The major value of philosophy is that it teaches not what to think, but how to think
It is the study of the principles underlying conduct, thought, existence and knowledge. The skills it develops are the ability to analyse, to engage with and to question prevailing views, formulate philosophical questions and to express thoughts clearly and precisely, identifying strengths and weaknesses of philosophical arguement. It encourages critical and creative problem solving through open-minded intellectual flexibility and examining existing paradigms in new ways. Learners investigate philosophical ideas, issues and positions: these include a brief survey of Western Philosophy and philosophical methods of inquiry; the ongoing debate within metaphysics concerning personal identity; free will; epistemology; the investigation of what distinguishes justified belief from opinion; the notion of knowledge and the approaches of Empiricism and Rationalism; examine the views of some modern philosophers and how to live a 'good life'; and explore answers to science and faith based universal questions around the origin of the universe and life on earth. Philosophy promotes respect for intellectual integrity and builds learners' capacity to be independent thinkers who can articulate and justify philosophical positions. Philosophy has had an historical role as a matrix within which disciplines form (such as physics, sociology, psychology, logic and computability theory, and cognitive science) and therefore Philosophy is an extremely useful subject for those considering careers in the law, advocacy, politics, journalism and many other areas which require skills of analysis and critical evaluation.
The course provides an overview of philosophy and focuses on five major topics within contemporary philosophy.
It is highly recommended that the units be studied in the order given.
Unit 1: An Introduction to Philosophy
Unit 2: Mind/Body
Unit 3: Free Will
Unit 4: Epistemology
Unit 5: Life, the Universe and Everything
Unit 6: Philosophers and the Good Life.
The major value of philosophy is that it teaches not what to think, but how to think. It is the study of the principles underlying conduct, thought, existence and knowledge. The skills it develops are the ability to analyse, to engage with and to question prevailing views and to express thoughts clearly and precisely. It encourages critical and creative problem solving through open-minded intellectual flexibility and examining existing paradigms in new ways. Philosophy promotes respect for intellectual integrity and builds learners’ capacity to be independent thinkers who can articulate and justify philosophical positions. Philosophy has had an historical role as a matrix within which disciplines form (such as physics, sociology, psychology, logic and computability theory, and cognitive science) and therefore Philosophy is an extremely useful subject for those considering careers in the law, advocacy, politics, journalism and many other areas which require skills of analysis and critical evaluation.
This course:
On successful completion of this course, learners will be able to:
This course has a complexity level of 3.
At Level 3, the learner is expected to acquire a combination of theoretical and/or technical and factual knowledge and skills and use judgement when varying procedures to deal with unusual or unexpected aspects that may arise. Some skills in organising self and others are expected. Level 3 is a standard suitable to prepare learners for further study at tertiary level. VET competencies at this level are often those characteristic of an AQF Certificate III.
This course has a size value of 15.
Learners will study six (6) compulsory units in all, of which five (Units 2-6) are externally assessed.
Each unit is of approximately 25 hours duration.
UNIT 1: AN INTRODUCTION TO PHILOSOPHY (APPROXIMATELY 25 HOURS)
This unit will provide learners with an introduction to Philosophical methods of enquiry and Philosophical ways of examining problems. A brief history of some of the important figures in Philosophy will provide learners with a context for their study of the other units.
LINKING QUESTION: ‘WHAT AM I?’
UNIT 2: MIND/BODY (APPROXIMATELY 25 HOURS)
Mind/Body will focus on the ongoing debate within metaphysics concerning personal identity, the nature of personhood and the validity of various answers to these questions. The religious interpretations of what a mind is and what a person is will not be a significant focus of this unit. Historically religion has been a significant force in shaping answers to metaphysical questions. However, in more recent times, mainstream philosophical opinion has turned more towards materialistic or property dualistic explanations in the development of answers to metaphysical questions. Therefore study in this topic will focus on these more recent schools of thought, but will not neglect classical philosophers.
LINKING QUESTION: ‘IF WE ARE PURELY MATERIAL BEINGS DOES THIS LEAVE ANY ROOM FOR FREE WILL?’
UNIT 3: FREE WILL (APPROXIMATELY 25 HOURS)
This Unit will consider the question of free will; what people mean when they speak of free will and whether human beings ever have the ability to choose freely. Learners will become familiar with and will critically analyse different answers to the question of free will and the arguments which have been presented to support those answers. The study of punishment will provide a context for learners to understand why the question of free will is important.
