Outline two or three (4 and 6 marks)

Mark scheme

Examiner's comment

This question was well answered on the whole. Some students repeated their points or had issues with adequate elaboration to get the mark for development. A very small minority of students got confused regarding theories.

Notes from the mark scheme and report

• 2 marks for each of three features clearly outlined, 1 if only partially outlined
• credited: social solidarity, skills for work, meritocracy, secondary socialisation, role allocation, universalistic standards
• marks lost by repeating points or not developing them

Mark scheme

Examiner's comment

For students who focused on the idea of factors influencing research topic a range of possible and straight forward factors could be selected which would get credit. For example, a topic of personal interest to the researcher or a topic being currently debated and in the “news”. Some students, however, restricted their responses to considering factors influencing the choice of research method: such as those of validity or reliability. These responses did not meet the demands of the question and could not be rewarded.

Notes from the mark scheme and report

• factors influencing choice of TOPIC, not of method
• credited: researcher's values, funding, access, usefulness to society, topical/news issues, personal interest
• answers about validity or reliability (choice of method) gained no marks

Mark scheme

Examiner's comment

On the 10-mark 'outline and explain' question (the fourth question in each topic area), and the 6-mark 'outline three...' question (the third question in each topic). In the 6-mark 'outline three...' questions, students could improve their performance by including a brief explanation of each identified point—such as a criticism or feature—rather than simply listing them. This question produced a wide variety of responses. Answers generally focused on differences in norms between a subculture and the dominant/mainstream culture. Successful responses referred to the “inverse” aspect of subcultures. Examples of subcultures (clothing / music ) were often used to help support answers.

Notes from the mark scheme and report

• credited: resistance to mainstream, style, inverse norms and values, slang, source of identity, sharing parent-culture values, arising from inequality
• best answers used the inverse-values idea
• examples like clothing and music supported points

Mark scheme

Examiner's comment

On the 10-mark 'outline and explain' question (the fourth question in each topic area), and the 6-mark 'outline three...' question (the third question in each topic). In the 6-mark 'outline three...' questions, students could improve their performance by including a brief explanation of each identified point—such as a criticism or feature—rather than simply listing them. This question was answered very well, with many students providing a wide range of reasons for the lone parent families being headed by a woman. Women being awarded custody, general expectations of society and male abandonment proved popular reasons. The phenomena of some responses giving a valid reason being without it being developed (and so not gaining full marks) remains.

Notes from the mark scheme and report

• credited: men less likely to leave work, breastfeeding, courts awarding custody to mothers, father abandonment, women choosing lone parenthood, gender norms
• answered very well
• undeveloped reasons still lost the second mark

Mark scheme

Examiner's comment

On the 10-mark 'outline and explain' question (the fourth question in each topic area), and the 6-mark 'outline three...' question (the third question in each topic). In the 6-mark 'outline three...' questions, students could improve their performance by including a brief explanation of each identified point—such as a criticism or feature—rather than simply listing them. Students were generally confident in answering this question. Popular approaches focused on the ethnocentrism of medical practitioners, racism in society in general and the unequal treatment of ethnic minorities by law enforcement officers.

Notes from the mark scheme and report

• credited: racism and self-esteem, police/criminal-justice routes into care, psychiatric ethnocentrism, poverty, lack of power to resist labels
• generally answered confidently

Mark scheme

Examiner's comment

On the 10-mark 'outline and explain' question (the fourth question in each topic area), and the 6-mark 'outline three...' question (the third question in each topic). In the 6-mark 'outline three...' questions, students could improve their performance by including a brief explanation of each identified point—such as a criticism or feature—rather than simply listing them. This was a novel question but one that students had a range of responses for. Popular possible effects of retirement that were suggested included: reduced income / poverty, increased time for leisure pursuits, lack of identity through the absence of work and loneliness.

Notes from the mark scheme and report

• credited: lower income, lack of daily structure, time for hobbies, loss of role or identity, caring for grandchildren, loss of status
• loneliness also used

Mark scheme

Notes from the mark scheme and report

• 2 marks for each of two ways clearly outlined, 1 if partially outlined
• credited: multicultural education, global curriculum convergence, private/global companies in schools (e.g. Pearson), longer school day after international league-table comparisons, new school types such as free schools, global digital platforms
• no examiners' report published

Mark scheme

Notes from the mark scheme and report

• 2 marks for each of three reasons clearly outlined
• credited: attainment gaps, parental attitudes, pro-school subcultures, cultural capital, cost of university, working-class habitus and self-exclusion
• no examiners' report published

Mark scheme

Examiner's comment

Question one was accessed well with many students scoring full marks. Boundary maintenance was the most popular response and even though it is not a requirement of the question to include the work of a sociologist to get the development mark, many students could identify Durkheim in this question. There was a range of identification points students used such as social cohesion and the warning device. When students used these, they were able to showcase their knowledge of contemporary affairs well and there were good examples such the Manchester bombings. There is a tendency to overwrite these smaller questions. The mark scheme highlights how the identification mark can be awarded, with a general idea on the detail required in the development mark.

