BROADER PERSPECTIVES
TEACHER’S NOTES 2015 ISSUE FOUR & FIVE
THE ESSAY ISSUE
NOTES
01.
For the teacher’s notes of this essay issue, we provide you with the question analyses of the 2014 ‘A’ level GP essay questions using the PVC (polarity-variable-constant) Framework. The purpose of this framework is to help students break down the questions into key terms or clauses, understand the questions’ requi rements, and formulate points for their essays. We believe close analysis of the wording of questions will aid students in understanding the tension, scope and demands of the debate they are engaging in.
02.
Here is a review of the PVC Framework:
INTRODUCTION
PVC FRAMEWORK
Polarity: Every argument begins with a basic polarity of two sides. Words such as ‘is’, ‘does’, ‘has’, ‘can’, ‘will’, ‘should’ and ‘must’ help generate two opposing responses to the question (i.e. is/is not; does/does not; and so on). Students must answer the question they have selected based on the polarity, as this will ensure relevance of their responses. Arguing that something can, or will, has a future aspect to it; while arguing that it has, or does, focuses on the present. Arguing about what should be or must requires considering why it is ideal or what creates the imperative. Questions phrased as statements may need to be paraphrased so that the polarity word (and the main variable) can be identified in these statements that are central to the question. Variables: Variables are words that determine the scope of the argument. There are usually multiple variables in a question: a main variable and other secondary variables. The main variable is either the key issue that ne eds to be resolved or the key value that needs to be established by the end of the argument. The main variable is identified by its direct association with the polarity word and hence constitutes the main tension or debate in the question. Secondary variables expand or specify the scope of examples, contexts, and conditions that are relevant to the discussion. Constants: Constants are terms that change the meaning of the question by introducing specific assumptions or additional requirements that need to be addressed in the argument. Some commonly seen constants are ‘only’, ‘never’, ‘really’, or ‘ever’, and they change the tone of the question and the extent to which one’s point of view need to be argued. Not all questions contain constants, and some questions contain multiple constants. We term questions without constants ‘basic polarity questions’. As a general rule of thumb, the more constants there are in a question, the more assumptions there are to be addressed – and thus the more complex the argument required.
Constants can also appear as given context(s). Questions that contain specified context(s) require students to answer the question within the parameters of that context(s). They can be the contexts of time (‘nowadays’, ‘today’s world’), space (‘Singapore’, ‘your society’) or a combination of both. These contexts highlight where the debate is most relevant and helps to generate insightful p oints or perspectives . It may be useful to list down the defining characteristics of the given context(s) during the planning stages of writing.
NOTES
03.
APPLICATION OF THE PVC FRAMEWORK
1. ‘Traditional marriage is an outdated concept.’ To what extent is this true of your society?
This question can be rephrased as: Is traditional marriage an outdated concept in your society? Polarity and main variable: ‘Is’ or ‘is not’ ‘an outdated concept’. From the main variable ‘an outdated concept’, the central debate must focus on the current relevance (of traditional marriage) and address what has changed from the past to now. Secondary variable: ‘Traditional marriage’. This could be defined through social, cultural and legal lenses – for instance, traditional wedding vows, lifelong fidelity, marriage between a man and a woman, and marriage as a religious or legal bond could be features of a ‘traditional marriage’ set apart from other less conventional (and conservative) relationships. The given context is ‘your society’. For most students, that would be Singapore and its unique characteristics that make for a meaningful discussion of the changing (or unchanging) institution of marriage.
2. How far should firms be allowed to limit their workers’ rights when profits are at stake?
Polarity and main variable: ‘Should’ or ‘should not’ ‘be allowed to limit’. How ideal or right it is to permit or condone this action is the main argument. This begs the question of who will be doing the permitting, whether it is the government, the public, or perhaps some other form of governance like unions or business ethics committees. Secondary variables: ‘Firms’, ‘their (firms’) workers’ rights’. The relationship between firms and their workers is to be examined, including the balance of power, their symbiotic relationship, and the firms’ responsibility towards their workers. The range of rights that can be curtailed should be established, with clarity about what are fundamental rights and secondary ones, and which ones tend to be under threat by firms seeking to stay profitable. Constant: ‘when profits are at stake’. Any argument made should be informed and shaped by this condition of profitability being threatened. This tension be tween profits and workers’ rights (and hence their wellbeing) raises questions about the nature of firms and what their main priority should be.
