Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    im gonna practice some essays now and then finnish my evening with some relaxing multiple choice questions to come in a better mood for tomorrow
    good luck to all of you. you will need it.

    haha... trying to push myself in a confident state ;-)
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    [QUOTE=amy123123]O
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by oliverschofield)
    42/50 with 30 mins to spare!!!!! How is that possible?? I'd love to be able to do that. That just over 1 minute per question. You must be some sort of superhuman.
    From two practise papers I scored 39/50 both times, and I used all the time available.
    I don't know what I was doing right, but something was working! I've always been quick with mental arithmetic and puzzles and similar kinds of things so that might be part of it, and I went through a phase when I was about 14-15 of sitting and doing internet puzzles and IQ tests daily so I suppose that's somewhat ingrained in me how you should go about reasoning an answer.

    I'm no genius though! And my common sense is miniscule. (I only discovered Unicorns were mythical when I was in year 10. Embarassment.)
    • Community Assistant
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    Community Assistant
    Is there anyone else out there who has basically not prepared at all? I'm going to do a couple of the practice papers tonight but aside from that I just haven't been thinking about the TSA at all.

    So, looking forward to failing tomorrow!
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by 09911041)
    im gonna practice some essays now and then finnish my evening with some relaxing multiple choice questions to come in a better mood for tomorrow
    good luck to all of you. you will need it.

    haha... trying to push myself in a confident state ;-)
    Judging by your previous scores, you'll probably just need to turn up and be fine

    On the bright side, in 16 hours time, this whole TSA nonsense will be over and done with
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    I'm applying from the US so I have no clue what the essay portion is supposed to look like. For standardized testing here, graders want very formulaic answers- intro, 2-3 body paragraphs (each with an example) and conclusion. Is structure as important on the TSA essay? If I discuss the issue critically and logically, is that enough or do I need "evidence" and examples as well? If I run out of time and don't write an official "conclusion" would that be a problem? thanks!
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Why is everyone panicing.... Im just about scrapping 60%:eek:
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by IsabelP)
    I'm applying from the US so I have no clue what the essay portion is supposed to look like. For standardized testing here, graders want very formulaic answers- intro, 2-3 body paragraphs (each with an example) and conclusion. Is structure as important on the TSA essay? If I discuss the issue critically and logically, is that enough or do I need "evidence" and examples as well? If I run out of time and don't write an official "conclusion" would that be a problem? thanks!
    That structure is exactly what you want. And yes, it's vital.

    I wouldn't necessarily be too set on examples. If you can think of some, then by all means put them in, but they aren't the be all and end all.

    On the conclusion point, I would recommend you definately get one in. It is better to sacrifice one of your argument points for the conclusion. If you get the 5 minute warning, you need to think about moving onto the conclusion.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    where can i get the flipping 2007 answers?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Here is one of my answers to section 2. What do people think? I will be grateful for any last minute advice.

    When, if ever, is forgiveness wrong?

    In answering the question, if and when is forgiveness wrong; one must weigh up the advantages and disadvantages of forgiveness. However, these consequences may be different for different parties. We need to decide if the effects that we are concerned with are the effects on the individual or the effects on other people and society.

    If one is only concerned with one's self, then forgiveness is always right, as it helps the individual to gain peace of mind and prevents and further negative consequences on that person. If the individual chose not to forgive; they would never be satisfied with their situation, because if they gained justice, it would be difficult to find peace of mind as they would never be sure if they had made the right decision. If they do not gain justice they will be forever seeking it.

    If one is concerned with effects of their decision on others, then forgiveness may not always be the best decision. For example, if one's family member had been murdered, then that person will seek justice in order to prevent any further murders. However, this decision may be less beneficial for that person.

    In my opinion, an individual should not be concerned with the effects on others of their decision to forgive. The effect on others should be prevented by a third party, e.g. police.

    Therefore, to conclude, I believe that forgiveness is always the right decision to make, because we have concluded that it is always the best decision for the individual and any external effects of the decision should be prevented by a third party.

    . . .

    I think the structure is okay, but the language I use is a bit crap. I can never find the right words when under pressure.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by oliverschofield)
    42/50 with 30 mins to spare!!!!! How is that possible?? I'd love to be able to do that. That just over 1 minute per question. You must be some sort of superhuman.
    From two practise papers I scored 39/50 both times, and I used all the time available.
    I've been finishing with about that amount of time to spare and getting between 39 and 45 on each one and I'm dumb as hell. I process things really quickly but I'm also way more likely to make stupid mistakes. I'm trying to take every question more slowly... got myself down to 15 minutes to spare but I really need to put more thought into each question so I don't throw easy answers away tomorrow :erm: 39 is a good mark and all you need is the time available It's if you ran out all the time, you'd have to worry.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:


    Bit stuck on this one guys. I got B but the answer is A. Just can't figure out why that's so. Anyone?
    Attached Images
     
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Heres my probably gash essay. Would really appreciate any criticism or feedback.

