WSSS 2022 MYE AS

Sec 4E5N Social Studies MYE Paper 2022 Suggested Answer key for students Section A Source-Based case study 1 Study Source A. What do you think the author is trying to say about FICA? Explain your answer, using details from the source. [5] The author is saying that FICA is necessary [POINT]. The source mentions a past case of foreign interference in Singapore, the case of Mr Hank Hendrickson instigating the Law Society President to organise lawyers to contest against the government [EVIDENCE], which shows that foreign interference ac tually has happened in Singapore before and that it is something that needs to be dealt with, thus necessitating FICA as it is meant to prevent such interference from happening again [EXPLANATION + LINK]. Marker’s feedback: • Students generally did well for this • A handful misinterpreted source as being against FICA; misinterpreted as saying that FICA is the interference, rather than realising it’s a past example that FICA is supposed to prevent • Answer must state that FICA can address / prevent such i nterference from happening again to get the higher level of marks as it shows a clearer understanding of the full context / source 2 Study Source B. Why do you think the author published this? Explain your answer. [7] [6] The author published this to convince Singaporeans [AUDIENCE], that FICA is dangerous / unnecessary / damaging [MESSAGE / INFERENCE] so that Singaporeans would complain or protest against FICA / be discontented with the government / support the SDP instead [INTENDED OUTCOME]. Given that ]. given that this was right after the announcement of FICA [CONTEXT], the opposition party is suggesting that FICA is curtailing the freedom of locals in expressing their views and censoring them / curtailing the freedom of opposition parties to indicate discontent about foreign-related policies [EXPLANATION], as seen by the giant hand of FICA pressing down the figure representing freedom [EVIDENCE] Marker’s feedback: • Generally competent performance across the level • Source was straightforward and thus, getting a valid inference was relatively manageable; however, to get a fully contextualised, specific answer was more challenging • To get full marks, answers had to address what kind of freedom FICA would restrict (wider context) and state the specific context of the source (after announcement of FICA)

2 3 Study Source C. How useful is this source in telling you about the impact of FICA? Explain your answer. [7] Usefulness based on content This source is useful in saying that FICA can be dangerous [POINT]. This can be seen from “the bill gives the government too much power to act purely on suspicions” [EVIDENCE], which indicates that the government can misuse the act to censor and prosecute those it suspects are hostile, even if they turn out not to be [EXPLANATION]. AND The source is also useful as it provides both sides of the issue, by acknowledging the need for such measures to counter foreign interference while also acknowledging potential pitfalls of the act. OR The source is also useful as it provides specific pointers on how to improve on the bill before it is passed, as can be seen from the suggestions to give checking ability to the High Court and to act on evidence rather than suspicion. Usefulness based on cross–reference Source C is useful as it is supported by Source F. Source F agrees that FICA can be dangerous (COMMON CRITERIA / INFERENCE). Source F states that if FICA’s definition of foreign interference isn’t made clear, “people could be scared off from collaborating with Singapore” and would thus “diminish Singapore’s position as a global hub” [EVIDENCE], damaging Singapore’s economic strength and business partnerships [EXPLANATION / OUTCOME]. Since the sources agree, Source C is reliable, thus useful. Other sources: Source A – disagree Source B – agree Source D – disagree Source E – disagree Usefulness based on wider context (involving provenance) Possible routes: -Enhanced reliability as WP is opposing party -> expectation that they will disagree with FICA but they do not completely oppose it / recognise that there is a need for such measures -Not reliable based on purpose but overall still useful in showing balanced view of need for FICA but also its drawbacks Given that the source is from an opposition party, one would expect that they would disagree with FICA on principle , especially if it could gain more support for them from the local population. However, while they do point out the potential pitfalls of the act, they also acknowledge the need to count dangerous acts of foreign interference and give suggestions on how to improve it. As such, in portraying the

3 4 Study Source D Are you surprised by what the source says? Explain your answer. [7] Surprise based on content The source says that FICA is necessary [POINT]. This can be seen from “not giving the power will severely compromise the government's ability to deal with the real risk of foreign interference” [EVIDENCE], which shows that without it, the country might suffer from foreign interference as the government doesn’t have the means to catch such actions before or as they happen [EXPLANATION]. Not surprised – expect him to side his own ministry’s stance Surprised – he would acknowledge that there are risks involved, just that the risks of not doing it are higher; one would not expect a minister to acknowledge any risks at all, lest people think less of the policy Responses that are not accepted • I expect him to support the FICA policy (with no explanation as to why) • I expect him to support the policy as the PAP came up with the policy. • I expect him to support the policy as he is part of the government (so?) • I expect him to support the policy as it is normal for people to want more power. (Do not make generalisations.) Surprise based on cross–reference I am surprised as Source D is contradicted by Source F. Source F disagrees that FICA is necessary (COMMON CRITERIA / INFERENCE). Source F states that if FICA’s definition of foreign interference isn’t made clear, “people could be scared off from collaborating with Singapore” and would thus “diminish Singapore’s position as a global hub” [EVIDENCE], damaging Singapore’s economic strength and business partnerships [EXPLANATION / OUTCOME]. Since the sources disagree, I am surprised. Other sources: Source A – agree Source B – disgree Source C – agree/disagree Source E – agree issue in a balanced way and acting against expectations, the source is reliable and thus useful. Marker’s feedback • Generally competent attempts at inference level • Performance is more varied at higher levels (cross references not done correctly; purpose levels without ATQ; purpose levels focussing only on content rather than provenance and impact) • Some cross references did not give reliability as part of the rationale; some featured weak or non-existent common criteria • Many purpose level answers did not take into account wider context (e.g. source is actually two sided and going against expectations for an opposition party)

4 Surprise based on purpose Given that he is the Minister of Home Affairs, I am not surprised that he says that FICA is necessary [MESSAGE], that “not giving the power will severely compromise the government’s ability to deal with the real risk of foreign interference” [EVIDENCE] as I expect him to justify and support his own ministry’s policy [EXPECTATION], so that those in parliament and, by extension, the population [AUDIENCE], will understand the reasoning behind FICA and support the policy [OUTCOME], rather than continue to protest it [CONTEXT]. Marker’s feedback: • Students generally could reason as to why they are surprised/no