UNIVERSITYOF
OFMALTA
MALTA
UNIVERSITY
THE MATRICULATION EXAMINATION
INTERMEDIATE LEVEL
PSYCHOLOGY
MAY 2014
EXAMINERS’ REPORT
MATRICULATION AND
EDUCATION
IM SECONDARY
HISTORY
CERTIFICATEMAY
EXAMINATIONS
2014 SESSION BOARD
IM EXAMINERS’ REPORT MAY 2014
IM PSYCHOLOGY
MAY 2014 SESSION
EXAMINERS’ REPORT
Part 1: Statistical Information
Table 1 shows the distribution of grades for the May 2014 session of the examination.
GRADE
A
B
C
D
E
F
abs
TOTAL
NUMBER
51
72
186
132
70
122
42
675
% OF TOTAL
7.6
10.7
27.6
19.6
10.4
18.1
6.2
100
Part 2: Comments regarding candidate’s performance
2.1 Part I: Overview
The Psychology matriculation examination at Intermediate level was introduced for the first
time in 2014. A total of 675 candidates undertook the examination. The paper consisted of 2
sections and candidates were required to answer a compulsory question from each section
and a further question from each section from a choice of two questions per section.
Examination scripts were in line with these requirements, suggesting that the examination
procedure was well understood by candidates. None of the questions presented in the
examination paper failed to attract responses, suggesting that the paper corresponded with
the curriculum set for this examination and that candidates were familiar with its contents. The
grade distribution for the cohort of candidates sitting for the May 2014 session demonstrated
a good spread and compared very well to other subjects examined at the same level. A
detailed marking scheme was compiled for examination purposes. This was adopted by the
examining board and samples drawn from the various scripts demonstrated excellent
consistency across examiners, questions, and scripts.
2.2 Part II: Topics
Answers to question 1 concerning research methods in psychology demonstrated a good
understanding of the distinction between quantitative methods and qualitative methods
overall. Answers demonstrated a good understanding of the fact that psychology, as a
discipline, relies on empirical research to establish psychological knowledge and facts. On the
other hand, overall, candidates demonstrated a more limited understanding of how to
translate psychological concerns into empirical questions. A more nuanced understanding of
the research process in psychology is desirable and should be emphasized.
Question 2, concerning the nature-nurture debate in psychology, proved rather popular.
Overall, candidates demonstrated good understanding of this debate. However, some
answers were prone to a shortcoming in articulating an opinion regarding the statement
presented. A number of candidates were prone to rely on personal opinion rather than
disciplinary knowledge in drawing their conclusion.
Question 3 was a less popular choice amongst candidates. Overall, however, responses to
this question demonstrated a good understanding of conformity and obedience. Similar to
question 2, however, the application of this knowledge to personal life was hampered by
candidates’ own personal experiences.
The shortcomings identified in answers to questions 2 and 3 seemingly carried over to
question 4. This question was a compulsory question in Section B, concerning a real-life
example that invited students to apply their knowledge of psychology to a presented case.
Generally speaking, candidates answered this question rather poorly, in particular section ‘d’
IM EXAMINERS’ REPORT MAY 2014
that queried aspects of candidates’ personal lives. The question was intended to stimulate
and test for reflexivity on the part of candidates, as detailed in the curriculum for this subject.
Whilst some candidates answered this question with insight, in general, candidates
demonstrated a poor understanding of this process and got lost in personal detail failing to
address the question from a psychological vantage point.
Question 5 proved to be a very popular question and, broadly speaking, candidates
demonstrated a good understanding of psychological disorders. This question was perhaps
the most factual question in the paper. Answers were largely straightforward and presented
no emergent issues.
Question 6 was by and large a similarly factual question to no. 5, although it proved to be a
less popular choice. The second part of this question was less factual than the first part, and
students performed better on the latter than the former.
2.3 PART III: General comments
The examination of IM Psychology in 2014 is deemed highly satisfactory. It seems that the
examining process was unhampered by the fact that 2014 marked the first sitting for this
subject. The examination process fully met expectations regarding candidates’ assessment at
this level. The examination paper set for this sitting was adequate in assessing different levels
of demonstrable knowledge and competencies expected at this level.
The Examination Panel also evaluated the candidates’ performance against a backdrop of
this first sitting and the first examination papers. By and large, candidates failed to draw
sufficiently on psychological knowledge to answer reflexivity questions, often equating their
own opinions on personal matters with reflexivity.
Recommendations received by MATSEC regarding the issue of reflexivity and the application
of psychological knowledge to everyday life have been noted for future sittings.
Chairperson
Examination Panel 2014