Category: Exam Preparation

Exam Predictions: What did we learn? (2025)

On By Aimee HorsleyIn Exam Preparation, Philosophy and Ethics: R.SLeave a comment

As students (and teachers) recover from the aftermath of this year’s exam questions, I have taken some time to reflect. I have to admit I was irritated with the philosophy paper due to the tricky wording, repeating Religious Experience AGAIN and selecting topics that are generally known to be either quite hard or unpopular with students. It just felt a bit mean. Then came ethics. I think nothing other than surprise can describe my reaction. I began to question OCR – are they just playing ‘pin the tail on the spec’ randomly picking areas of the specification and seemingly forgetting about certain topics/ areas that have NEVER appeared on the exam. At this point I was also questioning OCR’s motives. Religious Studies is by design one of (in my humble opinion) the trickiest A levels because not only do you have a huge amount of content but the students also have to develop high level evaluation skills alongside being able to write full essays like a degree level student. Then throw in the mix surprising and somewhat tricky Q/topics and you just wonder, why are OCR making it so hard?!?

Now I know (as I always reiterate) OCR can do anything they want! They can pick any topics, any wording and specific small areas, as long as it is present on the spec. And yes, they are doing this. But this year broke the mould in many different ways. Over the years I have studied the patterns, taken the courses, marked exam papers, been a close advocate of OCR for many years (well my whole 18-year career), so maybe I just got complacent. Or maybe OCR need to be more mindful of the capabilities of A level students (which I already reflected upon last year in Do the exam markers for DCT need a reality check?). OCR also need to ensure they remain competitive not only with other exam boards offering the same qualification but also other A level subjects.  

So here are my top takeaways from the exams this year:

  1. The examiners might NOT ask an application question. They might ask an ‘ethical topic’ but this does not mean you have to apply it to a normative theory. So this year they did ask euthanasia but did not invite any application to a normative theory within the question (you could have applied if you wanted to, the question just didn’t specify it). Note that when it says ‘making moral decisions’ for example this is inviting you to discuss the normative theory with a ‘moral decision’ thus the relevant application topic.
Ethics application questions over the years
2018: x2  Assess the view that natural law is of no help with regard to the issue of euthanasia.
‘Kantian ethics provides the best approach to Business Ethics.’ Discuss
2019: x2  Asses the view that utilitarianism does not help with business ethics.
‘Natural law provides the best approach to sexual ethics.’ Discuss
2020: x2  Assess the view that Kantian ethics does not help with practical moral decision making.
‘Situation ethics provides the best approach to sexual ethics.’ Discuss
2021: x3  ‘Issues raised by euthanasia are best addressed by situation ethics.’ Discuss
Critically assess the view that natural law is of no help in making moral decisions.
Evaluate the view that Kantian ethics provides a more useful approach to whistle blowing than utilitarianism.
2022: x1  ‘Choices about sexual behaviour should only follow the approach of utilitarian ethics.’ Discuss
2023: x3  “In situation ethics, moral decision making is entirely individualistic and subjective.” Discuss
“Kant’s categorical imperative is very helpful in moral decision making.” Discuss
Evaluate the view that utilitarianism provides the best approach to sexual ethics.
2024: x1  “According to utilitarianism, a business should focus on profit making and nothing else.” Discuss
2025: x0   

2. The examiners ask similar (sometimes very similar) questions between year groups. So AS questions used in A level exams and vice versa. This means going over past questions and planning answers for these would be very helpful.

3. The examiners might ask very similar questions in the same year between AS and A level papers (as seen this year with body, mind and soul topic). This means keeping an eye on the AS questions, as these may give an insight into possible A level questions.

