IH8Revision
Badges: 0
#1
Report Thread starter 6 years ago
#1
The question to the coursework I got given is as:
"Critically evaluate the view that no one model of the offending behaviour of children and young people exclusively explains the problem"

My lecturer said if you list the models and then just state theories the max you will get is a 2.2

I'm confused into how I can get a 2.1, like what views would I have to critically evaluate?

If you had a question like this in your course, please explain how you answered to get a 2.1 or above
0
reply
iammichealjackson
Badges: 18
Rep:
?
#2
Report 6 years ago
#2
(Original post by IH8Revision)
The question to the coursework I got given is as:
"Critically evaluate the view that no one model of the offending behaviour of children and young people exclusively explains the problem"

My lecturer said if you list the models and then just state theories the max you will get is a 2.2

I'm confused into how I can get a 2.1, like what views would I have to critically evaluate?

If you had a question like this in your course, please explain how you answered to get a 2.1 or above
Hi. The main issue is that when you come from A level, your taught to list theories and list their limitations. To get a first, you need to make your essay into an argument where every paragraph builds on to an overall argument, which answers the question.

If your just listing models and stating theories, that isn't putting any thought into constructing an essay. You may aswell just copy and paste your notes into an essay.....
0
reply
IH8Revision
Badges: 0
#3
Report Thread starter 6 years ago
#3
(Original post by iammichealjackson)
Hi. The main issue is that when you come from A level, your taught to list theories and list their limitations. To get a first, you need to make your essay into an argument where every paragraph builds on to an overall argument, which answers the question.

If your just listing models and stating theories, that isn't putting any thought into constructing an essay. You may aswell just copy and paste your notes into an essay.....
so i would make an argument, show relevant evidence which support this and then make a counter argument?
0
reply
iammichealjackson
Badges: 18
Rep:
?
#4
Report 6 years ago
#4
(Original post by IH8Revision)
so i would make an argument, show relevant evidence which support this and then make a counter argument?
There are lots of ways you could structure it. If its a 1,500 word limit, then 3 paragraphs in support of a general argument would work. Sometimes you might want to devote a whole paragraph to a "counter-argument", however you shouldn't spend a whole paragraph just detailing an opposing theory.

In the case of this question, it depends what the mean by a "model". I don't think you can reasonably make the argument that one particular model (e.g. cognitive psychology) can explain youth offending. Statistically, this would entail that a model of youth offending (e.g. cognitive deficits in executive function or IQ) can fully predict youth offending, so that you have a perfect correlation (r=1).

You need to make a particular reasoned argument why it cannot be the case that a single model can fully explain youth offending. For example, there are multiple causes of youth offending located at different levels (social, cognitive, political).

Even logically, going back to Tinbergen's four questions about behaviour, (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tinberg...four_questions), are there many models of young offending that encompass explanations about how it DEVELOPS, what its CAUSES are? (maybe developmental cognitive psychology...)
0
reply
IH8Revision
Badges: 0
#5
Report Thread starter 6 years ago
#5
(Original post by iammichealjackson)
There are lots of ways you could structure it. If its a 1,500 word limit, then 3 paragraphs in support of a general argument would work. Sometimes you might want to devote a whole paragraph to a "counter-argument", however you shouldn't spend a whole paragraph just detailing an opposing theory.

In the case of this question, it depends what the mean by a "model". I don't think you can reasonably make the argument that one particular model (e.g. cognitive psychology) can explain youth offending. Statistically, this would entail that a model of youth offending (e.g. cognitive deficits in executive function or IQ) can fully predict youth offending, so that you have a perfect correlation (r=1).

You need to make a particular reasoned argument why it cannot be the case that a single model can fully explain youth offending. For example, there are multiple causes of youth offending located at different levels (social, cognitive, political).

Even logically, going back to Tinbergen's four questions about behaviour, (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tinberg...four_questions), are there many models of young offending that encompass explanations about how it DEVELOPS, what its CAUSES are? (maybe developmental cognitive psychology...)
Ahh I get you! The way you just explained it made alot more sense.

