Understanding the Assessment Exams Feedback for A Level

Understanding the Assessment Exams Feedback for A Level Classical Civilisation H 408

Useful Documents • Examiners’ reports • Papers for all options • The specification

11. World of the Hero

The Texts • Vast majority of people did the Odyssey, but the Iliad questions were done slightly better on the whole • Responses to the questions on the Aeneid showed that candidates found it more challenging to write with confidence on this than on the Homeric texts

Overall, what went well…? • Candidates were well prepared in terms of their knowledge and understanding of Greek and Roman epic • Many seemed to enjoy engaging with scholarly views and having the opportunity to argue • Plans, however brief, often led to successful responses

Even better if… Candidates improve their timing • Few tackled the questions in numerical order; but this was often the most successful route. • Many did the higher tariff questions first, but this sometimes led to more time being spent on these questions at the expense of the lower tariff questions. • They also lost track of which questions they had answered; Qs 5, 6 and 7 were sometimes missed out. • Long general introductions to Qs 1, 3, and 5 did not help with timing and are not necessary. They pay attention to the details • A fair amount of misnaming of characters, many used Greek names of gods in the Aeneid questions, and occasionally there were Roman names in the Homer questions • Widespread lack of capital letters for names of characters and places • Language and tone could be informal; eg. ‘mum’ and ‘dad’ for Anticleia and Anchises, or O and A for Odysseus and Aeneas • Terminology not always used correctly or in a way that added to the response

10 markers Stronger answers • Got straight down to answering the question with reference to the passage and not outside events • Offered a range of ideas • Identified a strong selection of examples from the passage, with clear explanation of selection • Were able to explain how the language and literary techniques created effects • Tended to use a new paragraph for each new point in the response Neither weak nor strong • Some included scholarly ideas in these questions; this is fine as long as they are included as part of the analysis rather than for the sake of referencing them.

10 markers Weaker answers • “Wasted words” before actually starting to answer the question; introduction and conclusion not necessary BUT candidates should aim for more than bullet points • Some “more concerned to collect data from the passage than to interpret it” • Offered background information rather than simply focusing on the passage • Cited examples which were not unpacked well or in any detail, or over-explained without much substance • Commonly candidates “would get themselves tangled up talking about a literary technique (e. g. ‘Homer uses similes in this passage’) and struggle to link it back to the question. At times, they were clearly uncomfortable to make basic points without using technical terms, and due to their desire to use technical language ended up not actually making the point they were aiming for. ” • Contained misconceptions or errors, for example in the Aeneid passage reading ‘copses’ as ‘corpses’

10 marker: Comparative Stronger Answers • Identified good knowledge such as family bonds and values, and there was some good work on the presentation of the underworld and funeral and mourning rituals. • Compared the two passages directly rather than discussing one passage in general terms and then the next. Weaker Answers • Off-loaded what they knew about Greek and Roman culture and ignored the passages completely. • Used information not in the passages as a way of stating the passages were ineffective in showing the societies’ beliefs and values. • Where questions were tackled in a different order, this question was commonly left to the end or was omitted completely.

20 markers: Homer Closely read and most candidates successfully identified sufficient points and supporting evidence. Stronger Answers • Understood the complexities of the questions and offered very perceptive answers; for example dividing their points into what was emotionally important to Odysseus and what was practically important to him, or acknowledging that his priorities change and are changed at different points in his travels • Contained very detailed knowledge • Stayed very focused, and made fewer points well than many at speed

20 markers: Homer Weaker Answers • Omitted obvious material, such as discussing Achilles but not books 22 and 24 • Did not fully grasp the significance of certain elements of the texts; for example what Briseis represented to Achilles • Lacked a clear judgement at the start and, therefore, were not able to draw on this throughout the essay and construct a consistent argument • Candidates were keen to show their knowledge of technical terms, but some did not use these with precision or accuracy • Did not fully grasp/understand the implications of the precise wording of the question: for example insisting that three separate things/people are ‘most important’ to Achilles or Odysseus • Adopted a book by book approach, simply retelling story with relevant ideas appearing incidentally, rather than linking explicitly to the question

