© WJEC CBAC Ltd.

GCE EXAMINERS' REPORTS

RELIGIOUS STUDIES

AS/Advanced SUMMER 2012

© WJEC CBAC Ltd.

Statistical Information The Examiner’s Report may refer in general terms to statistical outcomes. Statistical information on candidates’ performances in all examination components (whether internally or externally assessed) is provided when results are issued. Annual Statistical Report The annual Statistical Report (issued in the second half of the Autumn Term) gives overall outcomes of all examinations administered by WJEC.

Unit Page RS1/2 CS 1

RS1/2 ETH 4

RS1/2 PHIL 8

RS1/2 BS 11

RS1/2 CHR 13

RS1/2 ER 16

RS1/2 WR 20

RS3 CS 25

RS3 ETH 28

RS3 PHIL 33

RS3 BS 36

RS3 CHR 39

RS3 ER 41

RS3 WR 46

RS4 HE 50

© WJEC CBAC Ltd.

1

RELIGIOUS STUDIES

General Certificate of Education

Summer 2012

Advanced Subsidiary/Advanced

Principal Examiner: Gordon Reid Unit Statistics The following statistics include all candidates entered for the unit, whether or not they 'cashed in' for an award. The attention of centres is drawn to the fact that the statistics listed should be viewed strictly within the context of this unit and that differences will undoubtedly occur between one year and the next and also between subjects in the same year. Unit Entry Max Mark Mean Mark RS1/2 CS 838 90 46.3 Grade Ranges A 68 B 58 C 48 D 38 E 28 N.B. The marks given above are raw marks and not uniform marks.

© WJEC CBAC Ltd.

2

RS1/2 CS - AN INTRODUCTION TO CONTEMPORARY SOCIETY The great majority of students answered q. 1, with the other questions attracting a broadly equal audience. There were some excellent answers at the top end and some very poor responses at the bottom. Overall the standard was reasonably good and similar, I believe, to the previous year. Q.1 (a) Most students knew the basics with regular mention of stewardship,

dominion, vegetarianism and the need to care for creation. Many used the Genesis narrative and a good number made mention of the views of other religions, most notably Islam and Buddhism. However, only the very best answers attracted serious scholarship from, for example, Vardy and Singer. Aristotle had a few mentions, often wrongly described as being a member of the early Christian church and, in one case, as a disciple of Jesus! The problem many candidates encountered was the lack of scholarly material at their disposal and a considerable number resorted to lengthy and often graphic accounts of how animals are killed for meat. A number did not properly distinguish between religious and moral issues and tended to treat the two concepts as the same thing.

Q.1 (b) Most focussed on the pros and cons of killing animals for food as opposed to

fox hunting, bear-baiting and other types of animal cruelty. The better students were able to talk about speciesim, hedonism and the argument for animal equality, but, as in (a), a number simply wrote lengthy narratives on hunting or experimentation. There were rather muddled references and few were prepared to offer a valid and supported argument. In the mid-range there were a considerable number of general answers, many repeating what had already been said in (a).

Q.2 (a) This was a popular question, but also the most feebly done, with only the best

offering any serious scholarly debate. At the top end, candidates correctly identified what religious specific broadcasting is and used appropriate material in support, including the argument of breath vs. depth and the use of religious leaders , sacred texts and religious festivals and practices. However, perhaps the majority of answers relied on re-telling events from a couple of programmes, most notably ‘Songs of Praise’ and ‘The Big Question’. A number confused cultural and religious issues and few made really successful links between religion and the programme. At the lower end, candidates wrongly resorted to narrative re-telling of events in ‘Eastenders’ or ‘The Simpsons’ which are, of course, not religious specific broadcasting. Most contented themselves with rather vague comments about religious or moral dilemmas.

Q.2 (b) There were few good answers to this question. The best candidates were

able to offer a reasoned analysis, using a range of broadcasting material, but overall there were too many stereotyped responses about comedy (‘Vicar of Dibley’) or humorous asides from ‘The Simpsons’. A few resorted to TV programmes to illustrate some rather vague arguments. There was a lot of repetition from (a) though most candidates were able to offer some kind of conclusion.

© WJEC CBAC Ltd.

3

Q.3 (a) This was better done with the highest candidates making useful reference to the six indicators of secularism. These candidates offered issues of belief, value-systems and community. . Elsewhere, most students in the mid-range talked about some of the indicators, faith schools, NRMs and organised religion. Weaker candidates wrote about a couple of the indicators but their comments lacked scholarly support and most responses in this range offered generalised notions of what secularism really is. The weakest candidates got tangled up with issues of media, race or religious diversity. Some made reference the UK becoming multi-faith on the one hand and secular on the other, though few were able to develop their arguments.

Q.3 (b) There were very few good answers. Most mid-upper range candidates knew

the difference between belief and practice and wrote about the rise of fundamentalism and materialism, but few were able to develop this further in a scholarly way. There were a number of anecdotes and homilies, but little meaningful analysis. In the lower range, differing viewpoints were mentioned but more links could have been made to a range of issues and comparisons between faith and practices would have been useful.

Q.4 (a) Although not very popular, this was probably the best-answered question of

all with most upper-range students referring quite impressively to Freud’s views, including wish-fulfilment, the finality of death and, inevitably, the Oedipus Complex. There were also useful references to neurosis and religion-engendered guilt. Mid -range responses were more narrative and, although mentioning issues such as neurosis and guilt-repression, tended to rely on long and graphic accounts of the primal horde. At the lowest end, candidates just wrote all they knew about Freud.

Q.4 (b) There were many brief answers to this question. The best candidates offered

examples and scholarly analysis, comparing Freud particularly to Jung and linking them both to psychological health. In the mid-range, candidates wrote more generally on Jung himself, and did not give enough time to the issue of psychological health. At the lowest end, arguments were unsubstantiated or simplistic, with considerable repetition.

© WJEC CBAC Ltd.

4

RELIGIOUS STUDIES

General Certificate of Education

Summer 2012

Advanced Subsidiary/Advanced

Principal Examiner: Andrew Pearce Unit Statistics The following statistics include all candidates entered for the unit, whether or not they 'cashed in' for an award. The attention of centres is drawn to the fact that the statistics listed should be viewed strictly within the context of this unit and that differences will undoubtedly occur between one year and the next and also between subjects in the same year. Unit Entry Max Mark Mean Mark RS1/2 ETH 1,852 90 44.4 Grade Ranges A 63 B 54 C 45 D 36 E 27 N.B. The marks given above are raw marks and not uniform marks.

© WJEC CBAC Ltd.

5

RS1/2 ETH - INTRODUCTION TO RELIGION AND ETHICS The paper appeared to be accessible and many centres had prepared their candidates well. There were a number of outstanding scripts. However, some students continue to 'write all they know about' rather than address the questions set. This was particularly noticeable in some answers to Question 2 and was reflected in candidates' level of achievement. In Question 3(a) weaker candidates were often unaware of the seven criteria of the hedonic calculus within Bentham’s Act Utilitarianism. They should be reminded therefore to make better use of the glossary provided by the WJEC in order to gain a true understanding of these ideas. A small number of candidates also failed to complete the paper which suggests they should be encouraged to set time limits for each question. Several candidates spent a disproportionate amount of time on their part (b) answers to the detriment of their part (a) answers which are worth double the marks. Some candidates also answered the (a) and (b) questions out of order which made the principle of salvage difficult to apply. It would also help considerably with the administration of the scripts if candidates entered the question numbers they have attempted on the front of their scripts. Q.1 (a) Good candidates were able to give a holistic, logical and coherent account of

Aquinas’ Natural Law theory. They were able to demonstrate how the various elements of the theory fitted together by using appropriate evidence. For example they were able to explain how the secondary precepts were developed from the primary precepts and how Aquinas’ understanding of real and apparent goods related to the concept of sin. Good candidates were able to use terminology such as absolutist, deontological, interior/exterior acts, etc. Weaker candidates simply wrote all they knew about Natural Law with little or no reference to the question. Many appeared to be simply writing out a list of pieces of information they had learnt with little or no understanding. Some spent time giving irrelevant background information on Aristotle or Aquinas. Some could list the four levels of law identified by Aquinas, but failed to demonstrate how these related to each other and their importance for the theory itself. They also often confused ‘real’ and ‘apparent’ goods with ‘interior’ and ‘exterior’ acts.

Q.1 (b) Good candidates produced mature and thought provoking responses with many candidates focussing on the social relevance of Natural Law. They successfully argued why in an increasingly secular society the theory might not be useful for some, whilst recognising that for Roman Catholics it is at the centre of their moral teachings. Others also perceptively recognised that the Natural Law in its original form was a secular theory and therefore might still be relevant in today’s society. Others recognised that the primary precepts have become the social norm in many cultures e.g. having a civil law in order to maintain ‘an ordered society.’ Good candidates also gave evidence or reasoning to support their ideas and made an appropriate conclusion. Weaker candidates tended to list points for and against the view expressed in the question with little or no analysis. For example “We live in a secular society.” They would be wiser to make fewer points, but to develop and analyse their arguments in greater depth. Some candidates answered the question as if it asked for the strengths and weaknesses of Natural Law which was not the case.

© WJEC CBAC Ltd.

6

Q.2 (a) Good candidates understood the terms ‘consequentialist’ and ‘relativistic’ and

carefully selected relevant information to address the question. Many candidates referred to some of the ten principles of Situation Ethics and clearly linked them to the question. For example the working principle of ‘relativism’ and the fundamental principle of ‘a loving end justifies the means’ are relevant here amongst many others. They were also able to justify the points they made using evidence such as Biblical texts to support their claims. Weaker candidates simply wrote all they knew about the theory or wasted time outlining the different types of love or the historical context in which the theory was developed. Some candidates clearly did not know or understand what the terms ‘consequentialist’ and ‘relativistic’ meant.

Q.2 (b) Good candidates were able to show why many who support Situation Ethics would say that it does not promote ‘bad behaviour’ as it is based on selfless love, it considers the consequences and it does not consider any act to be ‘bad’ if it is based on agape love. They did however recognise why for its opponents Situation Ethics could be seen to promote bad behaviour as love is subjective and it is hard to prove the real motive behind a person’s actions. Some stated that deontological theories are better at preventing ‘bad behaviour’ as they provide a clear definition of right or wrong. Good candidates also gave evidence or reasoning to support their ideas and made an appropriate conclusion. Weaker candidates tended to list points for and against the view expressed in the question with little or no analysis. For example “Situation Ethics is too subjective and allows people to do bad acts.” They would be wiser to make fewer points, but to develop and analyse their arguments in greater depth. Some candidates answered the question as if it asked for the strengths and weaknesses of Situation Ethics which is not the case.

Q.3 (a) Good candidates read the question carefully and recognised the trigger word ‘outline’ in the question. They used key terms such as the principle of utility, hedonism, teleological, relativistic, consequential and the hedonic calculus in their answer. They were also able to explain the various differences between Bentham (Act utilitarianism and the quantity of happiness) and Mill (Rule utilitarianism and the quality of happiness). The more able candidates even referred to the Strong and Weak forms of Rule Utilitarianism. Weaker candidates simply wrote all they knew about Utilitarianism. A number of candidates confused Bentham and Mill’s ideas and some were unable to even correctly identify the seven parts of the Hedonic Calculus let alone demonstrate some understanding of them. Some candidates correctly referred to Rule Utilitarianism as using rules, but failed to explain that the basis of these rules was the principle of the “greatest happiness for the greatest number.” Many weaker candidates inserted quotes from Bentham or Mill without any link to the point they were making and without demonstrating any understanding of what the quote actually meant. For example what does Mill’s quote “"It is better to be a human being dissatisfied than a pig satisfied; better to be Socrates dissatisfied than a fool satisfied” actually mean ?

© WJEC CBAC Ltd.

