9980 Example Candidate Responses (For Examination From 2020)

Example Candidate Responses
Cambridge International Project

Qualification 9980
For examination from 2020
© Cambridge University Press & Assessment 2021 v1
Cambridge Assessment International Education is part of Cambridge University Press & Assessment. Cambridge
University Press & Assessment is a department of the University of Cambridge.
Cambridge University Press & Assessment retains the copyright on all its publications. Registered centres are
permitted to copy material from this booklet for their own internal use. However, we cannot give permission to centres
to photocopy any material that is acknowledged to a third party even for internal use within a centre.
Contents
Introduction........................................................................................................................................................................4
Research Project...............................................................................................................................................................6
Example Candidate Response – high............................................................................................................................6
Example Candidate Response – middle......................................................................................................................33
Example Candidate Response – low...........................................................................................................................59
Introduction
The main aim of this booklet is to exemplify standards for those teaching the Cambridge International Project
Qualification 9980, and to show how different levels of candidates’ performance (high, middle and low) relate to the
subject’s curriculum and assessment objectives.
In this booklet candidate responses have been chosen from the June 2021 exam series to exemplify a range of
answers.
For each question, the response is annotated with a clear explanation of where and why marks were awarded or
omitted. This is followed by examiner comments on how the answer could have been improved. In this way, it is
possible for you to understand what candidates have done to gain their marks and what they could do to improve their
answers. There is also a list of common mistakes candidates made in their answers for each question.
This document provides illustrative examples of candidate work with examiner commentary. These help teachers
to assess the standard required to achieve marks beyond the guidance of the mark scheme. Therefore, in some
circumstances, such as where exact answers are required, there will not be much comment.
Mark schemes are available to download from the School Support Hub. These files are:
9980 June 2021 Mark Scheme 1
Past exam resources and other teaching and learning resources are available on the School Support Hub:
www.cambridgeinternational.org/support
Project proposals
Outline proposal forms are no longer in use for this syllabus for entries from 2022 series onwards. Instead, each
candidate must complete a project proposal form.
The completed project proposal forms must be reviewed internally and do not need to be approved by Cambridge
International. You should use the form to give guidance and feedback to candidates on their project proposal and
research question.
Project proposal forms can be downloaded from the School Support Hub (on the syllabus page, further guidance
tab) at www.cambridgeinternational.org/support or from the samples database at www.canmbridgeinternatoinal.org/
samples
Guidance about what to look for in a project proposal form and examples of completed project proposal forms can
also be found on the School Support Hub further guidance tab of the syllabus page.
4
How to use this booklet

This booklet goes through the paper one question at a time, showing you the high-, middle- and low-level response for
each question. The candidate answers are set in a table. In the left-hand column are the candidate answers, and in
the right-hand column are the Examiner comments.
Answers are by real candidates in exam conditions. Examiner comments are

These show you the types of answers for each level. alongside the answers. These
Discuss and analyse the answers with your learners in explain where and why marks
the classroom to improve their skills. were awarded. This helps you
to interpret the standard of
Cambridge exams so you can
help your learners to refine
their exam technique.
How the candidate could have improved their answer

• The candidate made good use of subheadings to give the report structure and sometimes linked these to the
assessment criteria. To improve their report, the candidate could have addressed the different aspects of the
project in a more balanced way.
This section explains how the candidate could
have improved each answer. This helps you to
interpret the standard of Cambridge exams and
helps your learners to refine their exam technique.
Common mistakes candidates made in this question

• The higher level projects asked a question, then set about answering it and candidates wrote in an analytical and
evaluative way. Some candidates gave an overly narrative account of their chosen topic area.
• Some candidates didn’t include the title of the report on the first page. Candidates needed to place the title of the
report on the first page to give them a focus for writing and also to give clarity to the reader.
Often candidates were not awarded Lists the common mistakes candidates made
marks because they misread or in answering each question. This will help your
misinterpreted the questions. learners to avoid these mistakes and give them
the best chance of achieving the available marks.
5
Research Project
Example Candidate Response – high Examiner comments
1 1 The candidate gives some

justification for their choice of
research question, but they need to
develop it further.
6
Example Candidate Response – high, continued Examiner comments
2 2 The candidate provides more

information on the justification for
the research question.
3 3 The candidate gives a clear

justification for their chosen
research method.
7
4 4 The candidate provides more

justification for their research
method and discusses the strengths
of the chosen method.
5 5 The candidate develops their

