The nature, existence and persistence of poverty P2

Mark scheme, including the levels grid and indicative content

Examiner's comment

The nature of these questions means that students cannot rely on reciting knowledge. Questions will ask them to bring together aspects of their sociological knowledge in ways they have not done before. It is therefore important for students to allow time to think about how to answer the question. Students should be 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 must be used to access application marks. Answers can indicate use of hooks by quoting, by a reference in parentheses or by wording (e.g. “As the item says…”). Items end with a sentence restating the question; the hooks are in the preceding part of the item. Introductions and conclusions are not required for 10-mark questions, are unlikely to help students and take up time. It is helpful if answers are set out to clearly indicate the two answers, with wording such as “One way/reason is…” or by starting a new paragraph for the second point. Answers that give more than two answers are unlikely to develop two of them sufficiently. The most successful answers to 10-mark questions were focused, clearly stating a point that addressed the question and then developing it, using sociological concepts, evidence such as an example and, where appropriate, theory. Most answers were able to make two points based on the hooks in the item and showed some knowledge of welfare policies. Ways based on the second hook tended to be less well developed than those based on the first.

Notes from the mark scheme and report

• item hooks: active state welfare provision vs encouraging self-reliance (reduced welfare)
• drift into the existence of poverty in general = 1–3
• the second hook was usually less developed

Mark scheme

Examiner's comment

Most answers were able to give a definition of absolute poverty or to give an example of it and so gain the partial mark.

Notes from the mark scheme and report

• 2 marks for being unable to afford the basic necessities of life
• an example (e.g. homelessness) = 1 mark

Mark scheme, including the levels grid and indicative content

Examiner's comment

The item for this question provided two ways to view the welfare state and many students took the lead given by first examining the Marxist view of the welfare state followed by the social democratic perspective. The most effective answers expanded the breadth of the debate into a consideration of the functionalist, New Right, feminist and postmodern views on welfare and the welfare state.

Notes from the mark scheme and report

• apply Item D (Marxist: welfare state maintains inequality and prevents opposition vs social democratic: tackles poverty)
• 13-16 e.g. New Right critique
• most followed the item's two views
• best widened to functionalist, New Right, feminist and postmodern views

Mark scheme, including the levels grid and indicative content

Examiner's comment

The items for these questions have a different purpose to those for 10 mark “analyse” questions. The items will suggest a few starting points for students, including ways into evaluation. Students are expected to also bring in further ideas (“and your knowledge” in the instruction). A wide range of material can be relevant to these questions, so students need to be selective. It is more effective to cover a limited number of points in depth rather than to try to include everything. Students who made essay plans appeared to benefit by having more structured and coherent responses. Q12: These answers were largely accurate and some made good use of contemporary material of, for example, food banks and homelessness. There was though a tendency to rely heavily on the item and to not show detailed conceptual knowledge or engage in a theoretical debate. Some potentially relevant discussion on functionalist and other views on meritocracy and social mobility was not directly related to poverty.

Notes from the mark scheme and report

• top band debates functionalist, Marxist, feminist, Weberian and New Right views of poverty
• good use of contemporary material (food banks, homelessness)
• heavy reliance on the item without conceptual depth or theoretical debate
• meritocracy and mobility material not tied back to poverty

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, 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

Mark scheme, including the levels grid and indicative content

Examiner's comment

The purpose of the items for these questions is to suggest a few starting points for students, including ways into evaluation. Students are expected to also bring in further ideas (“and your knowledge” in the instruction). A wide range of material can be relevant to these questions, so students need to be selective. It is more effective to cover a limited number of views/theories in depth rather than to include every possible theory. Students who made essay plans appeared to benefit by having more structured and coherent responses. Question 12: Answers showed a good range of knowledge on sociological explanations of the distribution of poverty. Because of the number of explanations that could be discussed, this was a question where it benefited students to be selective. This gave the opportunity for some depth to answers.

