1. Thinking Skills
Paper 2

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

3. 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?

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

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

6. 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)

7. 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?)

8. 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?)

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

10. 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

11. 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’, …

12. 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

13. 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

14. 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?

15. 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?

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

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

18. 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

19. 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?

20. 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

21. 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

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

23. 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 ! !