BMAT 2021 Essays marking thread

Watch this thread
This discussion is closed.
ecolier
Badges: 22
Rep:
? You'll earn badges for being active around the site. Rep gems come when your posts are rated by other community members.
#1
Report Thread starter 2 years ago
#1
This thread is for BMAT Essays only. For general BMAT discussion please go to https://www.thestudentroom.co.uk/sho....php?t=6282050

Section 3 (Written Task) - 1 Essay (Choice of 3), 30 Minutes
Question Types: Topical Medical Issues, Medical Ethics, Medical Philosophy, Veterinary Medicine

A) Address all parts of the question - Each question normally has three or four parts. Regardless of how good your essay is, if you do not address all parts of the question, your essay will be capped at 3/3.5 as per the Section 3 Official Marking Criteria.

B) Plan - With 30 minutes, and one A4 sheet provided, this section is the least time restricted. Essays which score highest are those which are well structured and address all parts of the question, bringing in additional topical examples and knowledge.

General TSR rules:
(1) Please don't ask for or post group chat links.
(2) Please don't ask for or post interview questions.
(3) Please don't offer to buy and sell items.
(4) Please don't double post!

Good luck!
Last edited by ecolier; 1 year ago
0
Yazomi
Badges: 21
Rep:
? You'll earn badges for being active around the site. Rep gems come when your posts are rated by other community members.
#2
Report 2 years ago
#2
Could someone possibly help mark this for me please, and criticism would be appreciated since it’s the first time I’ve written an essay since gcse


"Abortion should not be a crime"
Argue for and against this point (I saw the title but forgot the points given underneath so I kind of made it up)


The devastating choice of abortion to be put in women's head must have a logical reason behind it. Whether it is due to financial, crime or medical issues, most likely it is a last resort.

For a child to be born during a financial crisis would lead to overwhelming stress to the mother as well as the child. The child may grow up malnourished without the right to education; which inducing a greater motivation towards committing crime since they are at a disadvantage in comparison to the rest of society. This is only one of the many negative pathways the child could walk on as a cause of abortion being illegal. Alternatively, if giving birth would result the death of the woman due to health problems, should abortion still be a crime? A crime to not have the choice between life for the woman but giving the essence of life for a child without a mother?

On the other hand, murder is a crime. In some religion, they believe life has been created once the sperm and fertilised the egg therefore, in their perspective, the removal of even the embryo would be equivalent of murder. Since there are no scientific measures of when a baby is actually born, this draws a foggy line as to when they should be viewed as an alive human being or still a bundle of cells.

Overall, women should have the freedom to abort the child since in the end, the body belongs to her. In addition, under most circumstances, one would avoid such actions because they fear regret will consume them or their love for the child is genuine so leaving an escape route for the rare occasions, I believe, will be greatly appreciated.




I tried to use a variety of phrases but i realised i seem to have a sequence of stating, using the phrase 'would' and the extending it with because/due to/since. Would this make my essay seem overly structured or its fine?
Thank you for any help tho!
0
Chatnada
Badges: 3
Rep:
? You'll earn badges for being active around the site. Rep gems come when your posts are rated by other community members.
#3
Report 2 years ago
#3
Individual freedom and the rule of law are mutually incompatible.
Write a unified essay in which you address the following:
What might be the grounds for making this assertion? Give a reasoned argument against the
proposition. How can the concepts of freedom and law be reconciled in a real society?

People use individual freedom to express their feelings, however, in society, there must be the rule of law to limit the freedom. In some situations, freedom and law can mutually be incompatible.

There are many reasons to show that individual freedom and the rule of law are compatible. In society, we need a law to control the freedom of action which might harm the society, such as crime and fighting. The rule of law is related to every community in our daily life, such as school, sport, and work, especially at home. At school, we have rules which everyone must follow, also at work, they set their own conditions to control their worker’s action. Even in the house, we must follow the rules of the house to live together peacefully, so we can’t unaccept that the rule of law is always in society. Moreover, occurring together with the rule of law and individual freedom gives us the space to express our beliefs, and it reduces the racist. Nowadays, our community cares about freedom as much as law, so we are more open to the differences of other people. Nevertheless, in some countries like North Korea, people can't express their actions as they want, and they must strictly follow the law. This would contrast with human rights as it is unfair for a human to be forced to do things they wouldn't want to.