justification for the research method
further and discusses the strengths
of this particular method.
6 6 Some explanation of the

method in relation to it being a
strength of the project is provided.
There is also a link to planning and
design.
7 7 The candidate gives some detail

on the strength of the method and
links this to the specific areas to be
researched.
8
8 8 The candidate adds further

details on the strength of the
method. They link this to the time
span of research and why it was
selected.
9 9 The candidate includes more
detail about the strength of the
research method and uses an
appropriate level of academic
material.
10 10 The candidate discusses a

strength of the project and they
show how they make a careful
selection in line with the research
criteria.
9
11 11 The candidate shows evidence

of planning, which when carefully
done, becomes a strength of the
project.
12 12 This comment focuses on a

strength of the research method.
13 13 This candidate summarises

another strength of the research
method.
10
14 14 The candidate provides another

strength of the research method.
15 15 The candidate focuses on a

limitation of the research project
which can be a pertinent issue,
depending on the facilities available
to candidates.
16 16 The candidate identifies another

potential limitation with the research
method.
17 17 The candidate identifies another

potential limitation with the research
method.
11
12
18 18 The candidate links their

analysis of the material to an aspect
of the research question.
13
19 19 The candidate provides an

analysis of a more general nature.

analysis to the research question.
14
21 The candidate supports the

21 research question.
22 22 The candidate specifically links

their analysis of a particular source
to the research question.
15
23 23 The candidate provides more in-

depth analysis linked to the research
question.
16

analysis linked to an aspect of the
research question.

answer to the research question.
26 26 The candidate pulls together the

research material and its analysis
with some evaluative comments.
17
27 27 The candidate provides further

evaluation of the academic material
on previous pages.
28 28 The conclusion flows logically

from the research material and its
analysis and evaluation which helps
support the candidate’s overall
29
29 The candidate provides more
evaluation on another aspect of the
topic.
30 Based on the evaluation above,

30 this is another clear conclusion
which also links to the overall
research question.
18
19
31 31 The candidate provides a

thoughtful reflection on how their
views have developed as a result of
the research.
20
32 32 Throughout this section,

the candidate’s reflective
comments show clearly how their
understanding and views have
changed and developed due to their
research.
21
33 33 The candidate expands on

some of their points relating to the
strength of the project mentioned
near the start of the report and
includes some new aspects.
22
34 34 Although this section on

limitations of the study is shorter,
the candidate still makes some valid
points.
35 35 The submission of a
bibliography is a requirement
although this is not included in the
5000 word limit.
23
24
25
26
36 The candidate shows how their

36 research supports the evidence for
their argument.
27
37
37 The candidate provides further
evidence about how research
impacts the development of the
project.
28
38 38 The candidate shows evidence

of planning, although this is very
brief.
29
39 39 The candidate’s bibliography

demonstrates a wide range of
research using materials of an
appropriate academic level. They
include full citations using an
accepted referencing system and
active links which enable the reader
to access the original source.
30
31
Mark awarded for AO1 =

41 out of 56
12 out of 12
12 out of 12
Total mark awarded =

65 out of 80

• The candidate made good use of subheadings to give the report structure and sometimes linked these to the
assessment criteria. To improve their report, the candidate could have addressed the different aspects of the
project in a more balanced way.
• AO1 Research: The candidate briefly justified their research question although they could have developed this
further. The question guided the report and the candidate gave clear justification for the methods chosen, which
were appropriate for a project of this kind. To improve their report, the candidate could have included more detail
on the planning and a more detailed log. The log would be a useful way to show the evolution of the project and the
impact research had on its development.
• AO1 Analysis: The candidate demonstrated some good analysis of their source material, although they could
have developed this further. The analysis was consistently focused on the research question, however, the
candidate could have used this analysis to reach a wider range of conclusions on different aspects of the research
question. The candidate could also have been clearer about how these worked together to provide an overall
• AO1 Evaluation: The candidate provided a detailed and insightful discussion of both strengths and limitations of
the research method used and some evaluation of a range of sources. To improve their evaluation, the candidate
could have included more detail and made it more critically engaging.
• AO2 Reflection: The candidate demonstrated a detailed and insightful reflection on the strengths and limitations of
the project and on how their personal views had changed and developed.
• AO3 Communication: The report had a very clear structure for the most part which was easy to follow. The
candidate used subject-specific terminology accurately and they communicated their findings clearly and
appropriately. The candidate supported their project with a wide-ranging bibliography and used a consistent
method of citation.
32
Example Candidate Response – middle Examiner comments
33
Example Candidate Response – middle, continued Examiner comments
34
1 1 The candidate provides some

justification of their question,
although they could develop this
aspect more.
2 The candidate offers some

development on the justification of
the question, although this could be
more thoughtful. They could include
2
a consideration about why this issue
is so pertinent and important as well
as why it fascinates the candidate.
3 3 The candidate acknowledges a
limitation of the project.
35
4 4 The candidate provides

a justification for their chosen
research method.
36
5 5 The candidate provides

some evaluation of the source
material which precedes it and the
conclusion it gives rise to.
37
6 The candidate gives an