Notes from the mark scheme and report

• top band debates Marxist, functionalist, feminist and New Right views and/or material vs cultural explanations across class, age, gender, ethnicity
• many explanations available, so selectivity allowed depth

Mark scheme

Examiner's comment

Students were familiar with the notion of poverty and what it is. The relative part of the question proved the main discriminator within the question. Most students gained a partial mark for identifying the “lack of” poverty aspect to the question whilst fewer were able to provide the “relative” full definition.

Notes from the mark scheme and report

• 2 marks for being unable to afford the standard of living most of the population considers acceptable
• 1 for 'poor compared to others'
• the 'relative' element was the discriminator

Mark scheme, including the levels grid and indicative content

Examiner's comment

The items for 20 mark questions are written to provide a number of ideas on which students can begin to build their answers. Students are expected to also bring in further ideas (hence “and your knowledge” in the instruction). It is often the case that a wide range of material can be relevant to these questions, and students need to be selective. For example, it may be more effective to cover a limited number of views or theories in some depth rather than to include every possible theory. There was a tendency for answers to progressively lose sight of the question and to become a list of different views. Many attempts at evaluation were learned criticisms. Evaluation is more effective where it is focused on the demands of the question. Students should also be aware that evaluation includes awareness of the strengths as well as the weaknesses of an argument or theory. Following feedback from centres regarding the advance information for the 20 mark questions, we have monitored the marking of these questions, as well as carrying out statistical analysis on student performance. Based on this analysis, we can confirm that students have performed as we expected them to on these questions, and their performance on these questions is in line with previous series. Q12 There was some reasonable to good knowledge of evidence and sociological views on causes of poverty. Evaluation was both through criticisms of views focusing on structural factors and through comparisons with approaches emphasising other factors such as culture.

Notes from the mark scheme and report

• top band debates structural vs cultural or individual explanations (Marxism, social democratic, New Right, functionalism, feminisms)
• evaluation was through criticism of structural views and comparison with culture of poverty or dependency culture

Mark scheme

Examiner's comment

For low mark tariff questions where candidates are required to either define, explain or outline, care should be taken to ensure that points are not just identified. Many candidates struggled with this question, interpreting it as a question about the needs of people of different ages and reasons why they can’t afford to meet the needs. Most students were able to refer to different age groups. Better answers were able to link the experience of poverty to work or income opportunities available to people of different ages.

Notes from the mark scheme and report

• 2 marks for each of three ways clearly outlined, 1 if only partially outlined
• e.g. children's lack of earnings, pensioners' reliance on pensions, student debt, young adults' housing costs
• many wrote about needs of age groups rather than experience of poverty
• better answers linked to work and income

Mark scheme, including the levels grid and indicative content

Notes from the mark scheme and report

• must apply Item H (welfare state support for housing and employment, New Right dependency view, view that poverty has not been reduced)
• top band: debate between functionalism, New Right, social democratic, Marxist and feminist views on the effectiveness of specific policies
• no examiners' report comment for this part

Mark scheme, including the levels grid and indicative content

Notes from the mark scheme and report

• apply Item G (working-class fatalism, patriarchal values)
• e.g. fatalism leading to acceptance of position, unequal caring roles and the feminisation of poverty
• evaluation e.g. how poverty experience differs between groups
• definitions of poverty = tangent
• the 1-3 descriptor wrongly refers to 'criticisms of cultural explanations of poverty' (mark-scheme slip)

Mark scheme

Notes from the mark scheme and report

• 1 mark for a problem (deciding necessities vs luxuries, subjective judgements, comparisons over time), +1 for explaining it

Mark scheme, including the levels grid and indicative content

Notes from the mark scheme and report

• must link globalisation to the extent of poverty in the UK (outsourcing and insecure secondary labour market, relocation of jobs, tax avoidance reducing state relief)
• general accounts of poverty = 1–3 band

Mark scheme, including the levels grid and indicative content

Notes from the mark scheme and report

• item hooks: culture of poverty passed between generations vs structural factors
• top band weighs individual responsibility from functionalist, New Right, Weberian and Marxist positions
• concepts underclass, dependency culture, fatalism, situational constraints

Mark scheme

Examiner's comment

A number of students were unfamiliar with this term. Successful answers referred to the idea of an individual being denied access to aspects of social activity. Some answers failed to define exclusion and wrote about people being excluded by society.