7

Q.3 (b) Good candidates in agreeing with the statement given often distinguished between Bentham’s version of Utilitarianism and Mill’s claiming that the major weaknesses of Bentham’s version (quantity over the quality of happiness and the lack of clear rules) were dealt with by Mill. Others stated that the principle of utility is used as a basis for democracy and the distribution of healthcare. Arguments against the statement included the fact that happiness is subjective or that religious views would oppose the idea that a minority can be allowed to suffer for the majority’s happiness. Good candidates also gave evidence or reasoning to support their ideas and made an appropriate conclusion Weaker candidates tended to list points for and against the view expressed in the question with little or no analysis. For example “Utilitarianism works as it makes people happy” or made erroneous comments like “it fails to consider the minority” (it does consider them initially but allows them to suffer if doing so fulfils the principle of utility.) Weaker candidates would be wiser to make fewer points, but to develop and analyse their arguments in greater depth.

Q.4 (a) Whilst this appeared to be the least popular question, good candidates focussed on the question and were also able to link the religious teachings on adultery to other relevant issues such as marriage, abortion and contraception. They often referred to religious traditions, leaders or relevant theories such as Natural Law or Situation Ethics. Many of these candidates also quoted sacred texts with accuracy and insight e.g. Matthew 5:27-30 or John 7:53-8:11. Weaker candidates tended to give simplistic and stereo-typical religious views on this issue. Some clearly had no real idea about what ‘adultery’ means. They often made general claims without any supporting reasoning or evidence or made erroneous statements such as “Jesus forgave an adulterous woman without condemning her actions.” Others simply wrote about another issue such as marriage with little or no reference to the question set or made irrelevant references to Utilitarianism.

Q.4 (b) Good candidates were able to produce mature responses. For example they gave various reasons why traditional attitudes towards adultery are fair such as it could be damaging to society as it threatens the sanctity of marriage, it shows a lack of commitment, it leads to other issues such as abortion, it is a betrayal of the partner’s trust or the negative effects it has on a family. They were however, able to give arguments in favour of the statement given such as the fact that traditional punishments for adultery have included the death penalty which goes against the basic human right to life. Traditional attitudes also fail to consider the situation in which the adulterer finds themselves, whereas Situation Ethics and Utilitarianism are more relativistic and take this into account. Perceptive candidates referred to Fletcher’s example of sacrificial adultery. Good candidates also gave evidence or reasoning to support their ideas and made an appropriate conclusion. Weaker candidates tended to simply repeat information they had given in part (a) of the question such as “adultery is wrong as it breaks one of the Ten Commandments”. Those who did attempt to address the question tended to list points with little or no analysis. They would be wiser to make fewer points, but to develop and analyse their arguments in greater depth.

© WJEC CBAC Ltd.

8

RELIGIOUS STUDIES

General Certificate of Education

Summer 20212

Advanced Subsidiary/Advanced

Principal Examiner: Karl Lawson Unit Statistics The following statistics include all candidates entered for the unit, whether or not they 'cashed in' for an award. The attention of centres is drawn to the fact that the statistics listed should be viewed strictly within the context of this unit and that differences will undoubtedly occur between one year and the next and also between subjects in the same year. Unit Entry Max Mark Mean Mark RS1/2 PHIL 6,839 90 40.9 Grade Ranges A 63 B 53 C 44 D 35 E 26 N.B. The marks given above are raw marks and not uniform marks.

© WJEC CBAC Ltd.

9

RS1/2 PHIL - AN INTRODUCTION TO PHILOSOPHY OF RELIGION There was evidence this year that a significant number of centres were preparing candidates with ‘model answers’ to certain questions. However, the preparation of candidates for these questions puts them at a huge disadvantage when the paper offers a different perspective on the topic than the one the centre has prepared students for. Thus there is a very real danger that neither proper academic success is achieved in the student’s learning, nor their attainment. Candidates prepared for a ‘write all you know about’ approach to the cosmological/teleological arguments found themselves disadvantaged in terms of responding to a question, clearly signposted in the specification, on the arguments against. First, a high percentage of candidates continue to omit to fill in the necessary rubric on the front of the paper to indicate the questions addressed, this is a simple, requirement of the examination process and centres wishing to demonstrate good practice should strongly encourage candidates to observe this formality. Literacy and legibility issues are also a significant concern, centres are encouraged to do all that they can to alleviate these issues wherever possible, using the procedures that exist within the examination assessment system. Q.1 (a) A number of candidates misunderstood the question and simply described

the argument rather than examining the criticisms. A few candidates outlined the cosmological before criticising it, which was generally unnecessary. Successful candidates were able to make relevant reference to Hume and Kant, showing a good understanding of their criticisms. However, as with q2a, chronology with reference to scholars was an issue. Many referred to the Russell/Copleston debate, Russell’s statement that the Universe is just ‘a brute fact.’ Many alluded to the Big Bang and the possibility of infinite regression. Too many responses, however, appeared to simply refer to the criticisms in a somewhat cursory manner, and effectively listing the criticisms.

Q.1 (b) Some candidates were able to answer this question well, giving a detailed

evaluation that considered more than one side of the argument, referring to a variety of scholars. There was a tendency by weaker candidates merely to list arguments rather than engage with them and evaluate them. Too many candidates simply repeated what they had written in part (a). There was a tendency by all too many to simply list the arguments for and against, without stopping to critically evaluate The majority of answers tended to consist of two lists, one denoting strengths and the other weaknesses, followed by a brief conclusion. There was an overall lack of detailed analysis. This also applies for answers to question 2b.

Q.2 (a) At one end of the spectrum a number candidates produced excellent

answers, whilst at the other, some failed to secure any marks at all, simply because they appear to have misunderstood the question and regurgitated, some in great detail, what the teleological argument entails. The extensive list of Hume’s arguments against were rarely used. A more extensive grasp of his arguments against would have served many a candidate well. Other common pitfalls were explaining Darwin and evolution and giving an example but failing to connect this to the Teleological Argument and why it should therefore be considered an argument against it. All too often ‘create / created’ were used instead of ‘design / designed’ even where the argument was correctly teleological - though in some answers it clearly veered towards or moved into cosmological arguments. That said, there were other answers that comprehensively, accurately and clearly addressed the question.

© WJEC CBAC Ltd.

10

Q.2 (b) Successful candidates were able to demonstrate that the weaknesses of the Teleological Arguments were very well understood and appropriate conclusions were often drawn to this question. The impact of the theory of evolution and the Epicurean hypothesis were very well understood. Again, candidates used a range of philosophical language and applied this with precision. However, less successful candidates were more frequently seen and they often appeared unfamiliar with the distinct strengths of the Teleological Argument and, so, simply rehearsed a number of Teleological Arguments instead. Some candidates also repeated huge sections from part (a) without any real utilisation of the skill of evaluation. Indeed, there was a tendency, by some, to merely “list” the issues they knew with the Teleological Argument.

Q.3 (a) The vast majority of candidates demonstrated a very good grasp of

the Irenaean Theodicy and key points, such as being made in God’s image and not his likeness and Hick’s counterfactual hypothesis were well discussed and elaborated upon. Consequently, a high command of philosophical language was again demonstrated. However, there was a tendency, by some candidates, to become confused between the Augustinian and Irenaean Theodicies. In addition, where it was mentioned, many candidates were unclear in their understanding of what is meant by the epistemic distance and the role that it plays in the theodicy. A very few candidates simply rehearsed the problem of evil in answering this question.

Q.3 (b) This was well answered by many, drawing on Augustine and Irenaeus, and

evaluating the strengths and weaknesses of each. Less able candidates merely recounted the inconsistent triad, stating the problem rather than evaluating how successful theodicies might be as a response to the problem.

Q.4 (a) Some candidates appeared to have misread the question and simply wrote

all they knew about religious experience and mysticism. There was a tendency to use William James’ characteristics of mystical experience without applying these to the question. Answers that did address the question tended to be superficial, referring to drug intoxication and mental exhaustion, etc.

Q.4 (b) The psychological problems with mystical experiences were generally well

understood by those candidates that were able to demonstrate competency with this subject area. Many candidates also made reference to James’ “fruits” of a religious experience when defending them. However, due to a general limited knowledge and understanding in this area, some candidates solely focused on the psychological issues of the mystical experiences as being the only issue with it. There was also very limited analysis or evaluation of points and, consequently, answers tended to be very brief.

© WJEC CBAC Ltd.

11

RELIGIOUS STUDIES

General Certificate of Education

Summer 20212

Advanced Subsidiary/Advanced

Principal Examiner: Gwynn Ap Gwilym Unit Statistics The following statistics include all candidates entered for the unit, whether or not they 'cashed in' for an award. The attention of centres is drawn to the fact that the statistics listed should be viewed strictly within the context of this unit and that differences will undoubtedly occur between one year and the next and also between subjects in the same year. Unit Entry Max Mark Mean Mark RS1/2 BS 89 90 49.1 Grade Ranges A 69 B 58 C 47 D 36 E 26 N.B. The marks given above are raw marks and not uniform marks.

© WJEC CBAC Ltd.

12

RS1/2 BS - INTRODUCTION TO BIBLICAL STUDIES

No candidates attempted Section A.

As usual, the general standard varied considerably. There were few outstanding scripts. There are still candidates who write about ‘angles’ appearing to ‘sheppards’, about ‘King Harold’ and Jesus being born in a ‘manja’, and there were still several references to ‘the Immaculate Conception of Jesus’, even though past reports have emphasised that the doctrine of the Immaculate Conception concerns not Jesus but Mary. Many candidates seemed unaware of the time and value difference between part (a) and part (b) questions. Too often, more time was spent on (b) than on (a).

Q.1 (a) There were some good answers demonstrating a sound and detailed knowledge of the set texts. Some candidates, however, included unnecessarily an examination of John’s Prologue (or ‘John’s Birth Narrative’, as it was often incorrectly called). Very few seemed aware of the canticles in Luke 1 and 2.

(b) What was expected was some exploration of the supernatural elements in the Birth Narratives and the scholarly call for the demythologizing of the gospels. There was, however, a common tendency to interpret the word ‘myths’ simply as ‘not historically authentic’ and to launch into a prepared essay on the differences between Matthew and Luke which lead people to doubt the authenticity of their accounts. This approach received limited credit.

Q.2 (a) This was a very popular question. Most answers reflected a sound knowledge of the text, although there was often uncertainty as to who exactly walked pass the victim – offers included ‘a Pharisee’, ‘a rabbi’, ‘a Zealot’, ‘a high priest’, ‘an elder’ and ‘a wealthy man from the city’. For the record, it was a priest and a Levite. Explanations of the parable often lacked depth. While a few candidates wrote that the inn may represent the church, no one seemed to be aware that the robbers may represent the corrupt systems of this world.

(b) Most answers tended to dismiss out of hand the authenticity of the parables and needed to be more objective. Those who referred to Form Criticism saw it, in the main, as a weapon to undermine the authority of the text rather than as a tool to assist in understanding its development.

Q.3 (a) Again, this was a popular question. Most were aware of issues such as the compassion and messianic status of Jesus. Not so many saw the miracles as evidence of his deity and no one realised that even in Jesus’ time on earth they were not evidence that everyone could accept.

(b) There were two approaches. Some focused on the similarities between the accounts in the Synoptic Gospels, others on similarities between specific miracles within a single gospel. Both approaches were credited. Again, as with Form Criticism in 3 (b), there was a need here to see Redaction Criticism more objectively than merely as a method of devaluing the text.

Q.4 (a) Few candidates attempted this question and not all who attempted it had a sufficient grasp of the details of Luke 24.

(b) In general, those who responded were aware of the fundamental status of the resurrection in Christian belief and appreciated that if it were not historically true the integrity of the whole Christian message was at stake.

© WJEC CBAC Ltd.

13

RELIGIOUS STUDIES

General Certificate of Education

Summer 20212

Advanced Subsidiary/Advanced

Principal Examiner: Gwynn Ap Gwilym Unit Statistics The following statistics include all candidates entered for the unit, whether or not they 'cashed in' for an award. The attention of centres is drawn to the fact that the statistics listed should be viewed strictly within the context of this unit and that differences will undoubtedly occur between one year and the next and also between subjects in the same year. Unit Entry Max Mark Mean Mark RS1/2 CHR 54 90 37.0 Grade Ranges A 67 B 57 C 47 D 37 E 28 N.B. The marks given above are raw marks and not uniform marks.