20 marker: Virgil This question was not answered as well as the parallel questions on the Iliad and the Odyssey. • “Just as Dido was a distraction for Aeneas, she also proved to be a distraction for quite a number of candidates who did not go beyond the events of Book 4” • Answers often lacked detailed knowledge or omitted important details, eg. • Many did not remember that Mercury visited Aeneas twice and that Aeneas did not leave immediately • Few showed awareness of Aeneas’ speech to the Trojans on landing in Libya, of those only a handful noted that he is masking his own doubts. • Many did not answer the question with precision, eg. • ‘Reaching Italy’ was regularly read as ‘founding Rome’ • Many discussed books 7 -12 which were not part of the question

30 markers “Examiners did not always agree with those cited as scholars in some answers; while some of the named individuals are clearly experts in their own fields, for example Jurgen Klopp, Pep Guardiola and Nigel Farage, they have not contributed to the academic debate about Greek and Roman epic. “ Stronger Answers • Included lots of discussion and opinion • Used scholars’ quotations/ideas to back up a point or to present a point they were going to work with, but then analysed whether the scholars’ opinions supported their viewpoints and the reasons for this

30 markers Weaker Answers • Simply inserted a quotation and let it sit without exploring its relevance to the point being made • Used scholarship which was not entirely appropriate to the title and went on to answer a different question • Used scholarship as a substitute for evidence from the poems • A substantial number of responses did not include any scholars at all, while other responses referred to the York Notes as a scholar. • Tried to make the poems fit their understanding of the scholarship, creating errors in their presentation of the poem

21 -24. Culture and the Arts

21. Greek Theatre What went well… • Good engagement with the plays • Really nice references to performances of the plays which the candidates had seen, either live or as recordings • Most candidates seemed to be able to analyse the pot and come to reasoned conclusions Even better if… • Candidates were more comfortable with the material sources and placing them in the historical and cultural context of the plays

22. Imperial Image What went well… • Excellent AO 1 with hardly any weak responses in these terms • Many relied, understandably, on the scholars in the textbook but there was also good use of references to podcasts and lectures etc Even better if… • The sources were drawn together more successfully into coherent arguments, candidates planning their answers might have improved matters • Candidates avoid copying whole sections from the textbook, this can result in a rigid approach to responses and an unwillingness to challenge opinions • The whole of the prescribed sources were studied and learned, rather than just the sections quoted in the textbook • Candidates have a firmer understanding of the context of the sources, for example, many did not know when Suetonius was writing

23. The Invention of the Barbarian What went well… • The format of the paper did not seem to pose any particular problems of timing or comprehension • Good grasp of the need to compare and contrast the nature of Greeks and barbarians • Good answers effectively combined knowledge of the prescribed sources with a firm grasp of the context of the Persian Wars • The best essays were able to fashion an argument and then develop that through their writing in a well structured way Even better if… • Candidates use sufficient relevant detail, and on the precise requirements of the question • Avoid essays being a survey of evidence with insufficient effective analysis

24. Greek Art What went well… • Much evidence that candidates enjoyed studying the prescribed pots, statues and architectural sculpture • Many had even gone beyond the prescribed material to appreciate other pots by artists such as Exekias or a range of korai from the Athenian Acropolis; clear that teachers had made use of visits to museums in the UK, Italy and Greece. • Impressive candidates had the confidence to disagree with scholars and explain their own point of view; pleasing to read that level of critical engagement with modern scholarship Even better if… • Improve performance on low tariff questions in Section A • Engage fully with the scholarly argument or opinion being presented, rather than simply ‘name checking’ • Avoid over-reliance on one scholar (some quoted Woodford almost exclusively)

10 markers • Unlike AS Level, this question type is not marked on a points basis and is marked using the specification marking grid; continuous prose is required rather than bullet points, which limited some candidates’ arguments. • Focus on the source, not unnecessary background, and use a range of points from that source • Do not waste time with introductions and conclusions • Do not simply describe the source • Ensure that the focus is on the precise wording of the question, not just the general area • Students had more trouble recalling details about prescribed visual sources, leading to vague or generalised responses