Thank you
0
reply
lawcrimstudent
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#6
Report 4 years ago
#6
Hi! I have the exact same question to answer for my coursework. How did you go about answering it and how did you do??
0
reply
IH8Revision
Badges: 0
#7
Report Thread starter 4 years ago
#7
(Original post by lawcrimstudent)
Hi! I have the exact same question to answer for my coursework. How did you go about answering it and how did you do??
Are you at NTU? Because I went to that uni.

I'm not currently on my laptop to see what I wrote and will reply when I'm on my laptop. But from memory I think I explained one model. And after I explained it I critiqued it by saying something "however this model states.." I followed that same structure throughout the question
0
reply
lawcrimstudent
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#8
Report 4 years ago
#8
(Original post by IH8Revision)
Are you at NTU? Because I went to that uni.

I'm not currently on my laptop to see what I wrote and will reply when I'm on my laptop. But from memory I think I explained one model. And after I explained it I critiqued it by saying something "however this model states.." I followed that same structure throughout the question
Yeah I am at NTU. I have written about the rational actor model and i am half way through the biological explanation however I feel that it is really long and I dont know which parts to talk about which are the most relevant! and obviously I still need to talk about the victimized actor model too.

Ive not even started attempting to link it all to the question properly! Do you have any tips? Did you just criticise everything and/or linked the models together in some way to show that not one explanation will stand alone?

Thank you for your help x
0
reply
IH8Revision
Badges: 0
#9
Report Thread starter 4 years ago
#9
(Original post by lawcrimstudent)
Yeah I am at NTU. I have written about the rational actor model and i am half way through the biological explanation however I feel that it is really long and I dont know which parts to talk about which are the most relevant! and obviously I still need to talk about the victimized actor model too.

Ive not even started attempting to link it all to the question properly! Do you have any tips? Did you just criticise everything and/or linked the models together in some way to show that not one explanation will stand alone?

Thank you for your help x
This might sound obvious but use Rodger! Once you have written up a plan on how to answer the question, show/tell him how you're going to answer it, as I did this to find out whether I am answering the question correctly. I also used his book, a lot, to structure my answer too

For Bio I wouldn't talk about everything. I talked about Bio chemical, Altered biological state and then talked about Drugs and alcohol intake.

I linked the models after I wrote about a model. So for example, after I wrote about the Rational Actor Model, I crticised it on saying stuff like how children, the poor-minded and the insane were treated as fully rational individuals etc and then said whether they have an similarities/differences. But towards the end I said how there is no one model as they take aspects of each model

If you are going to write about Psychological theories, keep this to a minimum and only pick out theories you think are relevant because again there's quite a lot to write about and you wont get much marks just stating the theories.

Hope this helps x
0
reply
lawcrimstudent
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#10
Report 4 years ago
#10
(Original post by IH8Revision)
This might sound obvious but use Rodger! Once you have written up a plan on how to answer the question, show/tell him how you're going to answer it, as I did this to find out whether I am answering the question correctly. I also used his book, a lot, to structure my answer too

For Bio I wouldn't talk about everything. I talked about Bio chemical, Altered biological state and then talked about Drugs and alcohol intake.

I linked the models after I wrote about a model. So for example, after I wrote about the Rational Actor Model, I crticised it on saying stuff like how children, the poor-minded and the insane were treated as fully rational individuals etc and then said whether they have an similarities/differences. But towards the end I said how there is no one model as they take aspects of each model

If you are going to write about Psychological theories, keep this to a minimum and only pick out theories you think are relevant because again there's quite a lot to write about and you wont get much marks just stating the theories.

Hope this helps x
Ahhh ive only just seen this but I havent made any more progress since I posted.

Thanks for your help, youve reassured me that I am on the right track as I have done as you've suggested so far. Are the psychological theories not as important then? I didnt actually attend the lecture so I dont know how much weight to give them/if any. I will crack back on with the essay soon now I know im going along the right lines!

Thank you once again x
0
reply
IH8Revision
Badges: 0
#11
Report Thread starter 4 years ago
#11
(Original post by lawcrimstudent)
Ahhh ive only just seen this but I havent made any more progress since I posted.