LINKING QUESTION: ‘ACCORDING TO DETERMINISM, WE COULD KNOW “EVERYTHING” BUT WHAT DO WE REALLY KNOW?’
UNIT 4: EPISTEMOLOGY (APPROXIMATELY 25 HOURS)
This unit will introduce learners to the questions concerned with knowledge, what we can know and how we can know it. Two significant approaches to answering these questions are Empiricism and Rationalism, learners will learn about these schools of thought and will critically evaluate arguments put forward to support the validity of each approach.
LINKING QUESTION: ‘CAN WE KNOW WHERE WE COME FROM?’
UNIT 5: LIFE, THE UNIVERSE AND EVERYTHING (APPROXIMATELY 25 HOURS)
Following on from the unit on Epistemology, this unit explores different answers to the universal questions around the origin of the universe and life on earth. The two main explanations studied are scientific explanations and faith based explanations.
LINKING QUESTION: ‘WHAT ARE THE IMPLICATIONS FOR HOW WE SHOULD LIVE?’
UNIT 6: PHILOSOPHERS AND THE GOOD LIFE (APPROXIMATELY 25 HOURS)
Humankind has long sought answers to the questions around the issue of how we live a happy life. Modern Philosophers have drawn certain conclusions around what is needed for us to be happy. This unit examines the views of some of those Philosophers. Each dot point is linked to a particular Philosopher and it is the views of that Philosopher which will be studied in that part of this Unit of the course.
Criterion-based assessment is a form of outcomes assessment that identifies the extent of learner achievement at an appropriate end-point of study. Although assessment – as part of the learning program – is continuous, much of it is formative, and is done to help learners identify what they need to do to attain the maximum benefit from their study of the course. Therefore, assessment for summative reporting to TASC will focus on what both teacher and learner understand to reflect end-point achievement.
The standard of achievement each learner attains on each criterion is recorded as a rating ‘A’, ‘B’, or ‘C’, according to the outcomes specified in the standards section of the course.
A ‘t’ notation must be used where a learner demonstrates any achievement against a criterion less than the standard specified for the ‘C’ rating.
A ‘z’ notation is to be used where a learner provides no evidence of achievement at all.
Providers offering this course must participate in quality assurance processes specified by TASC to ensure provider validity and comparability of standards across all awards. To learn more, see TASC's quality assurance processes and assessment information.
Internal assessment of all criteria will be made by the provider. Providers will report the learner’s rating for each criterion to TASC.
TASC will supervise the external assessment of designated criteria which will be indicated by an asterisk (*). The ratings obtained from the external assessments will be used in addition to internal ratings from the provider to determine the final award.
The following processes will be facilitated by TASC to ensure there is:
Process – TASC gives course providers feedback about any systematic differences in the relationship of their internal and external assessments and, where appropriate, seeks further evidence through audit and requires corrective action in the future.
The assessment for Philosophy Level 3 will be based on the degree to which the learner can:
* = denotes criteria that are both internally and externally assessed
This criterion is both internally and externally assessed.
The learner:
| Rating A | Rating B | Rating C |
|---|---|---|
| clearly and accurately conveys ideas philosophical arguments/ points of view in written and spoken forms | clearly conveys ideas and philosophical arguments/ points of view in written and spoken forms | conveys ideas and basic philosophical arguments/ points of view in written and spoken forms |
| correctly uses a wide range of relevant philosophical terminology | correctly uses a range of philosophical terminology | correctly uses a limited range of philosophical terminology |
| uses conventions of philosophical discourse in a sophisticated manner | uses conventions of philosophical discourse | uses some conventions of philosophical discourse |
| clearly structures ideas and information to effectively present nuances of an argument or point of view | clearly structures ideas and information to present an argument or point of view | structures ideas and information to support an argument or point of view |
| selects compelling evidence to substantiate own considered and coherent interpretations and arguments | selects relevant evidence to support own reasoned interpretations, and arguments | uses some evidence to support own interpretations and arguments |
| links a range of complex ideas to logical steps in a coherent argument leading to clear conclusions | links complex ideas to logical steps in an argument leading to clear conclusions | links ideas to logical conclusions |
| produces written work in which English usage is correct including grammar, spelling of technical/ specialised terms, punctuation, accurate sentence structure, and effective use of paragraphs. | produces written work in which English usage is generally correct including grammar, spelling, punctuation, sentence structure, and use of paragraphs. | produces written work in which basic English usage is correct, including grammar, spelling of common words, simple punctuation, sentence structure, and use of paragraphs. |
This criterion is both internally and externally assessed.
