June 2024: AS Paper 2

Mark scheme

Examiner's comment

Most students could suggest two characteristics of field experiments such as taking place in real world settings or that the participant often does not know they are being observed. Students who claimed that field experiments were valid; reliable; representative were required to explain how this was the case to gain credit because such qualities could equally be a feature of other types of experiment or methods of research.

Notes from the mark scheme and report

• 2 marks for each of two characteristics clearly outlined, 1 if only partially outlined
• credited: real-world setting, participants unaware, variables not controlled, consent problems
• claims of validity, reliability or representativeness only credited if explained as specific to field experiments

Mark scheme, including the levels grid and indicative content

Examiner's comment

This question for most students was one they could answer with a varied range of material. The students who were more successful managed to link the basic preferences of the positivist choice of method (quantitative / reliable / representative and techniques of investigation such as Laboratory experiments etc) to the wider aims of positivism. The aims of trying to show sociology to be a science, to produce social facts to attempt an objective understanding of society; what might be loosely termed the positivist method. A small minority of students did not know what was meant by positivism and could not answer the question effectively.

Notes from the mark scheme and report

• evaluate advantages only
• top band analyses e.g. comparative analysis
• drift into examples of methods = 4–6
• only time/cost points = 1–3
• best answers linked quantitative, reliable, representative methods to positivist aims (science, social facts, objectivity)
• a few did not know what positivism is

Mark scheme

Examiner's comment

This question was drawn directly from the specification where the term high culture is listed. A significant minority of students did not appear to know the term and could not answer the question. Successful answers often made reference to the elite nature of high culture and paired it with an example of high culture such as opera / ballet / polo.

Notes from the mark scheme and report

• 2 marks need artistic or intellectual merit enjoyed by an elite minority
• an example alone = 1 mark
• a significant minority did not know the term

Mark scheme

Examiner's comment

This question was successfully answered by most students. Popular approaches involved using aspects of interactionist theory backstage / frontstage for example. Choice of leisure activities and clothes / fashion were also popular and successful approaches.

Notes from the mark scheme and report

• 2 marks for a clearly explained example (e.g. language, clothes, leisure choices) with how it shapes the impression given
• front-stage/back-stage ideas popular and credited

Mark scheme

Examiner's comment

The ‘outline three …’ 6-mark question. Students could easily improve outcomes on this question by realising the need to provide a line or so outlining the criticism / feature etc they have identified. Many students found gaining more than two marks for this question difficult. This was because answers often gave an example of a cultural expectation (for example that men maybe expected to engage in lifting weights in the gym whereas women might be expected to do Pilates) which was then repeated using an example of a different cultural expectation which capped the mark at two.

Notes from the mark scheme and report

• 2 marks for each of three factors clearly outlined, 1 if only partially outlined
• factors must be different: several examples of cultural expectations counted as one factor, capping many at 2 marks
• others credited: time, money, opportunities, threat of violence

Mark scheme, including the levels grid and indicative content

Examiner's comment

The ‘outline and explain’ 10-mark question. Here students would benefit more if an explicit identification of a way / reason / factor was made then leading to an explanation of it. So, making the student’s answer more cogent. This question proved to be straightforward. Generally, students managed to identify two agencies of socialisation and suggest a way in which they could shape identity. Where students found the question more challenging was in developing the identified way to include wider sociological material and include analysis. For example, the notion of the media stereotyping young people could be developed via use of moral panics or the view that stereotypes might be challenged through the more open access of social media. Students who developed their answers in ways like these produced more creditworthy response.

Notes from the mark scheme and report

• name an agency and explain how it shapes age identity
• drift into general accounts of age identity = 1–3
• top band analysis e.g. how gender interacts with age
• better answers developed media stereotyping through moral panics or challenge via social media

Mark scheme, including the levels grid and indicative content

Examiner's comment

Most students found this question to be straightforward. Use of the item to structure responses was common, though some students found it challenging to focus on the role of culture in society rather than present general theories of society. Marxism juxtaposed with functionalism featured heavily alongside feminism which was offered as further evaluation. Few students used interactionism or postmodernism in debates between perspectives but those that did were rewarded accordingly.

Notes from the mark scheme and report

• must stay on the role of culture, not general theories of society
• top band debates Marxist and functionalist views
• mostly Marxism juxtaposed with functionalism plus feminism
• interactionist or postmodern evaluation was rare but rewarded

Mark scheme

Examiner's comment

For both marks students needed to identify that the matrifocal family was female led and that power in the matrifocal family rested with the woman leading it.

