Thinking Skills Paper 2.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
A thinking map We have looked at a large number of pieces of reasoning types, and now we need a thinking map of how to best analyse, understand, and evaluate.
Advertisements

© Cambridge International Examinations 2013 Component/Paper 1.
National 5 History Final Exam Outline.
ASK QUESTIONS!!! During the next 45 – 90 minutes, I will present the main points of each chapter. Presented in terms of questions you should be able to.
Session 6 MED Discussion  So what does this all mean?  The place where the researcher can speculate, infer, and reflect  Challenge for the reader:
Paper 2 Source Skills. Candidates’ weaknesses (according to examiners’ reports) Not supporting your answers with source detail Simply reproducing knowledge.
Higher English Close Reading Types of Questions Understanding Questions Tuesday 8 OctoberCMCM1.
THE ESSAY From the French ‘essai’ - attempt English ‘assay’ – ‘try’ or ‘to weigh’
Argumentative Terms Complete your foldable with the following.
How to structure good history writing Always put an introduction which explains what you are going to talk about. Always put a conclusion which summarises.
Writing Exercise Try to write a short humor piece. It can be fictional or non-fictional. Essay by David Sedaris.
THINKING SKILLS Paper 2. Question 2 – scientific information (Evaluating broadly scientific sources) Considerations for all parts:  Is the information.
Nov (‘Anton Aschenbach’) Thinking Skills Paper 2 q. 1.
Informative Synthesis  Purpose: to convey information through summarizing in a clear, concise, organized manner (154)  Use source material to support.
CAS Managebac update CAS opportunity for someone with a scanner. Cambodia?
Common Core: Close Reading Informational Text Professional Development Session Presenters: Chelsea Armann Adrienne Van Gorden.
Don’t assume agreement—always support claims with evidence
Reading Comprehension
Critical thinking for assignments to get a better grade
GCSE HISTORY (OCR MODERN WORLD: SPEC B)
Rhetorical Devices and Fallacies
Do you agree with the message in the source?
Writing Paper Three Monday, November 2.
ARGUMENTATIVE ESSAYS (OPINION ESSAYS)
Persuasive Essay.
Writing frames and Mark Schemes for
THE QUESTIONS—SKILLS ANALYSE EVALUATE INFER UNDERSTAND SUMMARISE
GCSE English Literature Unit 1 Modern Texts
The Persuasive Essay.
Paper 3: Weimar and Nazi Germany
THE ESSAY From the French ‘essai’ - attempt
LO: To revise the nature of war and revolution
How do we evaluate an argument for effectiveness?
Language Component 1: 20th Century Reading
Ad Prima Charter School
Persuasive Essay 10.
Argument Essay Point/Counterpoint.
..
Non-Fiction Questioning Stance & Signposts
The Formal Argument.
GCSE EXAM QUESTION GUIDANCE
Describe two features of…
English B1A Counterargument.
Developing and evaluating lines of reasoning
Scholastic Aptitude Test Developing Critical Reading Skills
What is an ARGUMENT? An argument is a reasoned, logical way of demonstrating that the writer’s position, belief, or conclusion is valid. Arguments seek.
Lecture 13: Paper Writing Workshop Benjamin Graham
Writing A critical Review
Paper 1: Tues 6th June GCSE English Language Paper 2: Mon 12th June
Historical research.
A LEVEL Paper Three– Section A
Paper One: Answering Question 4
Mock Exam Review Warm Up 1
Evaluating Arguments and Claims
Core Course Knowledge Lesson 6
Core Course Knowledge Lesson 6
GCE AS History Revision
Unit 2 Read, wRite, and Research
Building an Academic Argument
Fact and Opinion: Is There Really a Difference
What is being assessed? Section B will contain three essay questions of which students are required to answer two. But for your mock you will get two.
Argumentative writing
Scientists argue, but they argue about ideas.
Source work Vocabulary Pyramid
Claim, Evidence and Reasoning
Summarizing, Quoting, and Paraphrasing: Writing about research
Unit 2 AO3 - Interpretations
Megan Smoot 4th Quarter Project 5/1/19
Putting together your final paper
Numbers & Stats ASK YOURSELF:
Presentation transcript:

Thinking Skills Paper 2

Question 1 – suspects & witnesses (Evaluating evidence) CIRCUMSTANCES Things that happened, and where they happened SUSPECTS People accused of doing something wrong (or, at least, could be accused) WITNESSES People who may have seen what happened, or heard about it, or know something about it

SUSPECTS MOTIVE OPPORTUNITY EVIDENCE Did they have a reason to do it? Did they have the chance to do it? EVIDENCE Is there convincing evidence they actually did it?