Similar/ repeated questions:

Continue reading “Exam Predictions: What did we learn? (2025)” →

DCT 2025 Exam Predictions

On By Aimee HorsleyIn Developments in Christian Thought, Exam Preparation, Philosophy and Ethics: R.SLeave a comment

If our last two exams have shown us anything it is that you need to revise everything. You also need to very carefully go through the spec (on the OCR website) to look at the wording for each section. The examiners are using the spec wording but the questions are still coming as a bit of a surprise, so you need to be prepared for anything. This is why my predictions for DCT feel a bit redundant, I am second guessing myself completely, over analysing previously asked questions, ignoring all previous patterns I have come to recognise. So rather than throwing away my crystal ball, I have just stayed with my original predictions.

  1. St. Augustine: “Augustine is right that sin means that humans can never be morally good.” Or “Augustine’s view of human nature is pessimistic” Discuss. Last asked in 2023 so is a possibility. The examiners could also ask “Critically assess the significance of Augustine’s teaching on human relationships before the Fall.” As this question came up in 2018 in the AS year but they do like repeating similar questions between the first and second year exams.
  2. Person of Jesus: “Jesus’ relationship with God was truly unique.” Discuss (Tip: make sure you know Mark 6-47-52 and John 9:1-41) No question has been asked on this area in the second year (human vs divine), so seems a large gap in the syllabus not to have been asked.
  3. Moral Action: “The cost of discipleship is too unrealistic.” Discuss. See past Q video for Q asked in first year exam, as examiners often repeat similar wording. Only two questions have been asked on Bonhoeffer in the second year and no question have ever been asked specifically on discipleship or grace. Also Bonhoeffer and grace was asked in last year’s AS exam so may reappear this year.
  4. Secularisation: General Q e.g. ‘To what extent is secularisation an opportunity for Christianity to develop new ways of thinking and acting.’ Or specific to Dawkins e.g. “Society would be happier without Christianity, as it is infantile, repressive and causes conflicts.” Discuss. The last question from this area was back in 2020 and the only areas to have been asked are Freud and a general Q (see ppt on YouTube for past questions) so some specific areas from the syllabus that are likely to come up this year.
  5. Gender and Theology: “Christianity can be changed and should not be abandoned.” Discuss or “Christianity is essentially sexist” Discuss. Just because we are missing it! Only two questions have been asked, one on Daly (2018) the other on Reuther (2022). I think a general question that links to both these feminist is possible.

Other possibilities: Death and Afterlife: Q on hell or election (limited/unlimited). This topic came up last year but there are lots of gaps and possible questions still on the spec that could be asked. Or Pluralism and Theology: “Christ is the ‘truth’ so there can be any other means of salvation.” Discuss.

Good luck to all of you! You have worked very hard, so this is your final opportunity to show off! Don’t forget to join the live stream on Thursday 18th June at 6.00 ( https://youtube.com/live/_kaaxnLSNi4?feature=share) for last minute exam support.

*Note: I sometimes refer to the exams by the first and second year. This is because OCR still set a paper for students who wish to sit the exam in the first year of the course (formerly known as the AS year), however most colleges no longer do this. The second year refers to the full A level exam (sat by everyone who completes the course) covering all 32 units.

*Important Update* – in the AS exam they have asked: 1. To what extent does reason have more authority than the Bible for Christian ethics? 2. ‘God may be known through the natural order of creation.’ Discuss. 3. Jesus’ mission was primarily to be a teacher of wisdom.’ Discuss. Going by the pattern in the philosophy and ethics exam, I am not discounting another question on natural vs revealed (there are a few questions that have been asked in the AS year that haven’t appeared in the second year), I also still think Jesus is a possibility.

Check out this ppt video of all past questions – I would especially look at the AS/ first year questions because the examiner’s seem to be repeating questions this year.

Ethics 2025 Exam Predictions

On By Aimee HorsleyIn Ethics New Spec, Exam Preparation, Philosophy and Ethics: R.SLeave a comment

First of all lets discuss the elephant in the room…that philosophy exam. A couple of big curve balls from OCR. This is the first time they have asked the same topic three years in a row. Not only that, the question on union is closely linked to last year’s question on mysticism (part of the definition of mysticism is union), it is also pretty much identical to a question asked in the AS 2023 exam. Now of course OCR can do this (they can do anything they want!) but when there are so many areas that have never been asked, I am so bored of seeing RE. Secondly, as far as I can tell, they have never asked a very similar question in the first and second year exam in the same year (in this case ‘materialism’). On the whole a harder paper, with tricky wording (all the wording is all on the spec though) and 4 topics that I would say are less popular with students. Onwards and upwards towards ethics.