Notes from the mark scheme and report

• 2 marks need a female-led family with power held by the woman
• an example such as a female-headed lone-parent family = 1 mark

Mark scheme

Examiner's comment

Most students had little difficulty in answering this question and as a result gained both marks. There were many reasons to explain a fall in infant mortality over the last 100 years. The majority of answers focussed on improvements in the nature of health care and provision.

Notes from the mark scheme and report

• 2 marks for a clearly explained reason (diet, health care, housing, vaccination) with its effect
• most gained both marks, usually via health care improvements

Mark scheme

Examiner's comment

The ‘outline three …’ 6-mark question. Students could easily improve outcomes on this question by realising the need to provide a line or so outlining the criticism / feature etc they have identified. This question was answered very well and extensive reasons for an increase in cohabitation were given. Some students identified communal household sharing as cohabitation, which could not be credited. The other main reason students did not gain full marks for this question was by not adding some development of the reason in order to gain the second mark.

Notes from the mark scheme and report

• 2 marks for each of three reasons clearly outlined, 1 if only partially outlined
• communal house-sharing is not cohabitation
• marks lost by not developing each reason

Mark scheme, including the levels grid and indicative content

Examiner's comment

The ‘outline and explain’ 10-mark question. Here students would benefit more if an explicit identification of a way / reason / factor was made then leading to an explanation of it. So, making the student’s answer more cogent. This question required students to identify a change in the organisation of paid work and suggest a way in which that change might impact on gender relationships in the family. This question proved more challenging for students. Answers sometimes spent a long time describing changes without connecting them to an impact on gender relationships. A sizeable minority did not refer to changes in the organisation of paid work except to say women now work. Analysis was often developed by reflecting on the response of various perspectives to the change for example functionalism and the new right.

Notes from the mark scheme and report

• must identify a change in the organisation of paid work and link it to gender relationships in the family
• drift into general gender roles = 1–3
• many described changes without the effect, or said only that women now work
• top band analysis e.g. class and ethnic variation

Mark scheme, including the levels grid and indicative content

Examiner's comment

This was a question most students found themselves well prepared for and were able to offer responses which covered many of the debates around childhood. The item was well used in general and helped guide students into the debate about the nature of childhood and in particular whether childhood is a “golden time” or not. Many students were able to move though a range of contributors to the debate, Palmer, Postman, Firestone, Pilcher etc showing this topic area to be a familiar one. Where answers were less effective was often due to a drift in the response into all aspects of childhood. Two common examples of this were overlong accounts of what parents buy for children and how divorce may affect them. Many answers attempted to locate the debate about childhood within the theoretical framework of Marxism, feminisms, functionalism and the new right. This was a legitimate approach but needed to keep the focus on child centredness and not move into general views of the perspectives on the family.

Notes from the mark scheme and report

• keep the focus on child-centredness
• drift into all aspects of childhood (spending on children, effects of divorce) or general perspectives on the family limits marks
• good answers used march of progress vs toxic childhood (Palmer, Postman, Pilcher)

Mark scheme

Examiner's comment

Most students who answered this question gained full credit and could find a synonym for impairment.

Notes from the mark scheme and report

• 2 marks for limitation or loss of a bodily function
• an example alone = 1 mark
• most gained full marks

Mark scheme

Examiner's comment

This question was broad in nature and in general answered well. Students could select any aspect of society and how it might impact on any type of mental illness. Popular answers featured gender inequality and stress, and racism and its impact on stress / anxiety / depression.

Notes from the mark scheme and report

• 2 marks for a structural factor (poverty, racism, gender inequality) explained as causing a pattern of mental illness
• any structural aspect and any mental illness credited
• ER comment for Q14 also printed under Q13

Mark scheme

Examiner's comment

The ‘outline three …’ 6-mark question. Students could easily improve outcomes on this question by realising the need to provide a line or so outlining the criticism / feature etc they have identified. Students seemed confident in answering this question. Popular approaches focussed on lack of access to buildings and discrimination and employment opportunities. Answers that were less successful often only identified two ways or the ways suggested overlapped.

