Sometimes though, the mark schemes are less than clear about how to reach that top band (the As and A*s). Here are some generic tips I've found in the mark schemes that are important in getting as close to full marks as you can:
January 2013
- Relevant research should be applied to part a)
- Must address “how” if the question asks for this
- “Discussion” may involve a comparison and following/challenging a viewpoint
- Detail is beneficial in part a)
- Usefulness, application, ecological validity, reductionism, reliability and ethics are all good evaluation points for interviewing witnesses
- A good way to “assess strengths and weaknesses” is to discuss whether or not an apparent “weakness” may actually be desirable or necessary in order to fulfil a function
June 2012
- Responses should be clear, precise and explicit
- To what extent implies a degree of judgement is necessary
- Responses should directly answer the question rather than simply describing research when this is not asked for. Research can be used to illustrate responses but this should be linked to the question.
- Usefulness can be examined in terms of validity, reliability, ethnocentrism, etc.
- Stronger answers with regards to treatments will be contextualised
- Comparison invites similarities as well as differences
- Reliability can be affected by mood, interviewee, social desirability bias, lying and misjudgement