© WJEC CBAC Ltd.

14

RS1/2 CHR - INTRODUCTION TO CHRISTIANITY The quality of responses varied considerably. There were some excellent scripts, but once again too many candidates lacked the basic skills of spelling, punctuation and grammar. It was, for instance, disconcerting to see so many references to ‘a preech’ (as in ‘screech’), or ‘preeches’, when what was meant was ‘a sermon’ or ‘sermons’. Q.1 (a) This question was answered reasonably well, given the difficult nature of the

topic. Some candidates tended to adopt a modalist approach, failing to express the Trinity in terms of three separate Persons. Several were able to link the Persons of the Trinity with their respective activities as recorded in Scripture. A number mentioned the development of the doctrine in the early years, when the implicit teaching of the New Testament was given credal form A few referred to the filioque controversy.

(b) The theological problem posed by the doctrine of one God in three Persons was clearly perceived. Some candidates discussed the Islamic charge of tritheism. A few were familiar with the Unitarian view. There were some good illustrations of how three distinct aspects can form one unified being.

Q.2 (a) This was a popular question. Many responses made much of the theocratic

experiment in Geneva with some, perhaps, neglecting other issues such as predestination, election and eucharistic teaching. Discerning candidates were able to contrast Calvin with Luther, showing how Luther was still catholic in some of his views, while Calvin was more radical. A surprisingly common error was to trace the Anabaptist movement to Calvin rather than Zwingli.

(b) This was a demanding question. Candidates could so easily have focused on Calvin’s failures in Geneva. In the event, many were able to give a sensible assessment of his legacy, in terms of his teaching and widespread influence.

Q.3 (a) Another popular question. The main weakness here was that candidates

tended to anticipate part (b) and spent time contrasting what they understood by liturgical worship with the more extempore kind. Answers would have been improved with more specific examples of liturgical worship from service books and practices.

(b) Not all candidates understood that what was needed was some awareness of the biblical evidence of liturgical and non-liturgical worship that forms the basis for modern practices. Most were able to make the link between New Testament practice and Non-cconformist or pentecostal/charismatic worship, but the case for a biblical basis for liturgical worship was often founded merely on the fact that liturgical worship contains biblical readings and that there is a biblical base for sermons (or ‘preeches’). Very few seemed to be aware that there are liturgical elements in the worship even of denominations that are generally considered to be non-liturgical, e.g. in communion services, dedication formulae, burial services etc.

© WJEC CBAC Ltd.

15

Q.4 (a) Another popular question, but the responses, on the whole, were

disappointing. Here again the main weakness was to mix the two parts, or to repeat much of what was written in (a) in part (b). There was little awareness of the biblical or historical reasons for not observing Christmas or Easter. Only rarely was there any reference to the lack of biblical mandate, the festivals’ pagan associations or Puritan beliefs. The gist of many responses was encapsulated in the words of the candidate who wrote: ‘Just because they are Christians doesn’t mean that they are loyal ones, so they don’t celebrate’.

(b) Most responses refuted the contention on the basis that Christians do not observe Christian festivals any more because they have been commercialized and secularized and have lost their religious meaning. While most candidates appeared to be aggrieved by this, there were some peculiar supporting arguments, such as that people cannot celebrate because they cannot afford to buy food or presents – the very symbols of commercialization and secularization. Christian celebration does not require either. The value of celebration for teaching and evangelizing was seldom explored. No one mentioned Saints’ Days.

© WJEC CBAC Ltd.

16

RELIGIOUS STUDIES

General Certificate of Education

Summer 20212

Advanced Subsidiary/Advanced

Principal Examiner: Huw D Jones Unit Statistics The following statistics include all candidates entered for the unit, whether or not they 'cashed in' for an award. The attention of centres is drawn to the fact that the statistics listed should be viewed strictly within the context of this unit and that differences will undoubtedly occur between one year and the next and also between subjects in the same year. Unit Entry Max Mark Mean Mark RS1/2 ER 997 90 53.1 Grade Ranges A 66 B 56 C 46 D 37 E 28 N.B. The marks given above are raw marks and not uniform marks.

© WJEC CBAC Ltd.

17

RS1/2ER- EASTERN RELIGIONS Generally the overall standard was good which one again demonstrates clearly the high standard of teaching of this module in most centres. Although a number of papers were poor, there were many excellent papers at the top end of the scale which showed great depth of knowledge and understanding. It is important to note that it is not the length of the answer which is important but the quality. However some weaknesses seem to be passed on from year to year with some candidates choosing to describe instead of explaining and answering how instead of why. Once again the knowledge and understanding part of the question ie part (a) was better answered than the evaluative part of the question ie part (b). However there was an improvement in the standard of the evaluative responses with centres obviously spending considerable time in preparing candidates for these challenging questions. Other candidates failed to answer the question as set while others did not read the question carefully enough. There were very few rubric infringements and there was a vast improvement in candidates noting on the front cover which questions they had attempted. Buddhism Q.1 (a) On the whole this question was well answered with many candidates referring

to a variety of aspects concerning the Buddha’s birth – the white elephant, the seven steps, Gautama’s first words, prophecy of Asita. However although the knowledge of these aspects was good the explanation of their significance was fairly basic with candidates referring time and time again to how they showed the Buddha was important without really developing the point any further. A number of candidates were confused with some of the details stating that his conception was ‘immaculate’ and that his mother was impregnated by the elephant. Other candidates simply described the life of the Buddha and did not limit it to the birth stories.

(b) It was clear that a number of centres had not discussed with their candidates the meaning of ‘myth’ although it is in the specification. Those candidates therefore when answering the question simply evaluated whether the Buddha’s story was believable or not. Other candidates did not read the question and only referred to the birth stories in their answers.

Q.2 (a) Most candidates were familiar with the concept as part of the Three Marks of

Existence. They were able to explain anatta as ‘no permanent self’ , that ‘self’ is formed out of the five skandhas although only a minority could correctly name them. Many candidates were also able to give relevant examples such as the chariot. They were also able to refer to the atman in Vedic religion and the notion of rebirth. However the relationship between dukkha, anicca and annatta could have been developed further. Unfortunately some candidates confused anatta with anicca.

(b) Responses to this question varied in quality. A number of candidates focused on the thrust of the question and discussed whether Buddhism was realistic, pessimistic or indeed optimistic and were able to give reasons and evidence from Buddhist teaching to support each viewpoint. However a number of candidates interpreted the question differently and discussed whether Buddhism was a realistic or unrealistic religion. They had a degree of success in evaluating dukkha and anicca from this perspective but found anatta much more problematic.

© WJEC CBAC Ltd.

18

Q.3 (a) This was a very popular question. However many candidates saw the term ‘sangha’ and proceeded to write everything they knew about the sangha without focusing on the question at all. Candidates needed to tie in their knowledge of the sangha with the focus of the question on role and importance. A number of candidates were able to do this very successfully by referring to the role/importance of the sangha in the past, present and future. There were also very good references to the monastic lifestyle and the relationship with the laity.

(b) A number of candidates answered this question by evaluating the importance

of the sangha on the one hand and then argued that another of the Three Jewels was the most important on the other. However this did not fully answer the question as candidates were asked to evaluate whether Buddhism could exist without the sangha. Many candidates did therefore refer to the Buddha gaining enlightenment without the sangha and his advice to his followers to be a lamp unto themselves.

Q.4 (a) Candidates had been well prepared on Buddhist meditation with many being able to discuss the main features of samatha and vipassana meditation in a confident and thorough manner. However some candidates spent too much time writing generally about the meaning and importance of meditation in Buddhism. Others wrote about zazen meditation which was irrelevant to this question. A few candidates confused samatha and vipassana.

(b) Generally this was well answered by the majority of candidates. Many were able to present reasoned arguments against the contention referring to other ways of gaining enlightenment. However arguments in favour were not of the same standard. Although candidates did refer to the fact that the Buddha gained enlightenment through meditation, they could also have referred to the fact that meditation is a third of the Eightfold Path and its influence on living the middle way. A number of students also referred to how meditation is viewed by different Buddhist groups such as Pure Land and Zen Buddhists.

Hinduism Q.1 (a) Answers to this question were very good or very poor. Candidates who were

familiar with Vaishnavism gave full, thorough answers explaining in detail the main features. Surprisingly a number of candidates attempted this question when they had absolutely no idea what vaishnavism was. One or two candidates explained vaishnavism as the caste system and proceeded to explain the four castes in detail.

(b) Again answers were very good or very poor. Surprisingly again some candidates had no idea what an avatar was and others evaluated whether the stories about avatars were believable or not. However there were candidates who discussed the issue in a mature way and discussed the actual need for avatars in today’s world as a result of conflict and suffering.

© WJEC CBAC Ltd.

19

Q.2 (a) This was a very popular and well answered question. Candidates had thorough.knowledge of the rites of passage or samskaras – birth, sacred thread, marriage and death. However there was a tendency to be over-descriptive of the different rites instead of focusing on their role in Hinduism.

(b) Again a well answered question. It was obvious from the answers that centres had thoroughly discussed this issue with candidates. Relevant and pertinent arguments were presented, for and against the contention, and supported by examples taken from everyday life.

Q.3 (a) Some candidates chose to describe stories about the different goddesses

rather than focusing on their features. In fact the majority of the answers tended to describe rather than explain the features although they are in some aspects closely related. Th most popular goddesses were Lakshmi, Durga and Kali. Some candidates confused Kali with Durga. Other candidates chose unwisely in the context of features that can be discussed eg Parvarti.

(b) Although similar questions have appeared on past papers the thrust of this question was slightly different and a number of candidates were caught out. The focus of the question is whether goddesses are as important as gods in Hinduism. However some candidates evaluated if goddesses were important or not and others evaluated if goddesses were good role-models or not. Although some aspects of these answers are relevant they do not fully address the question as set.

Q.4 (a) There were some excellent answers to this question with candidates showing thorough knowledge and understanding of the nature of puja in Hinduism. They were able to refer to practices in the home including references to the home shrine, the preparation of the murti etc. They were also able to refer to some of the practices of congregational puja such as arti. The main weakness of some answers was that they focused too much on puja in the home and made little reference if at all to puja in the mandir. Other answers tended to describe the practices rather than explaining their significance.

(b) A well answered question. Relevant and pertinent arguments were presented and supported by evidence and examples. However some of the arguments were superficial and did not refer to specific puja or festival practices practices as evidence.

Sikhism There were insufficient number of scripts to draw any helpful conclusions regarding performance.

© WJEC CBAC Ltd.

20

RELIGIOUS STUDIES

General Certificate of Education

Summer 20212

Advanced Subsidiary/Advanced

Principal Examiner: Peter Jaques Unit Statistics The following statistics include all candidates entered for the unit, whether or not they 'cashed in' for an award. The attention of centres is drawn to the fact that the statistics listed should be viewed strictly within the context of this unit and that differences will undoubtedly occur between one year and the next and also between subjects in the same year. Unit Entry Max Mark Mean Mark RS1/2 WR 445 90 48.5 Grade Ranges A 69 B 58 C 48 D 38 E 28 N.B. The marks given above are raw marks and not uniform marks.

© WJEC CBAC Ltd.

21

RS1/2 WR - INTRODUCTION TO WESTERN RELIGIONS

Examiners reported a generally sound level of response to this examination. The questions appeared to have been accessible to the whole ability range and there was clear evidence that the majority of candidates had been well prepared. There is still a reluctance on the part of some candidates to pay attention to the specific wording of each question and as a result, it is difficult for them to achieve the highest levels. All Part (a) questions require knowledge and understanding of a topic – Part (b) tests skills of evaluation, partly based on information used in Part (a). Questions that require explanation demand more than just description. It was pleasing to see more answers reflecting accurate use of specialist terminology and relevant scholarly quotations – the quality and depth of perception evident in some scripts was most impressive. It was noteworthy that there was an increase in Centres entering candidates for Section A. Section A: Introduction to Islam Q.1 (a) Most candidates showed good knowledge of the Qur’an but only the better

responses were able to explain its relevance to Muslims in the 21st Century.