The learner:
| Rating A | Rating B | Rating C |
|---|---|---|
| demonstrates detailed, specific and relevant knowledge of key philosophical terms, concepts and ideas | demonstrates detailed knowledge of key philosophical terms, concepts and ideas | demonstrates knowledge of some key philosophical terms, concepts and ideas |
| accurately recalls relevant information | recalls relevant information | recalls some relevant information |
| demonstrates profound understanding of philosophical language | demonstrates clear and accurate understanding of philosophical language | demonstrates some understanding of philosophical language |
| selects and uses a comprehensive range of pertinent examples | selects and uses a broad range of pertinent examples | selects and uses a range of pertinent examples |
| uses complex, relevant information in a logical, apposite manner to support an argument. | uses relevant information in a logical manner to support an argument. | uses relevant information to support an argument. |
This criterion is both internally and externally assessed.
The learner:
| Rating A | Rating B | Rating C |
|---|---|---|
| provides insightful explanation of at least one type of reasoning used in relevant philosophical arguments | provides explanation of at least one type of reasoning used in relevant philosophical arguments | correctly identifies and names at least one type of reasoning used in relevant philosophical arguments |
| explains philosophical arguments, identifies individual part of the argument and fully clarifies the logic of assertions | explains philosophical arguments and clarifies the logic of assertions | explains philosophical arguments |
| poses insightful questions and gives detailed answers (in oral and written form) to clarify meaning | poses questions and gives answers (in oral and written form) to clarify meaning | poses questions (in oral and written form) to clarify meaning |
| interprets philosophical texts and resources to cogently support own explanation of others’ philosophical positions. | interprets philosophical texts and resources to support own explanation of others’ philosophical positions. | draws on texts and resources to support own explanation of others’ philosophical positions. |
This criterion is both internally and externally assessed.
The learner:
| Rating A | Rating B | Rating C |
|---|---|---|
| explains reasons for an argument’s strength or weakness | identifies how an argument may be strengthened | identifies strength or weakness of an argument |
| evaluates the effectiveness of different arguments used to support a point of view | investigates different arguments used to support a point of view | identifies and categorises different arguments used to support a point of view |
| selects and applies philosophical analytical tools to propositions appropriately | selects and applies philosophical analytical tools to propositions | identifies key propositions in an argument |
| analyses and evaluates relative strengths and weaknesses of alternative viewpoints in a cogent, precise and lucid manner. | analyses and evaluates relative strengths and weaknesses of alternative viewpoints. | compares and evaluates relative strengths and weaknesses of alternative viewpoints. |
The learner:
| Rating A | Rating B | Rating C |
|---|---|---|
| critically evaluates implications and consequences of ideas and viewpoints | analyses implications and consequences of ideas and viewpoints | describes some implications of ideas and viewpoints |
| analyses contemporary issues | discusses contemporary issues | describes some contemporary issues |
| applies philosophical thinking to clarify and offer reasoned judgements on relevant contemporary issues | applies philosophical thinking to clarify and offer judgements on contemporary issues | applies philosophical thinking to engage with contemporary issues |
| analyses how adopting a philosophical position can influence how one lives one’s life. | discusses how adopting a philosophical position can influence how one lives one’s life. | describes how adopting a philosophical position can influence how one lives one’s life. |
* (‘If I believe x how does this affect my position on contemporary issue y?’)
