June 2024: AS Paper 1

Mark scheme

Examiner's comment

Question 01: Students were awarded full marks for a complete definition of the meaning of the marketisation of education. Some students merely repeated the word they were seeking to define, and centres would be well advised to warn against this when completing practice responses in future. Some students knew examples of marketisation policies but not what the term itself meant and were able to gain partial credit.

Notes from the mark scheme and report

• 2 marks for schools organising and running themselves like businesses
• 1 for a partial definition, only an example or policy, or a market feature not applied to education
• repeating 'market' without elaboration gets nothing
• some knew marketisation policies but not what the term means

Mark scheme

Examiner's comment

Question 02: This question was answered well by most students. They were able to identify an internal factor and then apply it to differential achievement amongst different ethnic groups. A minority identified external factors. This could still be awarded if then linked to an internal factor eg. language barriers in the school. However, some students did not make the link. Partial credit was given for identification but an insufficient link to achievement.

Notes from the mark scheme and report

• 1 mark for an internal factor (e.g. labelling, ethnocentric curriculum, anti-racism training), +1 for linking it to ethnic differences in achievement
• answered well
• a minority wrongly gave external factors

Mark scheme

Examiner's comment

Question 03: This question was answered well on the whole. However, a significant minority of students did not read the question carefully and provided feminist criticisms of the education system. There were also issues with repetition by some students. For example, making the same point from a Marxist perspective.

Notes from the mark scheme and report

• 2 marks for each of three criticisms clearly outlined, 1 if partial
• creditable: girls now outperform boys, more girls in science, teacher training, outdated, class matters more (Marxism), schools are meritocratic (functionalism)
• some misread the question and gave feminist criticisms of education instead
• repetition cost marks

Mark scheme, including the levels grid and indicative content

Examiner's comment

Question 04: In order to produce a good response to this question, students were required to show an understanding of how two inequalities in wider society impact the achievement of working-class pupils. Most students found this to be accessible and were able to identify at least one way. Good responses were able to identify two ways and develop them.

Notes from the mark scheme and report

• must be inequalities outside school (material deprivation, speech codes, cultural capital, habitus, fatalism) linked to working-class achievement
• drift into achievement of social groups in general = 1–3 band
• most managed one way, good answers developed two

Mark scheme, including the levels grid and indicative content

Examiner's comment

Question 05: This question was accessible to most students. Students who scored highly were able to deploy a wide range of theories and apply them to the issue of preparing pupils for work. The item was used well and provided ‘hooks’ that enabled students to develop their knowledge, analysis and evaluation. In better responses, there was developed analysis and evaluation as well as conceptual depth and detail. Some responses were able to develop evaluation by comparing and contrasting different theoretical approaches directly; other less sophisticated responses did this by juxtaposition. In some cases, answers merely provided catch-all theoretical responses that did not apply their knowledge to preparing for work; others drifted into this.

Notes from the mark scheme and report

• top band evaluates the functionalist view or explicitly compares functionalist and Marxist views of preparing pupils for work
• item hook on drama and music can be used to show Marxism's limits
• correspondence theory or role allocation alone = 9–12
• high scorers applied a wide range of theories and used the item's hooks well

Mark scheme, including the levels grid and indicative content

Examiner's comment

Question 06: This question was answered well up to a point by most students. A significant proportion did not understand the secondary nature of official statistics. Some seemed to be bringing up pre-learned responses about researching in education that only applied to primary methods. The fact that these did not apply to secondary methods meant that they could not be rewarded. Others did not really understand the nature of official statistics and how they are collated and collected. The item did give some hints concerning this. Despite this, some students deployed rich, detailed and varied responses that dealt with the applicability of using official statistics to examine issues in education. The most sophisticated responses developed and applied this to the issue of studying disruptive pupil behaviour sometimes developing item prompts and also thinking of further issues.

Notes from the mark scheme and report

• must apply official statistics to disruptive pupil behaviour specifically
• education in general caps at 13–16
• many did not grasp that official statistics are secondary data and recycled pre-learned points about primary research in schools
• item hooks: truancy recorded by all schools, validity and reliability issues