Year 12s: what will be the first way you research your future options? >>

OCR Phil/Eth marking methodology

Ok, I was studying the marking criteria to make sure I was on the right lines; however, it seemed a little vague so I wanted some other people's interpretations.

(Criteria - what I'd say it's actually asking for)

Response - answers the question, relevant and selected knowledge.
Knowledge - general knowledge, quotes, knowledge above the syllabus.
Technical term - correct use of terminology.
Evidence - Does this mean examples?
Communication - articulation, eloquence, structure.

Thank you (I know I've been opening threads left, right, and centre)

Reply 1

HarleyQuinn

Knowledge does not- mean ABOVE the syllabus. It means that you're knowledgable about the question and can adequately explain. If it meant above the syllabus then lots of people wouldn't get A's from the textbooks. And several of my class have, without 'extra' knowledge. Knowledge means that you're answering the question correctly using the right area of the syllabus.

Response means that you are correctly responding; not ignoring an Evaluate and Explain, for example, and just outlining a topic, is not a correct response.

Evidence means QUOTES. It means using quotes to illustrate your point providing EVIDENCE.

Reply 2

alphabetsoup

I'm guessing evidence probably also includes examples of scholars who justify certain strengths/criticisms, particularly in part b questions. I can never remember any scholars - it's the comment I get at the bottom of almost every essay I do!

Reply 3

Ekpyrotic

HarleyQuinn

Knowledge does not- mean ABOVE the syllabus

Well obviously you can get an A with textbook knowledge, but if you want to push into 90%+ I thought it would be hard to demonstrate "evidence of having read books, not just teacher's notes (mark scheme)" without referencing knowledge that is above the syllabus. I don't mean whole paragraphs of new philosophers - that would only hurt your marks - but referencing names while considering the usual points.

For example, "Genetic determinism describes how animal behaviour can be conditioned by their genes, for example, E.O Wilson, in the New Synthesis, describes how a females' genes have inclined them towards the matriarchal role, making them kinder and more loving."

Maybe I'm wrong, but I would have thought one little 'higher' comment each essay will ascertain them higher marks.

Reply 4

HarleyQuinn

Hm. Indeed. In our textbook we have comments like that already, as well as our teacher's notes, and our own notes. I guess I assumed that others would take the theory alone, without reference to other scholars, just the trad Anselm, Aquinas and Dawkins :wink:

I'm pretty confident in my textbook; it's written by 2 of the cheif examiners, and it's choc-full of quotes and such from others, in grey boxes. The main is in white, grey is for the A candidates. When we looked at spec answers, we found that they were making 'grey' comments as opposed to 'white'.

To me, 'reading books' is a bit of a given when taking a philosophy based course. I thought you meant taking on a whole new topic off syllabus, heh.

Stress and exams = getting to me :OP