Marking criteria
[How to get a perfect answer for the above question]
AO1 credit can be gained by a description of the biological model
of abnormality and/or of research relating to it. AO2 credit can
be earned through the effective consideration of the strengths and
limitations of the biological model.
Candidates following the Specification should be aware of the assumptions
of the biological model in relation to the causes and treatment
of abnormality i.e. the focus on genetics, neurotransmitters, neurophysiology,
neuroanatomy etc. and treatment via drugs, ECT, and psychosurgery.
This approach can be criticised for ignoring environmental and developmental
influences, and alternative approaches can be used to emphasise
this problem. However other approaches must be used in an explicitly
evaluative way to gain credit. Limitations of treatments include
ethical issues, dependency and side effects of drugs (and ECT),
the irreversibility of psychosurgery etc. Strengths of the biological
model include its testability via neuroscience
research, evidence for genetic and neurotransmitter involvement
in conditions such as schizophrenia, and the effectiveness of drugs
in some disorders.
The Specification also includes biological and psychological models
of eating disorders, along with relevant research studies, and this
material would be directly relevant to this question as a way of
illustrating the strengths and limitations of the biological model.
Strengths and limitations are required under AO2 and candidates
considering only one of these are providing only partial performance.
Such answers are subject to a maximum of 8 marks in Skill Domain
AO2.
Candidates may introduce further theories/studies as a form of commentary/evaluation.
The degree to which candidates use this material as part of a critical
commentary, rather than simply describing alternatives, will constitute
the effectiveness of the evaluation and hence the number of marks
awarded for AO2. Candidates who offer no commentary may still be
judged to have selected appropriate material and thus commentary
can
be described as ‘just discernible’. |