The candidate clearly identifies and explains her group’s issue of food insecurity from the outset and
throughout the presentation. The research presented is concisely delivered but dense and detailed,
meeting the requirements for Level 5.
Her own perspective, or possible solution, is effectively focused on urban agriculture which is
explicitly contrasted with named alternative perspectives taken by other members of her team (such
as aquaponics and genetic modification). Not only this, she also contextualises her approach against
broader economic, environmental and social perspectives. These sharp differentiations within a
number of areas also produce Level 5 achievement.
That movement from the economic, to the environmental to the social also produces an effective
structure for her presentation, which then allows her to provide effective case studies from a local
then a global context. The combined effect of this is to produce a logically structured and coherent
argument which also merits Level 5.
Her conclusion is thoroughly justified in the final minute of her presentation and firmly located in the
arguments and evidence she has previously presented in her presentation as a whole. It is an
effective solution and thus achieves Level 4; for Level 5, clear innovation would also be required
within the context of the problem.
The candidate’s communication methods were also effective: she engages her audience by
speaking fluently without notes, using arm gestures in a focused and expressive way and interacting
with well-chosen images using a pointer. Her intonation is also meaningfully integrated with her
content being delivered and also helps to engage the audience. There may have been some further
opportunities for creativity, but what has been achieved here meets the criteria for Level 4.