# data[].attributes.body
Demonstrate understanding by investigating different reasons, concepts and ideas.

# data[].attributes.body
Requires reasoned argument of factors to reach a judgement regarding their importance/relevance to the question context.

# data[].attributes.body
Identify key ideas and explain key concepts.

# data[].attributes.body
Deconstruct information and/or issues to find connections and provide logical chains of reasoning in order to make judgements regarding their importance/relevance to the question context.

# data[].attributes.body
Review/analyse information, bringing it together to form a conclusion/judgement based on strengths/weaknesses, alternatives, relevant data or information. Come to a supported judgement of a subject's qualities and relation to its context.

# data[].attributes.body
10 minutes

# data[].attributes.body
20 minutes

# data[].attributes.body
15 minutes

# data[].attributes.body
30 minutes

# data[].attributes.body
40 minutes

# data[].attributes.body
Point - State the point you are making.

Evidence - What specific evidence can you give to support your point?

Explain - What does your evidence mean? How does it link to the question?

Only explain the points to answer the questions. Do not evaluate the points.

# data[].attributes.body
Paragraph 1 - [PEE] Explain the side of the argument that you agree with.

Paragraph 2 - [Appraisal + PEE] Explain why someone might argue against your point in paragraph 1, evaluating the weaknesses of that argument.

Paragraph 3 - [PEE] Explain another argument to support the side you agree with.

Conclusion - [Judgement] Briefly make a final judgement on which side is stronger and why.

# data[].attributes.body
Try to include at two detailed points.

Point - State the point you are making.

Evidence - What does it say in the extract? You could use very short quotations, but it would be better to put it into your own words to show your understanding.

Explain - What does that part of the extract mean? How does it link to the question?

Only explain the points to answer the questions. Do not evaluate the points.

# data[].attributes.body
This question should usually link to the extract you explained in the 'clarify' question.

Introduction - Clarify any key terms in the question. Briefly explain the view that the question is proposing.

Paragraph 1 - [PEE] Explain the view of one philosopher who would argue in favour of the view presented in the question.

Paragraph 2 - [Appraisal] Analyse the view you have just explained using relevant philosophers who would agree/disagree with that view.

Paragraph 3 - [PEE ] Explain the view of another philosopher who would argue in favour of the view presented in the question.

Paragraph 4 - [Appraisal] Analyse the view you have just explained using relevant philosophers who would agree/disagree with that view.

Conclusion - Make a judgement on which side is stronger, explaining why you have made that judgement using evidence and referencing philosophers.

# data[].attributes.body
Introduction - Clarify the key points in the question and briefly mention the key arguments for and against that you will be writing about.

Paragraph 1 - [PEE] Explain the side of the argument that you are going to try to disprove: if your conclusion is going to agree with the statement, explain an opposing argument. If your conclusion is going to disagree with the statement, explain a supporting argument.

Paragraph 2 - [Appraisal + PEE] Explain why the argument you explained in paragraph 1 is wrong. Do this by choosing a view/philosopher that would disagree with paragraph 1 and explaining that view and why it counters paragraph 1. Make sure you include why the argument in paragraph 1 is weak and this one is strong.

Paragraph 3 - [PEE] Explain another argument for the side that you are trying to disprove. Who and why might someone disagree with paragraph 2.

Paragraph 4 - [Appraisal + PEE] Explain why the argument you explained in paragraph 3 is wrong using the same technique as paragraph 2.

Conclusion - Make a final judgement: which side of the argument is stronger? Why? Therefore, is the statement correct or incorrect? Why?

# data[].attributes.body
Step 1 – Identify the focus of the question. What is it actually asking you about?

Step 2 – Choose two key philosophers who will help you answer the question.

Step 3 – Introduction: Summarise in no more than three sentences what the main focus of the question actually is/means.

Paragraph 1

Step 4 – Point: Summarise the key idea of Philosopher 1 in one sentence. What are they trying to prove?

Step 5 – Evidence: What actually is their argument in a bit more detail.

Step 6 – Explain: How does their argument support their main idea (the point)?

Paragraph 2

Step 7 – Point: Summarise the key idea of Philosopher 2 in one sentence. What are they trying to prove?

Step 8 – Evidence: What actually is their argument in a bit more detail.

Step 9 – Explain: How does their argument support their main idea (the point)?

# data[].attributes.body
Step 1 – Identify the focus of the question. What is it actually asking you about?

Step 2 – Choose what your two main points are going to be, including which philosophers you can use to support those points.

Step 3 – Decide what your conclusion is going to be.

Step 4 – Choose one or two philosophers who would criticise your points.

Step 5 – Introduction: Summarise in no more than four sentences what the main focus of the question actually is/means.

Paragraph 1

Step 6 – Point: Summarise your first main point in one sentence.

Step 7 – Evidence: Which scholar/theory would agree with this main point? What is their argument?

Step 8 – Explain: How does their argument support the main point?

