Answer Scheme SBQ on GlobalisationDocument Transcript
SBQ on globalisation(a) Study Source A Is the cartoonist a supporter of globalisation? Explain your answer [5 marks]Points to note:The question targets the purpose of the cartoonist in drawing the cartoon. As suchyou need to figure out the intention of the author and the impact on the audience whoview the picture. o Intention of Author: Was the author a supporter of globalisation? o Why did he portray globalisation in this way and not in any other way? o What was the message he is trying to send to those who will see this picture? o Impact on Audience: As audiences, how would we feel upon seeing this picture? o Would we support globalisation as a result? o Would we feel inspired to do something about the matter?SAMPLE ANSWER: The cartoonist is not a supporter of globalisation. The cartoonist condemns globalisation by portraying it in purely negative terms. For example, globalisation is pictured as having caused massive environmental degradation. This can be seen from the source where a bulldozer, representing development and modernisation in a globalising world, had instead destroyed animals’ natural habitats and caused them to flee for their lives.In fact, the environmental damage has reached such a critical stage that anemergency call for help has to be made. This can be seen from the source where adistressed Mother Nature had to make an emergency call for help saying “I thinkI’m being stalked!”The author wants the readers who view this cartoon to realize the negativeeffect of globalisation and to do something to stop the severe consequences ofglobalisation which can cause our world to suffer as demonstrated by the desperatecall for emergency help by Mother Nature in the cartoon.
(b) Study Sources B and C How similar are the two sources? Explain your answer. [6 marks]The question requires you to compare the two sources and pick out the similaritiesAND the differences. You can compare the two sources in terms of 1. Content o Are there similarities in the views presented in both sources? o Are there differences in the views presented in both sources? 2. Tone o Are there similarities/differences in the tone of both sources? E.g. one is very emotional while the other one is more objective? 3. Purpose o Are there similarities/differences in the purposes of the two sources? What are the respective intentions of the authors when they present their views in that manner? What is the impact they want to have on the readers who read their views?Both sources B and C are similar in showing the negative effect of globalisation inAsia. For example both sources pointed out that globalisation have causedpeople in Asia to become more materialistic. Source B mentioned thatglobalisation has “a clear goal of promoting materialism” while source C agrees thatglobalisation “makes the Asian societies more vulnerable to the ills of uglymaterialism”.Both sources also highlighted the negative impact of globalisation on Asianvalues and traditional social structure. Source B, for example, pointed at how“globalisation has displaced Singapore’s family values with the loss of importanceplaced on family, marriage, aged parents”. Source C similarly indicated thatglobalisation has indeed caused an erosion of “traditional values and socialcohesion”.However, the sources differ in the views on the whether the West should beblamed for the negative effects brought about by the globalisation process.Source B blames the Western influence for eroding traditional values in Singapore.Globalisation is said to have make “Singaporeans behave like they come fromanother island of North America”. In contrast, source C asserted that Asiancountries must stop blaming the West for spreading globalisation because it affectsall countries in the world and “no nation is immune to the challenges andopportunities globalisation presents.Sources B and C also have different purposes. Source B is a personal onlineposting. The author criticises globalisation as a negative force, which has causedSingaporeans to become more materialistic and individualistic. He argued, forexample, that globalisation “has displaced Singapore’s family values” and put moreemphasis on the self. The author wants the readers of his online posting to beaware of these negative effects of globalisation on the society and influence themto not be too quick to support globalisation.
Source C, on the other hand, is a report from the Conference on Globalisation andRegional Security. The report presents a more objective view on the negative impactof globalisation. The reporter intends to convince the West that the Asian people’sconcerns are justifiable. The report therefore wants the West to consider andunderstand this perspective of the Asian people. The report also aims to discourageAsian societies from putting all the blame on the West because they too are affectedby the challenges that globalisation present. The report wants the Asian societies notto fault any country, for that matter, because all countries in the world haveexperienced difficulties with the process of globalisation.
(c) Study Source D. How useful is this source as evidence of the negative impact of globalisation? Explain your answer.This question requires you to evaluate the usefulness of this one source inunderstanding the topic. Can you use this source completely as evidence of thenegative impact of globalisation?A source is completely useful 1. when it tell you everything you need to know about a topic 2. when the source is reliableIf it does not fulfil these two criteria, it is only limited in its usefulness. Source D is useful because it tell us how globalisation has negatively impacted Singapore’s economy. Since Singapore exports “chips, pharmaceuticals, petrochemicals” to the world, the 2009 US financial turmoil, which affected all the countries in the world, had caused Singapore’s economy to suffer too as the demands for these products from the world went down. This can be seen from there source which states that “for the first time since 1965, we dip into our foreign reserves to fork out US$ 13.7 billion to help out companies survive the impact”. However, source D is only limited in its usefulness as evidence of the negative impact of globalisation. This is because source D does not tell me anything about the other negative effects of globalisation such as environmental degradation and loss of culture. When cross-referencing to the background information, we know that globalisation can affect a country’s “physical environment, culture, political systems, economic development and even one’s well-being”. Source D, however, talks only about how globalisation can negatively affect Singapore’s economic development. Source D did not mention about the negative environmental effects of globalisation like pictured in Source A where natural habitats of animals were sacrificed for modernisation and development. Source A showed a bulldozer causing the animals to flee for their lives. Source D also failed to mention the loss of culture as a result of globalisation as seen in sources B and C where Asian values and social cohesion had been eroded away by the globalisation process. Source D is also not useful because it is not reliable. Source D comes from the view of a high government official and therefore he can be biased in what he says as he needs to be careful in his views so as to reflect well on the country.
Study Source E. How far does this source prove that the positive impact ofglobalisation is greater than the negative effects? Explain your answer.This question targets reliability. Source E prove that the positive impact of globalisation is greater than the negative effects only to a small extent. The author noted that globalisation have made countries around the world join forces in the fight to save the environment. This can be seen from the way these countries set up “organisations monitoring climate change and the welfare of our endangered species”. However, source E is not totally reliable because some parts of the source are questionable. First of all, it is a view of only one person posted online. The view is an opinion and can therefore not be taken in its entirety as a reflection of the truth. The author could be an ardent supporter of globalisation and wants to persuade the readers into believing that globalisation is positive. He does this so as to influence the readers of his post to support globalisation. The source stated that the loss of culture caused by globalisation is inevitable and should not be viewed as a negative impact. This can be seen from the lines “the world we live in today is a result of several cultures coming together. People of one culture tend to see the flaws in their cultures and pick up the culture which is more correct or in tune with the times”. This is not true when we cross-referenced to sources B and C where Asian societies complained about the erosion of traditional values and social cohesion as a worrying trend. Source B said that it is like a nightmare that Singaporeans today behave like they come from the Western countries. Source C too said that “the West must recognise that Asian concern over eroding traditional values and social cohesion is valid”. While the source said that there are efforts to save the environment, it failed to highlight the seriousness of the environmental degradation brought about by globalisation. This can be seen when we cross-referenced to source A where globalisation is seen as threatening Mother Nature to such a critical extent that she is forced to call for emergency help. Therefore source E does not go far in proving the positive impact of globalisation is greater than the negative effects because it is not entirely reliable.