Notes from the mark scheme and report

• 2 marks for each of three ways clearly outlined, 1 if only partially outlined
• popular answers: access to buildings, discrimination in employment
• overlapping ways or only two ways lost marks

Mark scheme, including the levels grid and indicative content

Examiner's comment

The ‘outline and explain’ 10-mark question. Here students would benefit more if an explicit identification of a way / reason / factor was made then leading to an explanation of it. So, making the student’s answer more cogent. This question was not answered well, and many students did not seem clear on what the question wanted them to do. Some students talked about health chances rather than health care – which limited the amount of credit they could be given. Popular approaches to the question focussed on language barriers and racism / ethnocentrism amongst some health care professionals.

Notes from the mark scheme and report

• must be professionals' attitudes affecting access to health care, not health chances
• drift into general ethnicity and health = 1–3
• common answers: language barriers, racism/ethnocentrism
• top band analysis of differences between minority groups
• not answered well

Mark scheme, including the levels grid and indicative content

Examiner's comment

There were some well-structured, detailed and analytical responses to this question. Better answers offered juxtaposition between cultural and behavioural explanations and structural explanations for inequalities in health and illness in society. Less successful responses tended to merge together cultural and behavioural factors or simply listed factors explaining differences in health and illness amongst different groups in society. Some responses focussed on patterns of behaviour in different social groups in relation to smoking and diet with little if any focus on culture.

Notes from the mark scheme and report

• top band debates cultural/behavioural (individualistic) against structural/material explanations
• weaker answers merged cultural with behavioural factors, listed factors, or described smoking and diet with no link to culture

Mark scheme

Examiner's comment

Many answers were unable to give a definition of the culture of poverty and so could not get credit, though some managed to give a feature of the culture of poverty such as a present time orientation or a focus on immediate gratification and so could gain partial credit.

Notes from the mark scheme and report

• 2 marks for shared attitudes of the poor that keep them in poverty
• a feature alone (fatalism, present-time orientation) = 1 mark
• many could not define it

Mark scheme

Examiner's comment

Many students did not understand what “informal” welfare was as opposed to other types such as public etc. As a result, finding examples of how informal welfare might provide day to day support proved difficult. “Voluntary” examples of welfare such as food banks were often presented in answers as a type of informal welfare but could not be credited.

Notes from the mark scheme and report

• 2 marks for a clearly explained example of informal care (family, friends, neighbours)
• voluntary-sector examples such as food banks not credited
• many confused informal with other types of welfare

Mark scheme

Examiner's comment

The ‘outline three …’ 6-mark question. Students could easily improve outcomes on this question by realising the need to provide a line or so outlining the criticism / feature etc they have identified. Students found this question straight forward and frequently used examples from education relating to different ethnic groups to provide effective answers. Discrimination in the workplace and levels of unemployment also featured as popular ways of answering the question.

Notes from the mark scheme and report

• 2 marks for each of three reasons clearly outlined, 1 if only partially outlined
• common answers: educational disadvantage, labour-market discrimination, higher unemployment, barriers to welfare

Mark scheme, including the levels grid and indicative content

Examiner's comment

The ‘outline and explain’ 10-mark question. Here students would benefit more if an explicit identification of a way / reason / factor was made then leading to an explanation of it. So, making the student’s answer more cogent. Responses to this question often used levels of education and accumulated money as their starting point. For example, higher levels of education of the middle class making it easier for them to avoid long periods of unemployment and to be able to find work again quickly. Answers that used money focussed on money providing the middle class with a cushion not available to the working class so making unemployment more significant for the working class. Less effective answers talked about material or educational differences between the working and middle class without bringing them back to bear on how they might affect the significance of unemployment.

Notes from the mark scheme and report

• must explain why unemployment matters more for the working class than the middle class
• drift into general effects of unemployment = 1–3
• common answers: savings as a cushion, education and ability to retrain
• weaker answers described class differences without linking them to unemployment

Mark scheme, including the levels grid and indicative content

Examiner's comment

The item for this question was helpful in guiding students towards an effective structure for the answer. These answers considered the standard ways of measuring and defining poverty, absolute and relative, the poverty line and then went on to consider the suggestions made by the item, social exclusion and different types of deprivation. Answers that did not include the ways of measuring poverty but concentrated on the “wider aspects … of deprivation and social exclusion” only were less effective.

Notes from the mark scheme and report

• top band debates absolute, relative and deprivation-index/social exclusion measures
• answers covering only the item's wider deprivation and social exclusion, without standard measures, were less effective