3. ‘Gambling on sport undermines its spirit and should be banned.’ How realistic is this position?
This question can be rephrased as: Realistically, should gambling on sport be banned because it undermines its spirit? Polarity and main variable: ‘Should’ or ‘should not’ ‘be banned’. The idealism of “should” is contrasted with “is realistic or not”, reminding students not just to focus on the ideal but on whether a ban would work or be sensible given the world we live in. The effectiveness and desirability of legislating against gambling on sport and
NOTES
the defensibility of this position is the key contention of this question. Secondary variable: ‘gambling on sport’. This specifies a typ e of gambling but still allows for a broad range of examples and levels of severity. Constant: ‘undermines its spirit’. This is defined as the main reason for opposing gambling on sport. Thus the truth of this should be considered and developed in the essay rather than only arguing the other negative effects of gambling on sport. Students can challenge the validity and realism of this belief as a means of arguing for their stand. The spirit of sport needs to be well articulated and understood in arguing whether it is impacted negatively by gambling or not.
4. Discuss the view that, with an increasing global need for energy, every possible source should be exploited to the full.
This question can be rephrased as: With an increasing global need for energy, should every possible source be exploited to the full? Polarity and main variable: ‘Should’ or ‘should not’ ‘be exploited to the full’. The extreme nature of exploitation is emphasised and whether this is right or wrong, desirable or not is the main argument. Secondary variable: ‘every possible source’. A range of examples and categories of energy sources should be explored to reflect the degree/extent denoted here. Given context: The urgency and scale of the global need for energy is the defining context for this discussion. Global players should be considered especially since they will be the ones determining the demand and supply of, and hence pursuing or limiting the exploitation of resources with different motivations. For instance, corp orations might emphasise profit/ the long-term sustainability of their business, states might emphasise energy security / the welfare of their people, NGOs might emphasise the protection of the environment…)
5. ‘For the majority of people, the Ar ts are irrelevant to their daily lives.’ How true is this of your society?
This question can be rephrased as: Are the Ar ts irrelevant to the daily lives of the majority of people in your society? Polarity and main variable: ‘Are’ or ‘are not’ ‘irrelevant’. The current relevance is to be assessed and that requires arguing the meaning and value of the Arts. Secondary variable: the daily lives of the majority of people. The mundane, practical, day-to-day routines of most people make up the scope and interest of this discussion. The implied contrast of this scope and the Arts is that the latter is highbrow, reserved for special occasions, enjoyed by a select group of people, or limited in practicality and utility. How this majority is defined and described should be carefully developed to avoid sounding simplistic, overly generalised, or ill-informed.
NOTES
Given context: ‘your society’. Singapore’s unique demographics, economy, cultural environment, media, and links with the world’s cultural institutions and performing artists as well as the majority of Singaporeans’ lives, pragmatism, aspirations, preferences and preoccupations can be considered.
6. How far is it important for people to be aware of current events in countries other than their own?
Polarity and main variable: ‘is’ or ‘is not’ ‘important’. Arguments about why it is important or not can be made with different evaluations of how necessary, critical, valuable, and useful it is. Secondary variable: people’s awareness of current events in other countries. The differentiation between one’s own country and others, alo ng with the divide between local affairs and foreign affairs are assumed to be innate, but can be contradictory given globalisation. How awareness can be assessed and the means by which awareness is created should also be considered in the planning stages of the essay.