Thanks for your help, youve reassured me that I am on the right track as I have done as you've suggested so far. Are the psychological theories not as important then? I didnt actually attend the lecture so I dont know how much weight to give them/if any. I will crack back on with the essay soon now I know im going along the right lines!

Thank you once again x
For Psycho theories I used what was in his book. Like I just picked out the bits that I thought would be useful. I didn't go too much into detail with it. For example for The psychodynamic theory, behavourist and cognitive theorist, I just explained what it is and said whether any of the models use these aspects
0
reply
BrokenLife
Badges: 15
Rep:
?
#12
Report 4 years ago
#12
Do not describe, rather criticise. Use journals and other writers' views. Make sure you link back to the question at the end of every para. The main way to get a 2:1 is to basically be more evaluative and by evaluative, I mean most of your work should be criticising the points.
0
reply
Lord Samosa
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#13
Report 4 years ago
#13
Omd I actually took the time to write a reply to this until I saw it's an old thread :facepalm:

Here it is anyway

Spoiler:
Show
For a question like this, I would structure it like this;

-Introduction (brief introduction into the topic, and explain what you will be doing in this essay/the aim of this essay).

-Arguments for the statement (Go into detail into why, using your own analysis on the view backed by references) don't just repeat what the references say, evaluate them, and make it relevant to what you are talking about.

-Arguments against (same as above)

-Conclusion giving your view on the matter but acknowledging the opposing view.

I hope this makes sense, this is kinda what I did and it worked for me.
0
reply
BrokenLife
Badges: 15
Rep:
?
#14
Report 4 years ago
#14
(Original post by Lord Samosa)
Omd I actually took the time to write a reply to this until I saw it's an old thread :facepalm:

Here it is anyway
Spoiler:
Show
For a question like this, I would structure it like this;

-Introduction (brief introduction into the topic, and explain what you will be doing in this essay/the aim of this essay).

-Arguments for the statement (Go into detail into why, using your own analysis on the view backed by references) don't just repeat what the references say, evaluate them, and make it relevant to what you are talking about.

-Arguments against (same as above)

-Conclusion giving your view on the matter but acknowledging the opposing view.

I hope this makes sense, this is kinda what I did and it worked for me.
Loool I just realised.

If only I knew, if only.
0
reply
lawcrimstudent
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#15
Report 4 years ago
#15
(Original post by IH8Revision)
For Psycho theories I used what was in his book. Like I just picked out the bits that I thought would be useful. I didn't go too much into detail with it. For example for The psychodynamic theory, behavourist and cognitive theorist, I just explained what it is and said whether any of the models use these aspects
Okay cool. I will just pick a few bits out. I have decided to move onto the victimised actor model and then I will go back and add in the psychological approach when I shorten the essay down as I am already over the word count somehow!

I'm really struggling with the V.A.Model. I understand labelling theory but I'm so lost with basically everything else to do with it. I also cant really find much criticism.

Wish there was other texts to look at - I HATE roger's book!!
0
reply
Jenny_Schu
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#16
Report 4 years ago
#16
Hi IH8Revision,

You were asking about how to get a 2.1 in Psychology, what makes a good essay and also how to do critical analysis. I posted a link to a book called 'Psychology Essays' that I bought on Kindle which helped me (because I struggle with this as well, lol!) But the moderates declined it - don't know why.

Anyway, feel free to PM me if you want the details, presumably that's allowed.

Cheers,

Jen :-)
0
reply
X

Quick Reply

Attached files
Write a reply...
Reply
new posts
Back
to top
Latest
My Feed

See more of what you like on
The Student Room

You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

Personalise

Have you experienced financial difficulties as a student due to Covid-19?

Yes, I have really struggled financially (20)
13.16%
I have experienced some financial difficulties (42)
27.63%
I haven't experienced any financial difficulties and things have stayed the same (63)
41.45%
I have had better financial opportunities as a result of the pandemic (23)
15.13%
I've had another experience (let us know in the thread!) (4)
2.63%

Watched Threads

View All