Problem essay types
Now that I have the first year of the new curriculum under my belt, I have learned that there are three “types” of responses to Paper 1, Section C that cause some problems with marking. Here are my thoughts on how to approach them, based on the question: Discuss measurement in the study of communication in human relationships. The feedback below is based on how I addressed the issues with my own students.
Problem essay 1: All content (area of study), no concept
In this essay type, there were long descriptions of Gottman’s Four Horsemen, Bradbury and Fincham’s communication styles, and Altman and Taylor’s Social Penetration Theory. Often a study was used (most Sprecher and Hendrick’s study of disclosure). The only critical thinking was an evaluation of the study.
Approach to marking
Strand 1: The rubric is a bit confusing. Rather than using the terms “study and concept” or “study or concept”, it is simply “study/concept.” There is a very good understanding of the area of study, but nothing about the concept. In this case, the maximum strand would be 7 – 9, as they are “only partially addressed.”
Strand 2: The second strand would be 1 – 3, as there is no link between the area of study and the concept. Evaluation of the study, unless it is focused on measurement, is irrelevant.
Strand 3: Terminology may be used effectively and unpacked in a way that shows that it is relevant, accurate, and detailed. Up to full marks.
Final mark: With the following potential marks (7-9, 1-3, and -15), the maximum score for this type of essay is 8 marks.
Problem essay 2: All concept (generic), no link to content
In this essay type, the student focuses on general issues linked to measurement, but does not link them specifically to the study of communication. There are long descriptions that we need to operationalize constructs, create reliable tools, and/or a discussion of emic vs etic approaches.
Approach to marking
In some essays there was an outline of one or more theories of communication, but then no links. In this case, there is relevant knowledge of the area of the study and relevant knowledge of the concept. Strand 1 could earn a maximum of full marks; Strand 2 is again that there is no link between the concept and the content (1 – 3); For Strand 3, terminology may earn up to full marks (13 – 15). Final mark: Max of 10 marks.
In other essays, there was only a discussion of measurement, with no theories of communication explained. In this case, Strand 1 is partially addressed (7 – 9); Strand 2 is again that there is no link between the concept and the content (1 – 3); For Strand 3, terminology may earn up to full marks (13 – 15). Final mark: Max of 8 marks.
Problem essay 3: Content (area of study), not focused on correct concept
This essay was the trickiest to mark. In this essay, the concept was partially addressed. The most common example was that the student started writing about measurement, but focused mostly on bias, with a superficial connection that “bias affects measurement.” Another example is that the essay focused on ethics with limited links to measurement.
Approach to marking
Strand 1 is partially addressed (7 – 9); Strand 2: The links between the area of study and the concept are explained, and are partly relevant (7 – 9). Strand 3: Terminology may be used effectively and unpacked in a way that shows that it is relevant, accurate, and detailed. Up to full marks. Final mark: With the following potential marks (7-9, 7 - 9, and 13 -15), the maximum score for this type of essay would be 11/15 marks.