OCR RS Exam Predictions 2023 PowerPoint
Вставка
- Опубліковано 12 тра 2023
- This power point goes through my predictions for the upcoming RS exams. For more information including how to approach these questions and to access the Teach Along go to the blog.
Thank you for these the last few weeks!!! i cant believe it is finally over!
You are very welcome ☺️ I'm pleased I was able to help.
Thank you so much for your videos they were a lifesaver during a levels especially the night before live streams!!
You are very welcome Daisy, I am pleased I was able to help ☺️
I don't know if you'll see this comment but thank you so much for all of your videos. I ended my a levels with an A in RE despite certain circumstances and I would never have been able to do it without your videos!! You are an amazing teacher and you made me fall in love with the subject. Now I get to do Philosophy at uni alongside languages because you helped me find something I'm extremely passionate about! THANK YOU! I am so grateful I came across your videos. They helped me find my future pathway!!! :)
That is wonderful to hear ☺️ Well done on your A and I hope your passion grows for Philosophy on your Uni course!
Hi, I’d just like to thank you for all your help over the last two years. Although I don’t know you personally, your topic videos have been a life-saver helping in my preparation for the a level. You are a great teacher and hope u continue this for other students :)
Thank you for your lovely message John, I am so pleased my videos helped 🥰
Hi, thank you so much for this! I was wondering, when answering the question "critically assess Aquinas' three ways", would we have to analyse each individual way, or just the cosmological argument as a whole?
I would evaluate each way individually to avoid over description. Link each one to your line of argument and evaluate them, this way you get more marks for A02 :)
Hi, for comparing a posteriori with a priori, would you just be comparing the teleological/cosmological with the ontological. Or is rher more to it?cheers
Yes that's what I would do. Don't forget to explore a posteriori (using senses) and a priori (using reason) on its own as a philosophical approach. You can then apply this to examples so teleo/cosmo to onto. Make sure you always focus on the approach to understanding rather than great depth on the arguments themselves. You could also do Plato vs Aristotle as well :)
hi if you had a question asking to evaluate the 4 working principles for example, would u recommend a paragraph based around each working principle with evaluation or would you recommend just evaluating them as a whole? thanks :)
If the question is specifically on the four I would split them up in order to have a full discussion and to plump out your evaluation link to the other areas of SE such as the 6/agape/conscience. Hope your revision is going well :)
Got my B in the end thanks to you! Convinced I had a C, thanks so much! Now at uni of Leeds which is where I wanted but didn’t think I would get in!
That is fantastic news!! Well done :) I hope you really enjoy Leeds Uni :)
hi thank you for this video really helpful - for the situation ethics question about the four working principles and the 6 propostions, is it necessary to explain every working principle in detail or can you just name them then evaulate them as a whole maybe picking out 1 or 2?
That would work well Miah, show the examiner that you have knowledge of them all but explore a selection in more detail esp to evaluate. You can also merge some of them as the 6 and 4 do overlap. Hope your revision is going really well :)
Hi Miss,
How would you structure the pluralism and society question about redemptoris missio.I was thinking I could maybe do a paragraph on the development of the inter faith society, a paragraph on redemptoris missio and a paragraph n the scriptural reasoning movement or would there be an easier way to do it?
Thanks
That would work well but if the question specifically mentions the text I would link any paragraph not on RM back to parts of the main text even if it is a small link. If it is in the question you need a vein through your essay (probably within your line of argument) that links to the text :)
For the meta ethics questions - Is it a good idea to do 1 paragraph on each of the three theories but obviously focus on the one in the title and how it compares to the others? Or do we need to focus only on the one in the title?