Paragraph 2

Step 9 – Point: Summarise one criticism of your first main point in one sentence.

Step 10 – Evidence: Which scholar/theory would agree with this criticism? What do they argue?

Step 11 – Explain: How does the philosopher’s argument challenge your main point?

Paragraph 3

Step 12 – Point: Summarise your second main point in once sentence.

Step 13 – Evidence: Which philosopher would agree with this main point? What is their argument?

Step 14 – Explain: How does their argument support the main point?

Conclusion

Step 15 - Judgement: Make a final judgement on which side is stronger and why.

# data[].attributes.body
Step 1 – Identify the focus of the question. What is it actually asking you about?

Step 2 – Highlight or underline the key parts of the passage that relate to the focus of the question.

Step 3 – Choose two key ideas from the passage relating to the question.

Paragraph 1

Step 4 – Point: Summarise your first key idea in one sentence.

Step 5 – Evidence: Use a short quotation or paraphrase a short part of the text to show how your point it linked to the passage.

Step 6 – Explain: Explain the key idea in more detail. Try to bring in another philosopher that you know argues the same or a similar idea to support your point.

Paragraph 2

Step 7 – Point: Summarise your second key idea in one sentence.

Step 8 – Evidence: Use a short quotation or paraphrase a short part of the text to show how your point it linked to the passage.

Step 9 – Explain: Explain the key idea in more detail. Try to bring in another philosopher that you know argues the same or a similar idea to support your point.

# data[].attributes.body
Step 1 – Identify the focus of the question. What is it actually asking you about?

Step 2 – Choose two philosophers that argue for the view presented in the question.

Step 3 – Decide what you conclusion is going to be.

Step 4 – Introduction: Introduce the key ideas in the question, clarifying any key terms and briefly explaining the view presented.

Paragraph 1

Step 5 – Point: Summarise the view of your first philosopher in one sentence.

Step 6 – Evidence: What is your first philosopher’s main argument?

Step 7 – Explain: How does this argument support the view presented in the question?

Paragraph 2

Step 8 – Appraisal: Using other philosophers, analyse the strengths and weaknesses of this argument. Who would agree? Is this a good argument? Who would disagree? Is this a good argument? Why or why not? The mark scheme is very focused on the quality of appraisal, so this should take a whole paragraph to do well. Remember what your conclusion is going to be as you want to be showing that your conclusion is correct.

Paragraph 3

Step 9 – Point: Summarise the view of your second philosopher in one sentence.

Step 10 – Evidence: What is your second philosopher’s main argument?

Step 11 – Explain: How does this argument support the view presented in the question?

Paragraph 4

Step 12 – Appraisal: Using other philosophers, analyse the strengths and weaknesses of this argument. Who would agree? Is this a good argument? Who would disagree? Is this a good argument? Why or why not? The mark scheme is very focused on the quality of appraisal, so this should take a whole paragraph to do well. Remember what your conclusion is going to be as you want to be showing that your conclusion is correct.

Conclusion

Step 13 – Conclusion: Make your final judgement. Which view is stronger, the one agreeing with the question or the one disagreeing with the question? Why?

# data[].attributes.body
Step 1 – Identify two arguments that would agree with the view presented in the question, including which philosophers would support these views.

Step 2 – Identify two arguments that would disagree with the view presented in the question, including which philosophers would support these views.

Step 3 – Decide what your conclusion is going to be. This is really important if you are going to show the examiner that your answer has a ‘logical chain of reasoning’ which leads to a ‘convincing conclusion’.

Step 4 – Introduction: Briefly clarify the view in the question, defining any key terms and very briefly mentioning the key arguments for and against that you will be writing about.

Paragraph 1

Step 5 – Point: Summarise an argument that would go against your conclusion in one sentence.

Step 6 – Evidence: Which philosophers would support this view? What are their main arguments?

Step 7 – Explain: How do their arguments support your point?

Paragraph 2

Step 8 – Point: Summarise an argument that would agree with your conclusion in one sentence.

Step 9 – Evidence: Which philosophers would support this view? What are their main arguments?

Step 10 – Explain: How do these arguments prove the first paragraph wrong?

Step 11 – Appraise: Why is this argument strong and the one in your first paragraph weak?

Paragraph 3

Step 12 – Point: Summarise an argument that would go against your conclusion in one sentence.

Step 13 – Evidence: Which philosophers would support this view? What are their main arguments?

Step 14 – Explain: How do their arguments support your point?

Paragraph 4

Step 15 – Point: Summarise an argument that would agree with your conclusion in one sentence.

Step 16 – Evidence: Which philosophers would support this view? What are their main arguments?

Step 17 – Explain: How do these arguments prove the third paragraph wrong?

Step 18 – Appraise: Why is this argument strong and the one in your third paragraph weak?

Conclusion

Step 19 – Conclusion: Make your final judgement and explain why you are right and the arguments against your view are wrong.