This set practises the four skills in comparing perspectives: fair description, stated view versus inference, the question each source answers, and weighing evidence without ranking people or choices. Questions run from easier to harder. Write your answer first, then open the worked answer.
Every source, group, town and figure below is invented for practice.
Questions
Q1 (easy). Rewrite fairly: “Villagers are lazy about recycling.” Use this invented source: a council audit of 40 household bins found 18 with mixed waste.
Show answer
“An invented council audit of 40 household bins found 18 (45%) containing mixed waste.” Check: 18 ÷ 40 = 0.45. The label “lazy” is a trait, so it is replaced by a count, the source and the group audited.
Q2 (easy). Is each a local or a wider perspective: (a) a fishing village committee, (b) a regional water authority?
Show answer
(a) Local: people close to the issue. (b) Wider: a body working across a larger area. Neither label says which view is better.
Q3 (easy). Which word makes this sentence a stereotype: “Teenagers always ignore public notices”? Rewrite it.
Show answer
“Always” turns it into a claim about every teenager. A fair version: “In an invented school survey of 80 students, 52 (65%) said they rarely read notices on the board.” Check: 52 ÷ 80 = 0.65.
Q4 (medium). A school council says: “We ask for a covered walkway because pupils get wet in the rainy season.” Which are stated views and which an inference? (a) the council asks for a walkway, (b) the council wants to look good to the principal, (c) the council says pupils get wet in the rainy season.
Show answer
(a) and (c) are stated views, since each points to words in the statement. (b) is an inference with no support in the statement.
Q5 (medium). Rewrite with a labelled inference: “The company is only offering jobs to win votes.” Source: a company statement says the plan would create 60 jobs.
Show answer
“The company states the plan would create 60 jobs. This may suggest it wants to show benefit to the community, though the statement does not give that as a reason.” The first sentence is the stated view and the second a marked inference. The claim about votes is dropped because nothing in the source supports it.
Q6 (medium). Source G: a survey of 200 students found 130 use phones for study. Source H: an agency report says students aged 13 to 16 spend 3.5 hours a day on phones. State the question each answers and say whether they conflict.
Show answer
G: “How many students use phones for study?” (130 ÷ 200 = 65%). H: “How long do students spend on phones?” They do not conflict, because one counts a purpose and the other measures time. Both can be true together.
Q7 (medium). One report says 12% of commuters cycle, from a Monday-morning count in the city centre. Another says 7%, from a citywide household survey. Name three differences to check before calling it a contradiction.
Show answer
Group (commuters in the centre versus households citywide), method (count versus survey), time (one morning versus a longer period or different date). A fourth could be how each defines “commuter”. The figures may both be accurate for their own questions.
Q8 (harder). Claim: “Air quality worsened near the road.” Source J measured air quality at 5 sites over 30 days. Source K is one resident’s diary of days with smell. Compare the evidence on type, coverage and fit.
Show answer
J: measurement, 5 sites for 30 days, fits a claim about air quality directly. K: personal record, one person, shows experience rather than measurement. J is the more direct support on the information given. K still gives context, such as which days a resident noticed a problem.
Q9 (harder). Fix this conclusion: “The ministry’s study is untrustworthy because ministries always defend their own plans.”
Show answer
It ranks the actor and uses a sweeping word. A fair rewrite checks the study: “The study does not say how it chose its 12 sample sites, so it is hard to judge how well it represents the area.” The comment is now about method.
Q10 (harder, integrated). Source L: a hotel association statement opposes a tourist tax because bookings may fall, with a survey of 50 hotels where 31 expect fewer bookings. Source M: a city office model estimates the tax would raise RM2 million a year for beach cleaning, assuming visitor numbers stay the same. Write (i) each question, (ii) each stated view, (iii) one labelled inference, (iv) a fair conclusion about the evidence.
Show answer
(i) L: “What do hotels expect the tax to do to bookings?” M: “How much might the tax raise?” 31 ÷ 50 = 62%.
(ii) L: the association opposes the tax and says bookings may fall, with 62% of the 50 surveyed hotels expecting fewer bookings. M: the office estimates RM2 million a year for beach cleaning, if visitor numbers stay the same.
(iii) “This may suggest the hotels are concerned about income, although the statement does not mention income.”
(iv) “Both sources give limited evidence: L reports expectations and M gives a model that assumes no change in visitors. Because L suggests bookings might change, M’s assumption is the weak point. Neither source settles whether the tax should be introduced.” The conclusion stays on the evidence and takes no side.
If you got these wrong
| Where you slipped | What it usually means | Go to |
|---|---|---|
| Q1 to Q3: sweeping words or traits | Describing groups instead of sources | Describe local and wider perspectives |
| Q4 and Q5: guesses written as facts | Stated view and inference mixed | Stated view versus inferred motive |
| Q6 and Q7: “they contradict” | Question, group or period not checked | Sources answering different questions |
| Q8 to Q10: picking a winner | Ranking actors or choices | Comparing supporting evidence |
What to do next
Redo the questions you missed after a day, using a fresh sheet. When your answers keep to the source and label every inference, you are using the skill.
A teacher in online one-to-one Global Perspectives tuition can read your responses with you. They help you think more clearly about evidence and do not write assessed work for you.