7. In times of economic hardship, should a country still be expected to provide financial or material aid to ot hers?
Polarity and main variable: ‘Should’ or ‘should not’ ‘be expected’. The use of “should” and “expected” emphasise that this debate is about standards and ideals that we hold and being able to articulate why we have them. Those who might expect this of a country include citizens, other countries, or international governmental organisations. Secondary variables: ‘a country’, ‘provide financial or material aid to others’. Different types of countries should be considered to create the range and complexity in addressing this general question. The tension betwee n the responsibility of governments to care for their own country versus that of caring for others is key to this question. Constant: ‘still’. This creates a comparison between times when the economy is faring well and there is an expectation, and times of economic hardship when there may or may not continue to be that expectation. The reasons for expecting a country to provide aid in good or ordinary times need to be re-evaluated in the context of economic hardship to see if they continue to be valid. Given context: in times of economic hardship. This pits adverse economic conditions against humanitarian ideals. There are different levels of severity and various causes of economic hardship which would inform the argument on expectations.
NOTES
8. Do films offer anything more than an escape from reality?
Polarity and main variable: ‘Do’ or ‘do not’ ‘offer’. Secondary variables: ‘films’, ‘an escape from reality’. Varying the types of films presented in the essay and how they provide an escape from reality is important. Rather than offering an escape from reality, films could immerse the audiences in reality, or influence and impact realit y. The dichotomy of escape and return could be helpful in generating ideas, as well as the temporal effect (escape) versus the permanent or lasting effect of films. Constant: ‘anything more’. This suggests that films are only capable of offering escapism and are thus limited in their use and impact. Some students may choose to question the dismissiveness of this and argue for redeeming this role of films.
9. To what extent can the regulation of scientific or technological developments be justified?
Polarity and main variable: ‘Can’ or ‘cannot’ ‘be justified’. This requires examining the reasoning behind regulation and also weighing aspects like cost, efficacy, possible abuses, downsides, and possibl e short and long term implications for different groups of people, the economy, security, and the environment. ‘Justified’ implies that the essay must address whether the pros outweigh the cons or vice versa, instead of simply addressing the two sides of the argument. Secondary variable: ‘the regulation of scientific or technological developments’. Varying the different players who would be in charge of the regulation, as well as different types of science and technology would be meaningful for nuancing this discussion.
10. ‘Getting what one wants in life is what matters.’ Discuss.
This question can be rephrased as: Is getting what one wants in life what matters? Polarity and main variable: ‘Is’ or ‘is not’ ‘what matters’. Having to argue for whether something counts or is most important in the final analysis requires considering its value, significance, and how it impacts other aspects of life both in the short and long term. Secondary variable: ‘getting what one wants in life’. This allows for the essay to explore a wide range of personal goals and aims as well as diverse methods of achieving them. While this sounds like a rather philosophical and personal question, it should be examined on a larger scale given that this is a General Paper essay, to see how ‘getting what one wants in life’ would have wider implications for how people live, work, relate and interact, or how this principle may be reflected in our institutions, systems, and communal values.
NOTES
11. Examine the extent to which expenditu re on arms and the armed force s is justifiable in the modern world.
This question can be rephrased as: Is expenditure on arms and the armed forces justifiable in the modern world? Polarity and main variable: ‘Is’ or ‘is not’ ‘justifiable’. This question calls for examining the validity of the reasons supporting and opposing. ‘Justified’ implies that the essay must address whether the pros of spending on arms and the armed forces outweigh the cons or vice versa, instead of simply addressing the two sides of the argument.
Secondary variable: ‘expenditure on arms and the armed forces’. This would largely be expenditure by governments. Varying the types of governments (and therefore states), amount of spending, and types of arms or forces would be important. Given context: the modern world. The focus is on the current state of the world and the latest trends, pressing issues, and major events reshaping the debate on military spending.
12. Consider the view that some careers are better suited to one gender than the other.
This question can be rephrased as: Are some careers better suited to one gender than the other? Polarity and main variable: ‘Are’ or ‘are not’ ‘better suited’. This invites the student to assess the current situation and argue whether this pe rception of an advantageous fit for only one gender is true. Secondary variables: ‘some careers’, ‘one gender than the other’. The use of the word “career” suggests a more holistic and long term view, as opposed to jobs or types of work. Establishing an insightful categorisation of careers that favour one gender over the other for a variety of reasons would help with the development of the essay. Clarity in the differences between the genders (perceived or otherwise) and what reinforces those biases is also needed.
