GCSE RELIGIOUS STUDIES A

Transcription

1 GCSE RELIGIOUS STUDIES A A7 / Philosophy of Religion Report on the Examination 4050 June 2014 Version: 1.0

2 Further copies of this Report are available from aqa.org.uk Copyright 2014 AQA and its licensors. All rights reserved. AQA retains the copyright on all its publications. However, registered schools/colleges for AQA are permitted to copy material from this booklet for their own internal use, with the following important exception: AQA cannot give permission to schools/colleges to photocopy any material that is acknowledged to a third party even for internal use within the centre.

3 General comments There were many really impressive answers from this year s cohort. The most able students showed great understanding of the topics for study and evaluated different ideas effectively. Pleasingly, less able students showed good understanding of certain topics. Weaknesses in these students responses tended to be in specific topic areas rather than uniformly across all areas of the specification. The biggest area of concern was that many students answered AO1 questions as if they were AO2 questions, ie they automatically included evaluations, thereby including material that was irrelevant and couldn t be credited, regardless of its accuracy. There is evidence that some students struggled to complete the paper in the time allotted. If might help students to work to the guideline of one minute per mark. Alternatively, students could allocate 30 minutes to the completion of Part B and allow 15 minutes for the completion of each of the other sections. It was notable that some of those who had failed to complete the paper had written extended responses to the short answer questions and / or re-written the question at the start of their answers. Neither approach is an effective use of time. Indeed, where students extended responses beyond the line allocation, they did so having already achieved the maximum marks available. It would be helpful if schools could remind students that: answers should not be written in the spaces reserved for other questions all answers to Part B questions should be written on the lined pages at the end of the answer book extra pages should only be used if a student runs out of space because, for example, their writing is large. Part A Question A1 The Problem with Evil Nearly all the students gave a correct answer to Question A1(a), though some provided far more than was needed for a 1-mark question. While a small number of students confused the ideas of natural and moral evil, the main problem for those who failed to gain the mark was that they merely repeated the words of the question. For example, an act that is morally wrong gives no indication that the student understands the idea of moral, so it cannot be credited. Most students included some element of the inconsistent triad in their answer to Question A1(b), with quite a number referring to it by that name. For full marks there needed to be some development, but most students raised the issue of God having created humans knowing that they would err and what this reflects about his omniscience. The majority of the students used the technical term here, though there was no expectation that they should do so. The question was focussed on God s nature rather than God s existence, so some students penalised themselves by not reading the question carefully. Question A1(c) allowed for many approaches to be credited. Many students made reference to works of charity, using examples from different religious backgrounds. Some made reference to psychological responses, either rejecting God or seeing the suffering as an opportunity for personal development. While this question was open to being developed extensively, especially with the use of examples, most students restrained themselves and produced the right depth and length of answer to enable them to gain the full marks. Most students showed good understanding in Question A1(d) of the idea of karma, though there were some who neglected to examine karma as an explanation for the existence of evil. There 3 of 7

4 were some very impressive answers that showed how karma could explain the on-going role of evil but it could not explain the origin of evil. Most students included another explanation of evil, with many correctly citing the Fall in Genesis as one possible explanation of the existence of evil. Some students gave many different approaches but failed to compare them in the light of the question, treating this as an AO1 question rather than an AO2, so their marks were not as high as they might have been. Question A2 The Afterlife The idea of reincarnation was understood fairly well in Question A2(a). Those who made clear reference to the effects of karma on reincarnation gained both marks. Some of the definitions might have equally applied to resuscitation, for example the person comes back in their body. Students need to make it quite clear that they know the difference between reincarnation, resurrection and resuscitation. Credit in Question A2(b) came from an understanding of how the beliefs affect the way in which people lead the present life. Those students who merely explained what heaven is failed to answer the question. However, credit was given to those who showed how the desire to gain to the perfection of heaven can affect people s actions, bringing out the link between belief and action. Those who included the desire to avoid hell as the counterpart to wanting to gain heaven were also credited. The evaluation question (A2(c)) was that answered most without reference to religion. Such responses could not gain more than 3 marks. A number of students gave detailed accounts of near death experiences, particularly of Pam Reynolds, but failed to link the material fully to the question. Those who referred to the resurrection of Jesus and the teachings of the Bible and the Qur an clearly included religious ideas and found it easy to address the question, even when they dismissed the accuracy of this material. Question A3 Revelation and Enlightenment Some students found it difficult to address Question A3(a) fully. Those who referred to the belief in the divine origin of sacred texts, and therefore the ability of these documents to inspire and speak to the believer, tended to gain full marks. However, a number of responses dealt with either the divine origin without reference to their revelatory quality or tried to show how people could be inspired without referring to them being seen as the word of the deity, which meant that these answers were vague. There were many full answers presented to Question A3(b). Those who referred to God as the creator found it easy to complete the answer by reference to God showing his qualities in what God had created. Students who focused on nature giving examples of power did not explain how this might relate to God and the believer so they failed to access high marks. In Question A3(c), students who made reference to the enlightenment of Siddhartha Gautama as the Buddha (who came to understand reality through mediation), found it easy to gain full marks. The question did not necessitate reference to Buddhism as there are many examples of people gaining deep and sudden insight into a religious position, but the answer needed to go beyond it being another example of a vision. 4 of 7

