Summary
Highlights
This screencast is the third and final part of the Citizenship Project series, focusing on Section C, the reflection section. Despite being the most important, it's often undervalued in the marking scheme and challenging due to the need for efficient writing and precise placement of information under specific headings to avoid losing easy marks.
Common mistakes include inefficiency, rambling, neglecting certain sub-sections while excelling in others, including irrelevant information, repetition (tautology), and not using headings. Additionally, introducing new information in Section C that wasn't mentioned previously or being too generic with lists of skills without specific examples are also frequent errors. It's recommended to focus on one or two key concepts from the course and illustrate their influence on the project.
The marking scheme for Section C has changed from five subheadings with four marks each to greater emphasis on 'knowledge and insights gained' and 'skills developed,' now worth six marks each, with the remaining three subheadings receiving four marks combined. The exact word count for the 300-word limit is still ambiguous, but clear and specific instructions must be followed.
Section C breaks down into specific aspects: 'knowledge, insights, and knowledge of the course,' 'list of skills developed' (emphasizing working with others and personal effectiveness), and 'reflection, feedback, and learning from the course.' The suggested headings for writing are 'Knowledge and Insights,' 'Skills,' 'Reflection,' and 'Feedback and Learning.' For the 300-word limit, six-mark sections should be around 90 words, and four-mark sections around 60 words, requiring extreme efficiency.
An example of an H4 grade submission discussing 'fake news and the media' is reviewed. The 'knowledge and insights' section is too short and generic, lacking personal perspective. The 'skills' section is stronger but inefficiently worded. The student neglected to use headings, making it harder for the examiner, and failed to address personal effectiveness explicitly. The reflection was valid but lacked depth and specific detail, indicating underwritten sections due to inefficient writing, resulting in 13 out of 20 marks.
A second example on the same topic shows improvement. The student used clear headings: 'Knowledge and Insights,' 'Skills Developed,' 'Reflection,' and 'Feedback and Learning.' The insights are more substantial, and specific skills are mentioned. However, the 'reflection' primarily describes the process of editing rather than critical thought, and while the 'feedback and learning' section is good and received input from various sources, it could be more specific, earning 16 out of 20 marks.
A much stronger example that uses the full word count and demonstrates a better thought process is presented. 'Knowledge and insights' are robust, linking to specific organizations and a strong personal statement. 'Skills developed' are concisely linked to previous project parts, showing balance and organizational skills. 'Reflection' clearly evaluates data and personal conclusions. The 'feedback and learning' section is substantial and relevant, incorporating teacher feedback and specific course concepts like Martha Nussbaum and the social minimum, earning 19 out of 20 marks.
Section C is the most challenging to concisely fit information into 300 words. Discipline in word count and avoiding extraneous information are essential. Personal engagement, not generic writing, is crucial. Provide a shortlist of skills and be specific in linking them to earlier ideas. Reflect upon previously undertaken ideas in different parts of the project. The presenter wishes good luck with submissions and encourages visiting passluckpodcast.com for resources and following on Twitter.