June 2022: AS Paper 1

Mark scheme

Examiner's comment

Students were awarded marks for being able to state correct and specific information about comprehensives schools. Many were aware that comprehensives admit students from a local catchment area and that they do not take an examination to gain entry to the school. Unfortunately, many students made generic statements that did not gain credit, as they could equally be applied to other types of school, for example that comprehensives do not charge fees to attend.

Notes from the mark scheme and report

• 1 mark per accurate statement, 2 statements needed (e.g. non-selective, admits pupils from a local catchment area)
• generic points that fit other school types (e.g. no fees) not credited

Mark scheme

Examiner's comment

This question was answered very well by most students. Centres have clearly taught the correspondence principle well and this was used by many students to gain full marks. Other students were equally successful using a less theoretical approach, giving practical examples from schools. Where some students missed available marks, they tended to lack an explicit link to the world of work.

Notes from the mark scheme and report

• 1 mark for the example +1 for explaining the link to work (discipline codes and punctuality, competition, repetitive tasks and alienation)
• answered well, often via the correspondence principle or practical school examples

Mark scheme

Examiner's comment

The responses to this question showed that students have a good deal of knowledge about labelling theory. Unfortunately, many students did not gain credit, as their responses critiqued the process of labelling itself, rather than criticising the theory of labelling. Those who were able to gain marks in this question often used the example of the self-refuting prophecy to show that the theory can be too deterministic.

Notes from the mark scheme and report

• 2 marks for each of three criticisms clearly outlined, 1 if only partially outlined
• credited: too deterministic, innate ability/meritocracy, cultural or material factors more important, teacher training, Marxist reproduction
• many criticised the labelling process itself rather than the theory and scored nothing
• self-refuting prophecy used well for determinism

Mark scheme, including the levels grid and indicative content

Examiner's comment

In order to produce a good response to this question, students were required to show an understanding of two changes that have taken place in the labour market and then to use their application and analysis skills to relate this to the achievement of boys and/ or girls in education. Unfortunately, many students found the term ‘labour market’ difficult and their response dealt with changes made by the Labour government, or focussed on marketisation. Good responses often referred to declining manual labour opportunities in the UK and the impact this has had on boys in schools, along with equality laws that had a positive impact on the employment of women.

Notes from the mark scheme and report

• must link labour-market change to girls' and/or boys' achievement (more women in work as role models, decline of manual jobs and crisis of masculinity, equality laws)
• drift into achievement of other social groups = 1–3
• many misread 'labour market' as Labour government policy or marketisation

Mark scheme, including the levels grid and indicative content

Examiner's comment

This question was answered well by students. It was clear that centres had prepared students to be confident in their knowledge of educational policies. Many students were able to successfully identify a range of appropriate policies and the impact they had on social class inequalities. The best responses were able to separate intention from consequences and were able to give a critical account of the short-term and long-term impact of government educational interventions.

Notes from the mark scheme and report

• top band weighs the impact of different policies, or policies against wider class inequality as an explanation (hook in Item A)
• e.g. pupil premium, Aimhigher, Sure Start, academies, marketisation
• answered well with a good range of policies

Mark scheme, including the levels grid and indicative content

Examiner's comment

The majority of students were able to give a good account of the strengths and limitations of using covert participant observation to investigate education. Many had a good understanding of the ethical implications of deception and the theoretical benefit of validity. Students were often able to show application of one part of the method (eg covert or participant) to the problem of gaining entry to a school. To receive marks in the top level, students needed to be able to show that they had understood each element of the method (covert and participant and observation) and be able to apply this to gendered behaviour in schools. The difficulty of doing this is reflected in the mark scheme that the full application is only required for the top level. However, lots of students were successful in partial application and it was clear that they had been prepared to think practically about completing research in an educational setting.

Notes from the mark scheme and report

• must apply covert participant observation to gendered behaviour in schools
• education in general caps at 13–16
• little or no reference to covert participant observation = max 4
• most knew ethics of deception and validity well
• application often only to gaining entry to a school