Notes from the mark scheme and report

• 2 marks for each of two ways clearly outlined, 1 if partial
• credited: boundary maintenance, social cohesion, warning device, social change, employment
• naming Durkheim not required for the development mark
• well answered but many overwrote

Mark scheme

Examiner's comment

Question two was on the whole answered well and there was a wide range of different responses provided, some with more success than others. There were some challenges faced with repetition, in particular with students who had used moral panics as their identification and then tried another identification with stereotyping, which led to repetition of the self- fulfilling prophecy. Many students also used the deviancy amplification spiral and discussion of the ‘mods and rockers’. Where this was used, students did not always focus on the question set as they did not discuss the increase in crime. A small number of students drifted away from the question set and discussed the lack of media representation of some groups. Some students made use of new media in this question, and when this was given as an identification, they were able to develop it by using examples of new types of media such as social media platforms and new types of crime such as hate crime or hacking. This showcased the range of knowledge in answers to this question.

Notes from the mark scheme and report

• 2 marks for each of three ways clearly outlined
• credited: copycat crime, new media creating new crimes, desensitisation, relative deprivation from advertising, moral panics and stereotypes leading to targeting, undermining social controls
• moral panic then stereotyping repeated the same self-fulfilling prophecy point
• deviancy amplification often not linked to rising crime

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

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

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

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

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

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

Examiner's comment

Most students performed well on this question, typically identifying that vocational education prepares students for the workforce by providing relevant skills and knowledge. Common answers included that vocational education offers alternatives to traditional academic routes, allowing some students to achieve higher. However, some responses were too general, such as stating that ‘it prepares students for jobs’, without specifically linking this to vocational education. These generic answers could easily apply to both vocational and non-vocational education, which limited the marks that could be awarded.

Notes from the mark scheme and report

• 2 marks for each of two advantages clearly outlined, 1 if only partially outlined
• e.g. skilled workforce and competitiveness, alternative assessment of practical skills, work-relevant learning, higher achievement for some, wider choice
• generic points that fit any education ('prepares students for jobs') limited marks

Mark scheme

Examiner's comment

This was generally a high-performing question, with the vast majority of students able to score at least some marks. A significant proportion of students were able to achieve full marks, taking advantage of the wide range of possible responses. Students commonly discussed issues such as school oversubscription, geographical limitations, and the influence of socio-economic status and cultural capital on accessing high-performing schools of choice. These responses were well-developed and demonstrated a clear understanding of the factors limiting parental choice in school selection. However, some responses were too generic, often mentioning concepts like the ‘myth of parentocracy’ without elaborating on how or why it limits parental choice or providing specific examples. In these cases, students sometimes relied on broad statements without adequately applying their knowledge to the specifics of the question. To score higher, students could improve by providing more detailed examples and explanations, clearly linking their points to how these factors specifically limit parental choice.

Notes from the mark scheme and report

• 2 marks for each of three reasons clearly outlined, 1 if only partially outlined
• e.g. oversubscription and catchment areas, few schools in rural areas, council decides, selection criteria, lack of cultural capital, transport costs
• high-performing question
• naming the 'myth of parentocracy' without explaining how it limits choice gained little

Mark scheme

Examiner's comment

This question was a challenge for some students. Many did not really mention punishment, and answers were vague, for example referencing displacement. There was a need to know about types of punishment and why they wouldn’t control crime, which was the latter part of the question. Students did write some very good answers about prison being a university of crime. Many had some sensitive and thoughtful things to write about rehabilitation. The most popular answer was about the cost benefit analysis, and in lots of cases this was done well. There was a tendency to overwrite this question. A focus should be on writing one word or statement for the identification (1 mark) and a short development of this.