    “When if ever is forgiveness wrong?”
    Forgiveness can be defined as the rejection of wrongdoing, followed by the understanding and sympathy for the individual that committed such a wrongdoing.
    It is a broad question to address what is wrongdoing, for the purpose of this essay, absolute deontological approached will be assessed alongside a teleological Utilitarian approach. Principles such as stealing, murder, lying etc can be defined as inherently wrong under deontological systems, whereas anything indicretly non conducive to happiness is defined as immoral under a utilitarian approach.
    Forgiveness may clash with deontological systems. It can be argued that forgiving a murderer is undermining the perception that murder is wrong, thus I myself am acting immorally. Indeed forgiveness appears to accept the breaching of principles and is itself immoral. The only way forgiveness can be viewed a moral is to accept it as a deontological, ultimate principle. For instance Jesus teaching Christians the ultimate wisdom of forgiveness.
    Defining forgiveness as always immoral unless it is a moral principle is a weak foundation for its morality. A utilitarian approach can justify forgiveness more reliably and provide cases where it may be wrong. It may provide unhappiness to persuade a seriously upset victim to forgive his wrongdoer. It may appear often that under utilitarianism forgiveness is not justified. Using a direct quantitative analysis however shows that the unhappiness brought to surrounding family members of the vengeful victim totals a justification of forgiveness. It can be argued that in some specific cases it is still immoral to forgive as unhappiness comes about, for instance if the state forgave a public criminal, many people would be outraged and upset. However a qualitative utilitarian approach enables forgiveness to be universally justified. If we accept forgiveness as a higher happiness it is therefore justified as being better that not forgiving in all cases by the majority.
    In conclusion embracing forgiveness as an ultimate principle negates any instances it may be considered immoral. Embracing a qualitative utilitarian approach has a similar outcome. Therefore under these ethical systems forgiveness is always right and no instances can be found when it is considered wrong. However admittedly my conclusion is limited to the ethical systems I have assessed.

    I have justified qualitative utilitarianism through the “majority would accept” principle but haven’t used the same approach for the ultimate principles, is this a problem?
    My conclusion didn’t bother considering the quantitative utilitarian approach… I think this is a problem…
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by mcl)
    I've written one of the essays and would love for anyone to give me any feedback for improvements, tips etc

    'The freer the market, the freer the people'

    The free market functions without the intervention or with limited intervention and regulation by the state. The theories of supply and demand, competition and self-interest. Freedom can be either positive or negative. A freer market will enhance negative freedom as it leaves the individual at liberty to act at liberty to their wishes. A minimal state is advocated by Hobbes and Locke, believes in negative freedom. It will, however, erode positive freedom. This form of freedom was advocated by Marx and Rousseau as it aims to develop human nature for its own sake.

    If the market were freer there would be less government intervention in the form of regulation, subsidies, taxation and tariffs. Would this lead to people being freer? It would, in the sense of negative freedom, remove more restrictions on an individual and enhance their liberty. If, for example, a tariff imposed by the government were removed it would make individuals and businesses freer to trade with the other country or countries. It does, however, reduce positive freedom which classical liberals and the New Right say will create a 'nanny-state'. The Thatcher government of the 1980s privatised any state-owned industries such as coal, steal and the railways in order to increase competition. This made people freer by increasing their choice and mobility within in the market and by offering them the opportunity to compete.

    However, if the market were freer it could limit people's freedom. The market could be dominated by a monopoly that could dictate prices and wages and therefore limit the liberty of other's choice and ability to enter the market and compete. It restricts positive freedom which aims to enhance liberty through welfarism and economic intervention. A free market will not always make people freer as empirically proven. The Great Depression and Wall Street crash of 1929 shows how little state intervention from president Hoover's government eroded the liberty of the people. Citizens lost money in the banks which collapsed as they were not backed-up by the government - a form of intervention. When the economy went into steep decline many lost all their savings and their freedom to be economically active was capped. Likewise, the free marker may only make people freer for a certain time. The current economic crisis began in the sub-prime markets of the USA where people were free to get mortgages and loans that they otherwise wouldn't have been able to as they could not afford it. The government didn't regulate the actions of the banks and so when the housing market collapsed in 2008 people were actually left with little freedom. Their debts had mounted and they could not afford to pay them back and so the free market will not always make people freer in the long-run.
    In conclusion, a freer market may allow people to be freer from government intervention and regulation it may not allow those people who rely on welfarism to be freer. It is only if the free market which works by an invisible hand, coined by Adam Smith, doesn't act irresponsibly that it will enhance freedom. Otherwise, a freer market will in the long-run not make people any freer.



