VAPS Network Presentation 2012 Philosophy Exam. Agenda for Presentation Overview of student...

VAPS Network Presentation

2012 Philosophy Exam

Agenda for Presentation

• Overview of student performance

• Suggestions for improving performance

• Questions

Overview of student performance

Strengths-Most students were able to answer most, or all,

of the examination questions

-Students appeared to have a much better understanding of how to respond to the Section B answers

Weaknesses:

• Many students demonstrated only a vague understanding of the concepts, arguments and viewpoints expressed in the set texts

• Many students did not answer the question asked

• Students’ understanding of the concepts, arguments and viewpoints expressed in the set texts was sometimes inaccurate


• Students had difficulty identifying relevant contemporary debates when required and struggled to apply their knowledge of the concepts, viewpoint and arguments to more generalised questions

• A significant number of students did not understand the instruction to ‘critically compare’

• A substantial number of students struggled with the directive to evaluate

• Students continue to struggle with essay writing



• Many students’ responses were poorly constructed, convoluted, long-winded and indiscriminate, imprecise or overwritten


• Students generally have a good knowledge of Plato and Aristotle, although they have difficulty evaluating the arguments in these texts

• Students’ knowledge of Nietzsche is often imprecise and inaccurate. Students also have difficulty evaluating Nietzsche

• Students often struggle to get beyond basic comprehension with Weil. They have difficulty discerning arguments and seeing the connections between ideas in this text


• Although students generally understand Descartes they struggle with Armstrong and are particularly confused by his discussions of behaviourism and the role it plays in his argument. Students seem to have significant difficulty identifying the implications of these arguments and applying these arguments to contemporary debates.

• Students generally understand Hume• Students appear to struggle to go beyond a basic

understanding of Popper and, in particular, misunderstand falsification.


• Students appear to struggle significantly with Kuhn. There seems to be widespread misunderstanding of his views regarding scientific progress and the implications of his views for the relationship between science and certainty. Students also seem to regularly misinterpret Kuhn, muddling his sustained comparison between political and scientific revolution and the requirements for paradigm acceptance.

Given these problems, how might we address the issue of

improving student performance?

Suggestions for improving student performance

Students must have a comprehensive, thorough and detailed understanding of the set texts

-Explicitly remind students of this and give students plenty of class time to focus on eliciting the arguments from the texts

-Encourage close reading of the texts and engage in argument re-construction as a whole group on the whiteboard

-Encourage students to complete argument summaries of each of the set texts and mark up these summaries

-Include most, if not all, texts in your assessment

-Explicitly discourage sloppy thinking


Students require a clear understanding of what is expected of them in the exam, especially in terms of answering questions

-Model assessments on the various sections of the exam and where possible, use similar phrasing

-Do not make text revision the only form of preparation for the exam. Look at styles of questions, model responses and work with students to develop structures for responding to different kinds of questions that ensure the full mark range is covered.

-Include work on comprehending questions – for example, asking students to read questions and then explain what the question is asking them to do


Students must be able to apply their understanding of the concepts, arguments and viewpoints expressed in the set texts to contemporary debates

-Provide students with opportunities to think through the implications of arguments presented in texts for contemporary debates

-Include contemporary debates in your assessments, especially for Unit 4


Students must be able to critically compare the arguments and viewpoints presented in the set texts. Critical comparison does not mean:

•Comparing arguments•Evaluating arguments•Telling the reader which argument you prefer

It involves identifying similarities and differences between the texts and some comparative discussion of the merits and shortcomings of the arguments and viewpoints.

Evaluation

Critically compare the views of Callicles and Aristotle on the role of pleasure in the good life.

Callicles believes that pleasure is synonymous with a good life. By allowing our desires to expand (which he believes is in line with our natures) we can experience more pleasure and therefore greater happiness.

Aristotle would agree that pleasure comes naturally to us, but he would disagree that it is synonymous with the good life because he disagrees with Callicles on what human beings are. According to Aristotle, we are defined by reason. Thus a good life is one in which we use our reason to navigate our response to pleasure, rather than allowing our actions to be driven by it

While it can certainly be argued that using reason to help us navigate pleasure can result in a better life (by helping us to avoid pain), Aristotle’s argument relies on a view of human nature that seems less plausible than Callicles: humans seem instinctually attracted to pleasure (children enjoy what is pleasurable). But the notion that pleasure necessarily equals happiness is flawed. Some pleasures (heavy drinking) can result in unhappiness – which could have been avoided by applying our reason to pleasure. Thus it would seem that Aristotle’s view of the role of pleasure in a good life is more persuasive.


