his reliability, noting his institutional bias (defending the League's design to justify internationalist ideals after WWII) and how this defensive purpose affects the trustworthiness of his memoirs.

Accounts should cover the following points:
- **Control of Education**: The purging of Jewish and politically dissident teachers under the 1933 Civil Service Law; mandatory membership in the National Socialist Teachers' League (NSLB); ideological rewriting of textbooks to emphasize racial science, German heroism, and physical fitness.
- **Hitler Youth (HJ) and League of German Maidens (BDM)**: The absorption of other youth groups (such as Protestant and Scout groups); the Law on the Hitler Youth (1936) and subsequent 1939 decree making membership compulsory.
- **Gender-Specific Indoctrination**: Boys focused on physical toughness, ideological lectures, and military preparation (map-reading, trench-digging); girls focused on fitness, domestic skills, and preparation for motherhood (the 'three Ks' - Kinder, Küche, Kirche).
- **Alternative Youth Culture and Limits to Control**: The emergence of youth opposition groups such as the Swing Youth (Swingjugend) and the Edelweiss Pirates (Edelweisspiraten) who rejected the military regimentation of the HJ.

**Table A: Assessment of part (a) (15 marks)**

- **Level 3 [11–15 marks]**:
- Account includes the main events/developments and directly addresses the question.
- Account is consistently supported by accurate historical knowledge.
- Account is logically sequenced.

- **Level 2 [6–10 marks]**:
- Account describes some events/developments relevant to the question.
- Account is mostly supported by accurate historical knowledge.
- Account is structured in its approach.

- **Level 1 [1–5 marks]**:
- Response has limited relevance to the question.
- Response includes some accurate historical knowledge.
- Points made are generally unconnected.

- **Level 0 [0 marks]**:
- No creditable material.

Indicative content:

Candidates may consider the following facets of the discussion:

- Ideological and demographic importance: Policies aimed at restricting women to the home (the 'Three Ks': Kinder, Küche, Kirche) and promoting motherhood were central to Nazi racial purity and population growth. Measures like marriage loans, the Mother's Cross, and the Lebensborn program successfully increased birth rates and reinforced conservative family values to build the 'national community' (Volksgemeinschaft).

- Economic importance: Removing women from professional jobs (doctors, civil servants, teachers) in the early years of the regime was initially important for reducing male unemployment figures, which bolstered the popularity of the Nazi party.

- Limitations of these policies: The importance and effectiveness of these policies were undermined as Germany prepared for war. By 1937, severe labor shortages forced the regime to abandon many restrictions, resulting in a significant rise in the number of women in the workforce, contrary to original Nazi ideology.

- Relative importance of other factors: While family policies helped secure social conformity, other measures such as the terror state (Gestapo, concentration camps), comprehensive propaganda campaigns by Goebbels, economic recovery (rearmament, Autobahn construction), and the indoctrination of youth through the Hitler Youth were far more critical in maintaining overall Nazi control.

Table B: Use this table to give marks for each candidate response for AO2 for part (b) of each question.

- Level 5 (21–25 marks): An answer that presents more than one facet of the discussion. Uses well supported explanations in support of more than one facet of the discussion. Reaches a clear, convincing and substantiated judgement on relative importance.

- Level 4 (16–20 marks): An answer that presents more than one facet of the discussion. Explanations are used to support the facets presented. May attempt a judgement, which is partially supported.

- Level 3 (11–15 marks): An answer that presents one or more facets of the discussion. Explanation(s) are used to support only one of the facets presented. May attempt a judgement, which is unsupported.

- Level 2 (6–10 marks): An answer that attempts to address one or more facets but only using assertion. May include relevant comments linked to a facet but these will be undeveloped or implicit. May attempt a generalised judgement, which is mostly asserted.

- Level 1 (1–5 marks): An answer that presents general knowledge of the topic. Describes or identifies some points with limited focus. No attempt at judgement or where an attempt has been made, it is very general and undeveloped.

- Level 0 (0 marks): No creditable material.