WJEC - PY2 - Case Studies and Research methods

Yeah I'm starting to feel the same.

Also, the average grade in PY1 and PY2 is a D hahaha

Just thinking.. what are the chances that they'll reuse the same question twice in a year.. out of 10 case studies..

That could be like 6 less answers I have to revise.. like a day.. might be worth doing imo.

That did make me laugh a little xD
It's good that the average grade is low though, it means that grade boundaries get lower so people like us can get the high grades!
If I get an A in PY2, it means and A overall

Don't leave ANYTHING out. WJEC examiners are getting nasty this year, they got into a bit of trouble last year by telling teachers what would be coming up in upcoming exams so the teachers knew what to teach, and this year they seem to be going out of their way to catch people out - they did it in PY1 in January I think , they have NEVER set the question for the assumptions of the behavioural approach (I think that's the one), and they know that's the one people will always revise more for because they think "it's bound to come up" so... yeah, they did it with my Drama exam too.

I found my "Aims and Context" answers in a notebook the other day; I'll upload them when I get a chance if anyone wants (some are fairly long and thorough iirc but I maintain that's how I got an A) , but it probably won't be this week because it's busy, and I'm trying to prepare for PY4 which makes PY2 look like a breeze

I worry my answers aren't long etc enough for me to get an A

And in regards to the WJEC thing, a few months ago we had a seminar where the ex head of History for WJEC gave us tips. He started it off by pretending to look up on the roofs and said "Just looking to see if there's any Daily Telegraph reporters" haha

Same here haha.

Hope I get an A so bad.

I woulda got an A in PY1 if I took it a year earlier, the grade boundaries went up 2 raw marks grr

Same here haha.

Hope I get an A so bad.

I woulda got an A in PY1 if I took it a year earlier, the grade boundaries went up 2 raw marks grr

Thought the exact same thing when I saw the report from last year. I really want an A!

x

Any chance you can mark this for me:
Langer and Rodin aims:

Reckon it's the best essays i've done so far.
Also this:
Rosenhan's evaluation:

I really need this marked, because this if my first evaluation of the methodlogy and I want to make sure I'm doing it right.

You've already started =O I'm going to start next week. As for the perfect essay for PY2, I haven't got a clue :b I'm just going to try and do a really good essay and give it to my teacher and hope I get really high and then just all my essays similar to that.
Have you completed all the core studies? You know when the exam is?
Got to say though, Rahe study is just so boring xd

This website was a godsend to me - http://tonyryan.net/ contains tips, tricks and example answers for all the questions you may be asked in PY2 (or most of them, at least) - they're worth about 8 marks so it's better to combine what you get in the lessons and text books with these essays but it helped me tremendously (I got an A in the exam last year).

It seems like a hell of a lot, but if you break it down into the bare minimum facts, use flashcards for revision etc, it will really help. And don't get too hung up on remembering the names for alternative evidence etc - it's not necessary, as long as you remember what they found, apparently you don't lose any marks for not remembering the names.

The hardest question is by far the alternative evidence, because it's so easy to get confused, so as soon as you study each piece of research, pick out 4 or 5 alternative evidence studies that will be easy to remember - I think I got rid of my PY2 notes, unfortunately - and learn them, stick them on your bedroom wall, read over them, record them as an mp3 - whatever you can do to help you remember. The rest of the stuff is fairly easy. The exam itself is not hard because it will always be the same questions (the only thing that differs is whether you get two evaluate methodology or two alternative evidence questions), it's the remembering which is the hardest part.

A good memory should see you fine (I didn't do that much revision, to be honest, and got through on a good memory), but I can't stress enough the importance that you DO revise - if nothing else, it'll set you in good stead for PY3 and PY4, where a lot of revision is required.

Don't leave ANYTHING out. WJEC examiners are getting nasty this year, they got into a bit of trouble last year by telling teachers what would be coming up in upcoming exams so the teachers knew what to teach, and this year they seem to be going out of their way to catch people out - they did it in PY1 in January I think , they have NEVER set the question for the assumptions of the behavioural approach (I think that's the one), and they know that's the one people will always revise more for because they think "it's bound to come up" so... yeah, they did it with my Drama exam too.

