CGS 2026 SS MS

CRESCENT GIRLS’ SCHOOL SECONDARY FOUR PRELIMINARY EXAMINATION 2026 HUMANITIES 2260/1 2261/1 2262/1 Social Studies 19 August 2026 Marking Scheme This mark scheme consists of 18 printed pages.

2 1 Study Source A. Why did the cartoonist draw this cartoon? Explain your answer. [5] L1 Inference based on provenance The cartoonist drew this cartoon to reach out to the Canadian readers of the newspaper. [1] L2 Inference based on message/intended outcome, unsupported [2] L3 Inference based on message Award 4m for context The cartoonist drew this cartoon to convince(V) Canadians(A) that the Canadian government was spending huge amounts of money in hosting the World Cup yet allowing FIFA to profit at the expense of Canadians(M). This can be seen in how a man labelled “FIFA” has walked away with an arm and a leg – a metaphor for how much they are earning from the World Cup. This arm and leg came from a man labelled “Canadian Tax Payers”, signifying Canadians, showing that this cost was being borne by the Canadian people instead. Meanwhile, a man in the middle, labelled “Politicians”, is saying “No Foul”, symbolising that the Canadian government is aware of FIFA’s profiteering, but allows it to continue happening. The cartoonist was likely responding to how the Canadian government has had to cut expenditure on social services, meant for the welfare of the Canadians, to fund the World Cup (Context). [3-4]

3 L4 Purpose based on Message and Intended outcome Award 5m for context The cartoonist drew this cartoon to convince(V) Canadians(A) that the Canadian government was spending huge amounts of money in hosting the World Cup yet allowing FIFA to profit at the expense of Canadians(M), so that they pressure the government to prioritise spending more on the welfare of the Canadians (I) . This can be seen in how a man labelled “FIFA” has walked away with an arm and a leg – a metaphor for how much they are earning from the World Cup. This arm and leg came from a man labelled “Canadian Tax Payers”, signifying Canadians, showing that this cost was being borne by the Canadian people instead. Meanwhile, a man in the middle, labelled “Politicians”, is saying “No Foul”, symbolising that the Canadian government is aware of FIFA’s profiteering, but allows it to continue happening. The cartoonist was likely responding to how the Canadian government has had to cut expenditure on social services, meant for the welfare of the Canadians, to fund the World Cup (Context). Accept other reasonable interpretations E.g. The cartoon was drawn to convince the Canadian people that the cost of hosting the World Cup is not worth it so that they would pressure their government to cancel the World Cup. E.g. The cartoon was drawn to convince governments who want to host the World Cup that the cost of hosting the World Cup is not worth it so that they would not want to host future World Cup events. [4-5]

4 2 Study Sources B and C. How similar are the two sources? Explain your answer. [7] L1 Identifies agreement/disagreement in provenance/topic /source type Both sources are different because one is from research organisation while the other is from a football magazine. Both sources are similar as they both discuss the World Cup. OR False Matching Sources B and C are different because Source B talks about the 1998 World Cup but Source C does not [1] L2 Identifies agreement/disagreement in content, unsupported Both sources are similar in showing that the World Cup led to less economic benefits than expected. Both sources are different regarding the reason for reduced economic benefits. [2] L3 Similar OR different in content, supported Award 3m for explaining 1 point of similarity OR difference, supported but no BOC Award 4m for explaining 1 point of similarity OR difference, supported with clear BOC Both sources are similar in showing that the World Cup led to less economic benefits than expected . This is seen in Source B, which says, “80% of US hotel operators had less bookings than expected .” This shows that the hotels could not profit as much as they thought they would from the World Cup. Likewise, Source C says, “Steve's Sizzling Steaks had expected to benefit from the thousands of supporters travelling to the stadium during the tournament. ” and “official traffic warnings and gridlock alerts have discouraged regular customers from visiting.” This shows that contrary to having more customers, they ended up earning even less , as even their usual customers did not patronise them. [3-4]

5 Both sources are different regarding the reason for reduced economic benefits. Source B states, “Due to the World Cup, n on- football fans simply avoided the country due to its crowds.” It is saying that there were less tourists than usual as the ones who would usually be travelling there decided to travel elsewhere to avoid the football crowds, leading to lower income from tourism. However, Source C states, “ official traffic warnings and gridlock alerts have discouraged regular customers from visiting.” It is saying that the re were less customers than expected as traffic regulations prevented them from patronising the restaurants near the stadium , leading to lower income from potential patrons. Also accepted: • Similar in showing that countries can benefit economically from hosting the World Cup:  B: “The US GDP increase is estimated at about 0.05%”  C: “The 2026 World Cup is expected to generate billions for host cities overall.” • Different in whether hosts benefit economically from the World Cup  B: “12 of the last 14 World Cups produced net economic losses for host regions”  C: “The 2026 World Cup is expected to generate billions for host cities overall.” • Different why countries want to host the World Cup  B: “elevating the country’s global standing”  C: “The 2026 World Cup is expected to generate billions for host cities overall.” • Different regarding which industries have been negatively affected by the World Cup  B: “80% of US hotel operators had less bookings than expected.”  C: “Steve's Sizzling Steaks had expected to benefit from the thousands of supporters travelling to the stadium during the tournament. Instead, manager Henry Ditonto says official traffic warnings and gridlock alerts have discouraged even regular customers from visiting.” L4 Similar AND different in content, supported Award 5m for similarity and difference, supported but no c lear basis of comparison [5-6]

6 Award 6 m for similarity and difference, supported with clear basis of comparison 5 Different in perspective, explained Both sources are different in their perspective /stance on the impact of the World Cup . The economic report in Source B, being written by a research organisation, presents a balanced/objective perspective, placing priority on presenting facts, whether positive or negative. It presents how the World Cup has led to both higher and lower hotel room prices , as shown in “This led to lower hotel room prices in host cities like New York City. On the other hand, in Mexico, with fewer available hotels, prices were much higher.” It also states the monetary cost incurred by host nations as a matter of fact, as seen in “ Canada’s hosting costs at more than $1 billion , the event is less about boosting the economy and more about elevating the country’s global standing .” However, in Source C, the magazine presents a one-sided, critical perspective towards the traffic rules that had been introduced during the World Cup , as seen in “ Local businesses would have hoped football's biggest tournament would bring a surge in customers, yet traffic restrictions and public warnings appear to be having the opposite e