As I say every year, this is the hardest exam to predict because there are many question variations (topics asked on their own or as application) and a significant number of areas have already been asked over the years. On this note, I must be clear that I do not share my predictions with you to be correct, I share them with you to give you an idea of what to expect or what to be prepared for. I make my predictions simply by looking at previous questions, recognizing the obvious gaps (using the spec) and making possible questions from here (trust me no secret magic trick, I would be a pretty poor magician if I only got 2 out of 4 tricks right each time). So here goes…

Specific questions could be:

  1. Euthanasia and/or Situation Ethics: You could get a specific question on Situation Ethics. E.g. the six propositions (or four working principles asked in 2024 in first year) or “Fletcher’s understanding of agape means nothing more than wanting the best for the person involved in a given situation.” Discuss. You could also get a specific question on Euthanasia. E.g. “There is a moral difference between medical intervention to end a patient’s life and medical non-intervention to end a patient’s life” Discuss or “Quality of life is the only important issue when making moral decisions about euthanasia.” Discuss (asked in 2022 first year) Finally you might be asked an application question such as: Assess the view that situation ethics is of no help with regard to the issue of euthanasia. Situation ethics was not asked last year nor was euthanasia. There are also a number of areas of the spec for situation ethics that have never been asked. Don’t forget you could get a question on both SE and euthanasia in the same paper (and yes you can answer both if you want to).
  2. Utilitarianism: Never been asked in the second year (without business ethics/ sex), so any question on utility, hedonic calculus or act vs rule is possible. You might also get a question such as “The strengths of Bentham’s utilitarianism outweighs its weaknesses.” Discuss. Or “It is not possible to reach a moral decision based on the measure of pleasure.” Discuss. Most obvious choice…but is it too obvious? Don’t forget you could be asked a question that just wants you to discuss the normative theory and not apply it to an ethical situation (in this case business).
  3. Sex Ethics: Specifically on premarital sex, extramarital sex or homosexuality e.g. “No theory is useful when dealing with issues surrounding homosexuality.” Discuss. Or specific to Kant e.g. ‘To what extent can issues surrounding sex ethics be judged as good, bad, right or wrong based on the extent to which duty is best served.’ You could also get a general question such as: To what extent do religious beliefs and practices have a continuing role in the area of sexual ethics. I would be extremely surprised if a sex ethics question is not asked this year. Examiners usually like at least two application questions and there are a lot of areas of sex ethics that have not been asked (e.g. Kant with Sex ethics or a specific issue).
  4. Conscience: General Q e.g. “Conscience is just an umbrella term for moral decision making based on culture and environment not God.” Or “Conscience is a result of guilt not the presence of God.” Discuss. Conscience has not been asked since 2022, this means they might asked a similar question to one that has been asked in the past (check out the video on YouTube of previously asked questions) or a new area of the spec similar to the questions I’ve written above. 
  5. Business Ethics and/ or Utilitarianism: General Q on Business e.g. “Globalisation discourages the pursuit of good ethics as the foundation of good business.” Discuss. Or Business with Utilitarianism e.g. “Utilitarianism is not useful when making ethical decision regarding issues surrounding business ethics.” I think you may get a business question and a utilitarianism question. Utilitarianism and business have not been asked since 2019 – however I doubt they will ask for Utilitarianism and Utilitarianism with business 9but it is possible and yes you can answer both). I think the question will be a general business theme (probably not whistleblowing as this is the only theme that has been asked in 2021). It could be a business question that has been asked in the first year such as “good business decisions are always good ethical decisions”.