Examiners were advised to credit the following areas:

The Qur’an as the revealed book for all mankind.

The Qur’an as the source book of Islamic principles and values.

The basic rules of shari’a found in the Qur’an.

The Qur’an as the focal point of Islamic faith.

The Qur’an is timeless – relevant in every age and to every generation.

The Qur’an as the basic guide to life for all Muslims.

The use of the Qur’an in the home, the mosque and in study.

The Qur’an unites all Muslims and gives a world wide identity.

(b) There were a number of good answers here showing understanding of the variety of concepts about Allah found in the Qur’an and whether or not these ideas were within human comprehension. A frequent weakness in responses was the misunderstanding of the word ‘concept’ and general repetition of knowledge used in Part (a).

Q.2 (a) The majority of candidates were able to write freely and accurately about

Muhammad’s call to prophethood. Answers achieving the highest levels were able to go on and demonstrate an understanding of his preparation for prophethood, the influence of Christian and Jewish beliefs, reference to Sura 74 – ‘rise and warn’, and the influence of family and friends etc.

(b) There were some excellent answers to this question. Candidates gave good

reasons for the importance of Muhammad to Islam emphasising his call and also his humanity. Alternative views were well developed, stressing the importance and relevance of Qur’anic teaching, the role of the mosque, the pillars, family, ummah etc.

© WJEC CBAC Ltd.

22

Q.3 (a) Too many answers merely reflected descriptions of the main features of the mosque rather than discuss its role in Islam. To achieve the higher levels, answers should have referred to most of the following areas:

Centrality of the mosque to worship.

Constant reminder of Allah to the community.

Basis of muslim social life.

Place of learning – school – madrassah – study of Qur’an.

Use in rites of passage ceremonies.

Use in festivals.

Importance as a library, law court etc.

Role of Imam.

Importance of ummah.

(b) Some candidates interpreted this question as an evaluation of the importance of the mosque rather than ‘worship at the mosque’ and debated the role of the mosque compared with the role of the home and family in Islam. Although some of this debate had some relevance, to achieve the higher levels of response candidates were expected to focus on the worship element of the question and include ideas such as the following:-

Importance of the Imam and Friday prayer.

Importance of worship at the mosque during Ramadan.

Importance of worship at the mosque during festivals. Q.4 (a) There were very few balanced answers reflecting good knowledge of both

beliefs and practices in relation to death. Knowledge of practices was much more common and accurate than any understanding of beliefs surrounding the practice i.e. being prepared to meet Allah, judgements, after life etc.

(b) Some excellent answers to this question. Candidates were able to evaluate

the positive aspects of observing life cycle rituals for the survival of Islam – identity, family, ummah etc. The alternative view point was not as strong but many answers reflected the idea that the rituals were concerned with one day only – not enough for the survival of Islam – and then sensibly evaluated that the following were more important, the Qur’an, mosque, pillars, family etc.

Section B: Introduction to Judaism Q.1 (a) There was a disappointing response from the majority of candidates to this

question. Too many candidates wrote in general terms about the Torah – its contents, purpose, origin etc. without really focussing on the main thrust of the question i.e. Orthodox or Reform attitudes towards the Torah. Only a minority of responses demonstrated understanding of the differing views with regard to authority, relevance, place in worship, observance of mitzvot etc.

(b) A common error in responses to this question was to describe the Biblical

account of Moses on Mt. Sinai. However, there was some good debate about the authorship of the Torah – whole Torah written by Moses and the alternative view point that it was written by divinely inspired humans. Excellent use was made of critical scholarship - duplication of stories, anachronisms, concepts of God etc. and the Graf – Wellhausen theory involving the sources J.E.D.P.

© WJEC CBAC Ltd.

23

Q.2 (a) There was a wide range of answers to this question. Weaker responses displayed a limited understanding of the topic and wrote in detail about the Jews in Egypt, the plagues, crossing the Red Sea etc. Candidates achieving the higher levels were able to refer to covenants with Abraham and Moses, Israel chosen for responsibility rather than privilege – “light to all nations”, promise of holy land, observance of mitzvot etc.

(b) Most candidates demonstrated excellent understanding of the role of the

‘home’ in Judaism. The best responses demonstrated a balanced debate referring to religious practices in the home as well as key beliefs and practices in the wider Jewish community. Examiners were advised to credit the following areas:

Keeping a Jewish home central to Judaism.

Roles of mother, father etc.

Mezuzah – home as miniature sanctuary.

Importance of mitzvot.

Kashrut.

Home to celebrate during festivals.

Worship during Passover.

Importance of Shabbat observance.

Rites of passage ceremonies.

Retaining religious, racial and cultural identity.

On the other hand

Importance of synagogue worship.

Importance of Torah observance.

Traditions.

Festival observance.

Beliefs and practices – setting standards. Q.3 (a) The question asked candidates to show knowledge and understanding of the

‘nature’ of Shabbat. Too many answers merely reflected a good knowledge of Shabbat practices. Responses credited at the higher levels were generally focussed on the following main areas:-

Shabbat as a day of physical rest.

Ten Commandments (Ex. 20v8)

Central core celebration of Jewish life.

Reminder of the creation of the universe and of the covenant people.

Feelings of joy and tranquillity.

Time out from work etc. – not a burden but a delight.

Importance of family.

Time to connect with God.

Foretaste of the Messianic era.

Synagogue worship – importance of Torah.

Worship in the home – Shabbat meal.

Taking Shabbat into the working week.

© WJEC CBAC Ltd.

24

(b) There were many high level responses to the debate about Shabbat – its centrality and importance as a weekly observance, family orientated, time for worship, study etc. – “remember the Shabbat”. Alternative views highlighted the importance of the Torah and Talmud, value of home life, marriage, festivals, rites of passage etc.

Q.4 (a) Although this was not a popular question, the candidates who attempted it

generally showed a good basic knowledge and understanding of Jewish teaching about divorce – its acceptance and procedures. Most answers showed knowledge of the role of the Rabbinic courts, the get and the roles of husband and wife. Higher level responses reflected knowledge of the time span, role of the civil courts and the predicaments of the agunah and mamzerim.

(b) Generally good relevant debate about the “unjustness” of Jewish divorce laws

apparent unequal treatment of husband and wife, filing for divorce, period of waiting before remarriage etc. While the alternate view was often not fully developed, many stated that these divorce laws have been in effect for centuries and are accepted within Judaism. References were also made to the practice in Reform Judaism of the ‘pre-nuptial’ idea and the possibility of a clause in the marriage contract (ketubah) regarding this.

© WJEC CBAC Ltd.

25

RELIGIOUS STUDIES

General Certificate of Education

Summer 20212

Advanced Subsidiary/Advanced

Principal Examiner: Gordon Reid Unit Statistics The following statistics include all candidates entered for the unit, whether or not they 'cashed in' for an award. The attention of centres is drawn to the fact that the statistics listed should be viewed strictly within the context of this unit and that differences will undoubtedly occur between one year and the next and also between subjects in the same year. Unit Entry Max Mark Mean Mark RS1/3 CS 277 160 57.8 Grade Ranges A* 86 A 74 B 62 C 50 D 38 E 26 N.B. The marks given above are raw marks and not uniform marks.

© WJEC CBAC Ltd.

26

RS3 CS - STUDIES IN RELIGION AND CONTEMPORARY SOCIETY

The majority of students answered questions 1 and 2. The overall standard was similar to the previous year.

Q.1 (a) Higher range students were able to explain the main principles of the debates and issues involved and many made mention of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and various Acts of Parliament. A significant number listed examples of free speech and blasphemy, with copious references to ‘The Life of Brian’ and Salman Rushdie. The candidates linked this well with scholarly argument and debate. In the mid-range, candidates often allowed themselves to be side-tracked into writing too much on racial and cultural concerns, rather than free speech issues, for example, the British Airways crucifix case and debates about the wearing of the Burkha. Greater focus on the real thrust of the question is need for the highest marks. Lower range candidates offered mainly narrative accounts and anecdotes of perceived free speech/ blasphemy examples, many historical and having little relevance today.

Q1 (b) Most higher range candidates focussed on the pros and cons of speaking out against religious belief and were able to link this really effectively with the issue of satire itself. There was good use of scholarship and real-life examples. In the mid-range, there were rather more muddled references to insulting God, accompanied, on occasion, by graphic examples. Jerry Springer was a prominent figure. More scholarship and in-depth analysis would have improved answers. At the lower range, few offered supportive argument and there were significant numbers of general answers, many repeating what had already been said in (a) and largely ignoring the issue of satire altogether.

Q.2 (a) This was a popular question, but probably the most feebly done. The higher range candidates were successful because they wrote about the ways in which the film media conveys religious ideas, rather than re-telling the story of the films they had seen. They offered serious scholarly debate and positive analysis. In the mid-range few were able to analyse how film conveyed religious ideas. The great majority of answers relied on re-telling events in a couple of films, most notably ‘The Matrix’, ‘Bend it like Beckham’ and ‘East is East’. A number confused cultural and religious issues and few made really successful links between religious ideas as such, and the film media. At this level, candidates are well-advised to avoid a simple re-telling of the film story. At the lower range, candidates anecdotally recalled the films and contented themselves with rather vague comments about religious differences and symbolism - .though there were some interesting comparisons made between Jesus and Edward Scissorhands.

Q.2 (b) There were few really good answers to this question. The higher range candidates were able to offer a reasoned analysis, using a range of film material and highlighting the portrayal of religious ideas – with some interesting comparisons between older films such as ‘The Ten Commandments’ and more modern offerings such as ‘Bruce Almighty’. In the mid-range, there were many stereotyped responses and rather vague generalisations about how religious ideas were portrayed in films like ‘Superman Returns’, ‘Narnia’ and ‘The Passion of the Christ’. At this level, candidates need to concentrate their attention far more on what is behind the film, rather than discuss the contents of the film itself in a narrative way. At the lower end, candidates tended to bypass the question altogether and concentrated on re-telling the film narrative and making vague references to communication. There was a lot of repetition from (a) though most candidates were able to offer some kind of conclusion.

© WJEC CBAC Ltd.

27

Q.3 (a) This was slightly better done with the higher range candidates making useful reference to religious and cultural statistics such as the 2001 census. Examples of both positive and negative effects on communities were well-documented and effectively presented. However, in the mid-range, there were limited scholarly references and a general lack of supporting evidence. Most students talked about religious plurality issues, such as dress, faith schools and collective worship, with some rather undeveloped emphasis on religious diversity. A greater depth of analysis, linked to good examples, would improve marks in this area. At the lowest range, candidates used very general material and basic arguments. Some got tangled up with issues of religious freedom. Students used anecdotal evidence or stories from newspapers, offering little scholarly depth and heavy reliance on GCSE level material.

Q.3 (b) There were relatively few good answers to this question. Higher range

candidates highlighted religious differences well, and were able to offer effectively links to social cohesion, supported by useful evidence and statistics. However, in the mid-range, the link to social cohesion was often more tenuous. There were discussions concerning Islamophobia, the Queen as Head if the Church and last summer’s riots. Differing viewpoints were mentioned but more links could have been made to a range of social cohesion issues. In the lower range, students either ignored the social cohesion aspect or filled their answer with anecdotal accounts of racism. Only a few answers seemed to be wholly positive about social cohesion. A few answers, sadly, were uninformed and bigoted.

Q.4 (a) This was the least-popular but by far the best-answered question of all

with higher range students referring comprehensively and well to Maslow’s views. The very best explained these views in considerable detail, supported by good examples and scholarship. In the mid-range, candidates wrote down what they had learned about Maslow, but answers would have been better with a little more understanding and depth. The few students at the lower range simply offered some disjointed comment on Maslow’s views in simple note form.