To sum up, freedom should come together with the law to limit the actions. However, people have the right to express their feelings, so it should be balanced as the action would not contrast to the legal law.
0
Ahmad Parmar
Badges: 3
Rep:
? You'll earn badges for being active around the site. Rep gems come when your posts are rated by other community members.
#4
Report 2 years ago
#4
How do you go about answering section 3 in the BMAT exam?
0
Hidbid200
Badges: 7
Rep:
? You'll earn badges for being active around the site. Rep gems come when your posts are rated by other community members.
#5
Report 1 year ago
#5
(Original post by Yazomi)
Could someone possibly help mark this for me please, and criticism would be appreciated since it’s the first time I’ve written an essay since gcse


"Abortion should not be a crime"
Argue for and against this point (I saw the title but forgot the points given underneath so I kind of made it up)


The devastating choice of abortion to be put in women's head must have a logical reason behind it. Whether it is due to financial, crime or medical issues, most likely it is a last resort.

For a child to be born during a financial crisis would lead to overwhelming stress to the mother as well as the child. The child may grow up malnourished without the right to education; which inducing a greater motivation towards committing crime since they are at a disadvantage in comparison to the rest of society. This is only one of the many negative pathways the child could walk on as a cause of abortion being illegal. Alternatively, if giving birth would result the death of the woman due to health problems, should abortion still be a crime? A crime to not have the choice between life for the woman but giving the essence of life for a child without a mother?

On the other hand, murder is a crime. In some religion, they believe life has been created once the sperm and fertilised the egg therefore, in their perspective, the removal of even the embryo would be equivalent of murder. Since there are no scientific measures of when a baby is actually born, this draws a foggy line as to when they should be viewed as an alive human being or still a bundle of cells.

Overall, women should have the freedom to abort the child since in the end, the body belongs to her. In addition, under most circumstances, one would avoid such actions because they fear regret will consume them or their love for the child is genuine so leaving an escape route for the rare occasions, I believe, will be greatly appreciated.




I tried to use a variety of phrases but i realised i seem to have a sequence of stating, using the phrase 'would' and the extending it with because/due to/since. Would this make my essay seem overly structured or its fine?
Thank you for any help tho!
I reckon this would get a 4A. Only comment is that you dont need that introduction - waste of time writing it. I used to do 1 sentence introductions and then go straight into the FOR and AGAINST points before a conclusion where you show which side you are on (whilst considering both). Hope that helps!!
1
dc8003
Badges: 5
Rep:
? You'll earn badges for being active around the site. Rep gems come when your posts are rated by other community members.
#6
Report 1 year ago
#6
This is my first attempt at a BMAT essay, just to gauge where I am. Would be grateful if anyone is willing to give it a rough mark.

The Prompt (from a 2014 pp):
There is no such thing as dangerous speech; it is up to people to choose how they react. Explain the reasoning behind this statement. Argue to the contrary that there can be instances of dangerous speech. To what extent should a society put limitations on speech or text that it considers threatening?

The statement proposes that dangerous speech does not exist, but is rather categorised as dangerous due to the reactions is receives. It states that the description of dangerous is falsely attributed to the speech rather than the listeners. In our current climate, in the rise of reported ‘hate speech’ which is deemed dangerous, there is varying opinions on the statement, and I aim to present them to you.

‘Every reaction has an equal and opposite reaction’. If we ascribe one of Newton’s Laws to this argument, it can be perceived that the statement is false. Using Newton’s principle, the logic in context of the statement, is that if the reaction of the people is dangerous, so must the speech be. It determines that the reaction of the people is a direct consequence of the speech and that choice holds no prevalence. The reaction is equal in terms of nature (both the reaction and speech are dangerous) and opposite in terms of the intended audience (a speech is to people, and the reaction is to the speech and those who possibly agree/disagree with it). This means that speech can be dangerous. An example of dangerous speech is indoctrination to minors. In this case choice again holds no prevalence, because those who hear the speech are malleable. In WW2 Hitler implemented youth programs, targeted at young children who are impressionable. Their programs aimed to teach children dangerous beliefs, and resulted in a generation of radical children, steadfast in their dangerous beliefs.

On the other hand, one could agree with the statement, because as humans we are only in control of ourselves. This principle can largely be seen in most religions, as they all commonly promote pacifist views. For example, Jesus told his followers to turn their other cheek in offering to those who hit them. This serves as a metaphor to suggest that if someone attacks you, whether mentally, physically or verbally, retaliation should never be sought. This sentiment agrees with the statement, because it proposes we as humans have the power to render dangerous speech powerless, through our choice to resist dangerous reactions.