EVIDENCE CIRCUMSTANTIAL EVIDENCE WITNESS STATEMENTS Facts from which conclusions may be inferred WITNESS STATEMENTS Direct witness = ‘eye-witness’ Indirect witness

WITNESSES RELIABILITY PLAUSIBILITY CORROBORATION of the person of what they say CORROBORATION for what they say

RELIABILITY of the person REPUTATION Do other people respect and trust them? Do they have a position of authority or trust?   NEUTRALITY Are they biased? (prejudiced towards, or against, another person or thing) Do they have a vested interest? (a reason or motive to lie)

RELIABILITY of the person ABILITY TO SEE ( = ABILITY TO PERCEIVE) Could an eye-witness see and hear properly? OR ABILITY TO KNOW Does an indirect witness have any special knowledge or experience? (Do they offer more than hearsay, speculation or opinion?)

PLAUSIBILITY of what they say Are the statements of a witness consistent, coherent and reasonable? (OR are there unusual changes, contradictions or very unlikely details?)

CORROBORATION for what they say From other witness statements From circumstantial evidence

1 (d) Direct answer to the question ‘Do you agree …?’, ‘To what extent …?’, ‘How likely …?’ Choose from an imagined scale of 4 answers, such as: Strongly agree, partly agree, generally disagree, strongly disagree Very much, partly, only slightly, not at all Very likely, quite likely, unlikely, very unlikely If in doubt, choose one of the middle ones

Most important evidence Discuss this first: it shows you have evaluated the sources Be clear. Use words like: ‘Most important to consider …’, or ‘Probably the most important evidence …’ Other evidence Go through all or most of the sources Give an evaluation of the evidence: ‘also significant’, ‘partly useful’, ‘unreliable’, ‘inconclusive’, …

Plausible alternative scenarios Make clear what you think is the most likely explanation Suggest at least one alternative explanation – something you think is less likely but still a possibility (and say why) Further investigation Suggest If you were in charge, what would you investigate next? This shows again that you are evaluating the evidence

Question 1 terminology Motive Opportunity Circumstantial evidence Eye-witness /indirect witness Relevance Reliability Plausibility / credibility Corroboration Claims Bias & vested interest Ability to see Hearsay Speculation & opinion Consistency / contradictions Conclusive / inconclusive Alternative scenario

Question 2 – scientific information (Evaluating broadly scientific sources) Considerations for all parts: Is the information in each source relevant? Note any deliberate confusion in the evidence. Remember the Coffee & Caffeine question Is it reliable? Is it useful? (Is it sufficiently complete, accurate and precise?) Does it have support from other sources? What may be the implications of this information?

2 (d) ‘How far would you agree …?’, etc. Direct answer to the question ‘How far would you agree …?’, etc. ‘Strongly agree, generally agree, mostly disagree, strongly disagree’, etc.   Most important information Discuss this first: ‘Most important is Source X, because …’ Other information Give an evaluation of each source, such as: ‘also relevant’, ‘probably quite reliable’, ‘only partly supports’, ‘inconclusive’, … Further information To understand this topic better, what else would you want to know?

Question 2 terminology Conditions Factors Claims Relevance Reliability Usefulness Support Implications Vested interest Speculation Jumping to conclusions Contradictions Correlation & cause Conclusive / inconclusive

Question 3 – longer passage (Analysis, evaluation & further argument) ANALYSIS = ‘identify the structure’ MAIN CONCLUSION INTERMEDIATE CONCLUSIONS SUPPORTING REASONS EXAMPLES COUNTER ARGUMENT

ANALYSIS Part (a): identify the main conclusion Use the ‘because/therefore’ test Decide if you need the whole sentence or only part of it COPY it straight from the passage Part (b): identify 3 reasons that support the MC Three key reasons (intermediate conclusions) If you find more than three, just use the best ones Again, COPY them from the passage

EVALUATION Part (c): evaluate the reasoning EVALUATION = ‘Comment on the quality of the argument: its strengths, weaknesses and assumptions’ Comment much more on weaknesses than strengths ‘Assumptions’ are always implicit: so you cannot quote one from the passage! Discuss each paragraph in turn: how well do the reasons and examples support each intermediate conclusion?

Q.3 evaluation terminology Assumptions Unsupported assertions Straw person argument Conflation Restricting the options Emotive language Ad hominem argument Circular argument Contradictions Generalisations Exaggeration Slippery slope reasoning Analogies Examples Anecdote Open to challenge

FURTHER ARGUMENT Part (d): write your own short argument It might be to support or to challenge, or it might give you a choice Include at least a main conclusion, two or three reasons, and an example (and preferably a CA and IC, too) Your main conclusion can be copied from the question Do not use material already in the passage

Recommended revision for paper 2 Q.1 BUILDERS (text & notes) Q.2 CYCLING vs. DRIVING (text & notes) Q.3 DRUGS IN SPORT (text & notes)

Paper 2 – the most difficult parts Q.1 (d) – usually 6 marks Q.2 (d) – usually 6 marks Q.3 (c) – usually 5 marks These require your most complete evaluation skills And they are worth almost 40% of all the marks So really concentrate and think hard! AND ENJOY THE CHALLENGE ! !