Q 4 (b) There were many interesting answers to this question. The higher

range candidates offered a good variety of examples, supported by scholarly analysis. In the mid-range candidates offered more general arguments which, in some cases were unsubstantiated or a little too simplistic, with the focus on ’happy’ rather than ‘healthy’. Again here, answers would improve with greater depth of analysis and a greater range of scholarly opinion and support. The few lower range candidates concentrated a little too much on anecdotal

evidence about people they knew with psychological problems!

© WJEC CBAC Ltd.

28

RELIGIOUS STUDIES

General Certificate of Education

Summer 20212

Advanced Subsidiary/Advanced

Principal Examiner: Andrew Pearce Unit Statistics The following statistics include all candidates entered for the unit, whether or not they 'cashed in' for an award. The attention of centres is drawn to the fact that the statistics listed should be viewed strictly within the context of this unit and that differences will undoubtedly occur between one year and the next and also between subjects in the same year. Unit Entry Max Mark Mean Mark RS3 ETH 717 100 55.2 Grade Ranges A* 86 A 73 B 60 C 48 D 36 E 24 N.B. The marks given above are raw marks and not uniform marks.

© WJEC CBAC Ltd.

29

RS3 ETH - STUDIES IN RELIGION AND ETHICS The paper appeared to be accessible candidates and there were a number of outstanding scripts. Generally students were able to apply the trigger words to their answers. Good candidates had obviously carried out their own research and were able to offer mature observations in their answers. Some candidates failed to read the question carefully and as a result of this their responses were often only partially relevant. Weaker candidates produced rote learnt answers and as a result were unable to adapt the information they had learnt to the questions set. Candidates should also be reminded that when making use of the Decalogue (particularly in Q2 and Q3) that it states ‘Do not murder’ and not ‘do not kill’ and that this is significant difference. Weaker candidates also often failed to recognise that there may well be an important difference between what a member of a particular denomination believes and the official teachings of that denomination. A number of examiners commented on the poor literacy skills of some of the weaker candidates. For example the correct use of the apostrophe was sadly lacking in several answers. There were several examples of poor and in some cases almost illegible handwriting. Centres should be encouraged make use of the special access arrangements that are available through their centre's exam officer and/or ALN Coordinator or SENCo in order to prevent this issue arising in the future. Q.1 (a) Good candidates were able to give a holistic account of Virtue Ethics

incorporating his ideas on eudaimonia, the soul, intellectual and moral virtues and the doctrine of the mean. They were then able to explain how Aristotle’s theory can be used to make moral decisions by referring to contemporary moral issues such as a person’s conduct in war or medical ethics.

Weaker candidates tended to simply answer the question “Explain Aristotle’s Virtue Theory” rather than the question that was set. They were able to list elements of Virtue theory, but were often unable to see how these elements fitted together. Some claimed that the ‘doctrine of the mean’ is applied to both intellectual and moral virtues which is erroneous as it only applies to the moral virtues. Weaker candidates appeared to believe that by ‘soul’ Aristotle had in mind something which was separate from a person’s body which is also incorrect. Aristotle saw the ‘psuche’ as the substantial form of the body – it is what makes a body a body rather than a collection of matter.

(b) Good candidates knew Virtue Theory well enough to address the question.

For example arguments against the statement included that idea that the doctrine of the mean helps one achieve a perfect moral character which is superior to simply doing good acts as a bad person can do good deeds. Some candidates even recognised that within many of the world religions there is the underlying idea of personal development e.g. the Beatitudes or the Eightfold Path. Arguments in favour of the statement included A. C. Graylings comment that the doctrine of the mean was intended for middle-aged, middle class males. A number of perceptive candidates noted that numerous religious individuals who have been revered as moral characters would have been deemed not to be so by the doctrine of the mean as they often acted to extreme e.g. Mother Teresa, Jesus, Saint Paul, the Buddha. Indeed the Christian idea of agape or selfless love warrants acting lovingly to the extreme as it is without limits. Some candidates also suggested ways in which other ethical theories or religious outlooks might provide a better way of defining a moral character.

© WJEC CBAC Ltd.

30

Weaker candidates tended to list the advantages or disadvantages of Virtue Ethics with little or no direct reference to the question set. If they did attempt to address the question then their responses were often one sided and /or simplistic and this limited the level they were awarded. For example “It is the acts that someone performs that defines their moral character not the doctrine of the mean.”

Q.2 (a) Good candidates were able to define Kant’s Categorical Imperative (often contrasting this with a hypothetical imperative) and were able to demonstrate their knowledge and understanding of the three forms of the categorical imperative by using evidence. They were able to explain how the three forms of the imperative are compatible with a religious perspective (mainly Christianity). For example the first principle ('Do not act on any principle that cannot be universalized') could be seen to reflect the universal claims of some religions, e.g. the Ten Commandments in Christianity and Judaism. The second principle ('So act that you treat humanity... never merely as a means but always at the same time as an end') could be seen to reflect the claims of Christianity, Judaism and Islam e.g. that human beings are created 'in the image of God' (Genesis 1v27). This supports the idea that all human beings, therefore, have intrinsic worth and should be treated with dignity and respect. The third principle ('Act as if you live in a kingdom of ends') is an extension of the second version and states that ethical behaviour has to be seen within the context of society as a whole. This idea could be linked to the Christian or Muslim idea of stewardship.

Weaker candidates gave a very simplistic explanation of Kant’s moral law in general without focusing on the question set. Many often just listed elements of Kant's concepts of duty, rationality and the Categorical Imperative, but failed to link them together to the question. They also often stated that he supported both hypothetical and categorical imperatives which is incorrect. Many were unable to give more than one form of the categorical imperative and those who attempted to do so often did not really understand the 'Formula of the Kingdom of Ends'. Weaker candidates misinterpreted the question and listed how the Categorical Imperative was not compatible with a religious perspective and the principle of salvage was used here whenever possible.

(b) Good candidates took the opportunity to compare and contrast a morality based on religious beliefs with ethical theories such as Virtue Theory, Utilitarianism and Kant’s Moral Law. Arguments against the statement included the idea that for religious believers such as Christians God’s purpose for humankind is expressed through the scriptures such as the Ten Commandments which carry divine authority. A religious believer might also argue that our ability to reason and our conscience are God-given means of accessing God’s will. In arguing in favour of the statement some candidates referred to a humanist approach to morality and argued that you did not have to have a belief in God in order to be moral. Others stated that religion gave people a reason to be moral. Good candidates also perceptively noted that although Kant claimed that morality was not based upon religious belief there was a link to religious belief because in order to achieve the ‘supreme good’ there must be an afterlife.

Weaker candidates tended to treat the question as if it was about the strengths and weaknesses of Kant’s moral law rather than the question set. Those who did attempt to address the question often gave one sided and /or simplistic responses and this limited the level they were awarded. They made basic statements such as “I consider myself to be moral but I am an atheist.”

© WJEC CBAC Ltd.

31

Q.3 (a) Good candidates were able focus on the question and explained the ethical issues which arise from the existence AND use of nuclear weapons. In terms of the existence of nuclear weapons issue raised included the idea that is it morally right to threaten to use a nuclear weapon deterrent in order to maintain peace ? Or how can we stop these weapons being taken by terrorist groups ? Many also included religious pronouncements condemning the possession of Nuclear weapons as immoral when the financial resources used could be put to better use e.g. fighting poverty. In terms of the use of nuclear weapons some argued using the Just War theory that the use of nuclear weapons can be proportionate - although there may be considerable loss of civilian life, even so this might be less than if conventional war was to be fought over a long period of time. Others stated that nuclear warfare is not sufficiently discriminating or proportionate; it could lead to mutually assured destruction which goes against goes against the idea of stewardship. Good candidates also took the opportunity to use the religious and ethical theories studied at AS and A2 level to explain the issues which arise from the existence and use of nuclear weapons. For example a Utilitarian might well justify the bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki in World War II as it appeared to fulfil the principle of utility.

Weaker candidates often referred just to the use of nuclear weapons. Some even failed to do this and wrote all they knew about Just War of Pacifism. They appeared to have rote learnt answers and made little or no reference to the question. For example they simply gave an historical account of the development of the Just War theory.

Q.3 (b) Good candidates were able to analyse and evaluate the contention. They referred to the manufacture AND sale of weapons. For example some candidates referred to Oscar Schindler and explained how he manufactured weapons in order to save lives therefore his actions were morally justifiable. Arguments against the manufacture of weapons included the fact that weapons are intended to injure or kill which many claim is morally wrong. Others successfully argued that sovereign states need to buy weapons as they have the right to defend their citizens and their borders both under international law and according to the Just War theory. Some candidates stated that the manufacture and sale of weapons are necessary on economic grounds. Other stated that diplomacy and treaties provide better protection for vulnerable countries as they do not encourage then to arm themselves which causes corruption and exploitation as well as the diversion of financial resources away from healthcare, education and poverty related issues. Several candidates gave religious arguments for and against the contention and included a pacifist approach.

Weaker candidates often repeated irrelevant material from (a). Some focussed entirely on the sale of weapons with no or little reference to the manufacture of weapons which also limited their response. Those who did attempt to address the question often gave one sided and /or simplistic responses and this limited the level they were awarded.

© WJEC CBAC Ltd.

32

Q.4 (a) Good candidates gave a focused and relevant treatment of the topic showing a thorough knowledge and understanding of the moral issues raised for religious believers by from stem cell treatment (both adult stem cells and embryonic stem cells). They showed an awareness of the diversity of views that exist within a religion (mainly Christianity). Many candidates referred to various forms of religious authority within their answer and referred to ensoulment, personhood and sanctity of life v quality of life. Several candidates also explained Natural Law’s and Situation Ethics’ approach to stem cell research. Perceptive candidates were able to appreciate that supporters of N.L would be against the use of embryonic stem cells however they might well accept the use of adult stem cell research if it helped those in need.

Weaker candidates often appeared to lack even a basic knowledge and understanding of stem cell research and if they did this was often limited to just embryonic stem cell research. Weaker candidates also often failed to recognise that there may well be an important difference between what a member of a particular denomination believes and the official teachings of that denomination. Such candidates would benefit from wider reading including the work of Neil Messer on Bio Ethics.

(b) Good candidates were able to give strong arguments both for and against the contention referring to scholars such as Singer. They also took the opportunity to use the ethical theories studied at AS and A2 level to argue for and against the contention. Many candidates argued in favour of the statement stating that if the embryo is considered a ‘person’ then according to Kant’s second formulation of the Categorical Imperative it cannot be used as a means to an end. They also argued that embryonic stem cell research would also break some of the primary precepts of Natural law because the embryonic cell is not allowed to develop it breaks the precept ‘to reproduce’ and it also breaks the primary precept of ‘protect and preserve the innocent.’ Good candidates used various arguments when arguing against the statement including the fact that according to consequentialist theories like Situation Ethics and Utilitarianism if the outcome is selflessly loving or fulfils the principle of utility it is not immoral.

Weaker candidates gave a list of the arguments for and against stem cell research with little or no analysis or evaluation. Some weaker candidates misread the question and took as referring to all forms of genetics which also limited their response. Those who did attempt to address the question often gave one sided and /or simplistic responses and this limited the level they were awarded. They made statements such as “It is immoral because it uses stem cells from aborted foetuses.”

© WJEC CBAC Ltd.

33

RELIGIOUS STUDIES

General Certificate of Education

Summer 20212

Advanced Subsidiary/Advanced

Principal Examiner: Delyth Ellerton Harris Unit Statistics The following statistics include all candidates entered for the unit, whether or not they 'cashed in' for an award. The attention of centres is drawn to the fact that the statistics listed should be viewed strictly within the context of this unit and that differences will undoubtedly occur between one year and the next and also between subjects in the same year. Unit Entry Max Mark Mean Mark RS3 PHIL 691 100 62.2 Grade Ranges A* 88 A 77 B 64 C 51 D 39 E 27 N.B. The marks given above are raw marks and not uniform marks.

© WJEC CBAC Ltd.

