(Original post by y.yousef)
wow mate, seriously you are lucky you've got a 'structured' teacher.
Our teacher sits, and tells us to copy out of text book
so doing everything on my own...again....
that';s why i need big time help..or ele i'm gonna get U, and wont get in uni :/
'quotes'? what quotes
'assumptions'? wtff....i've never herd of this,....
3 main theories....in the 21 mark q??
Haha, it's nice but then I get stressy with my other subjects because they're not as formal!
We don't really do any textbook work, but don't beat yourself up.. anything is possible if you put your mind to it! Which university are you thinking of, and to study what? What grades?
On our A3 grids we have key terms just to spark pieces of information.
By Quotes we just mean like... famous things that a Sociologist may have said. For example, I remember W.I. Thomas for Interactionism said something like "When a situation is defined is real, it is real in its consequences". Karl Marx famously said religion was the "opium of the people" and that "workers of the world unite, you have nothing to lose but your chains". Examiners will like it if you shove a quote in, but obviously you don't need to!
Thennnn we usually have a box on History where we'd explain Marx's history. Or perhaps where Interactionism stemmed from. Or if it was Feminism then we'd talk about the three waves.
Key Assumptions we mention what the theory basically says. For Interactionism for example, we've got info about Blumer's 3 key assumptions.
Then we usually dedicate three boxes to theorists. For Interactionism, we'd mention Symbolic Interactionism (Mead - I/Me), Ethnomethodology (Garfinkel - Breaching Experiments), Dramaturgical Analogy (Goffman).
Then in the final box we'd AO2 it.
....then on the back we apply it to the other units - Family, Education, Religion and Crime. So for example, you can apply Interactionism to both Education and Crime because you can discuss Labelling Theory!
This is preparation for possible exam questions which require us to "Assess the contribution of <insert theory> to our understanding of society today". Some schools / colleges don't teach the methods section and just expect students to draw things from all parts of the course, but we're given set theories to mention for each one. Back on the old specification, there was a summary question which required you to do this, but now it's been changed slightly. It's the same kind of thing - just summing everything up and looking at how a theory in general is contributing to our understanding of society.
(Original post by RMW1994)
Ah thank god theres a thread for this,this is my last exam but the one i'm most nervous about! Managed to work out how many marks on this paper I need to get an A overall so feeling cool about it but would love to share revision notes and everything
Might need to start revision soon actually :/ Has anyone started studying the whole methodology stuff? like methods in context? If so,is it fairly straight forward and similar to the education bit with methods?
Hello! I remember you from January, haha!
I have an hour a week on Research Methods. It's fairly similar to the AS Research Methods but there's a couple more things that you should be aware of. Feminist Methodology is one thing, because it could be called upon during a 33 marker on Feminism too. Feminist Methodology is basically an unstructured interview because it allows the female to build a rapport with another female interviewer. Therefore, they're more likely to get more valid results. Another thing is relativism which I haven't looked at much yet, but I've got a hand-out to read on it!
There's a couple of other things too that I can't remember off the top of my head.
I think Research Methods is pretty good because if you're looking at it in the context of crime, there's not many things they can ask you about. For example, it's highly unlikely they'll ask you to discuss experiments in the context of crime. They're much more likely to ask about something like interviews or observations. A couple of us at my school are expecting the question to be Official Statistics in the context of crime - there hasn't been a question on Official Statistics yet and it's the perfect question to ask (you can say so much about how Official Crime Statistics are invalid)!!!
I do think we'd be able to do the Methods in Context question now and get some good marks. Just think if they ask a question on Official Statistics. Without even seeing the Item, we can say positivists like them, interpretivists don't. They lack elaboration, but they're good to look at trends over time. They're cheap for Sociologists but expensive for those who conduct them. They're usually representative but they're still invalid because not all crime is reported... police have priorities... etc.