Guide for OCR Religious Studies A level

Version for the school year starting 2025

(model essay coming soon)

General guidance

There is a lot of content for OCR RS A level. 31 topics (give or take 1 depending on how you count them)

It’s not advisable to try and memorise essays or essay plans. This is because there is a wide range of types of questions you could get for each topic. Engaging with the specific question is crucial for OCR RS. Learning one essay plan per topic will not work. Even if you learned 10 essay plans per topic there would still be a significant risk a question would come up that none of them really fit, and you’d get marked down for lack of focus on the question.

However, I don’t recommend the other extreme, of having no pre-structured content memorised and just hoping to piece together the right content in the right way in the heat of the moment in the exam.

I recommend a middle ground approach. There should be some memorisation of content which is pre-structured to some degree. Equally important though is developing the skill of applying that content to the various questions that could come up in the exam.

Exactly how much you rely on pre-structured content can vary according to your preferences and goals, but I think everyone should to some degree.

So, there are two things you need to do to prepare for this A level.

The first is to break topics down into a pre-structured way ideal for use in essays.

My method is to create multiple individual sections/paragraphs. This is what I’ve modelled with the notes on my website. These paragraphs can then be used as building blocks for your essay.

A full paragraph needs to consider two opposing views on a debated point of contention within a topic and come to a judgement about which side you think is right and why. If you learn multiple paragraphs for each topic structured in that way, you’ll have enough of a range of content to answer whatever question comes up in the exam.

The second is to develop the skills required to fit memorised content to questions:

1. Identifying what the AO1 marks are awarded for.
2. figuring out which paragraphs would best fit the particular question.
3. Linking the paragraphs to the actual question.
4. Writing a short plan to make sure your evaluations fit together into a line of argument.

Developing a skill takes practice. It’s not enough to only practice these skills when actually writing full essays. You need to practice these skills during revision.

Revising a topic should involve three parts:

1. Read through your revision materials for the topic (notes, flashcards, mindmaps, etc).
2. Practice writing out content from memory, then checking its accuracy and doing corrections. If you’re using flashcards/mindmaps, you’ll be writing summaries of paragraphs, if using longer notes, you could either practice writing them out in full or creating a summary.
3. Take some questions at random (from the list on my website) and practice doing a quick plan in 2 mins. This will test the skill of figuring out which content to use & figuring out a line of argument. Then write the linking sentences to practice linking the content to the question.

This approach has many benefits. One is not leaving it to you to figure out what arguments to put in what order in the heat of the moment in the exam. This also lessens the gap between what you do during revision and what you’ll actually be doing in the exam, making better results more reliable.

Essay structure

There are many equally valid ways to do essay structure. There is one I like the most because it ensures you do proper AO2 evaluation and works really well with the approach to revision I recommend of learning the content in a structured way. It’s also what most teachers do.

You teacher might want you to do it differently though, because it’s easier for teachers to get a whole class on board with one particular style, even though there are loads of styles that work. Your teacher is in charge of things like your grade predictions and might be closed minded about approaches they haven’t taught you, so keep that in mind!

Paragraphs need three parts:

• Point: an argument for or against the question.
• Counter: a direct counter-argument to the point.
• Evaluation: your judgement on whether the counter succeeded or failed.

These parts then need to be signposted in the right ways. Here’s the full structure:
Signposting parts are in blue (which must be there but should be short).
Key parts are in red (which should be longer and are where the bulk of the marks will come from).

Introduction

• Define any key terms in the question.
• State your line of argument/thesis (your answer to the question).

AO1 chunk (if doing the chunk method – otherwise ignore)

Main paragraphs:

• Two or three paragraphs/sections of this structure:

Intro statement

• Assertive language; state what you are going to do/argue/conclude in the paragraph (showing how it helps your thesis (1 or 2 sentences).
  • E.g.: “X [your thesis] is convincing because Y [conclusion of the paragraph/section]”.
  • E.g.: “X is not a successful theory because its argument Y is undermined by criticism Z”.

Point

• AO1: Add relevant AO1 (if doing the weave method).
• Point: neutral language: an argument for or against the question.

Counter:

• Neutral intro:
  • E.g.: “However, Y is (criticised/defended) by Z” (use language of question if possible)
  • E.g.: “Nonetheless, Y faces the issue of Z
  • E.g.: “Y would defend themselves by pointing/appealing to Z”
• A direct counter to the argument of the point section (3)

Evaluation: Your judgement on the counter’s success

• Assertive language: state which side you are taking.
  • E.g.: “X’s Y (defence/criticism) is un/successful because…”
  • If doing a little further back and forth in the evaluation, begin with something like this:
  • E.g.: “X attempts to defend themselves in way Z (explain Z) … but this fails because…”
• Justification sentence(s): your argument/justification for your judgement on whether the counter succeeds or fails.
• Link to the question: state what the evaluative judgement you reached says in response to the question.

Conclusion

• State how the judgements you reached in your evaluation sections tie together to justify your answer to the question/line of argument.

More detailed explanation of the essay structure

• Note that your intro statement and the ‘argument’ in the point section are different things and may not even agree with each other.
• E.g., imagine the question was ‘Evaluate Aquinas’ teleological argument” [40]
• For paragraph 1, your intro statement could say “Aquinas’ teleological argument can be defended against Hume’s critique of analogy”.
• Your AO1 would be explaining Aquinas’ 5^th way
• Your point argument could be an argument for or against Aquinas’ 5^th way – e.g., a strength or a weakness/criticism.
• (It doesn’t matter which you start with – since the counter will provide the other)
• Your counter would then either be Hume’s criticism to counter Aquinas’ strength – or a defence of Aquinas as a strength to counter Hume’s criticism – depending on what you chose to do for the point argument.
• Your evaluation then needs to be a reasoned judgement about whether the counter succeeds or fails.

Here’s an illustration of the two ways this paragraph could go – if my line of argument was to defend Aquinas:

Option 1:

• Intro statement: Aquinas can be defended vs Hume
• AO1: Aquinas’ 5^th way
• Point argument: Strength of Aquinas’ 5^th way
• Counter: Weakness/criticism of Aquinas’ 5^th way (Hume’s on analogy)
• Evaluation: My judgement that Aquinas can be defended against Hume’s critique and how/why.

Option 2:

• Intro statement: Aquinas can be defended vs Hume
• AO1: Aquinas’ 5^th way
• Point argument: Weakness/criticism of Aquinas’ 5^th way (Hume’s on analogy)
• Counter: defence/strength of Aquinas
• Evaluation: My judgement that this defence of Aquinas is successful and how/why.

So you see, the point argument and counter are the two sides of the debate. This has two important implications:

• It doesn’t matter which you do first, since both sides will inevitably be represented with this structure regardless.
• Whichever you start with, you can end with your judgement that fits your line of argument.
• What’s important is that the point section involves an argument relevant to the question – which you either introduce as something you’ll be criticising or defending in the intro sentence of a paragraph (the first sentence of each paragraph).

All the following paragraph structures are variants of what is valid within the flexibility of this structure:

Strength
Weakness that counters the strength
Evaluation of whether that weakness succeeded in countering the strength

Argument for X
Counter to that argument
Evaluation of whether that counter succeeded

Weakness
Defensive strength against that weakness
Evaluation of whether that defensive strength succeeded

Criticism
Defence against criticism
Evaluation of whether the defence succeeded

So in summary, the generic template paragraph structure is:

Intro statement: assert what your evaluation is going to show in the paragraph, making it clear how that fits your line of argument (answer to the question – use the language of the question).
AO1: Knowledge & understanding relevant to the question and paragraph.
Point argument: an argument either for (strength) or against (weakness/criticism) the question.
Counter: a direct counter-argument to the point argument.
Evaluation: your judgement about whether the counter succeeds or fails.

AO1 positioning

• For AO1, OCR have said that the chunk and weave method are both valid. It’s fine to also do a hybrid – where the AO1 weaved into paragraph 1 is a bit longer than in paragraph 2 or 3 – or you could even leave AO1 out of paragraph 3 in such cases.
• For some questions this might in fact be ideal. E.g., a question on Aquinas’ design argument or Anselm’s ontological argument – you’ll need to explain their arguments for AO1 marks in the AO1 section of the first paragraph. However, what other AO1 could you bring up for paragraphs 2 and 3? Especially since it would need to be something relevant to those paragraphs, i.e., to their critics.
• If doing an AO1 chunk after the intro before the first paragraph, make sure to link the AO1 to the question in its opening sentence. Explain what the content you are about to explain would say to the question. E.g., if asked to evaluate a scholar, open the AO1 explanation of their views by saying they think they are right because of reasons X, Y and Z – which you can then go on to explain.
• I’m afraid that clearly the best AO1 positioning somewhat depends on the question. However, if you’re happy with an A grade or lower, I wouldn’t worry much about this. The AO1 being there is the main thing. But if you want A*, appreciating the nuances of where to put AO1, whether to split it up, and if so which content, by what ratios and in which places, is good to think about. But even for A*, the main thing is to demonstrate impressive knowledge & understanding that other students wouldn’t.

What makes evaluation evaluation

• The evaluation must end with an argument presented as your judgement about whether the counter is successful or not, i.e., whether the point or the counter wins, and why.
• Scholarly views can go in the evaluation section, but you must end the paragraph with points presented as your reasons for your judgement. Whether it agrees with those scholars or not.
• What you must avoid is your evaluation point just being a re-statement of what a scholar thinks. You must provide additional reasons for thinking one side correct (not just repetitions of points already made!) .
• Evaluation is when you say which side is right and why.
• Don’t worry about having to think of such points in the heat of the moment in a test/exam. You can prepare and revise them beforehand. You could use the evaluation points in my notes, making your own, or creatively edit mine.
• Your evaluation must fit your line of argument, not contradict it.

Grade specific advice

A*

The rest of this document is available for OCR subscribers only.