34

RS3 PHIL - STUDIES IN PHILOSOPHY OF RELIGION It was satisfying to see the development of candidates’ thinking and writing between AS and A2. On many occasions candidates drew in AS work to good effect. They showed an awareness of the thinking of scholars that could be used across questions. Along with the use of a range of scholars, there was good evidence of direct quotations from scholars which were used to enhance answers. Candidates showed, in part b, a good awareness of the need for a conclusion to their answer. Some gave “balanced” arguments (for and against the statement) whilst others gave a variety of responses from the same perspective. Both are equally valid. Many candidates did well to adapt revised material to answer the questions set, but others seemed to be restricted to certain revised question-types and were therefore unable to do this. Examiners would ask teachers and Centres to remind candidates to put the number of the questions that they have attempted on the front of their paper. Q.1(a) Considering there are voluntarist views of faith specified on the specification,

one would expect these to be known well. However, they were not. Some referred to Kierkegaard’s “leap of faith” but few knew his arguments relating to certainty, cost and commitment. James’ theory was done superficially. There were sparing references to key words such as momentous, forced, living and so on. It is hard to see how these are not fundamental to an essay. Some candidates wrote about the ontological argument. They could have used this cleverly as a way into Anselm’s theory of faith, but it was generally not done in this fashion. Others wrote about propositional and non-propositional. If this had been used to explain the faith relating to these concepts of revelation, then that would have been valid.

(b) There was some very good use of Buber, Barth and Kierkegaard here, with

reasons for their views being acknowledged. Equally, some reference to Hick and religious faith being rational was seen. Again, some did use the ontological argument and here, on occasion, it could be used to answer the question. Some misunderstood “reason” as “having reasons” which did create a different slant to the question and not the one intended. References to propositional and non-propositional revelation could have been used to good effect.

Q.2 (a) There were some excellent answers to this question. Candidates generally

explained how issues regarding verification and falsification were problematic and did relate these to religious language. In contrast to previous years, strong and weak verification were also used to make Ayer’s point regarding religious language. Some candidates did no more than this. Breadth or depth applied in the levels of response. Others referred to the metaphysical aspect of religion, the paradoxical nature of religious language. The difficulties of using analogies, symbol and language games was also seen. However, there was considerable salvage from part a to part b and vice versa, which Centres would do well to look at.

© WJEC CBAC Ltd.

35

(b) This was tackled in a variety of ways. Some candidates looked at the criticisms of verification and falsification principles and gave good accounts of the work of Hick, Swinburne and Mitchell. Others who included the last two scholars, however, did not fully understand the point that they were making with regard to religious language. The other way in which candidates tackled this question was to evaluate the relative successes of analogy, symbol and language games in allowing people to use religious language. A mixture of both of these approaches was also seen. All were valid.

Q.3 (a) Hume was the main “challenge” given in the scripts. Many candidates knew

that he had a number of aspects to his criticism, “ignorant and barbarous” abounded! However, the main point regarding the amount of evidence for the natural laws “holding” was either missed out or misunderstood. So too was the point that he did not deem miracles to be impossible, rather, improbable. There was much use of other arguments such as Wiles and the pointlessness of some miracles, to name just a few. Centres could emphasise to candidates that Holland does not say that miracles are “only coincidences” in an objective sense.

(b) Some had a pre-prepared essay on “do miracles occur?” and were not able to

apply the information revised in such a way that it allowed them to answer this question. In these cases “essential” may not have been used once and marks reflected this. However, others continuously included the word “essential” and referred to aspects such as miracles being a fundamental part of religion or religion as being so much more than the miraculous. Candidates should be encouraged to be familiar with all of the bullet points on the specification.

Q.4 (a) This was a question which showed a huge range of approaches. Some

candidates wrote about the various types of determinism such as psychological and theological. Pertinent case studies were given, such as those of Pavlov and Skinner. Some included information in part a that others included in part b. When applied correctly, each was worthy of credit. Other candidates preferred to give the more general key features of hard determinism such as the lack of free will and the removal of blame form a person’s actions. It is surprising that Locke’s analogy often had other people in the room with him and some outside, enticing him to leave!

(b) As said above there was information here such as references to Darrow,

operant conditioning and so on that was also used in part a. There was some confusion in some case studies, however, as to what those studies “proved” with regard to genes or environment and more analysis of these could be done. There were approaches that were psychological, sociological and those that questioned whether our genes are given by God. Studies that showed that we are a combination of both were popular.

© WJEC CBAC Ltd.

36

RELIGIOUS STUDIES

General Certificate of Education

Summer 20212

Advanced Subsidiary/Advanced

Principal Examiner: Gwynn Ap Gwilym Unit Statistics The following statistics include all candidates entered for the unit, whether or not they 'cashed in' for an award. The attention of centres is drawn to the fact that the statistics listed should be viewed strictly within the context of this unit and that differences will undoubtedly occur between one year and the next and also between subjects in the same year. Unit Entry Max Mark Mean Mark RS3 BS 15 100 60.3 Grade Ranges A* 86 A 74 B 62 C 50 D 38 E 26 N.B. The marks given above are raw marks and not uniform marks.

© WJEC CBAC Ltd.

37

RS3 BS - STUDIES IN BIBLICAL STUDIES No candidates attempted Section A. The candidature for Section B was disappointingly small. This raises serious questions about the future of biblical based theological study. The standard, however, was generally high. All entrants must be congratulated on the quality of their work. Q.1 (a) There was some good discussion of worship, communal life, discipline and

tensions between Jews and Gentiles, but few made reference to testimony (Peter’s sermons, miracles in Jesus’ name etc). Candidates should be advised not to give chapter and verse. Checking these is time-consuming and inaccuracies may be penalised. To give one example from among many, one candidate wrote that ‘Acts 4:22 shows us how Barnabas was kind’. Acts 4:22 reads: ‘For the man on whom this sign of healing was performed was more than forty years old’. The healing was performed by Peter.

(b) Candidates were aware that there was unity in worship ( prayers, breaking of bread etc). Other types of unity generally focused on communal sharing. Stronger candidates included the Pentecost experience and baptism.

Q.2 (a) Few candidates attempted this question. Those who did were able to give an

adequate account of the content, context and purpose of the two set sermons (Acts 2:14-36 and 10:34-43), the first directed at the Jews, the second at the Gentiles. There was little awareness of additional material, e.g. Acts 3:11-44, 4:8-12 and 5:29-32.

(b) Most responses endorsed the contention on the grounds that too much time had passed since the sermons were preached for the author of Acts to be able to give a credible verbatim record. Little was made of Jesus’ appointment of Peter as the foundation stone of the Church, that he had been an eywitness to the resurrected Lord or that he may have wanted to recompense as soon as possible for his betrayal of Jesus.

Q.3 (a) Most responses centred on the events recorded in Acts and the focus was

therefore inevitably more on the history of Gentile inclusion than on Paul’s specific teaching on the subject. While this approach received some credit, what was required was some discussion of the teaching to be found in the set texts in Galatians 2 and 5 and Ephesians 3, which is based on the argument that the gospel’s guiding principle of grace operates for Jews and Gentiles alike.

(b) This was well answered. All those who responded knew that Paul was the specifically designated ‘apostle to the Gentiles’, the only apostle who did not dither over the question of Gentile inclusion. There was, however, equal awareness that other apostles had ministered to the Gentiles in obedience to the Great Commission.

© WJEC CBAC Ltd.

38

Q.4 (a) This was a popular question. There was some good discussion of Jesus’ teaching in Mark 10 and Matthew 5 (but not as much in Matthew 19) and of Paul’s in Romans 7 and I Corinthians 7, although there were surprisingly few references to his expectation of an imminent parousia. Good knowledge was demonstrated of Jewish (Hillel and Shammai) and Roman practice concerning divorce.

(b) There were some good arguments for and against the contention. In addition to the lines of thought suggested in the Mark Scheme, candidates provided other relevant arguments, e.g. that without marriage there would be no need for a teaching on divorce and since marriage is an act of God and divorce an act of man, it is clear that the teaching on marriage is more important than that on divorce.

© WJEC CBAC Ltd.

39

RELIGIOUS STUDIES

General Certificate of Education

Summer 20212

Advanced Subsidiary/Advanced

Principal Examiner: Gwynn Ap Gwilym Unit Statistics The following statistics include all candidates entered for the unit, whether or not they 'cashed in' for an award. The attention of centres is drawn to the fact that the statistics listed should be viewed strictly within the context of this unit and that differences will undoubtedly occur between one year and the next and also between subjects in the same year. Unit Entry Max Mark Mean Mark RS3 CHR 10 100 56.1 Grade Ranges A* 87 A 75 B 62 C 49 D 37 E 25 N.B. The marks given above are raw marks and not uniform marks.

© WJEC CBAC Ltd.

40

RS3 CHR - STUDIES IN CHRISTIANITY

The candidature this year was disappointingly small, but the general standard was high, an encouraging indication of good teaching and learning practices.

Q.1 (a) Responses correctly focused on the Church’s mission to be, through its sacramental worship, a sign of the living Jesus’ presence in the world and, through its peace and social justice initiatives, an instrument to bring about the mercy which God intends for all creation. There were some convincing examples of both aspects.

(b) Candidates realised that there is a Christian requirement to love one’s neighbour, but that the first commandment is to love God. No one made the point that a social conscience is not unique to Christianity, but there was adequate awareness that Christian belief includes theological as well as social convictions.

Q.2 (a) Those who responded outlined how the doctrine of the Fall necessitated a Saviour, and were able to discuss with some competence Jesus’ work of justification, sanctification and redemption. Discussion of the Logos focused entirely on John’s Prologue. There was little, if any, awareness of what the word meant in Jewish and Greek thought, or of modern scholarly opinion of its relevance to Christian theology.

(b) This component was well answered, showing that candidates had been adequately familiarised with the tensions between the Jesus of history and the Christ of faith. Whilst most of those who responded tended to side with the contention, they were nevertheless aware of the heretical implications of dismissing the historical Jesus.

Q.3 (a) This was a popular question which elicited a capable response and many excellent examples of male oriented language. There was an impressive awareness of scholarly opinion and many correct and relevant references to feminist theologians. Candidates appeared to have enjoyed their study of the topic.

(b) What was expected in favour of the contention was an argument that what matters is not Jesus’ maleness but his humanity, and against that to ignore his maleness is to separate the Jesus of history from the Christ of faith. In the event, arguments against contended that it matters very much that Jesus was a male because this has always coloured the Church’s attitude to women. This approach was fully credited.

Q.4 (a) Candidates were well acquainted with the history of twentieth century ecumenism, and especially with the establishment and work of the World Council of Churches and developments in Roman Catholicism following Vatican II, including ARCIC. There was less emphasis on the Taizé and Iona communities, and no one mentioned the national ecumenical instruments (Cytûn, CTE and ACTS) or bodies such as the Conference of European Churches (CEC) and the Porvoo Communion.

(b) There were some good arguments in favour of the contention, to the effect that the Ecumenical Movement has enabled churches to have a common approach to global issues such as peace and social justice. Arguments against were less convincing. There was little awareness of the lack of progress on a common ecumenical theology and ecclesiology.

© WJEC CBAC Ltd.

41

RELIGIOUS STUDIES

General Certificate of Education

Summer 20212

Advanced Subsidiary/Advanced

Principal Examiner: Wendy Dossett Unit Statistics The following statistics include all candidates entered for the unit, whether or not they 'cashed in' for an award. The attention of centres is drawn to the fact that the statistics listed should be viewed strictly within the context of this unit and that differences will undoubtedly occur between one year and the next and also between subjects in the same year. Unit Entry Max Mark Mean Mark RS3 ER 501 100 69.1 Grade Ranges A* 89 A 79 B 66 C 53 D 40 E 27 N.B. The marks given above are raw marks and not uniform marks.

© WJEC CBAC Ltd.