6 evaluation of the preceding source
material and leads to a conclusion
of this section.
38
39
7 7 This section is regarded as

analysis based on the research
material the candidate uses in the
previous paragraphs.
8 The candidate offers some

analysis of a problem with Sodium-
cooled Fast Reactors (SFRs).
evaluation to the source material
9
above.
40

analysis of Boiling Water Reactors
(BWRs).
41

analysis of the sustainability of one
type of reactor to another.
12
12 The candidate gives an analysis
of the potential problems with one
type of reactor and how these have
been addressed.
42
13 13 The candidate summarises the

aspects covered in the previous
section in an analytical way.
14 Although headed ‘Analysis’, this

14 comment is more an evaluation of
the research evidence and how it is
analysed.
15 15 The candidate provides a clear

conclusion.
43
16 16 This sentence is, in part, an


evaluative comment linked to the
18 practicalities of one type of reactor.
18 The candidate provides a
conclusion based on the material
which precedes it.
19 19 The first part of this paragraph

contains some overall reflection in
relation to the research question.
44

overall answer to the research
question.
45
21 21 The diagrams are added to the

project as a separate file. It may
be more useful for the candidate to
include them earlier in the body of
the report and with some direct links
to the text.
46
47

evidence of design and planning in
relation to the final report.
48
49
50
23
23 The candidate provides further
evidence of design and planning
showing refinement in how the
report will be developed.
51
24 24 The candidate provides further

information on how they refine the
plans for the structure of the final
report.
52
25 25 The candidate offers a

thoughtful comment about the
design and planning for the final
report.
53
54
55
26
26 The bibliography contains a
range of sources. Some are not
fully cited but the links are active
and take the reader directly to the
source.
56
57

37 out of 56
3 out of 12
10 out of 12

50 out of 80

• To improve their report, the candidate could have looked more carefully at the assessment criteria and ensured that
their report targeted each aspect clearly.
• The log was very long. Although it was a detailed record and dealt with some design and planning aspects, to
improve its usefulness, the candidate could have indicated clearly where their research supported the development
of their project in a tangible way. This would have allowed the candidate to combine some entries very close
together in time by focusing on the supportive impact they had in relation to the overall evolution of the project.
• AO1 Research: The candidate provided some reasonable justification of the research question although they
could have developed this more thoughtfully if they had placed it in the context of their interests. The question
largely guided the research and content of the report. The candidate chose an appropriate research method
given the context in which they were working and they gave a reasonable justification for their choice. The project
was well designed, although it could have followed the assessment criteria more fully. The candidate’s use of
subheadings demonstrated evidence of planning to lead the reader through the aspects of the report. The log
demonstrated that it had been kept throughout the life of the project and it evidenced some of the design features
seen in the final report.
• AO1 Analysis: The candidate provided some good analysis of sources used, although they needed to be clearer
about when it was their own voice that was being expressed and this would have improved the impact of the report.
The analysis was focused on the research question and the candidate drew some conclusions drawn which they
supported with the evidence they presented.
• AO1 Evaluation: The candidate needed to provide some focused content on the strengths and limitations of the
research methods they chose, but they provided some effective evaluation of at least one source.
• AO2 Reflection: The candidate provided some limited reflection on a limitation of the project, which was linked to
the pandemic. The candidate reflected on the project process, but not on the aspect in the assessment criteria, that
of the impact of the research on the candidate’s views and the extent to which these had changed or developed
during the life cycle of the project. To improve the candidate’s report, they needed to address both the strengths
and the limitations of the project and reflect on the change or development of views.
• AO3 Communication: The report was well structured, clear to follow and the candidate used accurate subject-
specific terminology. They communicated their research findings although this could have been clearer. The
candidate’s bibliography was complete and contained citations, references and links.
58
Example Candidate Response – low Examiner comments
59
Example Candidate Response – low, continued Examiner comments
1 The candidate provides some

