📚 AS WJEC Philosophy: 2026 Exam Changes and Trends | AS WJEC 哲学：2026年考试变化与趋势
From September 2025, WJEC will roll out a refreshed AS Philosophy specification, with first examinations in summer 2026. These updates aim to strengthen analytical rigour, broaden the thematic scope, and align assessment more closely with contemporary philosophical discourse. Students and teachers need to understand what is shifting and how to adapt.
从2025年9月起，WJEC将推出更新的AS哲学课程大纲，首次考试于2026年夏季进行。这些更新旨在增强分析严谨性、拓展主题范围，并使评估更贴近当代哲学讨论。学生和教师需要了解哪些方面在变化，以及如何适应。
1. Overview of 2026 Examination Reforms | 2026年考试改革概览
The new WJEC AS Philosophy specification introduces a two‑paper structure instead of the previous single‑paper model. Paper 1 focuses on Epistemology and Philosophy of Religion, while Paper 2 addresses Moral Philosophy and key themes in Metaphysics of Mind. This redesign reflects a deliberate effort to assess distinct skills across different areas of philosophy rather than mixing all topics in one sitting.
新的WJEC AS哲学课程大纲引入了双试卷结构，取代了以往的单卷模式。试卷1聚焦认识论与宗教哲学，试卷2则涵盖道德哲学与心灵形而上学关键主题。这一重新设计反映了有意识地努力在不同哲学领域考查不同技能，而不是将所有主题混合在同一场考试中。
Total examination time remains at 3 hours, but each paper now carries equal weighting of 50%. The question formats have diversified: alongside traditional essays, students will encounter structured short‑answer questions, stimulus‑response items, and a compulsory comparative evaluation task in each paper.
总考试时间保持为3小时，但每份试卷现在各占50%权重。题型已经多样化：除了传统的论文题，学生还会遇到结构化简答题、材料分析题，以及每份试卷中的一道必答对比评价题。
2. Revised Exam Structure | 调整后的考试结构
Paper 1 lasts 1 hour 30 minutes and comprises Section A (Epistemology) and Section B (Philosophy of Religion). Section A includes one compulsory 10‑mark structured question on a key concept, one 15‑mark essay from a choice of two, and a 25‑mark stimulus‑based analysis requiring students to examine an unseen passage. Section B mirrors this structure.
试卷1时长为1小时30分钟，包含A部分（认识论）和B部分（宗教哲学）。A部分包括一道必答的10分结构化概念题、一道从二选一的15分论文题，以及一道25分的材料分析题，要求学生分析一段未见文本。B部分结构相同。
Paper 2 also lasts 1 hour 30 minutes and covers Moral Philosophy and Metaphysics of Mind with an identical question distribution. A notable addition is the 'Philosophical Connections' 15‑mark question, where learners must compare theories from two different units, fostering synoptic thinking from the AS level upward.
试卷2同样为1小时30分钟，覆盖道德哲学与心灵形而上学，题型分布相同。一个显著新增是15分的“哲学联系”题，要求考生比较两个不同单元的理论，从AS阶段就培养贯通思维。
3. Updated Assessment Objectives | 更新的评估目标
WJEC has refined the assessment objectives (AOs) for 2026. AO1 (Knowledge and Understanding) now contributes 35% instead of the previous 40%. AO2 (Analysis and Evaluation) gains greater emphasis, rising to 45%, with the remaining 20% allocated to AO3 (Communication and Philosophical Method), a new objective explicitly rewarding clarity, structure, and critical use of technical vocabulary.
WJEC细化了2026年的评估目标（AO）。AO1（知识与理解）现在占比35%，而不再是40%。AO2（分析与评价）得到更大重视，上升至45%，剩余20%分配给AO3（交流与哲学方法），这是一项新的评估目标，明确奖励清晰度、论文结构以及对术语的批判性使用。
This shift means rote learning of arguments will be insufficient. Students must demonstrate the ability to weigh objections, recognise presuppositions, and construct sustained evaluative responses. Practice in articulating 'what follows from what' and identifying implicit premises will become central to exam success.
这一转变意味着机械背诵论点将不够。学生必须展示权衡反驳、识别预设以及构建持续评价性回答的能力。练习阐明“什么由什么推出”以及识别隐含前提，将成为考试成功的关键。
4. New Topics in Epistemology | 认识论新主题
The 2026 Epistemology unit retains core content such as the tripartite definition of knowledge and Gettier problems but introduces a mandatory section on Virtue Epistemology. Candidates must engage with Linda Zagzebski’s agent‑based approach and compare it critically with reliabilism, evaluating how intellectual virtues like open‑mindedness and intellectual courage contribute to knowledge.
2026年认识论单元保留了知识的三元定义和盖梯尔问题等核心内容，但引入了关于德性认识论的必修部分。考生必须研读琳达·扎格泽布斯基基于能动者的进路，并将其与可靠主义进行批判性比较，评价诸如开放心态与理智勇气等理智德性如何有助于知识。
Additionally, the specification now requires a close study of epistemic injustice, drawing on Miranda Fricker’s work. Testimonial and hermeneutical injustice are examined not just as social phenomena but as epistemological failures, linking tightly with issues of power, credibility, and the ethics of belief.