Society should not limit speech or text that is threatening, because it would be a violation of the right to free speech. In such debates, we ought to remember that freedom of expression does not equate to freedom of consequence. If limitations were imposed on speech and text, there would also have to be discussions on what is deemed acceptable to say, which is a subjective argument and thus futile. Limiting expression will not change people's minds and to progress as a society, the aim should be to encourage fruitful and respectful discussions rather than censoring and limiting the expression of opinions we do not agree with.
0
username5352678
Badges: 15
Rep:
? You'll earn badges for being active around the site. Rep gems come when your posts are rated by other community members.
#7
Report 1 year ago
#7
I suppose it will be easier now in terms of time, but idk about length, unless they give us a specific size text?
0
becausethenight
Badges: 19
Rep:
? You'll earn badges for being active around the site. Rep gems come when your posts are rated by other community members.
#8
Report 1 year ago
#8
It's not clear - maybe typed? (they can impose a word limit, in some ways it's an advantage as you're not impeded by handwriting size and can practice touch typing?)
0
simonmorrish
Badges: 11
Rep:
? You'll earn badges for being active around the site. Rep gems come when your posts are rated by other community members.
#9
Report 1 year ago
#9
(Original post by Hidbid200)
I reckon this would get a 4A. Only comment is that you dont need that introduction - waste of time writing it. I used to do 1 sentence introductions and then go straight into the FOR and AGAINST points before a conclusion where you show which side you are on (whilst considering both). Hope that helps!!
Hi. Sorry, but I think this is certainly not a 4A. I don't want you to have a false sense of confidence - you're going to need to work on this.

You have missed/forgotten and therefore not addressed the three points under the essay title, and therefore your numerical score is limited to 2.5 max. Additionally, your points do not flow very well, and some are unsound - for example to claim there is no scientific measure of when a baby is born is clearly nonsense. Unfortunately your grammar is also unsound in many places, starting from the first sentence. I would estimate a 2B.

I recommend that you try to get hold of some guidance and example essays from one of the various books and web sites that are available. The good news is that you can improve rapidly with practice. Good luck!
0
simonmorrish
Badges: 11
Rep:
? You'll earn badges for being active around the site. Rep gems come when your posts are rated by other community members.
#10
Report 1 year ago
#10
(Original post by dc8003)
This is my first attempt at a BMAT essay, just to gauge where I am. Would be grateful if anyone is willing to give it a rough mark.

The Prompt (from a 2014 pp):
There is no such thing as dangerous speech; it is up to people to choose how they react. Explain the reasoning behind this statement. Argue to the contrary that there can be instances of dangerous speech. To what extent should a society put limitations on speech or text that it considers threatening?

The statement proposes that dangerous speech does not exist, but is rather categorised as dangerous due to the reactions is receives. It states that the description of dangerous is falsely attributed to the speech rather than the listeners. In our current climate, in the rise of reported ‘hate speech’ which is deemed dangerous, there is varying opinions on the statement, and I aim to present them to you.

‘Every reaction has an equal and opposite reaction’. If we ascribe one of Newton’s Laws to this argument, it can be perceived that the statement is false. Using Newton’s principle, the logic in context of the statement, is that if the reaction of the people is dangerous, so must the speech be. It determines that the reaction of the people is a direct consequence of the speech and that choice holds no prevalence. The reaction is equal in terms of nature (both the reaction and speech are dangerous) and opposite in terms of the intended audience (a speech is to people, and the reaction is to the speech and those who possibly agree/disagree with it). This means that speech can be dangerous. An example of dangerous speech is indoctrination to minors. In this case choice again holds no prevalence, because those who hear the speech are malleable. In WW2 Hitler implemented youth programs, targeted at young children who are impressionable. Their programs aimed to teach children dangerous beliefs, and resulted in a generation of radical children, steadfast in their dangerous beliefs.

On the other hand, one could agree with the statement, because as humans we are only in control of ourselves. This principle can largely be seen in most religions, as they all commonly promote pacifist views. For example, Jesus told his followers to turn their other cheek in offering to those who hit them. This serves as a metaphor to suggest that if someone attacks you, whether mentally, physically or verbally, retaliation should never be sought. This sentiment agrees with the statement, because it proposes we as humans have the power to render dangerous speech powerless, through our choice to resist dangerous reactions.