• As you read through the texts, draw the students’ attention to points of comparison.

• Use classroom activities, such as role plays and collaborative tasks to help students develop a comprehensive understanding of the points of similarity and difference between the set texts in relation to key ideas.

• Model comparative responses on the whiteboard. Provide students with a structure for approaching such questions.

• Ensure Outcome tasks involve critical comparison


Students must be able to provide evaluations of the arguments and viewpoints expressed in the set texts. Students are not evaluating if they:

•Re-state the argument, prefaced with ‘I agree because’•Refer to their own beliefs as a means of justification•Pose questions•State that ‘the premises are true and the conclusion follows on from the premises’•Evaluate a different argument to what they are asked


Evaluation is the process we use to decide whether or not we have been given sufficient grounds for accepting a

particular conclusion.

Evaluation involves assessing the logic of an argument (how well do the premises support the conclusion?) and the reasons used to support the conclusion (how plausible are

the premises?).

Evaluation always involves providing reasons which show the reader/listener why a particular argument should or

shouldn’t be accepted.


• Identify the problem/s with the argument

• Demonstrate why this aspect of the argument is problematic by providing reasons and, if possible a concrete counter/example.

• Identify what this problem does to the argument.


Evaluate Callicles’ claim that philosophy is an inappropriate study for adults.

Identify the problems:•He claims that philosophy will lead to particular deficiencies (will prohibit a man from gaining the experience necessary to have standing in his society, will render him unable to address meeting, will prevent him from an understanding of human nature, etc). Is this true? Is this characterisation of philosophy accurate?


Develop the evaluation•Philosophy capacitates us with the skills to understand, formulate and defend arguments – all very useful skills to have for addressing meetings and understanding the legal system.

•One of the key questions philosophy investigates is the question of human nature, so one would assume studying philosophy would capacitate one to understand something of human nature.

•The example of Marcus Aurelius, who was both a Roman Emperor and philosopher would suggest that philosophy does not prohibit a man from developing the skills necessary to achieve standing in his society


Tying up the response.

This example, together with the kinds of skills philosophy teaches, would suggest that it is possible to pursue philosophy into adulthood without the kinds of consequences Callicles suggests.


• Make evaluation part of every classroom discussion – don’t just focus on reading and comprehending arguments. Provide time for students to evaluate arguments too.

• Be diligent in your response to student evaluations. Don’t let them get away with sloppy reasoning.

• Construct classroom activities and homework tasks which help students develop their skills of evaluation (charts with arguments for and against, written evaluations, researching examples, etc)

• Make evaluation a central component of every Outcome task


• Make sure students include evaluations in their text summaries and provide them with feedback

• Model the structure of evaluation for students and encourage them to work with this structure.


Students must be able to write good essays. Good essays demonstrate the following qualities:

•Clearly written•Logically organised.•Demonstrates in-depth knowledge of concepts, arguments, viewpoints and ‘big ideas’ and understands the relationship between these and the prompt•Includes what is necessary to answer the question and nothing extraneous.


• Uses relevant, concrete examples• Engages in detailed analysis• Provides sophisticated, developed, persuasive

evaluations• Demonstrates personal engagement with the ideas


• Provide students with examples of good and poor essay writing. Go through these examples with students and discuss strengths and weaknesses.

• Model essay writing on the board. Discuss with students how to use the arguments and viewpoints presented in texts to respond to questions.

• Do not treat the texts as isolated examples of philosophical arguments and viewpoints. Provide students with opportunities to understand them within the broader context of the questions they are concerned with and the contemporary debates they relate to.


• Provide students with opportunities to practice skills related to essay writing (summaries, written exercises, relating arguments to contemporary debates, etc) as well as opportunities to develop their essay writing.

• Construct Outcome tasks which mimic the kinds of essays they might see on the exam. In other words, try to go beyond getting students to ‘Outline and evaluate.’

• Encourage students to research examples that can be used in their essay writing and to share examples with the class

• Remember to be just as attentive towards logical organisation and written expression as you are to content when responding to student work


Students must be able to present responses clearly•Provide students with structures for answering different kinds of questions•Model responses on the board•Look at examples of good responses together and discuss what makes those responses good•Explicitly discourage students from writing long-winded, wordy responses that appear ‘clever.’

Questions?

VAPS Network Presentation 2012 Philosophy Exam. Agenda for Presentation Overview of student...

Documents

Transcript of VAPS Network Presentation 2012 Philosophy Exam. Agenda for Presentation Overview of student...