babolat300
New Member
- Joined
- May 10, 2018
- Messages
- 4
- Gender
- Male
- HSC
- 2018
Hello
We Had a research task, in which the question required us to 'Critically analyse sports policies and the sports environments to determine the degree to which they promote safe participation in a variety of sports'
I made the terrible mistake of not referring to syllabus terminology, or answering the question via the 5 syllabus dot points that this area comprises of. I was marked a 5/15 wholly for this reason. My explanation and examples were deemed to be good, however I did not directly refer to these 5 dot-points, or did I use specific terminology from the syllabus.
Is such a mark fair, considering i had good examples and content relating to the question, just not in the correct structure and wording stated in the syllabus. How can I argue for more marks?
Thanks
We Had a research task, in which the question required us to 'Critically analyse sports policies and the sports environments to determine the degree to which they promote safe participation in a variety of sports'
I made the terrible mistake of not referring to syllabus terminology, or answering the question via the 5 syllabus dot points that this area comprises of. I was marked a 5/15 wholly for this reason. My explanation and examples were deemed to be good, however I did not directly refer to these 5 dot-points, or did I use specific terminology from the syllabus.
Is such a mark fair, considering i had good examples and content relating to the question, just not in the correct structure and wording stated in the syllabus. How can I argue for more marks?
Thanks
Last edited: