Question
Question 7 The use of animals in sport can never be justified. Discuss.
The vast majority of candidates were able to consider a range of sports involving animals including horse or greyhound racing; dressage; pig, dog or cat shows; pitbull or bull fighting and dog agility. Some candidates did succumb to the emotive appeal of the issue, and this was often accompanied by register issues with some aggressively worded, passionate responses written in a very colloquial manner. The required context 'sport' was missed by some candidates and these essays were focused on how animals deserve protection and affection. Many candidates restricted animal sports to horse racing and dog racing with a few references to hunting, thus narrowing the argument. Comments were often focused on animal cruelty in sport such as animals being beaten to achieve a better performance. Others expressed the views that animals were well treated because the owners wanted to get the best out of them. More successful arguments were balanced, exploring when using animals in sport could be justified but evaluating those situations where it could not be, before reaching a final judgement focused on the
word 'never' in the question. (PERT)
1. If you included or mentioned any of the same points from the mark scheme, highlight them in your response
AND the mark scheme.
2. What would you have scored yourself? Why?
3. How did you feel answering this prompt? What challengers did you encounter? What came easy? Explain.
The vast majority of candidates were able to consider a range of sports involving animals including horse or greyhound racing; dressage; pig, dog or cat shows; pitbull or bull fighting and dog agility. Some candidates did succumb to the emotive appeal of the issue, and this was often accompanied by register issues with some aggressively worded, passionate responses written in a very colloquial manner. The required context 'sport' was missed by some candidates and these essays were focused on how animals deserve protection and affection. Many candidates restricted animal sports to horse racing and dog racing with a few references to hunting, thus narrowing the argument. Comments were often focused on animal cruelty in sport such as animals being beaten to achieve a better performance. Others expressed the views that animals were well treated because the owners wanted to get the best out of them. More successful arguments were balanced, exploring when using animals in sport could be justified but evaluating those situations where it could not be, before reaching a final judgement focused on the
word 'never' in the question. (PERT)
1. If you included or mentioned any of the same points from the mark scheme, highlight them in your response
AND the mark scheme.
2. What would you have scored yourself? Why?
3. How did you feel answering this prompt? What challengers did you encounter? What came easy? Explain.
Answers
GPT-4o mini
### 1. Highlighting Points from the Mark Scheme
**Mark Scheme Points:**
- Consideration of a range of sports involving animals
- Mention of horse or greyhound racing; dressage; pig, dog or cat shows; pitbull or bull fighting and dog agility.
- Discussion of animal cruelty in sport, including beating animals for better performance.
- Acknowledgment of some animals being well treated and owners wanting to achieve the best.
- Balanced arguments exploring justifications for using animals in sport vs. situations where it shouldn't be justified.
- Specific focus on the word "never" in the question.
**Response Points:**
- The response considered a range of sports involving animals (e.g., horse racing, dog racing, etc.).
- Discussion of animal cruelty in sport present (e.g., beating for better performance).
- Mentioned that some owners treat their animals well, wanting the best performance.
- Attempted to develop a balanced argument, exploring situations where animal usage in sport could be justified and where it should not.
- Focused on the final judgment regarding the word "never".
### 2. Self-Scoring
Based on the criteria provided in the mark scheme, I would score myself a 7 out of 10.
**Reasoning:**
- I successfully identified and discussed various sports involving animals, which is a key requirement.
- I also analyzed the issue of animal cruelty, a significant aspect of the argument.
- However, I may have leaned too heavily on emotive language in my response, which could detract from the objectivity expected in an argument.
- My exploration of justifications was somewhat limited, and a stronger engagement with the concept of "never" could have solidified my conclusion.
### 3. Reflection on Answering the Prompt
**Feelings:**
Answering this prompt felt challenging yet engaging. The topic elicits strong emotions, which made it difficult to maintain a balanced argument while addressing serious ethical concerns regarding animal treatment.
**Challenges:**
- The main challenge was balancing emotional appeal with logical reasoning. I felt pulled towards passionately defending the position against animal sports but had to ensure that I evaluated both sides.
- Maintaining an academic tone rather than a colloquial one was another challenge I faced, as many opinions on the topic are deeply entrenched and personal.
**What Came Easy:**
- I found it relatively easy to identify various sports involving animals and to discuss the general perspective of animal cruelty, as these aspects are well-known issues in contemporary discussions about animal rights.
- Formulating my view about the treatment of animals and the implications of using them for sport also flowed naturally, given the ethical concerns that are prevalent today.
Overall, the prompt demanded a careful and nuanced approach that I attempted to navigate, but I recognized areas for improvement, particularly in maintaining objectivity and thematic balance.
**Mark Scheme Points:**
- Consideration of a range of sports involving animals
- Mention of horse or greyhound racing; dressage; pig, dog or cat shows; pitbull or bull fighting and dog agility.
- Discussion of animal cruelty in sport, including beating animals for better performance.
- Acknowledgment of some animals being well treated and owners wanting to achieve the best.
- Balanced arguments exploring justifications for using animals in sport vs. situations where it shouldn't be justified.
- Specific focus on the word "never" in the question.
**Response Points:**
- The response considered a range of sports involving animals (e.g., horse racing, dog racing, etc.).
- Discussion of animal cruelty in sport present (e.g., beating for better performance).
- Mentioned that some owners treat their animals well, wanting the best performance.
- Attempted to develop a balanced argument, exploring situations where animal usage in sport could be justified and where it should not.
- Focused on the final judgment regarding the word "never".
### 2. Self-Scoring
Based on the criteria provided in the mark scheme, I would score myself a 7 out of 10.
**Reasoning:**
- I successfully identified and discussed various sports involving animals, which is a key requirement.
- I also analyzed the issue of animal cruelty, a significant aspect of the argument.
- However, I may have leaned too heavily on emotive language in my response, which could detract from the objectivity expected in an argument.
- My exploration of justifications was somewhat limited, and a stronger engagement with the concept of "never" could have solidified my conclusion.
### 3. Reflection on Answering the Prompt
**Feelings:**
Answering this prompt felt challenging yet engaging. The topic elicits strong emotions, which made it difficult to maintain a balanced argument while addressing serious ethical concerns regarding animal treatment.
**Challenges:**
- The main challenge was balancing emotional appeal with logical reasoning. I felt pulled towards passionately defending the position against animal sports but had to ensure that I evaluated both sides.
- Maintaining an academic tone rather than a colloquial one was another challenge I faced, as many opinions on the topic are deeply entrenched and personal.
**What Came Easy:**
- I found it relatively easy to identify various sports involving animals and to discuss the general perspective of animal cruelty, as these aspects are well-known issues in contemporary discussions about animal rights.
- Formulating my view about the treatment of animals and the implications of using them for sport also flowed naturally, given the ethical concerns that are prevalent today.
Overall, the prompt demanded a careful and nuanced approach that I attempted to navigate, but I recognized areas for improvement, particularly in maintaining objectivity and thematic balance.