How do you plan, research and write the Higher RMPS assignment so that it gains full marks for a balanced, well-evidenced, evaluative response to a chosen issue?
The Higher RMPS assignment: choosing a religious, moral or philosophical issue, researching sources, and writing a structured, balanced and evaluative response worth 30 marks of the course assessment.
An SQA Higher RMPS overview of the assignment, the 30-mark coursework component: how to choose a religious, moral or philosophical issue, research and reference sources, and write a structured, balanced and evaluative response that reaches a supported conclusion.
Reviewed by: AI editorial process; not yet individually human-reviewed
Have a quick question? Jump to the Q&A page
Jump to a section
What this dot point is asking
The assignment is the coursework component of SQA Higher RMPS, worth 30 marks of the 110-mark course assessment (the rest comes from Question Paper 1, 60 marks, and Question Paper 2, 20 marks). It is an independent investigation: you choose a religious, moral or philosophical issue, research it using a range of sources, and write up a structured, balanced and evaluative response that reaches a supported conclusion. This single page is the overview of how the assignment works and how to gain the marks; the underlying knowledge comes from the three content areas.
What the assignment is
- You have an open choice of issue, drawn from any of the three content areas (World Religion, Morality and Belief, Religious and Philosophical Questions) or a related topic.
- The strongest issues are debatable and best phrased as a question, so that the write-up naturally weighs two or more sides, for example "Should the death penalty be used?" or "Is it reasonable to believe in miracles?".
- You research the issue using a range of sources and reference them, then write up your findings.
How it is marked
- Knowledge and sources. Bring in accurate, relevant information and reference where it comes from. This shows the investigation is genuine and grounded.
- Balance. Present more than one viewpoint fairly, religious and non-religious as appropriate, so the response is not one-sided.
- Analysis and evaluation. Weigh the arguments, commenting on their strengths and weaknesses, rather than just describing them. This is the skill the SQA most often finds weak, so it is where marks are gained or lost.
- Conclusion. Reach a judgement that clearly follows from the analysis, not an opinion simply announced at the end.
How to structure the write-up
A clear structure makes the marks easy to award.
- Introduction. State the issue (ideally as a question) and why it matters, and signal the viewpoints you will weigh.
- The arguments. Present each main viewpoint with evidence from your sources, giving a section to each side.
- Analysis. Weigh the arguments against each other: how strong is each, how reliable is the evidence, do the objections succeed?
- Conclusion. Give a supported judgement that rests on the analysis you have done.
How it fits the course
The assignment is not separate from the rest of the course: it draws on the knowledge and skills built in the three content areas and rehearses the evaluation that the question papers also test. Choosing an issue from a topic you have studied (for example euthanasia from Religion, Medicine and the Human Body, or the design argument from the Existence of God) lets you reuse your knowledge and play to your strengths.
Try this
Q1. How many marks is the assignment worth, and out of what total? [2 marks]
- Cue. 30 marks, out of a total course assessment of 110 marks (Question Paper 1 is 60, Question Paper 2 is 20).
Q2. Which skill does the SQA most often report as weak in the assignment? [1 mark]
- Cue. Evaluation, weighing the arguments against each other rather than just describing them.
Exam-style practice questions
Practice questions written in the style of SQA exam questions on this dot point, with worked answer explainers. The year tag is the paper they imitate, not the source.
SQA Higher assignment20 marksPlan an assignment on a chosen issue, for example: 'Should euthanasia be legalised?'Show worked answer →
The assignment is marked on a small number of skills, so plan to hit each. Choose a clear, debatable issue phrased as a question, for example "Should euthanasia be legalised?". Identify your sources and reference them. Then structure the write-up: an introduction that sets out the issue and why it matters; a section presenting one side with evidence drawn from sources; a section presenting the other side with evidence; analysis that weighs the arguments (their strengths and weaknesses); and a conclusion that reaches a judgement supported by the preceding analysis. Marks come from a clear issue, relevant and accurate knowledge from sources, balance, analysis and evaluation, and a supported conclusion, so avoid a one-sided "essay" with no real weighing.
SQA Higher assignment20 marksHow do you gain the marks for evaluation in the assignment?Show worked answer →
Evaluation is the skill candidates most often underperform on, so it is where the easy marks are. Do not just describe two sides; weigh them. For each main argument, comment on how strong it is and why (Is the evidence reliable? Does an objection succeed? Is a viewpoint internally consistent?). Compare the sides directly rather than listing them. Then make sure your conclusion follows from that weighing: state a judgement and show it rests on the analysis you have done, not on an opinion announced at the end. Referencing your sources and showing where evidence comes from also supports the credibility marks.
Related dot points
- Religion and Justice: the nature and causes of crime, the aims of punishment (retribution, deterrence, protection, reformation, reparation), capital punishment, and religious and non-religious responses.
An SQA Higher RMPS answer on Religion and Justice (crime and punishment), covering the causes of crime, the five aims of punishment, the death penalty debate, and how religious and non-religious viewpoints respond to questions of justice.
- Religion, Medicine and the Human Body: the sanctity and quality of life, abortion, euthanasia and end-of-life care, embryo research and reproductive technology, and religious and non-religious responses.
An SQA Higher RMPS answer on Religion, Medicine and the Human Body, covering the sanctity and quality of life, abortion, euthanasia and end-of-life care, embryo research and reproductive technology, and how religious and non-religious viewpoints respond.
- The Existence of God: the cosmological, teleological (design) and ontological arguments, the case from religious experience, and challenges from atheism and the problem of evil.
An SQA Higher RMPS answer on the Existence of God, covering the cosmological, design and ontological arguments and the argument from religious experience, the main objections, and the challenge from atheism, with the skills to evaluate them.
- The Problem of Evil and Suffering: the logical and evidential problems, the distinction between moral and natural evil, theodicies (free will, soul-making), and religious and non-religious responses.
An SQA Higher RMPS answer on the Problem of Evil and Suffering, covering the logical and evidential problems, moral and natural evil, the free will and soul-making theodicies, and how religious and non-religious viewpoints respond, with the skills to evaluate them.
- Free Will and Determinism: hard determinism, libertarianism and compatibilism, the bearing on moral responsibility, and religious and non-religious responses.
An SQA Higher RMPS answer on Free Will and Determinism, covering hard determinism, libertarianism and compatibilism, what each says about moral responsibility, and how religious and non-religious viewpoints respond, with the skills to evaluate them.