Either way would work well Casey, just make sure if they do ask for a specific area in the Q that your comparison, discussion and evaluation of the other topic or topics (you don't have to do all three) is specifically and directly used for/against the one asked in the question. You could just explore in full detail the one asked for but this would be quite tricky as there is not lots of content/discussion but if you do bring in another theory be clear to your line of argument why you are bringing it in and do not fall into the trap of over describing another theory. Hope that makes sense and your revision is going really well :)
Hi, I’m really confused about how you would go about answering the business ethics questions. For instance, for the CSR one how do you even have an ethical debate if it is asking the ways things are and not what they should be?
Great question. You would discuss business ethics so in this case the ethics of CSR and you could link in how it is met/not met using other themes in business too e.g globalisation. You can bring in K/U to develop your exploration further e.g how does duty apply to CSR and if this is useful to understanding it as long as the focus of your answer is always the theme in the Q and linked to your line of argument. Hope this makes sense and your revision is going really well :)
Got an A in RS all thanks to you!! Your videos have always been so helpful and informative, I appreciate it a lot!! 💗 I doubt you’ll see this but yeah :)
That's fantastic news, well done!! I'm so pleased my videos helped ☺️
hi, thankyou so much for your amazing videos! i was just wondering about questions that are generically about business ethics (e.g., the corporate social responsibility question), do you still apply ethical theories to these?
yes
I am really pleased you are finding them helpful :) If it is a generic question you can discuss the theories but only as an extension of your business points. Do not focus on them as a distraction from business only as an evaluative extension. You could answer a whole essay without them and still do extremely well. If the question is specific e.g CSR then it might be easier to link to theories but make sure you use them only in relation tot eh specific theme in the question :)
@@IThinkThereforeITeach Thankyou so much!
hi, how would u approach this question? i find it hard completely focusing on natural evil - there would be so much more to talk about if it was on moral evil instead. thanks in advance :)
''Critically assess the view that Hick’s reworking of the Irenaean theodicy gives some purpose to natural evil’’
Give examples of natural evil in your discussion, discuss the influence of Irenaues and you can still discuss image to likeness as this is still developed through natural evil. Hope this helps :)
@@IThinkThereforeITeach thanks so much
Thanks! Didn’t the PM V form of the good come up last year tho?
Aristole's PM came up last year but not as a comparison Q with Plato. Hope your exam goes really well :)
@@IThinkThereforeITeach ohhh ok thank you!
Do you mind briefly explaining how you made your predictions, and what do you think are the chances you are right? Many thanks
Thank you for your question. I make my predictions by going through all previous questions, putting them in topics then using the exam board specification work out all the areas that have not been asked before (because examiners are testing that the spec has been covered properly) and then look for the most obvious gaps I.e John Hick POE. So no more chance of getting them right than anyone else who looks at patterns and the exam board are known to put in curve balls to reduce predictability but I have always done my predictions this way with some success :)
@@IThinkThereforeITeach Thank you very much!
for the question "assess the logical fallacies in Aquinas' first 3 ways" is this asking assess the problems he presents in his first 3 ways, or the problems with his first 3 ways?
It means that problems with his first three ways as presented by Hume and other critics :)
Also is the question about materialist critiques of dualism essentially the same as the mind can be fully explained by physical interactions
Yes you could approach both questions in the same way :)
hi :)
i was wondering what you would do in a situation where you may forget ao2 evaluation points? are their any prompts that you recommend that could help?
thank you!
You can always do general strengths and weaknesses that enforce your line of argument, you don't need to use specific names if you forget them. There are same prompts on the blog (under the same name) that might help :)
@@IThinkThereforeITeach thank you so much :)
Hello, does nature of god and attributes come under the same topic e.g. augustine original sin and then something like anselms 4th dimentionalist approach + what topic does bonhoffer come under!! Thanks :)
Hi Larry, Bonhoeffer is in the last exam so don't need to focus on him yet. Nature of God or God's Attributes is the same topic. Augustine would either be problem of evil or DCT (last exam) too. Nature of God is Anselm, Boethius and Swinburne. I hope your exam goes well tomorrow :)
I wrote about Sartre and Ross’ conflict of duty in the question asking if Kant’s categorical imperatives are useful in moral decision making. Is that waffle?