1 explanation for their choice of
research question, but they need to
develop this or clearly link it to the
reasons why they find this area so
interesting.
2
explanation for the research method
they choose, but they need to
justify it clearly. They choose an
appropriate research method.
3 3 The candidate provides a link

to the planning seen in the research
log.
60
4 4 The candidate offers some

development about why they choose
Beijing as the focus of their report,
but the research question refers to
China rather than Beijing.
61
5 5 The candidate gives some

analysis of the figures on the
previous page.
62
6 6 The candidate gives a brief

conclusion on the factual material.
63

analysis of the source material
above.
8
8 The candidate gives some
analysis in relation to topography.

9 analysis on the particular factor of
haze.
64

analysis on acid rain.
11 11 The candidate offers further

analysis and a conclusion on the
depletion of the ozone layer.
65
12 The candidate gives some

12
analysis relating to the impact of air
pollution on lung cancer rates.
66
67
13 The candidate links the analysis

13
to a source.
68
14 14 The candidate gives an answer

to the topic area posed by the
question.

15 more detail in their answer to the
research question, however the
project title relates to China as a
whole rather than just Beijing which
is the focus here.
69
70
71
16 16 The candidate records a

meeting about the design and
planning of the project.
17 17 The candidate does not include

any details about the article they
use, but this entry suggests that the
candidate uses research material
to support the development of the
project.
72
18 The log suggests that this

18
and the following articles support
the development of the project,
however, the first source is not
appropriate for a project at this
level. The candidate could include
the article citation in the log to help
them organise their material.
73
19 19 The candidate’s bibliography

contains some sources of an
appropriate academic level. Others,
such as Wikipedia, might give an
introductory overview but should
not be relied on in the final report.
Media sources work best as support
for more academically rigorous
material.
74
75

26 out of 56
0 out of 12
10 out of 12

36 out of 80

• The report had a contents page, which to some extent matched the assessment criteria. To improve their report
and enable the candidate to access a wider range of the assessment criteria, they needed to follow these headings
more closely and include a reflection section (which they list in the contents page) for example.
• The candidate needed to make sure that the research question matched the focus of the report. The question
related to manufacturing industries in China, but the candidate used material which focused on air pollution in a
more general sense in Beijing.
• The candidate included a lot of narrative material, but to improve their answer they needed to include it in a more
developed way, both in terms of analysis and evaluation.
• In a science-based project, the inclusion of data (perhaps in a diagrammatic format) could have improved the
candidate’s report. The candidate could have referred to and interrogated figures through comments which were
developed, justified and insightful.
• The bibliography contained a mix of sources. Some of these were of good academic quality whilst others were
media based, which could have provided useful support for arguments being made based on sound academic
material. Sources like Wikipedia could have provided useful background or introductory material but should not be
relied on for factual content in a project at this level.
• AO1 Research: The candidate included some justification for the research question although to improve their
report, the candidate could have developed this in the context of their particular interest in the topic area. In
its wider context of pollution, the question guided the content of the report but there was a mismatch between
the question and the focus of the candidate’s research. The candidate needed to ensure a clearer alignment
between the question and their research. The candidate’s chosen research method was appropriate although
they didn’t fully justify their choice, other than to say that primary research had not been possible. They provided
evidence of some planning and design in both the log and the report, although the contents page did not quite
match the material in the report as they did not include a reflection section in the report. The log was quite short
and somewhat vague in its content. There was also a sizeable gap in the entries which the candidate could have
explained. Some entries were linked to the design of the project and some suggested articles the candidate had
read which supported their research process, although they could have made these links explicit and included
more detail.
• AO1 Analysis: The candidate gave an analysis of some of the sources they used which focused on the topic of
air pollution. To improve their analysis, they could have ensured a tighter focus on the research question. The
candidate answered the research question in a broad sense and this was, in part, relevant to the evidence which
they had presented through the source material.
76
• AO1 Evaluation: The candidate referred to the type of research used, however, to improve their report they
needed to consider the strengths and/or limitations of the method they chose. They also needed to evaluate the
sources they used and make clear links to them in the report.
• AO2 Reflection: The candidate needed to discuss the strengths and limitations of the project itself. Although they
included a heading in the contents page for ‘Reflection’ they needed to include a section where the candidate
addressed the way their views had developed or changed as a result of the research undertaken.
• AO3 Communication: The report was structured and clear to follow. The candidate used some accurate subject-
specific terminology and included a useful glossary. They communicated their research findings but they needed
to present these in a more scientifically appropriate way. The material that the candidate included in the Appendix
could be included in the body of the report for greater impact and clarity. The candidate’s citation of sources was
consistent and mostly complete with links.
Common mistakes candidates made in this question

