[Gijoe123]

did everyone get 4 bs for q1-4 on multiple choice?

[tooosh]

(Original post by Gijoe123)
did everyone get 4 bs for q1-4 on multiple choice?

I got bbdb. That pattern sticks out for some reason O.o

[kinkin]

damn I flopped the main conclusion part. I thought it was the first sentence talking about the integration of computers since 1970's thought it didn't make sense lol. Meh w/e would be more upset if critical thinking was actually recognised by unis I was applied to LOL!

[exam2k10]

Does anyone remember what they put for the appeal question?
I put 'Appeal to emotion'
Dunno if this is right though.
I think I got the main conclusion wrong , but the counter assertion and one of the intermediate conclusions seem right
I am just happy with a C...this subject is not recognised by most unis anyways

[suggsina]

(Original post by exam2k10)
Does anyone remember what they put for the appeal question?
I put 'Appeal to emotion'
Dunno if this is right though.
I think I got the main conclusion wrong , but the counter assertion and one of the intermediate conclusions seem right
I am just happy with a C...this subject is not recognised by most unis anyways

Wasn't the quote from the mum saying that because mosty of her friends let their kids on the internet, she should? Sounds like majority to me.

[exam2k10]

(Original post by suggsina)
Wasn't the quote from the mum saying that because mosty of her friends let their kids on the internet, she should? Sounds like majority to me.

No, I thought she said although she feels that they should be restricted, they should still be allowed to use it because it brings a lot of benefits, according to her friends.

Therefore, I put 'Appeal to Emotion'.

But like I said earlier, I might be wrong.

Did not particularly like this paper.

[kimmey]

(Original post by exam2k10)
No, I thought she said although she feels that they should be restricted, they should still be allowed to use it because it brings a lot of benefits, according to her friends.

Therefore, I put 'Appeal to Emotion'.

But like I said earlier, I might be wrong.

Did not particularly like this paper.

nahhh it was appeal to popularity

[Xannny]

I thought that the main conclusion was the first sentence, that the internet is invading our homes?

If it was wrong then I am glad it was only 2 marks

Also for Kevins_Mum I initially thought it was an appeal to emotion, however, she talked about what other people did, which made me think it was an appeal to popularity.

[exam2k10]

(Original post by Xannny)
I thought that the main conclusion was the first sentence, that the internet is invading our homes?

If it was wrong then I am glad it was only 2 marks

Also for Kevins_Mum I initially thought it was an appeal to emotion, however, she talked about what other people did, which made me think it was an appeal to popularity.

DAMN! Do you know whether they will accept both answers provided that the candidate gave good reasoning?

[exam2k10]

What did people write for that principle question.

I wrote parents should take care of their children.

Would this be worthy of any marks?

Thanks

[exam2k10]

What did people write for that risk question in Section C. It was something like, give an example of when the risks are exposed rather than prevented.

I wrote 'committing crime'

[exam2k10]

For the analogy question, did people write 'the number of hours that children spend in sweet shops with no control are being compared to the children spending time on their PCs in their bedroom'?

Sorry for asking so many questions.

Just a bit worried about this exam

[rdizzle1]

(Original post by exam2k10)
For the analogy question, did people write 'the number of hours that children spend in sweet shops with no control are being compared to the children spending time on their PCs in their bedroom'?

Sorry for asking so many questions.

Just a bit worried about this exam

Yeah that was the anology - didn't you have to go onto explain it then

Also did people put the MC as the 2nd sentence of paragraph 2 ?

Overall, I thought it was ok , defo a step up from the first paper . I felt I got way too many C's for the multiple choice

[exam2k10]

Once again, I am sorry if I am asking too many questions, but for the question about the evaluation of the analogy, I wrote 'children who work in sweet shops do not get paid much and are poorly treated thus meaning that they are uneducated since they spend most of their time working. Similarly, children who spend too much time on the computer in their bedroom are becoming uneducated as they are trapped in their bedroom and don't want to come out.

There was another question about the increase of the number of people using the internet.
For this question, I wrote...
(1) Because many people have PC's they will be encouraged to have access to the internet.
(2) The internet brings many benefits such as helping someone with their homework.

And for evaluating the reasoning in paragraph 3 (I think) I wrote that
(1) The number of teenagers using the internet for more than (I can't remember) hours, are not specified and instead the author has just mentioned 'The number of teenagers using the internet for more than (I can't remember) hours...'
(2) There are many causes to the children becoming fat such as health problems and lack of exercise.

Can someone please tell me whether they would agree with my answers.

Would be very much appreciated.

[kimmey]

for the principle i wrote we should not do things that may harm others. i think wiriting about parents and children is too specifice and a principle has to be more general

[rugbygreg]

(Original post by exam2k10)
What did people write for that risk question in Section C. It was something like, give an example of when the risks are exposed rather than prevented.

I wrote 'committing crime'

I wrote about kids going to play in the park saying the risk of a lack of fitness and social aspect was one that they should be exposed to despite the kidnappers and sexual predators, I smuggly smiled to myself.

[tooosh]

(Original post by exam2k10)
Once again, I am sorry if I am asking too many questions, but for the question about the evaluation of the analogy, I wrote 'children who work in sweet shops do not get paid much and are poorly treated thus meaning that they are uneducated since they spend most of their time working. Similarly, children who spend too much time on the computer in their bedroom are becoming uneducated as they are trapped in their bedroom and don't want to come out.

The analogy was young people using computers without parental control to children being allowed to use a sweet shop without parental control. Not working in it, but eating the crap out of it.

Also I'm 99% sure that appeal question was popularity, there was no emotive language used, let alone any that could cover up a lack of evidence or anything.

It doesn't matter anyway, this AS is virtually useless as a qualification

[Xannny]

(Original post by exam2k10)
DAMN! Do you know whether they will accept both answers provided that the candidate gave good reasoning?

I'm not to sure, it was only worth around 3 marks I think, so you should be okay.

What did everyone put as the main conclusion?

[SiannD]

(Original post by Xannny)
I'm not to sure, it was only worth around 3 marks I think, so you should be okay.

What did everyone put as the main conclusion?

I put something from the second paragraph, can't remember what though sorry

[mirchsd]

I got abba for the first 4 multiple choice. What did everyone get for the counter assertion and intermediate conclusions?