As psychology helpWatch this thread
Example: 'Neuroscience findings need to be treated with caution' discuss the extend to which you agree with this statement
This is how I usually answer it
First topic on neuroscience- discuss for and against
Second topic- discuss for and against
Third topic- discuss for and against conclusion
when timing myself I go over 20 minutes when doing the 3 topics in detail, so I'm wondering if doing 2 topics would be enough to gain full marks?
Perhaps outline what topics these would be and then I/TSR can help you decide how much to write?
When writing I do:
-One paragraph highlighting the advantages of understanding consciousness, proving it as ethical
-One paragraph highlighting the disadvantages of understanding conscious, proving it as unethical
I use this format for two other topics such as-
-Treating criminal behaviour
-Improvement of marketing techniques
When doing one paragraph I try to add a reference, such as a case study/experiment/statement etc
Example of my format (simplified)- treating criminal behaviour against
-Treating criminal behaviour can be seen as unethical
-this is because many external factors such as neurological imbalances and social factors lead to criminal behaviour
-so neurological interventions may not be proven to be effective to all prisoners
-Martha Farah (2004) neurological intervention denies prisoners freedom
In the conclusion I write a general statement, my own opinion.
When answering a 20 mark question I try and aim for at least 2-3 pages
So ideally each of the paragraphs would be 1/4 of the page long w/ introduction and conclusion
Assuming a universal mark scheme gives points for a reference, a statement, backed up by detail, good vocabulary, well answered for each point. Would two topics be enough?
And also how much time are you expected to write for the introduction and conclusion? I feel like I spent too long doing each