Warning: count(): Parameter must be an array or an object that implements Countable in /nfs/c03/h02/mnt/55839/domains/bookboard.com/html/wp-content/plugins/q-and-a/inc/functions.php on line 252
Every year FIPI reform demo exam for social studies. This time has changed the requirements and system of evaluation of essay (task 29). I propose to understand the innovations!
Changes in social science essays 2018
What’s new in the demo exam 2018?
So, published a new demo exam for social studies 2018. We have already discussed her job, changes were few. But, one of the main became an innovation in the assessment of the task 29 (social science writing).
Essay requirements 2017
What has changed in the text of the job?
Essay requirements, in demos exam 2018
Let’s face it.
The word problem (which raises the author quotes) is replaced by the idea. It
I think no, in any case it is the thoughts that arise in the comprehension of the author’s quotes!
A more clearly formulated requirement to write some ideas (in 2017 if necessary…).
Also, please rely on facts and examples from public life and personal social experience, examples from other subjects.
Also evaluated two examples from different sources.
Harder formulated the requirement for the deployed sample and its apparent connection with the idea.
That is, in fact, changing the volume requirement (examples need to deploy, ideas need to see a few!) and let’s just say, the writing really goes away from the genre of easy and clear essay when you don’t have to meticulously write out an example, it is enough to voice the idea. To bulky essay, where all thoughts are heavy, extremely clear and articulated. Probably next year to the regulation of the number of words will come, as in other things, sorry
As is now checked essay?
First of all, changed a number of criteria. They became 4 instead of three.
The validation criteria of the task 29 essays on the exam 2017
Recall that in General for the mini-essay you can get 5 points (1-2-2). Now it’s 6 primary points, the value of the essay continues to grow, to learn to write it to get the most important points of the exam must!
Look at the changed criteria!
Essentially it does not change, it’s also the uncovering of quotes by author. And, also, for failure to disclose you will not only receive 0 for this criterion, but throughout the essay.
Criterion 1 task 29 exam 2018
So, you want to find the quote idea (?the problem?), associated with the course and highlight the thesis (your complete thought on the statement), which you further and will substantiate information from the course and examples of social practice.
Nothing new, frankly, do not see. Instead of meaningful quotes of the author’s writing …
“The basic idea, formulated by the author of the quote … I see…”. This issue seems relevant (? I completely agree with this idea because…).
The same in fact, criterion 2. Theoretical justification of ideas (problems) from the standpoint of scientific social science. terms, concepts, theories, and conclusions of science on this idea
Criterion 2 task 29 exam 2018
As before, estimated at 2 points maximum. This, if you see the linked chain of theoretical reasoning and builds. And if you do not see? Separate, not connected into a unified picture of the situation, but related to the topic are evaluated by only one score. Agree, very slippery and subjective criteria…
Here actually it is new. Is added to the score just for the fact that there are no mistakes in the theoretical constructs, terms. Something similar to checking the historical writings by criterion 6.
Criterion 3 task 29 exam 2018
And a new fourth criterion (although it is just the same and not new).
Criterion 4 task 29 exam 2018
This is a modified version of the previous criterion 3. Obviously only tightened. Let’s see how tough you demand to give examples to support the arguments:
1) is CLEARLY related to the selected terms and theses (and how to evaluate it EXPLICITLY (???)
2) DETAILED EXAMPLES (i.e., discharged thoroughly and easy to understand expert when validating). And if you do not understand? (not read, not seen, do not know…).
The obvious subjectivity, in our humble opinion, moreover, adapted to a legal justification. And in the background read/seen in 2017 it’s just scary really. That is actually
biased (not competent, not competent)
the expert is very well protected these tests (especially 29.2 and 29.4).
This is indirectly confirmed by further manual FIPI. Very curious, let’s see…
Recheck part 2
That is, even FIPI allows for the possibility of such arbitrary consideration of work…
1. Yes, it’s not a theoretical situation, what are You? 0 points.
2. The arguments are not in an explicit form. 0 points.
3. Well, these arguments are not painted. 0 points.
No comment, as they say…
So, analyze it according to new criteria…
“Protection of rights is the greatest protection of public values.”
(P. A. Sorokin)
The author addresses the problem of protecting rights is particularly relevant in modern society.
In his opinion the protection of the right is very important for companies.
I could not agree with the opinion of the author, because the right plays an important role in the life of any state, of society and of each person.
So, Sorokin shows the IDEA and the formulated thesis. I believe that K1 is made, come on!
PitirimSorokin, the great Russian sociologist
Criterion 2. On its opening plays:
Law is a set installed and protected by state government norms and rules, regulating relations of people in society. It is this system of rules expresses individual and common interests of all citizens of the state. A citizen is a person who is associated with a certain state of political and legal communication. The legal status of a citizen of a particular state is much higher than individuals without citizenship and foreigners, as they have a large amount of rights and freedoms. The state is the institution of the political system whose main function is the organization and control of joint actions and relations of persons who live in the country and protection of their rights and freedoms. The citizen and the government linked stable political and legal connection. Citizenship is a stable political and legal connection between the state and people. It is expressed in the existence of reciprocal rights and duties. The right acts as a regulator of social relations, it protects the rights of citizens and the state.
In the book we see here, the concepts of right, the citizen, the state and citizenship. And attempt to blend them into the overall fabric of reasoning. But, we don’t see it explicitly linked to the requirement of K2 to do it in the context of selected ideas and thesis (!). And, they recall, was:
… protection rights very important to society.
… the right plays an important role in the life of any state, of society and of each person.
In this case, only the sentence from the essay:
The legal status of a citizen of a particular state is much higher than individuals without citizenship and foreigners, as they have a large amount of rights and freedoms.
can affect the rating, but here the word a lot here obviously superfluous. For example, according to the Constitution, article 62, paragraph 3:
Foreign citizens and persons without citizenship use in the Russian Federation the rights and bear duties equally with citizens of the Russian Federation, except for cases established by Federal law or international Treaty of the Russian Federation.
Yes, political rights they have, but what about
“the legal status is much higher.”
it’s too much. That is, in this case, expose for 2 criterion 1 score with the wording:
In the context of each selected idea/ thesis is given a separate, unrelated reasoning concepts and/or terms.
Criterion 3. Let’s not quibble strictly to the above inaccuracies. In fact, a gross mistake it is not, it’s 1 point.
Now let’s look at the argument, criterion 4.
As an example I can give right of any person to freedom and independence, which is the most important moral and social values.
As a historical example is the uprising in Novocherkassk in 1961, when the workers after raising standards and lowering wages went on strike, the purpose of which was to defend their rights, workers ‘ rights, and to establish favourable conditions of work. This example illustrates how a group of people fought for their rights and defended them, despite threats from the authorities.
Thus, specific examples, we can make sure that protecting their rights, each of us contributes to the successful existence of the legal system in the state. Without this system, no society could exist peacefully and orderly, and no state can develop.
Over a simple statement of rights of the Constitution without disclosing how it is being implemented in social reality, previously not counted, this is a common mistake. And requirements now even more so.
When evaluating counted only formulated
deployed correct facts /examples.
A historical example is also not correct, unfortunately. The Novocherkassk events occurred in 1962, not in 1961. No reduction of wages was the increase in prices for meat and meat products, oil.
- Facts/examples that contain factual and conceptual
- the errors that led to substantial distortion of fact
- the statements and evidence of misunderstanding
- used historical, literary, geographical