Notes from the mark scheme and report

• AO grid not printed
• 2 marks: being denied access to key areas of social life such as work, politics, education
• an example only = 1 mark
• many were unfamiliar with the term
• AO split from AQA's standard grid for this paper (this year's mark scheme does not print it).

Mark scheme, including the levels grid and indicative content

Examiner's comment

Most answers were able to use the item as a stimulus to discuss structuralist views on the causes of poverty and inequality in society. The best responses were able to locate this discussion in Marxist and sometimes Weberian approaches to social inequality with reference to appropriate sociological concepts. They were then able to evaluate these approaches by discussing some criticisms and strengths of this structuralist approach, often in contrast to cultural and individualistic explanations of social inequality and poverty. A less successful approach was simply to juxtapose these alternative explanations of class inequality or to move rapidly away from discussing class inequality and instead to describe other forms of social inequality based on either gender, age or ethnicity. In general answers that discussed a more limited range of points in more detail were more successful than those that listed a larger number of points with more limited discussion.

Notes from the mark scheme and report

• AO grid not printed
• must apply Item D
• top band: debate between perspectives on causes of poverty, e.g. Marxist or Weberian structural views against New Right cultural and individual explanations
• juxtaposition or drifting into gender, age and ethnicity inequality limits marks
• a few points in depth scored better than long lists
• AO split from AQA's standard grid for this paper (this year's mark scheme does not print it).

Mark scheme, including the levels grid and indicative content

Examiner's comment

Some students wrote introductory paragraphs and/or conclusions. These are not necessary, and are unlikely to gain additional marks, and they also take up time. Some students made only one point in their answers, or three or more, rather than the two asked for in the question. Sometimes it was unclear how many points were being made. It is helpful for students to clearly indicate their two answers, with wording such as “One way is…” or by starting a new paragraph for their second point. Evaluation is not a requirement for answers to 10 mark “outline and explain” questions. The marks awarded for the assessment objectives being targeted are different in the two types of ten mark questions, and students should be made aware of this. The best answers to 10 mark questions were focused, clearly stating a point and then developing it, using sociological concepts, evidence and theory where appropriate. In some questions students tended to focus on the first aspect of the question at the expense of the second. Students need guidance on how to approach these questions and how to best demonstrate their sociological understanding. The nature of these questions means that students cannot rely on reciting knowledge. These questions will ask them to bring together aspects of their sociological knowledge in a way that they are unlikely to have done before. Most students were aware of ways in which globalization may have increased levels of poverty in the United Kingdom. A small number misinterpreted the question by including material on poverty in countries other than the United Kingdom. Popular ‘ways’ in answer to this question included outsourcing and migration.

Notes from the mark scheme and report

• two ways globalisation raised poverty in the UK (e.g. TNC power and outsourcing, casualisation, loss of manufacturing jobs, migration)
• poverty in other countries not credited
• drift into causes of poverty in general = 1–3
• AO split from AQA's standard grid for this paper (this year's mark scheme does not print it).