42

RS3 ER - EASTERN RELIGIONS Overall this paper differentiated well, and examiners had a sense of an improved standard this year with more candidates scoring in the higher levels. Higher scoring scripts evidenced engagement with scholars, though it was notable that a small minority of otherwise very able candidates did not. This was disappointing as candidates should be encouraged not only to read widely, but to show evidence of this in their answers. Candidates also need to be aware of the importance in AO2 answers of drawing appropriate conclusions to their discussions. There is a tendency to present facts and ideas without advancing arguments and without drawing together key ideas in an appropriate conclusion. As in previous years, the best answers showed candidates’ ability to relate different parts of the specification with each other. Spelling and grammar still pose problems for candidates, and the erroneous use of the apostrophe in plurals seems to be increasingly widespread. Section A: Buddhism Q.1 (a) This question was reasonably popular and was generally answered

satisfactorily. A high number of candidates scored full marks in this question, demonstrating detailed knowledge of the suttas and their organisation into Nikayas, and the kinds of teaching expressed in each section, as well as secondary scholarship on the topic. High scoring candidates were able to comment on several teachings demonstrating secure knowledge, and many highlighted and quoted from the Dhammapada as a popular and important sutta from the Khudakka Nikaya. Where candidates had included material from the Sanskrit sutras, this was credited. In the minority of cases (in both English and Welsh medium) where candidates had written only about the Lotus Sutra, credit was given up to a maximum of level four to reflect the limited the scope of their answers. Weaker answers focused more on the structure of the scriptures, rather than outlining the teachings.

(b) This question was mostly well answered with the best candidates able to

demonstrate sophisticated understandings of questions of historicity in Buddhism as understood across Theravada and Mahayana. Most demonstrated knowledge of and critical reflection about the oral tradition leading up to the commission of the scriptures to writing. Many demonstrated secure knowledge of the figure of Shakyamuni in the Lotus Sutra, and some also referred to buddha-nature, and to other Buddhas such as Amitabha and the Dhyani Buddhas. Some drew on material from the Vinaya to explain what that tells us about how the Buddha created the Sangha. Some made cogent arguments in favour of the view that information about the figure of the Buddha is less important than the teachings he uncovered. Some of the lowest scoring candidates muddled Theravada and Mahayana, others failed to make a reasoned evaluation. A large number of candidates said that Pali was the language of the Buddha. It would be more accurate to say that Pali is a language similar to the dialect of Prakrit likely to have been spoken by the Buddha (scholarship does not have a consensus on this point).

© WJEC CBAC Ltd.

43

Q.2 (a) This was a popular choice of question which was generally well answered by the majority of candidates. Clear understanding of topic was demonstrated and the majority were able to discuss the key facts and ideas supported by examples and evidence. Even lower scoring candidates managed to show some level of understanding. Opportunities were sometimes missed to refer to scholars, and a disappointing feature of a large minority of answers was the limitation of answers to merely the arhat and the bodhisattva. The best answers explained the complex nature of enlightenment, and then focused on a range of possible beings, including, in the Mahayana tradition, the universal buddha-nature. There were some excellent accounts of bodhicitta. Some candidates wrote well on the Dalai Lama. A surprising number of candidates neglected to mention the historical Buddha himself as an example of an enlightened being.

(b) Candidates tended to take one of two possible approaches to this question.

Some argued from the perspective of the historical authority of the Pali Canon, and others argued from the perspective of the appeal of the more egalitarian ideas to be found in Mahayana. Only the best candidates developed an answer which incorporated both or more approaches. A simplistic approach to evaluation tended to limited answers, with students failing to consider the question from a range of different ‘angles’. They tended to present an argument for, an argument against, and then make a judgement between the two arguments they had chosen, and fail to consider any further pertinent material or persective. Only the very best candidates could qualify statements about the appeal of the apparent ‘unselfishness’ of Mahayana with ways in which Theravada was similar. Very weak answers muddled Theravada and Mahayana, or failed to compare at all.

Q.3 (a) This was a very popular question, answered by the majority of candidates

generally very well. Candidates had been well prepared, and there was evidence of engagement with scholarship. What distinguished good from less good answers was the level of sophistication in the explanation of the teachings. Average and lower ability candidates tended to describe (sometimes in admirable detail, with an awareness of diversity) yet fail to explain – i.e. to link the practices to Buddhist teachings, or only to explain in a cursory way.

(b) This was generally very well answered with some outstanding answers which

considered the question from a range of angles, and reflected on the non-credal and skilful means nature of the Mahayana context for the nembutsu. Good answers set the nembutsu within the range of other Buddhist practices there was clear evidence of independent thought. A large number of candidates suggested that the historical Buddha did not use or mention the nembutsu. Whilst this is correct from a Theravada perspective, there are Mahayana sutras (the Three Pure Land Sutras or The Triple Sutra) which attribute the teaching of the nembutsu to Shakyamuni, who gives the account of the bodhisattva vows of Amitabha. There was good use of scholars in evidence in answer to this question. A small minority of candidates confused nembutsu with daimoku.

© WJEC CBAC Ltd.

44

Q.4 (a) Answers to this question were mixed. There were some outstanding answers

on Samye Ling, Throssel Hole Priory, The Buddhist Society and Amaravati/Chithurst/The English Sangha Trust, and in the Welsh medium scripts, some Welsh Buddhist groups.However many answers were characterised by insufficient knowledge. Some, but very few, demonstrated evidence of reading about Buddhist organisations in Britain beyond the websites of the organisations themselves, and even then, the richness offered in terms of information from the websites was not sufficiently explored or expressed. The weaker candidates emphasised history over lifestyle. That said there were some truly excellent and well balanced answers which demonstrated good research.

(b) This was a reasonably well answered questions, with weaker candidates

failing to understand what might be meant by personal experience, or failing to sufficiently consider other putative explanations of the popularity of Buddhism in the West. Several candidates wrote a great deal about wars and soldiers marrying Buddhist women, almost to the exclusion of any other analysis. The best answers drew on candidates’ knowledge of the range of types of Buddhism, some writing cogently on the individualism of FWBO/Triratna. Some good answers also demonstrated a robust sense of secularisation as a context for the rise of types of Buddhism which valorise personal experience. It was good to see candidates reflecting on the unusual and ambiguous authority of a religious founder who enjoined his followers not to take the teachings on trust or authority, but to test them in experience and reject them if found wanting.

Section B: Hinduism Q.1 (a) This was extremely well answered, with candidates evidencing their reading

and secure, scholarly-informed knowledge and understanding. Some candidates focused their answer on Aryan/Vedic religion, and neglected to consider the possibility of Indus Valley religion having an influence on the origins of Hinduism.

(b) This was well answered, although with questions such as this candidates

might consider focusing their answer on ‘Hinduism today’. They tended to provide an audit of features of early forms, and comment on whether they had survived or not. What they didn’t do so often was to take the broader approach of considering features of contemporary Hinduism and commenting on their history. Thus, answers were unnecessarily limited. Surprisingly very few candidates considered the contemporary sampradaya (which it was clear from other answers they knew very well). Very few, if any candidates mentioned the renewed interest in the Vedas from those in the Hindutva movement.

Q.2 (a) This was largely well answered, by the minority of candidates who answered

it Accurate reference was made to the text, but it is surprising still to see candidates who wish to retell the story of the Gita, without reference to the question, or to focus on karma and bhakti rather than answering the question set.

(b) This was answered well by a minority of high-scoring candidates who were

able to read the Bhagavad Gita at a number of levels. It was clear from most answers however, that candidates struggled to grasp the idea of an ‘allegory’ – despite the term being on the specification.

© WJEC CBAC Ltd.

45

Q.3 (a) This was a very popular question most who attempted it were able to write at length and in detail. Some weaker answers focused entirely or almost entirely on the life of Swaminarayan, which was frustrating, since this is an issue which has been mentioned in previous reports. Good candidates quoted scholars.

(b) This question was well answered by many candidates, though some failed to make an argument either way. There was a tendency to state reasons and evidence for, followed by reasons and evidence against, without coming to a conclusion.

Q.4 (a) This was a very popular question, in which even the weakest answers gained

some credit. However, as in previous years failure to read the question led some candidates to give partial answers (focusing only on mistreatment of women) or answers lacking in focus (writing lots of facts about women, but not considering ‘value’). Opportunities were missed to cite scholarship, or diversity of views.

(b) Similarly to (a), candidates often just explored the status of women, failing to

engage with the thrust of the question. Many candidates seemed to be confused by the stimulus quotation, unable to express a nuanced view. The question was challenging as it required candidates to think about the issue from a variety of possible angles. The best candidates were able to mount persuasive arguments that whilst discrimination is indeed in part justified on grounds of religion in Hinduism (whilst pointing out some of it might be best understood as cultural) it is (in their view) not acceptable to justify discrimination on religious or any other grounds.

Section C: Sikhism Only a very small number of centres tackled the Sikhism section, so there is insufficient evidence available to produce a meaningful report, beyond noting that all questions elicited answers across the ability range, but most demonstrating significant and secure knowledge, understand and evaluation.

© WJEC CBAC Ltd.

46

RELIGIOUS STUDIES

General Certificate of Education

Summer 20212

Advanced Subsidiary/Advanced

Principal Examiner: Richard Gray Unit Statistics The following statistics include all candidates entered for the unit, whether or not they 'cashed in' for an award. The attention of centres is drawn to the fact that the statistics listed should be viewed strictly within the context of this unit and that differences will undoubtedly occur between one year and the next and also between subjects in the same year. Unit Entry Max Mark Mean Mark RS3 WR 171 100 66.6 Grade Ranges A* 89 A 78 B 65 C 52 D 39 E 27 N.B. The marks given above are raw marks and not uniform marks.

© WJEC CBAC Ltd.

47

RS3 WR - WESTERN RELIGIONS

Islam An increase in the number of entries this year – up to 15. There was an improvement in standards; the essays were more academic (less faith based) this year. However, whilst the AO1 were packed with knowledge and good understanding, the AO2 answers tended to be weaker, being much shorter in length proportionally and also limited - sometimes one-sided -in reasoning. Q.1 A very straightforward question that was generally done well. A few candidates

included a lot of information and some did tend to ramble; more organisation of information was needed. The majority of candidates did offer an argument for the (b) question but tended to state the viewpoint that Abu Bakr was not the true successor of Muhammad.

Q,.2 The majority wrote well, including information on the 12 imams and the power of the

imam, the importance of Husayn and the extra pilgrimages and festivals. Very few referred to the interpretation of Shari’a and Hadith as a distinctive feature. Temporary marriage and the concession to deny faith under persecution were also distinctive features that were not always mentioned. Students tended to repeat information in the (b) part that had already been included in (a) showing a lack of focus; better answers referred back to the question.

Q.3 Many candidates misread/misunderstood the question by referring to the role of

women rather than their status. Most candidates concentrated on the role of the mother, particularly in setting the tone for the family and especially in the light of temptations and distractions in modern Western society. Few candidates mentioned the equality of women in law, inheritance rights etc.

Q.4 Only one student answered this question. It was quite a good answer, not faith-

based. Misunderstandings of jihad and links with terrorism were dealt with. Judaism Generally answers were of a very good standard this year with noticeable improvements in the use of technical religious terminology. A minor point was that some candidates had a tendency to refer to scholars/holocaust theologians by their first names, for example, Richard, Emil and Elie instead of Rubenstein, Fackenheim and Wiesel; a more academic approach is encouraged. Q.1 (a) A straightforward question that was generally answered well. The majority

wrote well about ein sof and the 10 sefirot. There were a few papers that included diagrams to explain the concept of sefirot: one was exceptional, showing a very thorough understanding by explaining each section; while another was a simple diagram with no explanation. Where the diagram was explained clearly and linked to the answer it was clearly relevant and credited; however, answers that followed rubric and produced prose tended to be better explanations. The majority of candidates referred to the need to find union with God. Some got distracted with historical details on the figures of Baal Shem Tov and Shabbatei Zevi without any reference to the question.

© WJEC CBAC Ltd.

