CASPer Tips & Techniques

3. Answering the questions:

• • 1,2,3 or 3,2,1? This is very much question and individual specific however we would recommend avoiding the common error of spending three valuable minutes on a challenging question 1, when question 3 is considerably easier to commence. Often starting with question 3 (or 2) can provide a helping hand in answering question 1.
  • Overlapping answers: With the very limited time, ensure that you don’t repeat points that you have made for other questions in the same scenario

4. Troubleshoot Points – Struggling for points in the exam pressure? Keep in mind the following 5 points which are applicable to a wide range of scenarios

• Short Term v Long Term: Almost every action will have one consequence in the short term and a different effect in the long term. For example, lending a colleague money who is in debt would likely relieve their financial pressure in the short term, however in the long term it may make them more financially dependent as well as setting an unsustainable precedent whereby the colleague may expect your continued financial support.

• Slippery Slope: This is the principle of ‘one thing leading to another’. In the case of a colleague not completing their fair share of work for a class project, failing to address this directly may result in the colleague becoming more complacent with future projects as well as examinations, likely to their personal detriment.

• Address The Route Cause: The majority of CASPer candidates will take an ethically appropriate stance that addresses the immediate concern. However, very few will address the underlying cause, which is imperative in preventing a recurrence of the scenario. For example, in a scenario where you have identified a student stealing, the obvious action to take is to address this with the student and consider escalating to a tutor/supervisor. Equally if not more important is to consider and address the circumstances that has required the student to steal (eg. Substance misuse, family challenges, pressure from external influences). Without considering and addressing the underlying aetiology, the perceived problem will likely persist.
• A v Z: Almost every action can be analysed from two polar perspectives; in the case of ethical scenarios, the only ‘right approach’ is the approach that recognises the potentially opposing views. Even in the most universally unacceptable circumstance, you should be able to consider (not necessarily agree with) opposing views. For example, if there was a scenario regarding a student who was cheating in an examination, the majority of students would identify this as being inappropriate and consider reporting this to a scenario tutor; this is a suitable and safe approach to take. Excellent candidates would potentially also state the following; ‘On the other hand, one may argue that there are likely significant stressors that have resulted in the student cheating and by reporting this student, this would likely add to those stressors and encourage further unacceptable behaviour in the future. As such, providing a stern warning in the first instance, may be a more appropriate course of action.’
•  Additional Information: Finally, when you are struggling for key points, ask yourself ‘what additional information would help me come to a judgement’. For example, in the case of a ‘friend asking for money’, key factors are likely to be: the amount of money requested, my present financial circumstances, what the friend requires the money for as well as if this is a regular occurrence or unexpected request. Through documenting these factors, the examiners can note your well-reasoned thought processes.