That sounds very good :)
Hi thank you for this! For hicks reworking of Ireneus question could I talk about ireneus in the first paragraph evaluate then in the second bring hick and his reworking and the final para as Augustine to suggest that irensus and hick both fail?
That sounds so clever I juts literally spoke about Hick
But then again the focus is on Hick perhaps bring Augustine as an evaluation put not a whole paragraph before the focus is lost and I would also try being irenaues in briefly maybe at the intro instead of a paragraph ,do all paragraphs and evaluate
Make sure Hick is the focus in every paragraph as the Q is on him. I would avoid doing a whole paragraph on Irenaeus/Augustine but you could use them as part of your discussion of Hick. So first para on Hick but in your discussion say how he was influenced by Irenaues and developed it further. Always focus on the specific question throughout. Any extra names as great but have to be clearly and directly focused for or against Hick. Hope that makes sense :)
@@IThinkThereforeITeach yes it does thank you!!
the question 'should christian theology engage with secular atheist theologies' is on the spec under liberation theology and marx. If this comes up can you answer it in reference to feminism as well or just marxism
You could mention feminism as a synoptic link but the focus of the Q would be on Liberation Theology and its relationship to Marxism :)
For the religious experience question, what would the difference between psychological And physiological be? Thank you!
So psychological explanations would include things like wish fulfilment/neurosis (Freud) or Jung’s God archetype, due to the mind, whereas physiological involves biology-based explanations like temporal lobe epilepsy to account for Paul’s conversion, or starvation and isolation causing Teresa of Ávila’s visions.
Psychological is Freud and/or Feuerbach also William James. Physiological means the body so dehydration (St Paul) or illness (St Theresa) as explanations for their RE. Check out my teach along video on RE as this explains all these areas in more detail. Hope your revision is going really well 🙂
hey there, i was wondering if you could possibly interlink via negativa to 20th century? i was rushing and i put it in alongside signs and symbols, i answered the evaluate the verification principle question.
As long as it was linked back to verification and part of your line of argument, you can interlink the two RL topics. Hope your revision for ethics is going well :)
@@IThinkThereforeITeach brilliant, studying meta ethics right now and im enjoying it!
I’m basing my revision from this video. Fingers crossed :)))))
I hope my videos help and your revision goes really well :)
Me and you both atp
@@IThinkThereforeITeach it didddddd🎉🎉🎉🎉
If we get a poorer mark on one exam eg a C in Philosophy, but a B in Ehics and an A in Chstroanity for example, will we still get a good grade? The garde boundaries on the Ocr website five the marks for each paper which just confused me as if u must get a B in all papers to attain a B for example? Thanks!
Your grade is decided on the raw marks of each paper, so if you got a low mark on one question or paper it would even out. You do not need a B in all papers to get a B, your marks are added together for your overall result :)
hi, what would you say if you got a secularism question that was 'to what extent are spiritual values just human values?'? (i saw it on the specification but i would be unsure what to say)
It is asking about whether we learn anything more from Christian values (spiritual) or whether they are just human values. You could synoptically discuss topics such as Situation Ethics (spiritual vs human values), Liberation Theology or Christian values in general and argue whether they are more than just general human values. You could use Freud/Dawkins/humanist views to argue against Christian values and how we should focus on developing human values seperate to this and whether this is the right or wrong approach. Hope that makes sense :)
@@IThinkThereforeITeach Yes, that makes sense. Thankyou so much :)
Hi miss, just wondering what you mean by “the existence of evils does not justify the need to create a vale of soul making”- is it just saying that evil is justified in itself and it doesn’t need to have a purpose ? I’m confused
It's about John Hick's argument, it wants you to explore his views and whether natural evil as a test and moral evil to grow and mature into likeness is justified to develop our souls 'Vale of soul making' in this world. Hope that makes sense :)
please can i ask for the a level paper are you asked two questions from A1 and two questions from A2? Thank you
Hi Rose, great question. You could be any combination of questions. So you could for example get 1 Q from A1 and 3 Q from A2 or vice versa. Go over the past question papers on the OCR website and you will see how much variation there csn be :)
Hi miss could you briefly
explain what this question is asking “the logical fallacies in Aquinas first three ways cannot be overcome” and what do you mean logical fallacies
thank you ❤
Fallacies means a mistaken logic (for a better definition for your essay just Google it) so Hume argues that Aquinas makes fallacies in his arguments linking c/e to God to example. Your job would be to say whether Aquinas is correct (fallacies don't work) or whether he is not correct (fallacies presented by Hume and critics stand). Hope that makes sense :)
Hi so do u think that religious language won’t come up at all I hope it doesn’t tbh - also do u think grade boundaries do will be higher or lower than last years as they were told the topics before
I think you might get a RL Q especially via negativa or verification. Not sure about grade boundaries they are hard to predict, depends completely on how students perform in the exams :)
Are your predictions the first 4, the section saying possibilities. Or is it all 8?