此外，大纲如今要求仔细研究认知不公，借用了米兰达·弗里克的研究。证言不公与诠释不公不仅作为社会现象被考察，也作为认识论上的失败，与权力、可信度及信念伦理等问题紧密相连。
5. Shifts in Moral Philosophy | 道德哲学的变化
Utilitarianism remains a cornerstone, yet the 2026 syllabus expands its scope to include preference utilitarianism and a comparative assessment of act, rule, and preference approaches through applied dilemmas, such as the non‑identity problem in population ethics. Kantian ethics similarly deepens with an explicit focus on the Formula of Humanity as an end in itself, with candidates expected to apply it to biomedical consent cases.
功利主义依旧是基石，但2026年大纲将其范围扩展到偏好功利主义，并通过应用困境（例如人口伦理学中的非同一性问题）对行为、规则和偏好进路进行比较评估。康德伦理学同样深化，明确聚焦“人是目的”公式，要求考生将其应用于生物医学知情同意案例。
Aristotelian virtue ethics is now paired with contemporary neo‑Aristotelianism, such as Philippa Foot’s natural goodness. The specification also brings in the ethics of care as a distinct normative theory, requiring students to evaluate its challenge to impartiality and its relevance in familial and political contexts.
亚里士多德德性伦理学如今与当代新亚里士多德主义（如菲莉帕·富特自然善好理论）并置。大纲还将关怀伦理学作为独特的规范理论引入，要求学生评价其对公正性的挑战及其在家庭和政治情境中的相关性。
6. Religious Philosophy Updates | 宗教哲学更新
While the teleological and cosmological arguments are preserved, the 2026 syllabus places new weight on the problem of divine hiddenness alongside the more traditional problem of evil. J.L. Schellenberg’s argument from reasonable non‑belief becomes a compulsory study text, pushing candidates to assess whether a loving God would ensure all capable individuals can enter a relationship with the divine.
虽然目的论论证和宇宙论论证得以保留，但2026年大纲赋予神的隐匿性问题与更传统的恶的问题同等权重。J.L.舍伦贝格基于合理不信的论证成为必读文本，促使考生评估一位慈爱的上帝是否会确保所有有能力的人都能与上帝建立关系。
Religious language also sees a transformation: the syllabus introduces the via negativa and the analogy of proportionality in greater depth, and candidates must now critically compare the cognitive assertions of religious realism with expressivist and functionalist alternatives inspired by Wittgensteinian fideism.
宗教语言也经历了转变：大纲更深入地引入否定之路与比例类比，考生现在必须批判性比较宗教实在论的认知主张与受维特根斯坦信仰主义启发的表现主义和功能主义替代方案。
7. Enhanced Essay Requirements | 强化的论文要求
From 2026, essays are judged more strictly on philosophical coherence. The mark scheme now reserves 5 marks out of 25 for ‘philosophical integration’, which assesses how well a response interweaves explanations, examples, and objections into a single line of argument rather than treating them as discrete blocks. This rewards students who can maintain a clear thesis throughout.
从2026年起，论文在哲学连贯性方面的评判将更加严格。评分方案现在从25分中预留5分用于“哲学整合”，评估回答如何将解释、例子和反驳交织成一条单一论证线索，而不是将它们作为独立模块处理。这奖励那些能够始终保持清晰论点的学生。
Moreover, the use of technical terminology must be precise and purposeful. Loose phrasing, even if conceptually correct, will lose credit under the new AO3 communication criteria. Teachers are advised to train students in crafting robust introductory sentences that signal the direction of evaluation early.
此外，专业术语的使用必须精确且有目的。即使概念正确，松散措辞也会在新的AO3交流标准下失分。建议教师训练学生构建有力的引导句，从早期就预示评价方向。
8. Metaphysics of Mind Developments | 心灵形而上学的发展
The Metaphysics of Mind unit now includes contemporary physicalism beyond identity theory. Eliminative materialism is introduced through the work of Paul Churchland, challenging candidates to explore the implications of folk psychology being radically false. Students must confront the tension between first‑person phenomenal experience and third‑person neuroscientific descriptions.
心灵形而上学单元如今包含了超越同一论的当代物理主义。消除式唯物主义通过保罗·丘奇兰德的研究被引入，挑战考生探索民间心理学根本上为假的影响。学生必须面对第一人称现象经验与第三人称神经科学描述之间的张力。
Property dualism, especially David Chalmers’ zombie argument, remains a central topic but is now examined through a comparative lens that requires evaluating its explanatory power against Russellian monism. This change reflects the growing influence of post‑physicalist metaphysics in undergraduate philosophy, ensuring AS students are better prepared for progression.
