Short Answer Questions

[WhoTookMyUsername]

A recent post from shinny got me thinking:
Under what circumstances should you put in an example in Short Answer Questions?
Of course we all respect Shinny's advice, especially as he got an exceptional score in the subject,
but what has everyone done with respect to short answer questions? Put in an example if it states to, or put in one if it's worth >2 marks?

[pi]

I always tried to put one in (talking from my Unit 4 experience, I didn't do much for Unit 3), it adds clarity and shows the examiner(s) that you really understand the issue. However, I would probably not waste time doing this for 1 and some 2 marks questions.

[dooodyo]

What type of examples could one use for unit 3 biology ?

[pi]

What type of examples could one use for unit 3 biology ?

Types of enzymes/proteins (structural, etc.) or examples of different types of homeostasis are a few good ones

[WhoTookMyUsername]

if for example, you were giving a defintion of an enzyme,
would you say .

e.g. Catalase can be reused and lowers activation energy of the h202 to o2 reaction or something

[HERculina]

hmmm. i noe i wouldnt for this q.  - i would focus more on giving an actual definition of an enzyme?

[pi]

if for example, you were giving a defintion of an enzyme,
would you say .

e.g. Catalase can be reused and lowers activation energy of the h202 to o2 reaction or something

Probably not, as definitions are usually 1 mark questions, and only 1 or 2 lines are given to write your answer

[shinny]

In cases where you guys come back asking 'have I answered this question with enough detail?' after a SAC. If you're inside a SAC/exam sitting there thinking that, write more! It's as simple as that. Writing more isn't going to hurt. The way I did all my writing exams (Bio, BM etc.) was to do a 'superficial' answering first where I just cover the questions, then go back and add as much as I possibly could with the time remaining. Of course you don't do this if you're struggling for time already and can't finish the paper as is. Reason is because in most cases it isn't necessary to do this to get the marks, but it just covers me for the cases where I'm not sure or where the examiner may have taken marks off because I actually was unknowingly too superficial in my first answer. As for the example specifically, that's more of a BM thing but it can be used in Bio. Rather than always an example though, at least clarify terms further or whatever. My point in that post was more to just keep writing rather than specifically using an example - that's just one method of giving more detail.

[WhoTookMyUsername]

lol i certainly did that in my SAC. every SA question i went way over the written lines and and in the margin.
Thanks for clarifying that its a good strategy

[HERculina]

oooo. for my first sac i went over the lines too and i thought that may have contributed to my bad mark so in the second sac i cut it down a bit and made sure none of my answers went over the lines. I went home thinking - WHY DIDNT I EXPLAIN WAT DENATURING IS?!!!! WHY DIDNT I INCLUDE THAT IT LOWERS ACTIVATION ENERGY!???  :buck2:
is it still possible to get a good SS without doing good in biology sacs

[WhoTookMyUsername]

i forgot to say enzymes can be re used

[Bing 101]

i forgot to say enzymes can be re used

Likewise :/

[Readinya]

In cases where you guys come back asking 'have I answered this question with enough detail?' after a SAC. If you're inside a SAC/exam sitting there thinking that, write more! It's as simple as that. Writing more isn't going to hurt. The way I did all my writing exams (Bio, BM etc.) was to do a 'superficial' answering first where I just cover the questions, then go back and add as much as I possibly could with the time remaining. Of course you don't do this if you're struggling for time already and can't finish the paper as is. Reason is because in most cases it isn't necessary to do this to get the marks, but it just covers me for the cases where I'm not sure or where the examiner may have taken marks off because I actually was unknowingly too superficial in my first answer. As for the example specifically, that's more of a BM thing but it can be used in Bio. Rather than always an example though, at least clarify terms further or whatever. My point in that post was more to just keep writing rather than specifically using an example - that's just one method of giving more detail.

I have this really bad habit of writing too much... and sometimes not going to the point. My teacher says that we should actually be as concise as possible - because writing too much increases the chances of contradicting yourself.

Opinions?

[shinny]

In cases where you guys come back asking 'have I answered this question with enough detail?' after a SAC. If you're inside a SAC/exam sitting there thinking that, write more! It's as simple as that. Writing more isn't going to hurt. The way I did all my writing exams (Bio, BM etc.) was to do a 'superficial' answering first where I just cover the questions, then go back and add as much as I possibly could with the time remaining. Of course you don't do this if you're struggling for time already and can't finish the paper as is. Reason is because in most cases it isn't necessary to do this to get the marks, but it just covers me for the cases where I'm not sure or where the examiner may have taken marks off because I actually was unknowingly too superficial in my first answer. As for the example specifically, that's more of a BM thing but it can be used in Bio. Rather than always an example though, at least clarify terms further or whatever. My point in that post was more to just keep writing rather than specifically using an example - that's just one method of giving more detail.

I have this really bad habit of writing too much... and sometimes not going to the point. My teacher says that we should actually be as concise as possible - because writing too much increases the chances of contradicting yourself.

Opinions?

Well as long as you're adding in more content. When I tell this to people, most of them end up writing the same thing in multiple different ways; that's not what I'm saying. If you're signposting your points as distinct as you give each one, and preferably in order of relevance to the question, the examiners shouldn't have a problem with it. I don't see how you can contradict yourself unless you've got no idea what you're talking about. Writing more isn't going to do this unless you inherently don't know the content or just start making crap up. Obviously you only add more if you know what you're saying is correct.