Mark scheme, including the levels grid and indicative content

Examiner's comment

Some students wrote introductory paragraphs and/or conclusions. These are not necessary, and are unlikely to gain additional marks, and they also take up time. Some students made only one point in their answers, or three or more, rather than the two asked for in the question. Sometimes it was unclear how many points were being made. It is helpful for students to clearly indicate their two answers, with wording such as “One way is…” or by starting a new paragraph for their second point. Evaluation is not a requirement for answers to 10 mark “outline and explain” questions. The marks awarded for the assessment objectives being targeted are different in the two types of ten mark questions, and students should be made aware of this. The best answers to 10 mark questions were focused, clearly stating a point and then developing it, using sociological concepts, evidence and theory where appropriate. In some questions students tended to focus on the first aspect of the question at the expense of the second. Students need guidance on how to approach these questions and how to best demonstrate their sociological understanding. The nature of these questions means that students cannot rely on reciting knowledge. These questions will ask them to bring together aspects of their sociological knowledge in a way that they are unlikely to have done before. Most students knew the challenges of measuring relative poverty and were able, for example, to give some good cross cultural analyses, comparing something that might be on a list in one part of the world but not in another part of the world (such as wi fi). Other answers focused on inherent bias by the researcher or differences based on social class or ethnicity.

Notes from the mark scheme and report

• two developed difficulties from Item G (lists of items), e.g. choosing which items to include, people choosing not to own items
• drift into definitions of poverty is a tangent
• good answers used cross-cultural examples (wi-fi) and researcher bias
• AO split from AQA's standard grid for this paper (this year's mark scheme does not print it).

Mark scheme

Examiner's comment

Successful answers referred to the idea of people having their own view of what constitutes poverty. Partial answers tended to explain that it was a non-official definition. A number of students were unfamiliar with this term.

Notes from the mark scheme and report

• 2 marks for people feeling they are poor
• 'non-official definition' = 1 mark
• many did not know the term
• AO split from AQA's standard grid for this paper (this year's mark scheme does not print it).

Mark scheme, including the levels grid and indicative content

Examiner's comment

Answers to this question often took two different approaches. The first approach was to go through different social groups in the United Kingdom and describe why they might experience poverty. These answers tended to be very descriptive and lacking in sociological analysis. The alternative approach was to explain various sociological perspectives on the causes of poverty. They would explain functionalist, Weberian, Marxist, feminist and New Right approaches often in self-contained sections. The best answers adopted some combination of these approaches by, for example, locating a discussion about why people with disabilities may be more likely to experience poverty in a Marxist context of the value of individuals and groups in a capitalist society. Typical answers referred to social class, age, family type, gender, ethnicity as well as disability. Many successful students were able to contrast structural explanations with more individualistic explanations for poverty.

Notes from the mark scheme and report

• top band needs explanations for at least two social groups
• apply Item D (family type, unemployment)
• evaluation via Marxist, Weberian, New Right, feminist explanations or structural vs individual
• group-by-group description or self-contained perspective sections both limited
• best combined the two
• AO split from AQA's standard grid for this paper (this year's mark scheme does not print it).

Mark scheme, including the levels grid and indicative content

Examiner's comment

A number of students wrote introductory paragraphs and/or conclusions. These are not necessary, and are unlikely to gain additional marks. A number of students made only one point in their answer, or three or more, rather than the two asked for. In these cases, the two best answers were rewarded and will be in future series. It is helpful for students to clearly indicate their two answers, with wording such as “One way is…” or by starting a new paragraph for their second point. Schools and colleges should note that there is no reference in the mark scheme for 10 mark ‘outline and explain’ questions to evaluation, and that evaluation is not a requirement for answers to these questions. The assessment objective allocations are different in the two types of 10 mark questions, and students should be made aware of this. There was a wide range of responses to these questions. A minority of students wrote very brief answers. For these 10 mark items, a simple statement of two ways, reasons or factors, without development, is not sufficient to access more than the lower marks in the mark range. The best answers were focused, clearly stating a point and then developing it, with use of sociological concepts, evidence and theory where appropriate, in ways that demonstrated the skills expected from the targeted assessment objectives. There was a tendency, however, for many answers to focus on the first aspect of the question at the expense of the second. Students need guidance on how to approach these questions and how to best demonstrate their sociological understanding. The nature of these questions means that students cannot rely on reciting knowledge. They require students to bring together two aspects of their sociological knowledge in a way that they are unlikely to have done before. Answers will sometimes require claims that students may be unsure of because they do not know of specific evidence (for example, in question 5, whether migrants from Eastern Europe who are single workers tend to live alone or in shared households). However, answers that are sociologically plausible will be accepted. Students often showed an impressive knowledge of recent and current government policies, such as the bedroom tax and changes to benefits. A few chose zero hours contracts, which are not a government policy. However, it was possible to use this by arguing that government policy was to allow these.