20 markers • Use detailed evidence from the sources to back up every assertion, these can be non-prescribed • Consider the definition of key terms in the question, especially if they can be understood in more than one way and set parameters for the discussion • Avoid descriptive answers, when key terms have been identified ensure an argument is constructed around these • Make a range of points which cover many of the key ideas inherent in the question • Remember that the provided source(s) can help with some good information, they will be linked; although there is no requirement to use them

Marking 30 markers • Reference to secondary sources, scholars and/or academic works is expected • When marking the first bullet point in the AO 2 marking grid (i. e. the quality of the response overall) determines the level • Second bullet point, which contains reference to scholars, secondary sources and/or academic works, and the quality of extended response statement determines where in the level the mark should be awarded

30 markers • Make sure source knowledge is secure and can be deployed with detail • Express clear opinions about the questions, and use evidence to back up these opinions • “It is good to see candidates agreeing or disagreeing with scholars rather than just adding quotations” - encourage critical analysis of such material • “Some answers were driven by scholars’ opinions, making it difficult to follow the candidate’s own views on the question. ” • Better responses again identify and define key terms in the question and keep focused on these • Too often the less successful answers simply surveyed the available sources

31 -34. Beliefs and Ideas

31. Greek Religion What went well… • Proven to be a very popular topic • Some really impressive answers where candidates were employed the prescribed sources, material studied in other components, secondary sources and scholarship to good effect • Generally, those who were the most successful were those who tackled the questions in numerical order • Candidates showed good knowledge and understanding of the content • There were very few essays without use of scholarship, the best answers displayed good understanding of the subject and personal and perceptive critical thinking Even better if… • Improve timing, and ensure if the questions are done in a different order that every question has been answered • Use knowledge to answer the precise question effectively • More examples from literature, the prescribed sources and material culture to back up points in the essay questions • Sometimes, quotations from scholars were used at the beginning of every paragraph, hindering the flow of the argument and making an almost bullet-style response

32. Love and Relationships What went well… • Great deal of knowledge evident, and the strongest answers deployed this accurately and relevantly • All candidates dealt with the higher tariff questions appropriately by comparing and contrasting and allowing ample time to write a sufficient response • Almost all candidates followed the format of the question paper; allowed candidates to develop on themes that the previous questions pointed to • Very few candidates did not include references to modern, and almost all candidates attempted some kind of evaluation of the scholars they cited Even better if… • Avoid including references to wider reading without commenting further or evaluating the scholar • Avoid slipping into a narrative account, rather than keeping the focus on evaluation and analysis (AO 2) • Make sure knowledge and comfort with Ovid is equal to that with Sappho

33. Politics of the Late Republic What went well… • Strong candidates were able to make mature judgements, based on sound factual knowledge, about the political careers of Cicero, Cato, Pompey, Caesar and others, and the parts they played in the events of the 1 st century BCE • Generally, candidates were well prepared to discuss Cicero’s consulship, especially the Catilinarian conspiracy and the events which led to the Civil War, especially Caesar’s deteriorating relationship with the senate Even better if… • Improve understanding of the differences between patronage and amicitia, and the critical evaluation of the ‘factual’ content of Cicero’s work • Better knowledge of Cicero’s letters, not just the speech(es) • “When discussing matters such as politicians’ careers or the causes of the fall of the Roman republic, causes and consequences are seldom sensibly discussed without due observance of correct chronology” • Ensure all references to secondary and/or modern scholarship, support the points being made in a meaningful way, and acknowledge differing levels of authority; “Just as less is sometimes more, so more can sometimes be less. “