The learner:
| Rating A | Rating B | Rating C |
|---|---|---|
| uses a wide range of resources and methods to collect, categorise and organise specific and relevant information | uses a wide range of resources and methods to collect and categorise specific information | use a range of resources and methods to collect and categorise information |
| critically analyses sources, selects accurate and relevant information, and correctly extracts detailed meaning to form a reasoned response and reach valid, logical conclusions about philosophical issues | analyses sources and selects relevant information, and correctly extracts meaning to form a considered response and reach valid conclusions about philosophical issues | selects information and correctly extracts basic meaning to form a response and reach some valid conclusions about philosophical issues |
| clearly identifies the information, images, ideas and words of others used in the learner’s work | clearly identifies the information, images, ideas and words of others used in the learner’s work | identifies the information, images, ideas and words of others from the learner’s own |
| clearly identifies sources of the information, images, ideas and words that are not the learner’s own. Referencing conventions and methodologies are followed with a high degree of accuracy | clearly identifies sources of the information, images, ideas and words that are not the learner’s own. Referencing conventions and methodologies are followed correctly | identifies the sources of information, images, ideas and words that are not the learner’s own. Referencing conventions and methodologies are generally followed correctly |
| creates appropriate, well structured reference lists/ bibliographies. | creates appropriate, structured reference lists/ bibliographies. | creates appropriate reference lists/bibliographies. |
The learner:
| Rating A | Rating B | Rating C |
|---|---|---|
| sets goals which are measurable, achievable and realistic, and effectively plans actions | sets goals which are measurable, achievable and realistic, and plans accordingly | sets goals which are generally measurable, achievable and realistic, and plans accordingly |
| evaluates, selects and uses planning tools and strategies to achieve objectives and manage activities within proposed times | selects and uses planning tools and strategies to achieve objectives and manage activities within proposed times | uses planning tools to achieve objectives within proposed times |
| reflects on progress towards meeting goals and timelines, critically evaluates progress and plans future actions. | reflects on progress towards meeting goals and timelines, analyses progress and plans future actions. | reflects on progress towards meeting goals and timelines, and articulates some ways in which goals can be met in the future. |
Philosophy Level 3 (with the award of):
EXCEPTIONAL ACHIEVEMENT
HIGH ACHIEVEMENT
COMMENDABLE ACHIEVEMENT
SATISFACTORY ACHIEVEMENT
PRELIMINARY ACHIEVEMENT
The final award will be determined by the Office of Tasmanian Assessment, Standards and Certification from the 11 ratings (7 ratings from the internal assessment and 4 ratings from the external assessment).
The minimum requirements for an award in Philosophy Level 3 are as follows:
EXCEPTIONAL ACHIEVEMENT (EA)
9 ‘A’, 2 ‘B’ ratings (3 ‘A’s, 1 ‘B’ from external assessment)
HIGH ACHIEVEMENT (HA)
4 ‘A’, 5 ‘B’, 2 ‘C’ ratings (1 ‘A’, 2 ‘B’s, 1 ‘C’ from external assessment).
COMMENDABLE ACHIEVEMENT (CA)
6 ‘B’, 4 ‘C’ ratings (2 ‘B’s, 2 ‘C’s from external assessment).
SATISFACTORY ACHIEVEMENT (SA)
9 ‘C’ ratings (2 ‘C’s from external assessment).
PRELIMINARY ACHIEVEMENT (PA)
5 ‘C’ ratings.
The Department of Education’s Curriculum Services will develop and regularly revise the curriculum. This evaluation will be informed by the experience of the course’s implementation, delivery and assessment.
In addition, stakeholders may request Curriculum Services to review a particular aspect of an accredited course.
Requests for amendments to an accredited course will be forwarded by Curriculum Services to the Office of TASC for formal consideration.
Such requests for amendment will be considered in terms of the likely improvements to the outcomes for learners, possible consequences for delivery and assessment of the course, and alignment with Australian Curriculum materials.
A course is formally analysed prior to the expiry of its accreditation as part of the process to develop specifications to guide the development of any replacement course.
Version 1 – accredited on 4 April 2012 for use from 1 January 2013.
Version 2 – refinement of course content, criteria and standard elements.
PHL315113 Asessment Report 2016.pdf
(2017-07-21 01:05pm AEST)
PHL315113 Assessment Report 2015.pdf
(2017-07-21 01:05pm AEST)
PHL315113 Exam Paper 2013.pdf
(2017-07-21 01:05pm AEST)
PHL315113 Exam Paper 2014.pdf
(2017-07-21 01:05pm AEST)
PHL315113 Exam Paper 2015.pdf
(2017-07-21 01:05pm AEST)
PHL315113 Exam Paper 2016.pdf
(2017-07-21 01:05pm AEST)
PHL315113 Assessment Report 2013.pdf
(2017-07-26 04:02pm AEST)
PHL315113 Assessment Report 2014.pdf
(2017-07-26 04:02pm AEST)
PHL315113 External Assessment Specifications 2016-2017.pdf
(2017-07-26 04:04pm AEST)
PHL315113 Exam Paper 2017.pdf
(2017-11-23 04:49pm AEDT)
PHL315113 - Philosophy Marking Guide 2017.pdf
(2018-01-02 03:13pm AEDT)