属性二元论，尤其大卫·查默斯的僵尸论证，仍然是中心主题，但现在通过比较视角考察，要求对照罗素一元论评估其解释力。这一变化反映了后物理主义形而上学在本科哲学中日益增长的影响，确保AS学生为升学做好更充分的准备。
9. Effective Study Strategies | 高效备考策略
To meet the demands of the reformed specification, students should adopt an active, layered revision method. Create condensed note cards for each argument's structure: premise 1, premise 2, intermediate conclusion, main conclusion, and three possible objections with responses. Regularly practising these under timed conditions helps internalise the logical flow required by AO2.
为了满足改革后大纲的要求，学生应采用主动、分层的复习方法。为每个论证的结构制作浓缩笔记卡：前提1、前提2、中间结论、主结论以及三个可能的反驳及回应。在限时条件下定期练习这些内容，有助于内化AO2所要求的逻辑流程。
Equally important is dialogic study: discussing dilemmas such as 'Can we have knowledge of other minds?' with peers refines evaluative habits. Use the new stimulus‑response format from past pilot papers to practise extracting and critiquing arguments from short philosophical passages, a skill that many candidates initially underestimate.
同样重要的是对话式学习：与同学讨论“我们能否拥有关于他心的知识？”等困境，可以磨练评价习惯。使用过往试行试卷中的新型材料分析题格式，练习从简短哲学段落中提取并评论论证，这是一项许多考生最初会低估的技能。
10. Common Mistakes to Avoid | 常见误区与避免
One pervasive error is treating opposing views as straw men. Under the 2026 mark scheme, evaluative credit depends on representing the strongest version of a counter‑argument before rebutting it. Another common pitfall is neglecting the ‘comparative’ dimension in the new synoptic questions; candidates often summarise two theories separately without drawing substantive links.
一个普遍错误是将对立观点当作稻草人。根据2026年评分方案，评价得分取决于在反驳之前呈现出反论证的最强版本。另一个常见陷阱是忽视新的贯通题中的“比较”维度；考生常常分别总结两个理论，却没有建立实质性的联系。
Relying solely on pre‑written essay plans is also risky, as stimulus‑based questions demand on‑the‑spot analysis of unfamiliar texts. Finally, misreading command words such as 'examine', 'evaluate', or 'assess' leads to descriptive rather than evaluative answers, severely limiting AO2 marks.
只依赖预先写好的论文计划也是危险的，因为材料分析题要求当场分析不熟悉的文本。最后，误读如“审视”、“评价”或“评定”等指令词会导致描述性而非评价性的回答，严重限制AO2得分。
11. Resources and Teacher Support | 资源与教师支持
WJEC will release a comprehensive set of digital resources in spring 2025, including an annotated anthology of the newly prescribed texts for epistemic injustice and divine hiddenness. Additionally, the exam board is hosting regional CPD workshops focused on integrating AO3 skills into everyday teaching, which is critical given its novelty.
WJEC将于2025年春季发布一整套数字资源，包括对认识不公和神的隐匿性新指定文本的注释选集。此外，考试局正在举办区域CPD工作坊，重点是将AO3技能融入日常教学，鉴于其新颖性，这一点至关重要。
Teachers are encouraged to build a formative assessment bank that mirrors the new question styles. Using a traffic‑light system on key skills — argument mapping, term usage, and integration — can help identify gaps early. Collaboration across centres via the WJEC philosophy forum has already started generating shared lesson plans for the revised topics.
鼓励教师建立反映新题型风格的形成性评估题库。使用关键技能（论证映射、术语使用和整合）的交通灯系统有助于及早发现差距。各个中心通过WJEC哲学论坛进行合作，已经开始为修订后的主题生成共享教案。
12. Future Trends and Recommendations | 未来趋势与建议
The 2026 changes signal a broader shift toward philosophy as a lived practice rather than a historical survey. Expect increasing emphasis on applied philosophy and interdisciplinarity: questions linking ethical theory to climate justice or personal identity to artificial intelligence will likely become standard. Students who consistently relate abstract arguments to concrete scenarios will excel.
2026年的变化标志着哲学正在从历史考察转向作为生活实践的更广泛转变。预计将越来越强调应用哲学和跨学科性：将伦理理论与气候正义联系、或将人格同一性与人工智能联系的问题很可能将成为常态。能够持续将抽象论证与具体情境联系起来的学生将表现出色。
Cultivate intellectual humility and curiosity beyond the syllabus. Reading short articles from sources like the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (beginner level entries) and the Philosophy Bites podcast sharpens the evaluative vocabulary that AO3 rewards. Start early, revise iteratively, and treat every class discussion as an opportunity to practise constructing philosophical dialogue — the very skill the new exams seek to measure.
培养超越大纲的理智谦逊与好奇心。阅读斯坦福哲学百科（初级条目）等来源的短文，以及收听Philosophy Bites播客，可以磨砺AO3所奖励的评价性词汇。尽早开始，迭代复习，并将每一次课堂讨论视作练习构建哲学对话的机会——这正是新考试试图衡量的技能。
Published by TutorHao | Philosophy Revision Series | aleveler.com
更多咨询请联系16621398022（同微信）
或截图后用「扫一扫 → 相册」选择本图