Notes from the mark scheme and report

• 2 marks for each of two reasons clearly outlined, 1 if partial (e.g. labelling and deviant careers, prisons as universities of crime, high reoffending, root causes such as inequality untouched, CJS bias, rational choice where gains outweigh penalties)
• many never mentioned punishment and wrote vaguely (e.g. displacement)
• cost-benefit was the most popular answer
• over-writing common, a short identification plus brief development is enough

Mark scheme

Examiner's comment

This question was in large part answered well, although it is worth noting that despite the vast variety of material a student could present there was some repetition. This was mainly when students had used racist police practices or the family as an explanation, and these could not be credited twice. As with Question 1, there was a tendency to overwrite this question. A focus should be on writing one word or statement for the identification (1 mark) and a short development of this.

Notes from the mark scheme and report

• 2 marks for each of three reasons clearly outlined, 1 if partial (e.g. marginalisation, crime as protest, police racism and stop and search, court bias, social control in families, material deprivation, victimisation)
• answered well
• repeated reasons (racist policing, family) credited only once
• over-writing common

Mark scheme

Examiner's comment

It was evident that students had been well-prepared to understand the demands of the different styles of questions, giving appropriately short responses to the 2 mark questions and using bullet points in their answers to question 3. Question 03: Students generally had a good understanding of Marxist theories of education. However, this question caused difficulties for a number of students. Unfortunately, under the pressure of the examination, many didn’t read the question fully to understand that the response required criticisms of Marxist theory, not the ways in which Marxists would criticise the education system. Where students did understand the requirements of the question, many were able to identify criticisms and develop them appropriately.

Notes from the mark scheme and report

• criticisms OF Marxist views, not Marxist criticisms of education (a common misreading)
• credited: functionalist meritocracy, interactionist labelling, equality policies, neglect of gender and ethnicity, Bernstein speech codes, determinism ignoring working-class success

Mark scheme

Examiner's comment

Students generally understood the difference between primary and secondary data. Some were less adept at identifying the advantages of such data. Students who claimed that primary sources were more valid; reliable; representative were required to explain how this is the case to gain credit as such qualities could equally be a feature of secondary sources of data. More successful responses were able to use the fact that the researcher was in control over the entirety of the research process to formulate effective answers.

Notes from the mark scheme and report

• 2 marks for each of two advantages clearly outlined, 1 if partial (e.g. researcher gathers exactly what is needed, operationalises concepts their own way, knows how the data were produced, fills gaps where no secondary data exist)
• bare claims that primary data are more valid, reliable or representative need explaining, since secondary data can share these qualities
• best answers stressed the researcher's control of the whole process

Mark scheme

Examiner's comment

The ‘outline three’ 6 mark question (the third question in every topic area). Students could easily improve outcomes on this question by realising the need to briefly (eg a line or so) expand upon the criticism / feature etc being outlined. Many students struggled with this question, with the discriminating factor being whether the students had any knowledge of postmodernism or not. Those that did were able to use a wide variety of features such as pick and mix / increased choice / hybridity etc to gain credit – the mark scheme was quite generous here. It is worth noting that the students who did this and did not receive full marks mostly did not add a line or so to explain the meaning of the feature so leaving the point undeveloped. If this was the case they received a partial mark.

Notes from the mark scheme and report

• 2 marks for each of three features clearly outlined, 1 if partial (e.g. no metanarratives, consumption, pick and mix choice, diversity, globalisation, body as project)
• the deciding factor was whether students knew postmodernism at all
• listing a feature without a line of explanation gets 1 mark

Mark scheme

Examiner's comment

The ‘outline three’ 6 mark question (the third question in every topic area). Students could easily improve outcomes on this question by realising the need to briefly (eg a line or so) expand upon the criticism / feature etc being outlined. Many students scored well in this question and were able to identify three features of the symmetrical family. Many answers offered up more than the three features required indicating that students have a good understanding of the symmetrical family. Answers that did not attract full marks tended to list features but not (briefly) expand upon them.

Notes from the mark scheme and report

• 2 marks for each of three features clearly outlined, 1 if partial (e.g. home-centred/privatised, joint conjugal roles, geographically mobile nuclear unit, shared decisions and leisure)
• features listed without brief expansion lose the second mark

Mark scheme

Examiner's comment

The ‘outline three’ 6 mark question (the third question in every topic area). Students could easily improve outcomes on this question by realising the need to briefly (eg a line or so) expand upon the criticism / feature etc being outlined. Students found this question difficult. There were two main stumbling points. The first was answers that focussed on health care rather than health chances as demanded by the question. These answers could receive only minimum credit. The second was not identifying cultural factors – such as working class culture may encourage heavier drinking which presents a health risk – as opposed to other factors. The main diversion away from identifying cultural factors tended to be to identify material factors instead, such as a lack of money for food / heating. Again, answers following this path could gain only minimum credit.