Other possibilities: Corporate Social Responsibility (asked in the first year exam 2024) or globalisation (Business Ethics). Also: Critically assess the view that people just know within themselves what is good, bad, right and wrong from a common-sense approach (linking to intuitionism – Meta Ethics).

Good luck to all of you! You have worked very hard, so this is your opportunity to show off! Don’t forget to join the live stream on Monday 16th June at 6.00 ( https://www.youtube.com/live/91XyqVwQuqM?si=JRWesAdrceUE4oMe) for last minute exam support.

*Note: I sometimes refer to the exams by the first and second year. This is because OCR still set a paper for students who wish to sit the exam in the first year of the course (formerly known as the AS year), however most colleges no longer do this. The second year refers to the full A level exam (sat by everyone who completes the course) covering all 32 units.

*Important Update* – in the AS exam they have asked 1. ‘The most useful approach to business ethics is provided by utilitarianism.’ Discuss. 2. Assess the view that Kantian ethics is of little help in moral decision making. 3.’The five primary precepts are the most helpful part of natural law in moral decision making.’ Discuss. Going by the pattern in the philosophy exam, I am not discounting another question on business with Utilitarianism being asked in this exam too.

Philosophy 2025 Exam Predictions

On By Aimee HorsleyIn Exam Preparation, Philosophy New SpecLeave a comment

As I say every year, it is impossible to accurately predict exam questions due to the magnitude of questions the exam board could ask. I did however predict one topic Q spot on last year (analogy) and two other topic areas on Plato and Cosmological (not quite the right wording of the questions though)– so go me!

We have to be prepared that the exam board could ask curveball questions to avoid people like me ‘accurately’ predicting the questions. They may ask questions that have previously featured in the first-year exams (e.g. they asked a Q on Descartes in 2023 and a very similar question on Descartes appeared the year before in the first-year exam). The examiners might also repeat topics over multiple years, so just because it was asked last year does not mean the topic wont also appear this year as well (e.g. a question on Religious Experience has been asked in both 2023 and 2024). The examiners could also use the same wording (repeat the same questions), so going over my ppt on previously asked questions will help prepare you further (https://youtu.be/qUHXa_3rlhA).

With all this in mind, these predictions are just my own musings and may be completely wrong, so you must still revise all areas on the spec. But if I were going to write an exam paper this is how I would do it…

  1. Soul, Mind and Body: ‘Aristotle presents the most comprehensive view of the soul.’ Or Critically assess the view that the mind can be fully explained by material interactions. Or “The mind-body distinction is a category error” Discuss. My reasoning behind this choice is that it was not on last year’s paper and there are a number of obvious gaps from the spec that haven’t been asked before.
  2. Ontological: Critically assess the view that existence can be treated as a predicate. Or ‘The ontological argument does not justify belief in God.’ Discuss. This is a top runner for me. Ontological has not been asked since 2021! There are also a considerable number of questions the examiners have never asked. You could also get a question on Kant (only asked in the first year 2018) or Gaunilo (asked in the second year 2021 or in the first year 2024 –they like to ask similar questions from the first-year exam in the following second year exam). Also ‘predicate’ is a clear part of the spec that has not appeared in the first-year exam either.
  3. Problem of Evil: ‘Hick’s reworking of the Irenaean theodicy gives some purpose to natural evil’ Discuss. Or ‘The need to create a ‘vale of soul-making’ cannot justify the existence or extent of evils.’ Discuss. It must come up!!!! I’ve been waiting for this one for years. I think the examiners have forgotten that this is part of the spec. Poor John Hick. Is this going to be the year?
  4. Nature of God: “Swinburne successfully resolves the problems surrounding God’s omniscience and human freewill.” Discuss. Or “God cannot have divine foreknowledge and be fully benevolent.” Discuss. A number of areas of NOG that have not been asked, so two obvious questions would be Swinburne and/or benevolence. There is going to be at least one question from the second-year topics and since all areas of Religious Language 20th century have been asked (no obvious gaps) and Religious Language: Analogy was asked last year, it seems that this year NOG seems likely.