Who told you this? Or is it just your opinion? I agree that there was some controversy over the WJEC GCSE geography INSET where it seemed some examiners were giving answers ( I am not sure they actually said anything you couldnt work out actually).

Hopwever, I am concerned by what you say. I am going to write to the WJEC subject officer about this, because if what you suggest is true then I think the examination process could be considered unfair.

I am also very concerned because if (IFF) WJEC are doing this then they will be moving away from one of the basic precepts of their specification - that all questions will be clear and unambiguous and they are not there to " catch out" .

Further, as a teacher, if this is the case, then I think they should have sent a round robin out. I havent been told this and it annoys me to see it written by students on a site like this. Especially so if it is true as it would seem then that some teachers have been given inside information and others not - which effectively means that they are still employing dodgy practices.

I trust they are not.

As for your comment vis the PY1. I thought that paper was fairly standard and the marking equally so. I can see no justification for your comments.


Rant over.

Who told you this? Or is it just your opinion? I agree that there was some controversy over the WJEC GCSE geography INSET where it seemed some examiners were giving answers ( I am not sure they actually said anything you couldnt work out actually).

Hopwever, I am concerned by what you say. I am going to write to the WJEC subject officer about this, because if what you suggest is true then I think the examination process could be considered unfair.

I am also very concerned because if (IFF) WJEC are doing this then they will be moving away from one of the basic precepts of their specification - that all questions will be clear and unambiguous and they are not there to " catch out" .

Further, as a teacher, if this is the case, then I think they should have sent a round robin out. I havent been told this and it annoys me to see it written by students on a site like this. Especially so if it is true as it would seem then that some teachers have been given inside information and others not - which effectively means that they are still employing dodgy practices.

I trust they are not.

As for your comment vis the PY1. I thought that paper was fairly standard and the marking equally so. I can see no justification for your comments.


Rant over.

Please help. What studies from aims and achievements are/did you guys going to reuse for Alt research?

Asch, Dull Gweithredu Welsh version:


Asch, Aims and Context, English version.

Please mark this honestly, and make sure everything's right because I don't know if it is.

Asch's experiment of conformity belongs to the Behaviourist approach, because it looks at how people conform (behaviour) and how different factors change the levels of conformity.

Asch was influenced by Jenness and Sherif Studies of conformity. Sherif asked his participants to estimate how many peas were in a jar. He grouped the participants to discuss the answer, and then asked them for individual estimate. He wanted to see how many of the grouped participants answered with the same results, to see if they 'conformed' with eachother. Asch judges this study, saying that in ambiguous situations people look to others for reasonable answers and so the study does not measure conformity.

Asch was also influenced by Sherif, who asked participants to measure the distance a spotlight moves from one spot to the other. Firstly, he got individual estimates and then put the participants into groups of 3 based on who their different results during the first set of estimates. They had the time to discuss the distance, and then had to individually estimate the distance moved again. Sherif found that the three participants all had simular results. Asch judged this study, saying that it shows how the group as a whole came to a decission and does not measure conformity.

He also judged both studies on the fact that the questions asked were so ambiguous, and so naturally the participants would look to others for answers.

Asch's aims was to measure conformity when the answers are completely obvious, compared to both studies where they were ambiguous. He wanted to see see how different factors for example the ammount in groups effected on conformity levels.

I dont think it is fair if they are as was suggested going to get " nasty" - that implies more than ensuring no one cuts corners.

I have left it to my students to decide whether they wish to recycle aims and context information into critically assess questions.
The examiners report makes it quite clear that this is acceptable and students are not disadvantaged for doing it.

I tend to teach students to present the aim of a study and then para " The background to this study comes from ..... name 2 pieces oif research and/ or evidence.

In the critically assess question, they start with the conclusions of the study and the write evidence that supports the study ( which can come from aims and context)

Then a paragraph which continues " however, ( or on the other hand) and cites evidence / studies which do not support the conclusions.

This tends to work. I have provided all my class with copies of model answers taken from past papers written by my ex students ( all top grade answers) . That is the way they revise.

We are currently running through aim and context/ critically assess questions for revision dealing with how to recycle information where possible as it can save on memory space.

Hope that helps.