5 Many students made good use of examples in their responses to Question A3(d), including reasons why that particular example could or could not be trusted. Few students gave a blanket negative or positive response to this question which proved that they had actually thought about the material during their studies. Good use was made of the experiences of Peter in Jaffa, Saul of Tarsus, Muhammad, Julian of Norwich and St Bernadette, with references being made to heat, exhaustion, dehydration, etc, as alternative explanations. The effects of the visions on the life of the visionary and of other people were often referred to as reasons why the vision might be seen as reliable. Question A4 The Existence of God In response to Question A4(a), some students gave a list of reasons why people found it difficult to believe in the existence of God, giving some development of one idea. Better answers examined one reason but in greater depth. As there were only 3 marks available either approach could gain full marks. Most students scored highly on this question. A small number of students confused the terms atheist and theist in Question A4(b) and so failed to gain any marks. The rest were able to justify one or the other being the easier stance to take. It was the nature of the argument that was credited and it was encouraging to see how many thoughtfully disagreed with the statement and were able to justify their position. There was no requirement for both sides of the argument to be presented, but some students presented both arguments well. The focus of Question A4(c) was on religious experiences proving the existence of God. A number of students simply explained what religious experiences were and so they failed to answer the question. The 3-mark evaluation question (A3(d)) focused on the nature of faith and the need for evidence. Many thoughtful responses showed how faith went beyond evidence, though some showed how faith was never irrational. The main weakness in answers was a failure to develop the relevant points. The impression given in quite a number of responses was that students knew what the answer was but that they failed to show their understanding. Examiners cannot credit anything that is not explicitly presented. Part B Students responses were fairly evenly split between the two questions. The same issue arose on both questions: the AO1 parts were dealt with as if they were AO2 so students failed to access the highest levels of the mark scheme because they included material that was irrelevant. In the past, similar topics have been set as AO2 questions. However, students should be warned against representing learned information or answers. It is unlikely that a 6-mark question will appear in exactly the same format on two exam papers. One of the challenges facing GCSE students is the manipulation of information in response to a new question. Question B5 The Characteristics of God Question B5(a) was not well-answered overall. Many students did not understand the idea of forms as used here. A disappointing number of students complicated their answer by including reference to the Trinity and stressed the triune nature of the Godhead rather than the Unity. Those who included clear reference to the Islamic and Jewish ideas of the godhead found this a very straightforward question. However, a disappointing number of students stressed the distinctness of Hindu gods, and so lacked focus. Many did not realise that they had gone into AO2 territory and so failed to access marks. Those who included the negative aspects of having multiple forms of the deity were credited. 5 of 7

6 The crucial element of Question B5(b) was inclusive words. A disappointing number of students merely examined the use of parent and ruler as suitable words to use about God. Many omitted reference to the non-sexist aspect of these words. Those who referred to the use of masculine terms in the Hebrew, Christian and Muslim scriptures found a good counter-argument that they could develop strongly. More able students raised the issue of whether any words, inclusive or not, were relevant when speaking about the Godhead. Most students presented some relevant explanation of the term all-powerful in response to Question B5(c), often referring to the unlimited nature of what God can do. Examples were used to help explain ideas but, even with the use of these examples, most students failed to develop their statements enough to access the higher marks. When dealing with all-merciful, many students limited their responses to the God who was willing to forgive totally. The understanding nature of God who appreciates the problems people face was not well developed in answers. In Question B5(d), there were a number of students who did not evidence their understanding of the term transcendent. Some presumed it referred to God not being able to deal with everybody in the same way, so their answers were limited to being accurate about the personal nature of God. Those who appreciated the relationship between the God who is beyond everything yet being the God who cares, responded well to this question, flagging up the apparent contradictory nature of those two terms which does not limit God. Some good answers included reference to the Christian Trinity showing both aspects of being transcendent and personal. Question B6 Science and Religion Question B6(a) required students to do more than simply write out a creation story. More able students showed how aspects of one or two creation stories brought out the qualities of God. While many students referred to the Genesis accounts of creation, good use was also made of the Hindu accounts of creation. The question was clearly about the creation stories, so any reference to the Fall in Genesis 3 was irrelevant. Some students listed the qualities of God in a generalised way but failed to link these qualities to any creation story, so they did not gain many marks. It would have been better for the students to focus on the role of God in creating the whole of nature rather than just the human element, though credit was given to what the stories show about God in the creation of humans. Many students knew the term the Big Bang in Question B6(b) but had little knowledge of what it actually means. A disappointing number referred to rocks or atoms colliding in space, and there was great confusion between the Big Bang and theory of evolution. Reference to evolution was irrelevant in answer to this question. A large number of the students made reference to Aquinas cosmological argument in their answers, showing that they understood the nature of the debate, particularly as to whether science can prove everything. There was good reference made to the idea of the god-of-the-gaps as part of the argument against the need for God in creation. There was good understanding in general about the issues under discussion in Question B6(c). Many students were quoted parts of the Genesis story, showing the importance of humans in creation. Some students also included reference to the Hindu creation stories. Most clearly made the contrast between the special role that is stated in religious creation stories for humans with the limited role that is implied through the idea of evolution. However, some students did bring out the idea that humans have evolved to the highpoint that they have now, which could be seen as similar to the position in the religious accounts. 6 of 7

7 In Question B6(d), many students linked the idea of freedom of thought and included different religious opinions about the status of religious documents, particularly the Bible accounts of creation. More able students showed there was no real conflict between the theory of evolution and the Biblical accounts of creation if the latter is read in a certain way. However, many respected the rights of fundamentalists to stick to their beliefs. The quality of the answers suggests that the majority of the students have valued their study of the philosophy of religion. It has helped them to think in new ways and has shown them how to argue successfully. The main challenge for future years is that students learn when to use evaluation in their answers and when to refrain from doing so. Mark Ranges and Award of Grades Grade boundaries and cumulative percentage grades are available on the Results Statistics page of the AQA Website. Converting Marks into UMS marks Convert raw marks into Uniform Mark Scale (UMS) marks by using the link below. UMS conversion calculator 7 of 7