Alternative Q (I think these are unlikely but if the examiners are wanting easy question options, these are obvious gaps from the spec that have not been asked):

Continue reading “Philosophy 2025 Exam Predictions” →

RS Exam Support 2025

On By Aimee HorsleyIn Exam Preparation, Philosophy and Ethics: R.SLeave a comment

Powerpoint of Past Exam Questions:

Powerpoint of Gaps and Possible Questions (if you would like a copy of these ppts):

Predictions:

Live Streams for last minute exam support:

Links to last year’s live streams (membership exclusive):

Philosophy:

Ethics:

DCT:

Don’t forget to check out the Examiner’s Report summaries (Essay Writing Tips (Examiner’s Report 2024) and Goldilocks and the Three Exam Papers) These will give you an insight into what the examiner’s are looking for and what to avoid.

Essay Writing Tips (Examiner’s Report 2024)

On By Aimee HorsleyIn Essay Tips and Techniques, Exam PreparationLeave a comment

I always find it helpful reading the examiner’s reports but in recent years I have also found them highly frustrating, vague and somewhat unfair. This year’s Philosophy and Ethics reports come with very few surprises, a selection of helpful pointers (which I summarise below) and a general repetition of previous years’ comments. However the Christian Thought section infuriated me due to the clear disparity in expectations (with the other modules of the course) and a complete disregard of the cohort of students we teach. Can I order a reality check please?

Helpful all-round pointers:

Best AnswersWhat to Avoid
Selected relevant material. Selection of material in response to Q is as much about what is left out as what is put in. Unclear why certain arguments were brought into an answer e.g. Tillich’s symbol in Aquinas’ analogy. This works but only when evaluatively.
https://www.youtube.com/shorts/Fs-9Rx6q9Po		Weaker students wrote everything they knew. Questions are intended to test how well candidates can use the material to respond to a specific question. Not just a recall test. Need to think and plan responses, rather than seeing a key word and launching into a pre prepared answer.
Focus directly on the Q. Most successful responses focused on the specific words in the Q e.g. the word ‘sufficient’ found in the Q can change the direction of an answer.
https://www.youtube.com/shorts/9VRdJjEvFes
https://www.youtube.com/shorts/KdZnPH98LNk		Evaluation was juxtaposed rather than developed. This means that arguments, such as those presented by key scholars, are simply stated (regurgitated info) rather than exploring why they are relevant and how their argument impacts your overall discussion.
Introduction included an outline of what was going to be argued with hypothesis and reasoning. Outlining thesis/ judgment in introduction.
https://www.youtube.com/shorts/azNF-rVAKWg		Absence of planning was noticeable.  
Structure your paragraphs by starting with a view, rather than a name, which tends to lean to an essay that is driven by A02 rather than A01.
https://www.youtube.com/shorts/QIQj6v2_a4U		Having a simplistic view of content.  
Embed discussion, use the material as a vehicle for discussion (A02). Argument driven approach rather than stating criticisms of scholars.
https://www.youtube.com/shorts/RoJn9UlkVGQ		Longer essays are not necessarily better – focus can drift.  
Relevant synoptic links made.  
https://youtube.com/shorts/xstsllLKJqc		Being synoptic can lead to time wasted exploring other topics that did not significantly increase credit for the question being answered.  
Unnamed scholarly views can be credited highly – you don’t need a ‘menu of scholars’ (love this phrase, already used it two or three times in my lessons already!).  
https://www.youtube.com/shorts/qwsMq8j7d3E		Unnecessary comparisons with other theories. For example in a Cosmological question contrasting with Teleological and/or Ontological – WHY would you do this?!? – unless fuelling the debate – multiple concepts can dilute the responses made – don’t ‘shoehorn’ other aspects of the course into answers.

Stay tuned for the summary of the DCT section of the examiner’s report, which needs a far more in-depth exploration. Coming soon 😊 (You can now find it here: Do the exam markers for DCT need a reality check?)