June 2023: Paper 3

Mark scheme

Examiner's comment

Some students had a tendency to overwrite responses to question 1 and 2, with some being written in an essay style, which is not what the question demands. This could lead to timing issues for other questions in the paper. Some students did not read the question fully, or they were unable to link surveillance to not reducing crime. Comments were on offending in general. Some answers were too general to gain credit. Students should be encouraged to be specific.

Notes from the mark scheme and report

• 2 marks for each of two reasons clearly outlined, 1 if partial
• credited: displacement, crimes hidden from surveillance (e.g. domestic violence), offenders concealing identity, not everyone deterred, targeting of typical offenders and self-fulfilling prophecy
• some did not link surveillance to failing to reduce crime and wrote about offending in general
• answers must be specific

Mark scheme

Examiner's comment

Some students had a tendency to overwrite responses to question 1 and 2, with some being written in an essay style, which is not what the question demands. This could lead to timing issues for other questions in the paper. This question was answered well, a large majority of students did give three reasons. There was a tendency to overwrite, for example writing on Strain theory, or relative deprivation in depth. This may impact timing for other questions.

Notes from the mark scheme and report

• 2 marks for each of three reasons clearly outlined
• credited: poverty, marginalisation, strain, underclass socialisation, biased CJS, middle-class opportunity for white-collar crime, labelling
• well answered but many overwrote (e.g. strain theory in depth), costing time

Mark scheme, including the levels grid and indicative content

Examiner's comment

Students should be made aware that there are two types of ten mark questions. These have different requirements and different mark schemes. There are different marks available for the assessment objectives. The items for 10 mark “analyse” questions are written to give prompts or “hooks” for student answers. These have to be used to access application marks. Answers can indicate use of hooks by quoting, by a reference in parentheses or by wording (eg “As the item says…”). Items end with a sentence restating the question; the hooks are in the preceding part of the item. Some students are not able to develop the hook effectively and recycle parts of the item. Students need to be able to link the parts of the question for example punishment and social order together.

Notes from the mark scheme and report

• must develop hooks from Item A (social solidarity, ruling-class control of the working class)
• the last line of the item restates the question and is not a hook
• top band links punishment to social order, e.g. reinforcing value consensus (Durkheim) and incapacitating or controlling the working class (Marxists, Foucault)
• recycling the item without development limits marks

Mark scheme, including the levels grid and indicative content

Examiner's comment

It enabled a synoptic link between sociological theory and world issues, seen mainly in question 4. This question saw the full range of marks awarded. Students should be praised for their ability to write about global crime, using appropriate sociologists and some developed contemporary examples. There was a tendency to over use the item without developing points. This resulted in a list like essay.

Notes from the mark scheme and report

• must apply Item B (new opportunities and types of crime, cybercrime, Marxist view of deregulation, global cooperation against green crime and human rights abuses)
• top band: debate between perspectives or problems of defining and measuring global crime
• drift into general explanations of crime = 7–12
• over-reliance on the item produced list-like essays
• best answers used contemporary examples and named sociologists

Mark scheme, including the levels grid and indicative content

Examiner's comment

Students should be made aware that there are two types of ten mark questions. These have different requirements and different mark schemes. There are different marks available for the assessment objectives. 10 mark “outline and explain” questions have more marks available for knowledge and understanding, and none for evaluation. Yet some students include evaluation in their responses to this type of question, which is not creditworthy. There is a need to read the question carefully, some students focused on a comparison of interpretivism with positivism which did not meet the demands of the question. There is a level of challenge for students using theory and concepts correctly with some confusing reliability and validity.

Notes from the mark scheme and report

• no marks for evaluation in this question type
• two reasons each developed, e.g. verstehen and meanings, validity of unstructured methods, siding with the underdog
• general disadvantages of qualitative methods = 1–3
• comparing interpretivism with positivism missed the question
• some confused reliability and validity

Mark scheme, including the levels grid and indicative content

Examiner's comment

Students should be praised for writing about different types of feminism and patriarchy in depth. Some students were also able to synoptically link patriarchy to other areas of sociology. There were some good attempts to evaluate one type of feminism with another. Students should be encouraged to keep evaluation focused on the question set.

Notes from the mark scheme and report

• must apply Item C (radical feminism, pay gap, oppression in the family, Marxist critique)
• top band: debate between types of feminism and other perspectives (Marxism, functionalism, postmodernism)
• drift into the history of feminism = 5–8
• strong answers linked patriarchy synoptically to other topics
• evaluation should stay on whether today's society is patriarchal