HSC Studies of Religion Question Thread

[dancing phalanges]

Yes, CSSA paper. The feedback stated that you NEEDED to talk about core ethical teachings.

So this is Section 2 right? Because I didn't and got 3/3 and then 3/4 without mentioning any of them. And I'm double checking why I lost 1 mark for the 4 marker and I doubt it's that reason.

[elysepopplewell]

Hey everyone above! Instead of quoting you all I'm just addressing it here.

I don't know the wording of the exact question you are talking about, but I think what it appears happened to you is what happened to me in my trial. My short answer question was something like, describe the core ethical teachings of the religion. So I launched into that, and immediately jumped to the sexual or bioethics (can't remember if I did Christianity or Islam for this bit). So my response was like: The ethical teachings of Christianity regarding bioethics are say no to abortion, in some cases yes to euthanasia, because ultimately this is God's plan (OBVIOUSLY THIS IS A SIMPLIFIED VERSION). It was only 5 marks or less, and I thought I'd put some super specific details in there and I'd be getting a hell yeah from my marker. I only got like, 1, possibly 2, marks? Because I'd more or less mentioned that creatures are made in the image of God and referenced it - which is the kind of ethical teaching they are looking for. So they weren't asking me to apply the ethical teachings to anything, which I did by relating specifically to bioethics, but instead they asked about the teachings ~in general~ of the religion. You can skew these towards your set of ethics, whether that's environmental, ethical, or bio, but unless the question is asking about adherents using the ethics to make decisions, or application of ethics in modern society, then you should be sticking to the teachings individually.

The way I organised my notes after trials was like:

-Core ethical teachings
-Sources of ethical teachings
-Applications of ethical teachings

So this kind of three-tiered level of studying helped me draw everything apart. I'm not sure about how you all learned this in the classroom, but for me it was almost like learning the ethics through the cases of ethical issues. Which can be great, but it meant I didn't know how to talk about anything individually, which put me in a bad position for the short answers.

Does this clear anything up for anyone, or else, raise new issues? I try to cover this in my lectures because I know it's confusing, but often it doesn't make sense until you actually do an exam where it asks you to specifically divide things.

[dancing phalanges]

Hey everyone above! Instead of quoting you all I'm just addressing it here.

I don't know the wording of the exact question you are talking about, but I think what it appears happened to you is what happened to me in my trial. My short answer question was something like, describe the core ethical teachings of the religion. So I launched into that, and immediately jumped to the sexual or bioethics (can't remember if I did Christianity or Islam for this bit). So my response was like: The ethical teachings of Christianity regarding bioethics are say no to abortion, in some cases yes to euthanasia, because ultimately this is God's plan (OBVIOUSLY THIS IS A SIMPLIFIED VERSION). It was only 5 marks or less, and I thought I'd put some super specific details in there and I'd be getting a hell yeah from my marker. I only got like, 1, possibly 2, marks? Because I'd more or less mentioned that creatures are made in the image of God and referenced it - which is the kind of ethical teaching they are looking for. So they weren't asking me to apply the ethical teachings to anything, which I did by relating specifically to bioethics, but instead they asked about the teachings ~in general~ of the religion. You can skew these towards your set of ethics, whether that's environmental, ethical, or bio, but unless the question is asking about adherents using the ethics to make decisions, or application of ethics in modern society, then you should be sticking to the teachings individually.

The way I organised my notes after trials was like:

-Core ethical teachings
-Sources of ethical teachings
-Applications of ethical teachings

So this kind of three-tiered level of studying helped me draw everything apart. I'm not sure about how you all learned this in the classroom, but for me it was almost like learning the ethics through the cases of ethical issues. Which can be great, but it meant I didn't know how to talk about anything individually, which put me in a bad position for the short answers.

Does this clear anything up for anyone, or else, raise new issues? I try to cover this in my lectures because I know it's confusing, but often it doesn't make sense until you actually do an exam where it asks you to specifically divide things.

Hey Elyse
The first question of the CSSA Paper was to Outline 3 ethical teachings of your religious tradition and I think it said in relation to sexual ethics, bioethics etc. 2nd question was how 2 of those ethical teachings guide adherents in their everyday lives.

[elysepopplewell]

Hey Elyse
The first question of the CSSA Paper was to Outline 3 ethical teachings of your religious tradition and I think it said in relation to sexual ethics, bioethics etc. 2nd question was how 2 of those ethical teachings guide adherents in their everyday lives.

Right! This is the defining factor then. In relation to sexual, bioethics, etc, will make the difference in the situation of someone challenging their marks, it comes down to that finer wording.

Glad you got great marks Dancing Phalanges!

[asd987]

Hi, just wondering if you are allowed to use the same ethic for 2 religions in short answer. e.g. can i talk about bioethics for both Christianity and Buddhism 

[jamonwindeyer]

Hi, just wondering if you are allowed to use the same ethic for 2 religions in short answer. e.g. can i talk about bioethics for both Christianity and Buddhism 

Hey! Unfortunately not - You have to choose one specific religion for short answers and then use the other for the extended response

[asd987]

Hey, thanks for that but i think you misunderstood my question. I was asking if its okay to use the same ethics for 2 religions in the short answer section. e.g. if there is a question about ethics, can i choose bioethics for both Christianity and Buddhism for short answer? Or must i chose bioethics and a different one such as enviro. 