It is very hard to make specific predications (you need to revise all the content to be safe) so the first 4 would be my choice but the other possibilities are also quite likely :)
hey, i was wondering in the exam are they allowed to ask a question on the same topic twice because i’ve been avoiding meta ethics
hey! they've never done it before, but it is possible. but i highly doubt it as exam boards like to try and cover more areas of the course rather than focus on one specifically
As the other comment highlights it is possible but has never been done before. Examiner's want to test students on a range of knowledge so it would be quite unfair to ask on the same topic such as meta ethics. However within the application topics you could get a question on Business Ethics and one on Kant, so you could use Kant in a business ethics too, thus talking about the same argument twice :)
Hi, how would you answer the business ethics questions? What information would you include and how would you structure it?
Hi, which business ethics Q? The ones that focus on specific business themes, rather than a theory? :)
@@IThinkThereforeITeach Thank you for replying! Specifically the question that you highlighted of CSR and hypocritical window dressing
You would discuss business ethics so in this case the ethics of CSR and you could link in how it is met/not met using other themes in business too e.g globalisation (is it just window dressing as in do businesses only do it to look good but dont practice it). You can bring in K/U to develop your exploration further e.g how does duty apply to CSR and if this is useful to understanding it as long as the focus of your answer is always the theme in the Q and linked to your line of argument. Hope this makes sense and your revision is going really well :)
@@IThinkThereforeITeach would it make sense to do one paragraph on Friedman, one paragraph on Adam Smith and one paragraph on Kant?
Whilst interweaving other points into discussion such as stake holders/shareholders responsibility etc. Check out the business teach along to help with this if needed :)
Hi Amy I’m basing my predictions off this video it’s a risk but I’ll take it how was your predictions last year
Least year was advanced infor they were told what was coming up
I got a few right :). My predictions are just more the gaps of what has not been asked before and I make questions for there. It is more to prepare students not to be surprised by any question. I hope your exam goes really well :)
It was advanced information but as there where still more than 4 topics to revise, predictions were still possible (just a smaller pool to choose from) :)
Hi, for the soul, body mind question, ‘the mind can be fully explained by physical or material interactions’, how would you actually approach this?
You would use Dawkins and Behaviourism against the dualist approach, with maybe some Aristotle as a compromise as he talks of the body and soul (dualism) but believes they need each other and cannot survive after death (materialism) :)
Thank you, but I’m not actually understanding what the question is really asking. When it says the mind can just be explained by physical interactions is this essentially pointing to the materialist/ monist viewpoint that mind and body are one and nothing beyond the physical exists (so like Aristotle’s idea). And if so is this question just basically evaluating the ideas of monism
If you only believe in physical or material you a materialist ...only the material exists. So the soul is not something seperate but only part of the material body. So not fully monist as monist just says one thing whereas Aristotle and Dawkins both have arguments for 'soul' but link to material. Hope this helps :)
@@IThinkThereforeITeach ok, thank you!