Notes from the mark scheme and report

• two ways policy increased poverty (benefit cuts/caps, means-testing and the poverty trap, tax changes such as VAT)
• drift into government policy in general = 1–3
• good answers used current policies e.g. bedroom tax
• zero-hours contracts are not a policy unless framed as government permitting them

Mark scheme, including the levels grid and indicative content

Examiner's comment

Many scripts had one substantial, well developed answer to a 20 mark question and one significantly briefer one, again suggesting problems with time management. It is often the case that a wide range of material can be relevant to these questions, and students will need to be selective. For example, it may be more effective to cover a limited number of views or theories in some depth, rather than to include every possible theory. There was a tendency for answers to progressively lose sight of the question and to become a list of different views. The best answers will address all aspects of the question and will draw on theories, concepts and empirical examples or evidence. Evaluation which meets the demands of the questions is better than points of criticism which have been learned and included, regardless of the specific question that has been set. Students should also be aware that evaluation includes awareness of the strengths, as well as the weaknesses, of an argument or theory. There was a range in the quality of responses to this question. Better answers were able to apply different theories and concepts to gender differences in poverty, but others struggled to move beyond a descriptive account, often of discrimination at work, with little reference to poverty.

Notes from the mark scheme and report

• top band debates feminist views against others such as New Right
• many stayed with a description of workplace discrimination with little link to poverty

Mark scheme

Examiner's comment

Most answers were able to explain a problem of using an absolute definition of poverty, usually with reference to cultural differences in defining basic necessities. A minority of students wrote answers that were tangential, such as by discussing the merits of the benefit system.

Notes from the mark scheme and report

• 2 marks for a clearly explained example, 1 if partial
• most common answer: cultural differences in what counts as a basic necessity
• tangents such as the merits of the benefit system not credited

Mark scheme, including the levels grid and indicative content

Examiner's comment

The 10 mark outline and explain question requires students to link two aspects of the specification. The best answers took note of both aspects of the question, clearly identified two separate points and developed them in relation to the second part of the question. Weaker answers either ignored one aspect of the question or attempted to cover a number of ideas rather than focusing on two. Some students were hampered in their attempts to answer this question because they were unclear about what means tested benefits are. These answers often developed into general criticisms of the provision of welfare benefits and struggled to make relevant points. Successful answers made reference to problems such as the complexity of the system, the stigma attached to claiming and the relatively low amount of money received. Top band answers were able to explain these problems in terms of their effect or scope or underlying causes. For example, by discussing stigma in the context of media stereotypes, the effect this had on claimants and illustrating the issues with examples, such as the provision of free school meals.

Notes from the mark scheme and report

• no marks for evaluation in this question type
• two reasons each developed, e.g. poverty trap, stigma deterring claims, complexity, low levels of benefit
• general dependency-culture accounts = 1–3
• many were unsure what means-tested benefits are and wrote general criticisms of welfare

Mark scheme

Examiner's comment

In the 6 mark question some students are writing far too much, thereby losing focus on the precise wording of the question. Most students were able to identify some reasons why families with young children may be likely to experience poverty. These usually cited the expense of bringing up children, the inability to do paid work full time, the expense of child care, and/or the necessity for some mothers to have a career break. Failure to get maximum marks was usually due to the point being too general, or not spelling out explicitly the significance of, or reason for, the point raised, for example stating that ‘children are expensive’ without explaining why young children incur particular expenses. or refrerring to a ‘career break’ without explaining the consequences of this for family income.

Notes from the mark scheme and report

• credited: costs of young children, mothers' career breaks, both parents unable to work full time, childcare costs, inadequate child benefit
• marks lost by general points (e.g. 'children are expensive') without saying why or what the consequence for income is