OCR RS Philosophy and Ethics A2

Hi guys i have some resources if you want them?? xxx

Hi guys i have some resources if you want them?? xxx

Hey guys,
I am sitting both AS and A2 RS this year. I have done OCR AS with everyone else think it went well. However, as I never did A2 in school (I am now external) I don't really get how you structure the essay compared to AS essays where its two questions. Can anyone explain the difference in the questions between AS/A2 like how do you structure the 35 mark question, is it still 25 marks describing and 10 marks arguing just in 1 question?? Also does anyone know where you can find example essays with the marks they got?
Thanks

Favourite topic, either miracles or religious experience.. Two questions on these two (but definitely not related to God's omnibenevolence, I can never get enough marks on this topic) and I'll be very, very happy.. haha. What about yours?

I don't see A* as aiming high here, but I guess it's just me.. Last year I got 87/83 and an A, despite doing horrible and not doing too much revision. This year my marks in class are a lot higher, I never even had above 28 at AS and now at A2 I had 30+ consistently, last two essays being 33/35 and 34/35, which really gave me hope for the exam.. And revising 2 hours every day, not counting the school lessons just for Philosophy and Ethics for the last few months really, really helped. I really want full UMS marks even though to get into uni I want is a BCC lol.

Wow almost full marks
You gotta tell me how you do that. What kind of structure do you use and all. Because for me constantly whatever I do I always manage to scrape a B or get a low B and i would really like to push for a high B or an A at least

Be obsessed about knowing 95% of the thinkers and theories on a given topic..

How I structure my essay:

Intro: Briefly mention the issues, the views on the topic and your argument..
Paragraph 1:
-Thinker/theory that supports your argument
---Criticise the thinker/theory with another thinker/theory/weakness in the argument
------Criticisee the criticism showing why the criticism fails
Repeat
Repeat
Paragraph 2:
-Thinker/theory that disagrees with your argument
---Criticise the thinker/theory with another thinker/theory/weakness in the argument
------Say why your criticism works
Repeat
Repeat

Conclusion: Summarise your argument(s), say why some disagree, say why they're wrong.

Pretty much what I do every time, and I get level 5 both for AO1 and AO2. It helps to know almost every main thinker's name and their theories and key names.

That should help. And if it helps other people, they will do better in the exam. And if they do better in the exam, they grade boundaries will be higher. And if the grade boundaries are higher, I will find it more difficult to get A*. I am sacrificing here for you! lol

My teacher emphasised criticising the criticism to get the 'critical analysis' in the level 5.. So if the question is about something like hard determinism, you'd state how this hard determinist supports your argument. Then you criticise it by, for example, saying how hard determinism entails no moral responsibility, and this is a weaknes.. You could criticise it by saying how it's simply an appeal to consequences, and that just because we don't like what adopting the hard determinist view would bring, it doesn't mean it's not true - it's like saying that just because you prefer that there is life after death, and not there being nothing, it doesn't mean that life after death therefore exists.

Be obsessed about knowing 95% of the thinkers and theories on a given topic..

How I structure my essay:

Intro: Briefly mention the issues, the views on the topic and your argument..
Paragraph 1:
-Thinker/theory that supports your argument
---Criticise the thinker/theory with another thinker/theory/weakness in the argument
------Criticisee the criticism showing why the criticism fails
Repeat
Repeat
Paragraph 2:
-Thinker/theory that disagrees with your argument
---Criticise the thinker/theory with another thinker/theory/weakness in the argument
------Say why your criticism works
Repeat
Repeat

Conclusion: Summarise your argument(s), say why some disagree, say why they're wrong.

Pretty much what I do every time, and I get level 5 both for AO1 and AO2. It helps to know almost every main thinker's name and their theories and key names.

That should help. And if it helps other people, they will do better in the exam. And if they do better in the exam, they grade boundaries will be higher. And if the grade boundaries are higher, I will find it more difficult to get A*. I am sacrificing here for you! lol

My teacher emphasised criticising the criticism to get the 'critical analysis' in the level 5.. So if the question is about something like hard determinism, you'd state how this hard determinist supports your argument. Then you criticise it by, for example, saying how hard determinism entails no moral responsibility, and this is a weaknes.. You could criticise it by saying how it's simply an appeal to consequences, and that just because we don't like what adopting the hard determinist view would bring, it doesn't mean it's not true - it's like saying that just because you prefer that there is life after death, and not there being nothing, it doesn't mean that life after death therefore exists.

Is this for the whole question or just the discussion part? Seems like so much evaluation/comparing points compared to AS!
Thanks


BTW thanks Annie for the info and test paper really helpful!

Wow, that looks so... Complex. So much criticism
How am I gonna do this is an exam :/

That's the whole question.. In AS we had to do AO1 for the 25 marker, and AO2 for the 10 marker. At A2 I basically do it like I did the 10 marker, but go a lot more in depth about the thinkers, their theories and what they say, basically combining the two. At least that's what my teacher recommended.



It's not really that complex haha. Intro and conclusion, that's quite obvious lol. It's just a matter of making an argument using whoever/whatever you use, criticising it, and then criticising the criticism, then repeating that two more times, and then second parapraph reversing it, so you say why someone might disagree with you, and you criticise them so in the end your argument is the best one.
Make some practice plans and that should sink in

Hi everyone, I'm feeling really stressed about RS. I just can't seem to remember everything, especially the topic on life after death which was the last topic our teacher went through. On the whole, the topics this year are much harder than last year's. I am probably going into the exam room knowing 3-4 topics well and hoping that there are two questions on them.