SEMESTER: July 2021

Script Markers’ Comments

PSY354 Counselling Psychology in Singapore

Q1a

Most responses were good in their evaluation of the theory in question. The weaker responses
tended to be those that were too general. The points discussed should be tailored to the
theoretical model in question and whether it would be suitable for the client in the scenario
given.

Q1b

Students should remember to craft actual questions as instructed for this question. Some
students also tried to create their own facts to justify their risk assessment, but this was
unnecessary and erroneous. The question did not ask for a definite risk assessment. In this
scenario, it is imperative to include a point to seek the client’s permission for disclosure of
information. Many students did not include this point in their discussion.

Q2

This question was rather well done on the whole. Most students were able to identify the ethical
issues presented in the scenario and most students were also able to discuss the management
strategies for the issues. However, some students tended to be too generic in their suggestions
on how to manage the issues. Strategies suggested should be specific to each issue presented.
On a related note, some students also had responses that were too generic in response to the
the issue and should have focused on a strategy for this.

Q3a

Most of the responses for this question were quite average. Many students did not explain the
relevant factors they discussed. Some of the much weaker answers merely listed the relevant
points without any discussion. The factors discussed should also be specific to the scenario
given and not just generic factors for any group. Given that this was an open book exam, there
is an expectation for technical terms to be accurate, such as errors in citing the stages of a moral
development theory wrongly.

Q3b

The main problem with question 3b was that several students omitted or forgot to respond to
it. Otherwise, this question was fairly well done.

***