Discuss the extent to which two or more named countries or regions have met their Millennium Development Goals (MDGs).

Responses should show a clear understanding of what the MDGs set out to achieve.

All goals need not be covered in the response. Strong responses are likely to identify that some countries/regions have been more successful than others in meeting their targets. For example, answers may focus on populations in Southeast Asia and South Asia where considerable progress has been made compared with Sub-Saharan Africa where many nations are behind on some targets.

Alternatively answers may focus on the fact that poverty, hunger, education and reduced child mortality targets have been very successful but targets linked to gender empowerment are still far off-target in many places.

Stronger candidates may recognize that some of the MDG targets are different for different regions/countries and that they are tied to percentages; thus, it has been easier for some countries to meet their targets than others and therefore, even when targets are met, large numbers of people may still be experiencing a low quality of life.

At band D, responses are likely to describe some of the MDGs with limited reference to actual progress within a country or region.

At band E, responses are likely to have generally accurate knowledge of MDGs and make some reference to progress in two or more countries/regions, possibly with some simplistic evaluation.

At band F, a range of MDG targets will be discussed, with accurate knowledge of the level (or lack) of progress being made in two or more countries/regions, leading to some conclusion/evaluation of the extent to which the goals have been met.

Marks should be allocated according to the markbands.

This question was rarely chosen which was odd given this was the 2015 exam and the MDGs which underline the entire core officially ended this year. Those that did tackle this question tended to have sound knowledge and understanding of both the MDGs and how specific countries or regions had either made or had not made progress in relation to some of the goals. The better answers were willing to describe AND explain why progress was fast/slow. Country comparisons seemed more common than regional comparisons although there were a few who very skilfully compared South East Asia with Sub-Saharan Africa. Weaker answers tended to be very superficial with very poor knowledge of the MDGs and the targets. Some had limited knowledge on specific regions and compared MEDCs with LEDCs which was less appropriate.