48

(b) There were some excellent, mature answers that included reference to mysticism today and the Hasidic movement’s move away from mysticism towards a more traditional approach. Better answers used the examples of the rebbe and the exclusivity of mysticism to argue against the statement. The majority identified the style of worship as showing it is not in the true tradition. Against the statement was not always as strong, although many did identify mystical accounts from the Torah/scriptures, for example, burning bush, Ezekiel’s vision. Answers could have explored more the views of academics concerning the recent surge of popularity and interest in Jewish mysticism, that it is superficial and not really true and serious mysticism.

Q.2 (a) Some candidates gave a comparison of Orthodox and Reform Judaism;

sometimes it seemed that they were answering a different question. Likewise, one or two centres outlined the principles and practices of Neo-Orthodox Judaism movement which was not really a focus of the question. Many did not only refer to what was distinctive or did not make it clear why it was distinctive; for example, references were made to kosher without making the point that many Reform Jews do not keep kosher. The example of Sabbath was usually well used; mikveh was a good example, as were mourning customs. The majority of candidates used dress, the role of women, kashrut as examples; fewer made reference to tight-knit communities, purity laws or the rabbi. Most candidates referred to the divine nature of the Torah but very few candidates mentioned Halakhah or Talmud. There tended to be an imbalance or confusion over beliefs and practices. Some candidates examined different groups within Orthodoxy while others gave a general overview. Most compared Orthodox with Reform at some point.

(b) Examples were often lacking or generalisations were made. Surprisingly,

many failed to recognise that Neo-Orthodoxy have modernised. Many stated that if Jews want to modernise they can become Reform, or that Reform have modernised and have kept the covenant with no recognition that Orthodoxy would not agree with this view. The best answers were aware of both Reform and Neo-Orthodox Judaism but also focused on the pure tradition of Orthodox Judaism to assess the question effectively. Only a few answers indicated that Torah and Talmud are actually reviewed through rabbinical study.

Q.3 (a) Very few answers considered thoroughly the issues of religious and secular

identity. A minority wrote about ethnic Jews or a sense of national belonging. Some listed what made someone Jewish but left this undeveloped rather than evaluating the issue. Better candidates made links between their chosen examples and the issue of identity. Most referred to assimilation, education, inter-marriage and anti-Semitism and unpacked the relevance of these. The best answers included reference to being Jewish in a modern society rather than just an account of matrilineal descent, conversion etc. No-one made mention of popular perceptions/stereotypes of Jews in the media etc. The best answers were those that were aware that the issue of Jewish identity today is multi-faceted and is not just down to one factor.

© WJEC CBAC Ltd.

49

(b) Examples were generally good: separate seating, purity laws, divorce rights, clothes, female rabbis, Rosh Chodesh, matrilineal descent, examples of Old Testament heroines. The better students used these examples to highlight the Jewish understanding of the difference between role and status and that different role does not necessarily indicate lower status. Weaker candidates tended to list without necessarily making the connection back to the question. Many students answered by contrasting Orthodox Jewish views with those from within Reform Judaism. Some answered by comparing and contrasting the issue in a number of different groups as the contention did question whether women were treated as inferior in all branches of Judaism. A few considered the positives of a woman’s role within Orthodoxy in particular the striking importance women have in their private role in the household in contrast to what appears to be a detrimental public image. In general students were well prepared for this question.

Q.4 (a) The important issue about this question was its focus. The question did not

ask for a summary of theological responses per se but rather to consider theological views in the light of the challenge that the Holocaust was a divine punishment. Many students had good knowledge of the views of various theologians (no-one looked at less than 3) but didn’t always use that information to address whether they actually challenged the traditional view of divine punishment. Some students did not seem to grasp that they had to consider that it was not a divine punishment; a few candidates put forward the idea that the views of theologians might be challenging to the Jewish community. Details were accurate but students did not always tailor their information to answer the question. The way that some candidates set out their answer would have been better suited to the (b) part question i.e. ideas of God. The best answers, therefore, consistently referred back to the question and highlighted how theologians challenged the traditional view of the holocaust as a divine punishment.

(b) An issue with this answer tended to be repetition; many candidates simply

repeated the points they had made in (a), going through individual theologians viewpoints again. Most students mentioned the covenant and the concept of being chosen/elected. They referred to the breaking of the covenant, but many failed to realise that it was a two-way agreement, implying that God would always protect them and failing to make the point that the holocaust could be viewed as a divine punishment for breaking the covenant. Better answers included comparisons with times in history when God had intervened and made judgements on whether this meant that the relationship with God could be maintained. It was evident that students were not prepared for the thrust of this question but more able candidates were sufficiently well-read to adapt.

© WJEC CBAC Ltd.

50

RELIGIOUS STUDIES

General Certificate of Education

Summer 20212

Advanced Subsidiary/Advanced

Principal Examiner: Karl Lawson Unit Statistics The following statistics include all candidates entered for the unit, whether or not they 'cashed in' for an award. The attention of centres is drawn to the fact that the statistics listed should be viewed strictly within the context of this unit and that differences will undoubtedly occur between one year and the next and also between subjects in the same year. Unit Entry Max Mark Mean Mark RS3 HE 2,103 75 45.9 Grade Ranges A* 66 A 58 B 49 C 40 D 32 E 24 N.B. The marks given above are raw marks and not uniform marks.

© WJEC CBAC Ltd.

51

RS4 HE - HUMAN EXPERIENCE General As with previous years, the paper attracted a full range of responses, in terms of quality, from the candidature and there were several outstanding scripts produced. There were no significant issues in terms of the content of the paper. Centres are advised to take notice of the specific comments which follow which will assist in producing good practice with regards to this paper. A very notable feature this year was the ‘common centre produced’ response, certainly in terms of structure and content. This does not necessarily suggest that one common answer is produced but that an exemplar structure is given and the same resources given to candidates to use. There was very limited evidence of individual investigation. However, some answers gave the impression that the candidates had learnt the work parrot-fashion and did not really understand what they were writing about. This was evident in key words and terms being spelt wrongly and key concepts misinterpreted. Once again, candidates are using quotations for the sake of using quotations and throwing them into their answers willy-nilly. Candidates need to be reminded that quotes in quotation marks need to be the actual words otherwise they should be paraphrased. Another issue is that a number of answers are becoming more and more subjective especially from a fundamentalist viewpoint, so much so at times that the answer reads more like a sermon than an objective academic consideration of the subject. The danger is that it leads to a very narrow answer which doesn't really consider diversity of views. There was also a tendency of a significant number of candidates to ‘waffle’ and prevaricate in setting the parameters of their essay. In some cases this unnecessary prelude extended to the second page or even third page. Again, perhaps centres could be encouraged to ask their students to become more direct in promptly addressing the question. A final point was that it appears that some centres are encouraging candidates to write long conclusions at the end of part ‘a’, as this an AO1 response, this is an unnecessary addition. Q.1 (a) When candidates were able to accurately address the focus of this question

(ie the use of sacred writings as a form of authority’ the overall standard was good. At the higher level, candidates showed good knowledge and understanding of the different ways in which sacred writings display authority and there was clear use of scholarship and good examples, particularly concerning the Bible, Torah and the Qur’an. Most talked well about teachings, ethics and liturgy. In the mid-range, candidates tended to concentrate on fewer texts, mostly the Bible, and answers were more generalised and lacking the scholarship and depth of the better answers. At the lower end, candidates tended to respond more anecdotally about how the scriptures affected their lives.

(b) The higher range candidates offered good evaluation of a range of views,

including interesting criticism of church structures. Most in the mid-lower range offered varying levels of evaluation, but most on a fairly simplistic level, based mainly on church teachings and religious ethics. There were some particularly good answers debated the relative authority of Rabbis and other Jewish leaders compared to Christian priests and the Pope. Some weaker answers simply stated the other forms of authority and sometimes compared them to scriptural authority. Better answers were able to evaluate the merits of each form of authority individually before comparing them with scriptural authority. Weaker answers saw religious building and religious symbols as forms of authority.

© WJEC CBAC Ltd.

52

Q.2 (a) This was done very well by the best students, who were able to write with clarity and detail on a variety of features linked to religious experience, with most concentrating on prayer, miracles and meditation. They knew the key facts and ideas and linked these well with scholarly argument and debate. A good range of different scholars were mentioned, most notably Swinburne, James and Dawkins. In the mid-range, a number of candidates resorted to writing more generally about religious experience without effectively differentiating between the various features and a number confused religious experiences with mystical ones. Examples, beyond the Toronto Blessing, were rare. Answers were accurate and relevant with some understanding but lacking a real cutting edge. Material was generally well-organised, but the deciding factor between mid and upper-range results rested, to a considerable extent, on the understanding of the features of religious experience. At the lower end, candidates simply wrote all they knew about religious experiences. Some used anecdotal evidence of a friend telling the author about seeing a ghost or having a cousin’s great aunt coming back from a coma. Centres should discourage this practice as it lacks the necessary academic rigour to gain their candidates the best marks.

(b) There were very few really good answers to this question. The more able

candidates considered a range of differing views, and were able to offer well-balanced conclusions, supported by scholarly evidence. A number made interesting references to verification and falsification debates. A significant number of candidates focussed too much effort on the issue of verifying religious experience, rather than its value. A few candidates raised the issue of how valuable scriptural religious experiences were (conversion of Paul, burning bush, Pentecost etc), given a kind of ‘Bultmann’ demythologising stance. Some better candidates raised the issue that religious experiences might have value irrespective of their verification (a kind of utilitarian approach). At the lower end, answers tended to rely on personal opinions and homilies, offering simplistic evaluation, but lacking depth and scholarship. There were many very general answers, often repeating what had already been said in (a).

Q.3 (a) Good answers demonstrated clear understanding of specific religious teachings

and were able to explain the diversity within the religions under discussion. Some particularly good answers were seen from the perspective of Buddhism, in which the varying beliefs of Theravada, Mahayana, Tibetan and Pure Land Buddhism were explained and exemplified effectively. Good answers from a Christian perspective were able to discuss debates regarding immortality of the soul, resurrection of the body and the nature of heaven and hell. Some discussed atonement at length, which is not strictly relevant to the nature of life after death, although better answers related it well. Some candidates clearly had good religious knowledge but made little reference to scholarship or diversity of views and therefore limited their mark. Weaker answers sometimes simply explained funeral rituals without reference to teachings about life after death. Some candidates also included pages of irrelevant material about the nature of life including discussions of the sanctity of life and quality of life as relating to abortion and care of premature babies. Candidates who attempted to draw on Eastern religions that they did not appear to have studied before often made significant errors when discussing Buddhism, including misunderstandings about the soul and the difference between reincarnation and rebirth. These were particularly evident when material about Tibetan Buddhism had clearly been used with little understanding of the diversity within Buddhism. Other candidates confused the beliefs of New Religious Movements with the beliefs of mainstream Protestant Christians. Dualism and monism were frequently discussed with a fairly hazy account of how these related to life after death. Finally some candidates simply gave biblical references with no supporting quotation and no explanation, which did not add to the effectiveness of the response.

© WJEC CBAC Ltd.

53

(b) Many candidates appeared to adopt a very narrow approach to this question. There is lots of available evidence for this question that was not used e.g. Dawkins, scientific understandings, materialism, Hick’s replica, Susan Blackmore and NDE’s. Better candidates were able to use this material effectively. In the higher range, students offered good evaluation to life after death arguments, well-supported by scholarship and evidence. Nearly everyone referred to near-death experiences and spiritualism. In the mid-range, candidates tended to touch upon issues, rather than discuss and evaluate them in depth. Evaluation was speculative and lacked supporting evidence. There were quite a number of anecdotes and personal testimonies, but little really convincing argument. Again, quite a lot of ‘folk faith’ was offered, rather than solid religious argument and evidence.

GCE Religious Studies Examiners Report - Summer 2012 HT 20 09 12

© WJEC CBAC Ltd.

WJEC 245 Western Avenue Cardiff CF5 2YX Tel No 029 2026 5000 Fax 029 2057 5994 E-mail: exams@wjec.co.uk website: www.wjec.co.uk