Essay techniques socio scly3 scly4 aqa

I would recommend Back and Fourth but always linking back to the question. For example in a 'long answer' e.g. 33 markers. It's best to have 10 different arguments that either disagree or agree with 'the view' or is a 'sociological explanation'. e.g. if you have 3 arguments that support, 3 that disagree, 2 that support because the 2 disagreeing arguments lack/ignore/fail to acknowledge 'x' and then 1 that disagrees with the question completely = your showing that you can convey range. But you must use connectives to link your paragraphs to show that your answer is structured and planned and not like a shopping list of theories (which chunking can sometimes cause)

(Original post by holc) can someone tell me what PERVERT is please? P - Practical issues E - Ethical issues R - Reliable issues V - Validity issues E - Enough research issues R - Representative issues T - Theoretical issues (feminist - rape of researcher) They are techniques that you could use to answer a methods question, but tbh this is mostly for a.s questions. At a2 i would recommend just using PET as its more broad for discussing methods IN CONTEXT as opposed to methods alone.

(Original post by SamuelSingleton) Is 8 points enough for a 33 marker? ie 4 supporting and 4 opposing with an example for each ? That is enough! but i would also suggest maybe having one extra argument that completely FLIPS the question. For example if there was a questions on 'religion = instability and conflict... Obviously you would have one side that agrees with the question = Class Marx, Rad Fem, Giddens, Huntington and against the argument you would prob have Durkheim, Weber, Norris Englehart and Bruce.....and thats probs enough BUT to show that pazazz factor I would even include a postmodernist argument that infers that 'If Religion can be defined inclusively then Marxism is also a religion, and as it has been proven to cause arguably the most conflict in history e.g. Inspiring WW2, then marxism its self is a source of conflict and is hypocritical to argue that it is religion that is the source when infact it is only the means of marxist values, so when we question if religion is the source of conflict, we have to also question is sociology?!.... Wham bam thank you mam your in the top band. Just be sassy and show them some bad bit** attitude to stand out and even question the question. Hope this helps....in short....the answer was yes

(Original post by steeeephtaylor) Here are my teachers predictions: SCLY3: - Functionalism (33 marker) - Secularisation (33 marker) - Postmodernity (33 marker) - Fundamentalism (18 marker) - Age and religion - Social groups, ethnicity and class - Cults ; sects - Social change SCLY4: - Ethnicity ; crime - Crime reduction strategies - State crime - Age, crime and victimisation - Social action theories - Postmodernism (33 marker) - Functionalism (33 marker) - Social policy - Sociology and science Hope this helps, he correctly predicted the questions for SCLY1 and SCLY2 in AS so I trust him.

(Original post by Bonica) 'Is sociology a science' on crime and deviance, what do you write about if that comes up? Sociology is not a science arguments could include: - Kuhn's paradigm argument (that science works from a theoretical framework like sociology, it is included by the teaching of science by professors and provides 'coloured lenses' on how science could be researched etc) - Interpretivist argument (science is a different study from the social world, social constructions, use of methods etc) - Sociology is not subjective - Sociology is not value free (and Post Modernists argue it should be value free otherwise it is open for manipluation and does not give the vulnerable a voice) - PostModernist argument: Sociology should not try be like a science, can only give interpretations, it should not provide a monopoly of information. Sociology is a science arguments: - Argument from Postivist & Postivist methods - Argument that sociology can be objective like natural science - Argument from open & closed systems: science often operates in open systems like sociology, so sociology can be a natural science. - Argument that sociology can be value free. Hope this helps a little!

(Original post by kxrnl) I don't know if this would be of much help, but just approach the 18 marker as if it was a 21 marker. My teacher taught me that - First highlight the keyword of the question and explain what it means before doing anything, so that it shows the examiner you're secure about understanding the meaning of the topic second, look at the argument and key point that, to show that you are aware that the main argument will have a critique. For example- Functionalist see religion as promoting consensus and harmony rather than conflict. Highlight the **** out of the conflict and say " however... marxists/ feminists.." then beginning outlining functionalism- durkheim, malinowski, parson, and if you have time, put an alternate view of functionalism= neo functionalist- britishness a civil religion? Criticisms of functionalism? - religion is often dysfunctional= creates war, conflict. = introduce your counter argument critique your argument with other THEORIES/APPROACHES = marxist= religion= false harmony, ideology, suppress the working class to conform =feminism=religion= ideology used by the patriarchal society/ men, to suppress women into a subordinate position, gives women impression that they are equal to men however they are merely the second sex/ keep women into traditional roles etc. Evaluate the marxist/feminist theories Critique the whole argument with postmodernism= religion and science are merely metanarratives= people disenchanted/ disillusioned. Because of the damage science and religion has caused= genetic mod, conflict, green harms, globalisation of crime, weapons of mass destruction etc. Feyerbend and Kaplan Science is a myth. I kinda summed up a performa of what a 33marker would look like, but otherwise, if it was a 18marker, use only one theory to critique your argument. Hope this was helpful