How to increase A2 skills – some ideas

I think that the key for pupils is getting them to understand the difference between ‘putting an argument’ and ‘considering an argument’. This distinction is seen clearest in the old level descriptors between band 5 and band 6 of the AO2 section. Essentially they need to realise that simply putting down a thinker’s idea as a criticism is not enough. They need to
assess how useful the idea is with regards to the question.

Once pupils have grasped this idea there are a number of different ways that I use to develop this particular skill. One of the basic ways is (as Aristotle suggested) to model it yourself. They will begin to understand what you mean when you ‘criticise the criticisms’ if you make suggestions yourself.

The next stage is to collate all the part (b) criticisms that you can find.
In the Revision section of the website you will find Whizz Thru PowerPoints (it is a real pain but pupils can have a copy of the PowerPoints from ‘notes’ print out option so they can jot ideas as you deliver the lesson). There is nothing
particularly dynamic at this stage as it is just a knowledge fest. The basic principle I work on here is that there is no way that they could fit all of these potential criticisms into one part (b), but if you blitz them with ideas you would hope that some of them would stick for the less able or lazy candidates and that the top candidates have plentyof part (b) fuel for their critical fires. I have done this for every unit so that they come to expect it. .

One activity that I have found particularly helpful is a silent debate activity.  Essentially pupils need an A3 sheet. They work in smallish groups (I’d advise no more than 5 in a group). Give them a stimulus question that is part (b) – eg: ‘Kantian ethics is the best approach to issues surrounding euthanasia’. Discuss (10). Pupils then take it in terms to write an idea that
is associated with the statement. It is very important that they are watching what the other person is writing. You may have to remind them that it is a silent debate and so they need to be quiet!!!

Once the first person has finished writing they pass the sheet clockwise or anti-clockwise and the next person can either write a critical response to the idea that has just been written or they can start a new thread. This continues until they have exhausted all possibilities or until your arbitrary time (no less that 15 mins I’d suggest) has past. Your task
at this point is to check that they are not simply starting new threads (this being simply ‘putting ideas down’ – old band 5) but that they are using their knowledge of philosophers and their critical assessment to challenge what has been written by someone else (considering ideas – old band 6). You may consider telling pupils that they must have a minimum of 3
responses to each thread. This means that pupils begin to get the idea of being critical of ideas not simply accepting them (as Socrates said ‘Never be satisfied with second hand truths’).

After a silent debate activity or some work on part (b), I would give them a
timed essay in class (15 mins). It is then extremely useful to get them to
peer assess the work that they have written. During this time encourage
pupils to think about areas of the written work that could have been more
critical.

Another useful tip is that of weaving. Quite often pupils will write their
answers in a methodical way – this means that they spend time focusing on,
for want of a better word, the ‘strengths’ of the statement and then once
they have finished moving on to the ‘weaknesses’ of the statement. There is
nothing inherently wrong with this approach but it may strait jacket pupils
and encourages them to be unreflective in their part (b) work. If you
encourage your students to ‘weave’ their part (b) criticisms then they have
to think of a philosopher or criticism that may be relevant. This way they
cross over from ‘strengths’ to ‘weaknesses’. The next stage is for them to
assess the question / statement directly and make a judgement as to whether
the idea that they have discussed is useful/supportive of the idea at hand.
Some have argued that you need to use the language of the question (ie: to
quote the question directly), again there is nothing inherently wrong with
this approach put it lacks subtlety (an examiner may be thinking ‘Here’s a
candidate that has been told to quote the question as part of their AO2
work’). A more gentle approach may be to address the question by inferring
the ideas more (although they must be explicit in their assessment).

Instead of repeating (‘blah blah
blah…shows it cannot be defended’ ‘X, Y, Z shows it cannot be defended’ ‘
‘A, B, C cannot be defended’ or ‘such and such can be defended’, ‘thingy
suggests that it can be defended’), better candidates will use synonyms
which still address the idea in the statement but avoid repetition: ‘such
and such may suggest that Aquinas’ ideas are indeed
indefensible’.

Insist that pupils avoid simply asserting ideas. The inclusion of words
like ‘might suggest’ or ‘may suggest’ avoids over committal to issues and
lifts them out of the lower bands in AO2.

Stu Bowman
(Durham Johnston Comprehensive School)