• The higher level projects asked a question, then set about answering it and candidates wrote in an analytical and
evaluative way, however, some candidates gave an overly narrative account of their chosen topic area.
• Some candidates didn’t include the title of the report on the first page. Candidates needed to place the title of the
report on the first page to give them a focus for writing and also to give clarity to the reader.
• Some candidates did not adhere to the word count. It is an important skill in a project of this level to meet the word
count. Candidates needed to make sure they came within, or very close to, the 5000 word limit for the report.
Material added to the research log after the word count was reached, for example a reflection section, or additional
documents added in an effort to extend the word count were not awarded any marks. Candidates needed to
include the word count on the first page of the report.
• Some candidates were not familiar with the assessment criteria and did not use it to structure their report. They
needed to get to know the assessment criteria and make use of it to structure their report, for example with the use
of appropriate subheadings.
• The research log was a record of the candidate’s project journey. The best logs demonstrated evidence of
planning and design which fed into the report and indicated the way the research had developed. This refined the
candidate’s approach to their topic area and report. Some research logs were too long. Instead, candidates could
have combined several entries on consecutive days under one common heading.
• Some candidates included long and detailed excerpts from research sources. Instead, they needed to focus on the
analysis and evaluation of the material in their own words.
• Candidates needed to submit all documents in Microsoft Word, including the research report, research log and
bibliography.
77
Cambridge Assessment International Education
The Triangle Building, Shaftesbury Road, Cambridge, CB2 8EA, United Kingdom
t: +44 1223 553554
e: info@cambridgeinternational.org www.cambridgeinternational.org
© Cambridge University Press & Assessment 2021 v1

9980 Example Candidate Responses (For Examination From 2020)

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

9980 Example Candidate Responses (For Examination From 2020)

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Example Candidate Responses

Cambridge International Project

9980 June 2021 Mark Scheme 1

How to use this booklet

Answers are by real candidates in exam conditions. Examiner comments are

How the candidate could have improved their answer

Common mistakes candidates made in this question

Example Candidate Response – high Examiner comments

1 1 The candidate gives some

Example Candidate Response – high, continued Examiner comments

2 2 The candidate provides more

3 3 The candidate gives a clear

Example Candidate Response – high, continued Examiner comments

4 4 The candidate provides more

5 5 The candidate develops their

6 6 Some explanation of the

7 7 The candidate gives some detail

Example Candidate Response – high, continued Examiner comments

8 8 The candidate adds further

10 10 The candidate discusses a

Example Candidate Response – high, continued Examiner comments

11 11 The candidate shows evidence

12 12 This comment focuses on a

13 13 This candidate summarises

Example Candidate Response – high, continued Examiner comments

14 14 The candidate provides another

15 15 The candidate focuses on a

16 16 The candidate identifies another

17 17 The candidate identifies another

Example Candidate Response – high, continued Examiner comments

Example Candidate Response – high, continued Examiner comments

18 18 The candidate links their

Example Candidate Response – high, continued Examiner comments

19 19 The candidate provides an

20 20 The candidate links their

Example Candidate Response – high, continued Examiner comments

21 The candidate supports the

22 22 The candidate specifically links

Example Candidate Response – high, continued Examiner comments

23 23 The candidate provides more in-

Example Candidate Response – high, continued Examiner comments

24 24 The candidate provides an

25 25 The candidate provides an

26 26 The candidate pulls together the

Example Candidate Response – high, continued Examiner comments

27 27 The candidate provides further

28 28 The conclusion flows logically

30 Based on the evaluation above,

Example Candidate Response – high, continued Examiner comments

Example Candidate Response – high, continued Examiner comments

31 31 The candidate provides a

Example Candidate Response – high, continued Examiner comments

32 32 Throughout this section,

Example Candidate Response – high, continued Examiner comments

33 33 The candidate expands on

Example Candidate Response – high, continued Examiner comments

34 34 Although this section on

Example Candidate Response – high, continued Examiner comments

Example Candidate Response – high, continued Examiner comments

Example Candidate Response – high, continued Examiner comments

Example Candidate Response – high, continued Examiner comments

36 The candidate shows how their

Example Candidate Response – high, continued Examiner comments