why are you worrying about it lol, philosophy paper has happened
Ethics Questions were as follow (approximately)
1. Situation ethics is individualistic and subjective discuss
2. How relevant is the Principle of sanctity of life when considering euthanasia (I think… I didn’t do that one)
3. Utilitarianism is the best approach to sexual ethics discuss
4. Are Kants categorical imperatives useful for moral decision making
Not exactly what I prepared for, the situation ethics question was quite a curveball I think and they repeated the utilitarianism question if I’m not wrong. But it went ok, I think
Thank you for this, yes I am surprised another specific euthanasia Q and the util/sex is surprising. Quite a specific paper bit hopefully manageable :)
i just had my philosophy exam, THANK YOU!
What were the questions?
@@kylefarrell5371
‘critically asses william james (religious experience)
‘natural evil has no purpose in the world’
‘descartes provides a chorent solution (can’t remember end but it’s dualism ofc)
‘evaluate the verification principle’
@@user-zi8si2cr4k Thank youuu :)
@@user-zi8si2cr4k descartes provides a coherent solution to the mind/soul and body problem
You are very welcome, I hope it went really well :)
Do you think the other topics for ethics are unlikely?
Within ethics any topic is possible through the application questions they ask, I just highlight obvious gaps to focus revision but you need to be prepared for all topics :)
Hi Miss, I believe Nature of God and 5 ethics topics are missing? What are the missing predictions? Thank you so much miss
Hi Hannah, I don't make predictions for every question just the ones I think are most likely. From the other ppt with the gaps (areas never been asked before) you could probably work out any other likely possibilities. Hope your revision is going well 🙂
@@IThinkThereforeITeach it isn’t unfortunately drowing in my other a levels
Just stager your revision for Philosphy, because the exams are over three weeks, focus on philosphy then move onto ethics. It is very challenging balancing all your revision but I am sure you are doing great 🙂
Surely they can’t ask a question on religious experience and problem of evil with hick because they both come under God and the World topic?
They could ask two questions on the same topic so they definitely could ask two questions from the same section :)
i have case studies for business ethics and euthanasia - what kind of case studies do you use for sex ethics
Research current events and examples in the news, including laws in other countries (is or is not legal) and statistics e.g suicide rate in homosexuals. This would provide content to explore :)
do you reckon gender and theology will come up?
Reuther came up last year so I doubt it but if it did, it might be a general Christianity is sexist, Daly or a compare :)
@@IThinkThereforeITeach oh okay, also how would you go about explaining michels foucault thought on ars erotica when talking about gender and power (science sexualis)
I have not studied Foucault in detail so could not help with the specific application of this, however it would work well if you have studied it as wider reading. I would avoid over complicating a Gender and Theo Q though but would work well as a quick synoptic link or to develop your evaluation further :)
Hi Miss, Is nature of God unlikely?
Hi Hannah, it is a possibility as are any of the topics. NoG featured on last year's paper so they could ask again but there are lots of areas not asked yet so thats what my predictions are based on :)
Hey Miss, I believe Nature of God focuses were missed out in the powerpoint? What could the focuses be?
i would be pleased with any of these questions tbf
Sounds like you are prepared! I hope your revision continues to go well :)
neeerrrddddddddd
Do you think the topic of Jesus will come up?
Person of Jesus is a popular topic area the examiner's like asking questions on but this means that nearly every area has already been asked. They could of course repeat a previous area/question but the only area that hasn't really been explored in the second year exam is divine vs human nature :)
Hi, is it likely that euthanasia will come up this year?
i’m praying euthanasia comes up it’s my favourite topic
Euthanasia was on last years exam but they have also never asked a SE question in the second year which could link to euthanasia. So it definitely could be brought in again but I don't think on its own (a theme within euthansia) I think it would be an application to SE :)