    Any help would be good
    thanks!!!
    hmm..you haven't by any chance seen tomorrow's exam...have you? :p:
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Clements-)


    Bit stuck on this one guys. I got B but the answer is A. Just can't figure out why that's so. Anyone?
    could you please attach that exam paper (and mark scheme) ?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    I give up!!
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Just written a quick answer to one of the titles. Would really appreciate any feedback as I am beginning to panic! lol

    In order to be a successful leader, is it better to be loved or feared?

    The answer to this question would depend on the definition of what constitutes a successful leader. In order to lead successfully you require 2 things: support from those being led and efficiency in your act of leading. If applying the title to leaders of countries I suggest a prosperous nation is another indication of a successful leader.

    If a leader is supported by the electorate, he is by definition pleasing the majority. He is able to remain in power, carry out the measures he wishes with the knowledge he has the peoples backing. A feared leader has guaranteed support. For the purpose of determining his success, the reasons for that support are irrelevant, merely the fact that it is ensured. A loved leader probably does have the support of most people but he cannot force that to remain nor can he ensure dissidents are converted. So if we consider having the support of the public a prerequisite of being a successful leader it is patently better to have this guaranteed (being feared) than it be probable (being loved).

    Efficiency is another measure I would use to determine the success of leadership. A feared leader has no opposition, as established previously, and therefore all of his instructions are carried out without question – speeding up the time in which they are done. This can be very important at times of uncertainty. Without the Stalinist regime of terror in the 1920s, industrialisation of the USSR may not have happened at anywhere near the rate of efficiency as it did – having potentially catastrophic effects on their preparation and thus the outcome of WWII. If a leader is loved there is always room for his actions to be questioned – as love is voluntary. This accountability can slow decisions down, ergo it is impossible for a loved leader to compete with a feared leader’s efficiency.

    One more way to judge a political leader’s success is the prosperity of the nation. Efficiency and support of the public are key factors in creating a prosperous nation. The totalitarian regimes of the 20th century serve as examples to prove feared leaders have a better chance of creating a strong military and through their stringent control: a strong economy. Hitler rejuvenated German industry, brought back the military, improved unemployment and even improved personal wealth and living conditions. Whilst back in the UK we had Baldwin and Chamberlain overseeing the general strike, worsening class divisions and the latter making a pitiful attempt to appease the steam train that was Adolf Hitler. When a leader is feared he is in complete control, with everyone ‘pushing in the same direction’ a prosperous nation is more likely.

    The areas of judgement I have focused on are those which I believe to be the most common amongst people’s evaluation of previous political leaders and how successful they have been. Of course it completely depends on what is being led (e.g. a teacher leading a class) and what qualities those being led value the most but for the purpose of this essay I have applied it largely to the leaders of nations. Hitler was undoubtedly a racist murderer but I reject that these elements of his leadership should determine whether he was successful or not. When compared to his counterparts at the time, one thing was undeniable, the man got things done! It is the fact that gaining the support of the public, running an efficient leadership and creating a prosperous nation can be achieved much more easily and are much more likely under a feared leader which leads m to sya it is better to be feared than be loved.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by amy123123)
    could you please attach that exam paper (and mark scheme) ?
    http://www.xtremepapers.net/CIE/Inte...4_w08_qp_1.pdf

    http://www.xtremepapers.net/CIE/Inte...4_w08_ms_1.pdf
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Clements-)


    Bit stuck on this one guys. I got B but the answer is A. Just can't figure out why that's so. Anyone?
    Well she wanted to buy 15 pens at $2 each, so that'd be $30 in total on pens.
    However, she ended up buying 15 boxes of pens, at $18 each, so that'd be $270 on pens.
    She spent $380 over all, $270 of which was on pens.
    She therefore spent $110 on other items. (380 - 270)
    If we add $30 to this $110, we get $140, which is what she originally intended to pay.
    She however, spent $380, but with the 10% deduction, she paid $342 (380 x 0.9)
    $342 - $140 = $202
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Just done the 2008 practice - full marks xD. Some of the questions posted on here have been much harder than anything on either of the tests on the website. I got a few wrong on the specimen paper I did last week but they were due to not understanding the question rather than flaws in my reasoning. Before that though, I tried two questions someone posted on here and got them both completely wrong after spending ages on them (well, relative to the time I spent on each of the actual questions).

    Not looking forward to the essay part... Not sure what to expect for psychology.
 
 
 
  • 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.

  • Poll
    Brussels sprouts
  • 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.

  • The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

    Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

    Quick reply
    Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.