[jamonwindeyer]

Hey, thanks for that but i think you misunderstood my question. I was asking if its okay to use the same ethics for 2 religions in the short answer section. e.g. if there is a question about ethics, can i choose bioethics for both Christianity and Buddhism for short answer? Or must i chose bioethics and a different one such as enviro. 

Ahhh for SOR2, I gotcha - Pretty sure you can! I've never read anything to suggest otherwise at least?

[mjorfian]

Hey, thanks for that but i think you misunderstood my question. I was asking if its okay to use the same ethics for 2 religions in the short answer section. e.g. if there is a question about ethics, can i choose bioethics for both Christianity and Buddhism for short answer? Or must i chose bioethics and a different one such as enviro. 

yeah you can, 100%. My school did sexual ethics for both christianity and islam and so that's what I naturally do for short answers. Schools are permitted to pick whatever options they please so long as it follows the syllabus criteria.

[mjorfian]

Hey guys, one of our SOR teachers suggested to memorise 5 marker responses for every single dot point post 1945/ aboriginal spirituality and  religion and non religion in order to make sure we get 5/5, as she reckons the questions are usually similar and recycled off the syllabus. Do you think this is an efficient idea for the HSC? if not, what are some tips for short answers? I feel like they're marked really harshly and the most I've managed to get for them is 4/5. Can never hit that 5 mark for some reason because our markers are quite picky. thanks!

[elysepopplewell]

Hey guys, one of our SOR teachers suggested to memorise 5 marker responses for every single dot point post 1945/ aboriginal spirituality and  religion and non religion in order to make sure we get 5/5, as she reckons the questions are usually similar and recycled off the syllabus. Do you think this is an efficient idea for the HSC? if not, what are some tips for short answers? I feel like they're marked really harshly and the most I've managed to get for them is 4/5. Can never hit that 5 mark for some reason because our markers are quite picky. thanks!

I personally don't recommend memorising a bunch of 5 marker responses. It's true that the questions are often quite predictable in their nature given the limitations of the syllabus, but I don't think it's the right thing to do to in terms of guaranteeing full marks and in terms of your time management. Practicing a 5 marker for each of the syllabus dot points, however, is an excellent idea. It really forces you to cover all bases and identify any things you need to work on. I think the memorising part is the bit that catches me, it's not going to guarantee your full marks and it's a lot to commit to memory!

As it is with every question, it's important to identify the key words in a short answer response. You HAVE to be direct in your response because of the limited space, time, and marks. So you really do need to address things specifically. So for example, if it asks you about the affect of dispossession on Aboriginal Spirituality - it's very easy for students to get caught up in addressing the effects on Indigenous lives and not actually address the "spirituality" bit (this is valid criticism of a HSC question a few years ago...possibly my own 2015 paper...I can't remember though). So you really need to be certain that what you are addressing is EXACTLY what they want because there's not enough time to waffle around until you make your way to the point.

Also, remember correct terminology. So, recognise Aboriginal is an adjective and not a noun, spell Dreaming with a capital D, know that agnosticism and atheism are not quite the same, etc. Because it is such a power packed little response, accuracy of these kinds of things makes a difference!

[Lachlan Morley]

Hi All,

In section 2 the depth study short answers, i seem to be able to consistantly get full marks in questions up the value of 5 marks but for 8 mark questions i cant seem to get above 6

Is there anything markers look for specifically in those higher mark questions

[jamonwindeyer]

Hi All,

In section 2 the depth study short answers, i seem to be able to consistantly get full marks in questions up the value of 5 marks but for 8 mark questions i cant seem to get above 6

Is there anything markers look for specifically in those higher mark questions

There's nothing they look for that you wouldn't expect:

- Responding to the right verb (making a judgement when evaluating, actually drawing links between things when analysing, etc)
- Appropriate and varied examples
- A logical, well structured response to the question

What sort of feedback are you getting on your responses? That should hopefully give you an idea as to what is being missed?

[Lachlan Morley]

Hi Guys,

I'm really struggling to break into the 90's in SOR2 past papers and seem to be stuck in the high 80's

I seem to be dropping the majoirty of my marks in the two essays.

I seem to be writing in enough depth and detail but i just cant seem to break into the A range consistantly.

Does anyone have any overarching tips on how i can imporve my SOR2 essay writing

[elysepopplewell]

Hi Guys,

I'm really struggling to break into the 90's in SOR2 past papers and seem to be stuck in the high 80's

I seem to be dropping the majoirty of my marks in the two essays.

I seem to be writing in enough depth and detail but i just cant seem to break into the A range consistantly.

Does anyone have any overarching tips on how i can imporve my SOR2 essay writing

Hey there! Good on you for reaching out to bump up your marks. Religion and Peace essays, I find, students tend to skip out on the sacred texts and writings a lot and instead focus on initiatives and so on. So definitely that, and also, even if the essay asks about world peace specifically, bring in the inner peace as a means of being able to achieve world peace. Individuals are what makes up the world, so for individuals to find peace in themselves, they can find peace in the world around them.

As a note, my mum is an SOR2 teacher and I just asked her if she had anything to add and she said she wholeheartedly agrees.

Otherwise - is it in your expression that your losing your marks? Or do you find yourself to be a fairly strong writer?