Society should not limit speech or text that is threatening, because it would be a violation of the right to free speech. In such debates, we ought to remember that freedom of expression does not equate to freedom of consequence. If limitations were imposed on speech and text, there would also have to be discussions on what is deemed acceptable to say, which is a subjective argument and thus futile. Limiting expression will not change people's minds and to progress as a society, the aim should be to encourage fruitful and respectful discussions rather than censoring and limiting the expression of opinions we do not agree with.
Spelling and grammar is fine, so A. Covers all aspects of the question, so >= 3. Introduction strong. In the second para, the analogy using Newton, though innovative, is not clearly relevant and is somewhat strained. The discussion of direct consequence and example of the Hitler youth is a strong point. The third para is arguing for the statement, which is not the set task, so adds little; though the first and last sentences could be regarded as "explaining the reasoning behind the statement". The conclusion is interesting and thoughtful, but your answer to the "to what extent" question seems to be "not at all"; while this is a valid view, you haven't addressed why you have disregarded your strong arguments in your second paragraph. I think it would get a 3.5A. With more arguments against the statement and a conclusion that follows on logically from those, you could increase your score, perhaps to 4.5A.
2
dc8003
Badges: 5
Rep:
? You'll earn badges for being active around the site. Rep gems come when your posts are rated by other community members.
#11
Report 1 year ago
#11
(Original post by simonmorrish)
Spelling and grammar is fine, so A. Covers all aspects of the question, so >= 3. Introduction strong. In the second para, the analogy using Newton, though innovative, is not clearly relevant and is somewhat strained. The discussion of direct consequence and example of the Hitler youth is a strong point. The third para is arguing for the statement, which is not the set task, so adds little; though the first and last sentences could be regarded as "explaining the reasoning behind the statement". The conclusion is interesting and thoughtful, but your answer to the "to what extent" question seems to be "not at all"; while this is a valid view, you haven't addressed why you have disregarded your strong arguments in your second paragraph. I think it would get a 3.5A. With more arguments against the statement and a conclusion that follows on logically from those, you could increase your score, perhaps to 4.5A.
Thank you so much!!
1
Arthur95
Badges: 13
Rep:
? You'll earn badges for being active around the site. Rep gems come when your posts are rated by other community members.
#12
Report 1 year ago
#12
Guys, any advice to improve my writing to get high mark in essay section??
Like what do I need to score 5 or 6 ?
0
xsowmix
Badges: 18
Rep:
? You'll earn badges for being active around the site. Rep gems come when your posts are rated by other community members.
#13
Report 1 year ago
#13
(Original post by Arthur95)
Guys, any advice to improve my writing to get high mark in essay section??
Like what do I need to score 5 or 6 ?
I'm not very good at essay writing but just want to let you know that section is marked out of 5
3
Arthur95
Badges: 13
Rep:
? You'll earn badges for being active around the site. Rep gems come when your posts are rated by other community members.
#14
Report 1 year ago
#14
(Original post by xsowmix)
I'm not very good at essay writing but just want to let you know that section is marked out of 5
Whatever,
Anyway is there any tip that I can use it to improve my writing to get high mark in that section??!
0
becausethenight
Badges: 19
Rep:
? You'll earn badges for being active around the site. Rep gems come when your posts are rated by other community members.
#15
Report 1 year ago
#15
(Original post by Arthur95)
Guys, any advice to improve my writing to get high mark in essay section??
Like what do I need to score 5 or 6 ?
...well, you probably need to know how it's scored to assess if your score is 'high'

Main advice is answer all of the question so that you can access 2.5+ scores. I would also suggest reading some philosophy (a very brief introductions, Philosophy Now, something by Singer or Glover if you want a book) to get a sense of how to write logically and argumentatively as it's quite different from, say, English essays or newspaper articles. TMP also has some tips here https://www.themedicportal.com/blog/...mat-section-3/

Then it's just practice! Make sure you have someone you trust to read and assess your essays or talk through arguments with.
1
username5352678
Badges: 15
Rep:
? You'll earn badges for being active around the site. Rep gems come when your posts are rated by other community members.
#16
Report 1 year ago
#16
Not sure if anyone else know this but we can use pen and paper for workings out in BMAT this year and word limit for BMAT section 3 is 550 words
https://support.admissionstesting.or...s/360048909072
5
Mephistopheles07
Badges: 8
Rep:
? You'll earn badges for being active around the site. Rep gems come when your posts are rated by other community members.
#17
Report 1 year ago
#17
Does anyone know how we’ll be going about typing the essay on the computer? Is it the same as the past years (about 3/4ths of an A4) and if so, considering that the font will be automatically assigned, how should we practice?
0
username5352678
Badges: 15
Rep:
? You'll earn badges for being active around the site. Rep gems come when your posts are rated by other community members.
#18
Report 1 year ago
#18
(Original post by Mephistopheles07)
Does anyone know how we’ll be going about typing the essay on the computer? Is it the same as the past years (about 3/4ths of an A4) and if so, considering that the font will be automatically assigned, how should we practice?
550 word limit
0
Mephistopheles07
Badges: 8
Rep:
? You'll earn badges for being active around the site. Rep gems come when your posts are rated by other community members.
#19
Report 1 year ago
#19
(Original post by Medi-cry)
550 word limit
Thank you for your reply, where was this information? I cannot find out anything about the new computerised format from the website
0
Coolperson123
Badges: 6
Rep:
? You'll earn badges for being active around the site. Rep gems come when your posts are rated by other community members.
#20
Report 1 year ago
#20
(Original post by aspireddentist)
Thanks for your reply!
Yeah same I feel that it would be just a normal word doc to type hopefully.
Really like BMAT compared to UCAT and is so good that they removed the lengthy questions from section 1.
They say S3 will be 550 words
0
X
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

Has advance information helped during your exams?

Yes (1)
50%
No (0)
0%
I didn't use it to prepare (1)
50%

Watched Threads

View All