Hi, I have a GPR exam next week and I feel in my current state I'd simply wing it if i were to take the exam today. We haven't spent much time on exam papers ect. mostly the presentations and essays.
The way my teacher marks is very scientific, as in, he'll award marks only when you've used a point given in the mark scheme; so for a 14 mark "pro's and con's" question, he expects 7 different points for each side to be written. This seems not only counter-intuitive but unfeasible. Reading the few model answers coupled with the mark scheme they didn't write in this fashion. I pointed out to my teacher that it states that the examiner shouldn't expect a given answer and is to be flexible.
How should I approach questions? Can you revise for the exam?
While reading the mark scheme it seemed that 2 major aspects accounted for marks but the rest seems ambiguous; comprehension of the articles given and the ability to evenly compare - not writing 5 pro's for a source and then 1 con. Are there any goto's for marks? I know I'll - trying to - use the 'CRABVINE' acronym but very loosely. Are marks rewarded based on the construction of the answer, or simply the points given?
Find out here