Se connecter

Se connecter avec OpenID

Characteristics that Moderators look for in answers which

Characteristics that Moderators
look for in answers which exhibit
Levels 3/4
Part (a)
• The work is a coherent piece of prose where source
analysis is integrated with the answer to the question.
• Source selection is appropriate for the question.
• Sources are not considered in isolation but are
evaluated in the context of the question: eg
candidates explain what a source is useful/reliable for.
• Conclusions are clear, answering the question with
reference to the evidence.
Part (b)
• The given interpretations are clearly explained.
• Source selection is appropriate in that it includes sources that
facilitate discussion of the interpretation(s).
• Effective answers begin with the view of an historian and then
examine the sources he or she might have used to come to that
• Source attributions are analysed in the context of the
• A judgement on the question is clearly made and supported.
Both parts
• Historical knowledge is used appropriately but
does not drift into lengthy narrative.
• Time and space is not wasted with extensive
quotation from sources or unecessary debate
about, for example,
• The levels awarded are for the whole piece, so decide
at the end.
• Pinpoint the level via use of the marking checklist; get
the actual mark by assessing best fit within that level.
• To be awarded a level, the candidate should have
sustained it. A single clear level 4 statement, for
example, does not often indicate level 4 overall.
• Do not credit mistakes, either historical or evidential.
Common Errors made by candidates which have been marked
as creditworthy, sometimes at a high level, by centres
Use of sources for information only
Source evaluation through content only
Erroneous eveluation
Erroneous evaluation used to back up an argument…or…
Relying uncritically on sources correctly assessed as
Source evaluation not integrated with answer to the
Treating part b) as solely a source exercise to the detriment
of interpretations
Attributions ignored
Questions not answered, little or no judgement shown
Common Errors by markers
• High level awarded for the whole piece when
level demonstrated only once
• Accurately assessing level then automatically
awarding top mark
• Halo Effect and its opposite
Без категории
Taille du fichier
80 Кб