34. Democracy and the Athenians What went well… • Good understanding of the extracts from drama, Thucydides and the two Plato analogies • Where candidates worked through the paper in sequence they tended to have allocated time sensibly and generally appeared to complete the paper without needing to rush • The main achievements of the Key Thinkers were also generally understood • Excellent range of further research and scholarship, a wide range of ancient sources and modern scholars were used effectively, e. g. • the relevant sections of the Aristotelian Constitution of the Athenians and Plutarch’s Lives of Solon and Pericles • the parts of the Aristophanes plays not prescribed for study • Aeschylus’ Persians or Aristophanes’ Lysistrata • most of the standard modern scholars (e. g. Barrow, Cartledge, Ehrenberg, Macdowell) as well as presenters of television programmes, lecturers at school conferences and material available in on-line courses • Some had made good use of the very accessible introductions to the Penguin editions of the Oresteia and the Aristophanes plays • One or two used archaeological evidence, notably from the Agora excavations • Others made good use of knowledge gained from other Components

34. Democracy and the Athenians Even better if… • Further work is done on The Old Oligarch and Cleisthenes; these were weaker areas • Better understanding of: • Progression of events and awareness that dates BC ‘go backwards’ • How the major historical events of the period covered by the prescribed literary sources, relate to those sources or the reforms of the Key Thinkers. • The century and decade in which the authors of the prescribed sources were writing • The use of terms such as ‘citizen’ and ’magistrate’ or ‘magistracy’ in the context of ancient Athens as opposed to the modern world • Candidates understand that wider reading is not necessary in Section A, the questions carrying only 1 or 2 marks can often be answered in one or two words, the 10 and 20 mark questions are likely to be related • Avoid if possible ‘a scholar says…’ followed by a couple of words which could have been picked out of the air; creditable but less impressive • Timing if tackling the questions out of order; those who did the Section B essay first often misjudged the time they would then need for Section A and had to rush

10 markers: Sources • “Not all candidates seemed comfortable with the interpretation or reading of a visual source and there was much description” - in literary sources too, candidates need to be sure to focus on analysis not just description • There was some good use of technical terms, but also opportunities for confusion and inaccuracy • Candidates should note that they only need to refer to the passage/ source, don’t waste time discussing material found elsewhere • “The best approach was to deal with the passage from start to finish while vaguer answers talked about the passage as a whole. ” • “Candidates who were able to include evidence from all parts of the passage were able to come to the most convincing conclusions” • Many candidates didn’t think about the author’s intentions and took things very much at face value, missing opportunities for more sophisticated analysis

10 markers: Thought • Students had “a tendency to veer away from the question” and neglected to answer what was asked • Ensure understanding of key terms, misunderstandings can lead to totally off piste reponses • “There was some excellent use of scholars in this question, but it was not required” • Detailed knowledge about the ideas and actions of the Thinkers are crucial; “Where such knowledge was accurate, sound judgements were almost certain to follow”

20 markers • Remember that this essay isn’t expected to be as long as the 30 marker; take care with timing • “There was some impressive use of supporting classical evidence from a wide variety of source (archaeology, art, literature, inscriptions, artefacts etc. ) and the best answers used these consistently” • The best answers appreciated that Seneca and Ovid were writing for very different reasons • “Better responses offered more nuanced interpretations of the facts” – for example the different audiences or motivations of authors • Organise the response carefully around the key terms of the question, rather than narratively • Take care not to critique ideas from a modern viewpoint when asked specifically for an ancient one

30 markers • Set clear parameters for answers; questions are often broad, think carefully about essay structure and content • Avoid historical surveys or retellings of the ‘story’ • Ensure understanding of the different institutions and technical terms in an ancient context • “Nearly all were able to say something useful about the perceived bias or purpose of the sources used” • Avoid modern scholarship consisting of “phrases with no particular purpose other than to show the examiner that the candidate knew the name of a modern scholar” • A high level of detail is expected when something is a prescribed source, avoid vagueness • Linking scholarship to relevant sources can be highly effective • Despite the philosophers not having prescribed sources, knowledge of some helped candidates to frame their ideas effectively • “Some candidates made effective use of classical sources studied in other components” • “While some answers engaged excellently with the views of scholars and gave a considered response in support/opposition to them, some also used scholars’ views at the expense of expressing an opinion”