Notes from the mark scheme and report

• 2 marks for each of three cultural factors clearly outlined, 1 if partial (e.g. diet, smoking, exercise, drug and alcohol use linked to class)
• answers about health care rather than health chances, or giving material factors such as lack of money, get minimal credit

Mark scheme

Examiner's comment

The ‘outline three’ 6 mark question (the third question in every topic area). Students could easily improve outcomes on this question by realising the need to briefly (eg a line or so) expand upon the criticism / feature etc being outlined. Students found this question straight forward. Where students lacked specific understanding regarding gender and poverty they were readily able to adapt general gender based material such as gender roles / childcare responsibilities etc and apply it to the question. Many students gained full marks for this question.

Notes from the mark scheme and report

• 2 marks for each of three reasons clearly outlined, 1 if partial (e.g. lower pay, smaller pensions, female-headed lone-parent families, career breaks for childbirth, part-time work due to childcare)
• found straightforward, many full marks

Mark scheme

Examiner's comment

A small number of students struggled with this question, perhaps because the theories are more often presented as being different rather than in terms of their similarities. However, most students were able to offer at least one similarity between functionalist and Marxist views of education. The most common answers were that both views argue that education prepares students for the workplace and/or that education is a secondary agent of socialisation. Most students then developed these points by providing an example from either or both of the functionalist or Marxist perspectives.

Notes from the mark scheme and report

• 2 marks for each of two similarities clearly outlined, 1 if only partially outlined
• some students struggled because the two theories are usually taught as contrasting
• most common answers: both see education as preparing pupils for work, and as an agency of secondary socialisation

Mark scheme

Examiner's comment

There were a wide range of answers to this question. Many students took the approach of criticising marketisation policies generally. Students commonly referred to the ‘myth of parentocracy’ and/or that these policies may have led to greater inequalities as some schools may select students from some social groups over others. Other students referred to criticisms of specific marketisation policies, for example, that league tables may produce a misleading and inaccurate picture of the success of a school. Some less successful students drifted into criticisms of privatisation in education without any success of linking this in any way to marketisation. Some others referred to more general and non-relevant policies such as the tripartite system.

Notes from the mark scheme and report

• 2 marks for each of three criticisms clearly outlined, 1 if only partially outlined
• common answers: myth of parentocracy, greater inequality through selection, league tables misleading
• weaker answers drifted into privatisation or unrelated policies such as the tripartite system

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

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

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. The demands of this question were generally understood and most students were able to score at least 2 marks. Partial marks were relatively common as students did not always develop points in terms of a specific characteristic of structured interviews. The most common errors were confusion with unstructured interviews, or outlining disadvantages of structured interviews.

Notes from the mark scheme and report

• 2 marks for each of two advantages clearly outlined, 1 if only partially outlined
• e.g. reliability through standardised questions, factual data, easy to quantify, less interviewer bias
• partial marks common when the point was not tied to a feature of structured interviews
• errors: confusing with unstructured interviews, giving disadvantages

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 students struggled with this question. Most were able to outline at least one way in which old age may be a stigmatised identity. The most common response was derogatory language but often this was repeated using different examples and only gained credit once. Assumptions about dependency and barriers to employment were often identified but only partially outlined.

Notes from the mark scheme and report

• 2 marks for each of three ways clearly outlined, 1 if only partially outlined
• e.g. derogatory language, negative media stereotypes, neglect in health care, employment barriers, assumptions of dependency
• repeating derogatory language with different examples credited once only

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 students scored well in this question and were able to identify three effects and explain them briefly. Some answers to this question were longer than necessary; some included references to, and descriptions of, research. Partial marks were achieved when an effect was identified but developed in an incorrect way. For example, parents may see less of their children as they are at work, which gained credit, but then developed by claiming the children will miss out on socialisation so won’t know right from wrong which is incorrect. Some answers drifted to effects on women’s careers rather than on the family. Occasionally students confused what was meant by dual earner and went into descriptions of househusbands ie role reversal.

Notes from the mark scheme and report

• 2 marks for each of three effects clearly outlined, 1 if only partially outlined
• e.g. more equal domestic roles, more father involvement, grandparent or nursery childcare, affluence, smaller families
• incorrect development (e.g. children not learning right from wrong) limits to 1
• drift into women's careers or role reversal not credited
• long answers unnecessary

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. This question was generally answered well. Exam technique was good with very few examples of long answers. The most common responses were language barriers, experiences of racism and social class. Social class sometimes gained a partial mark when not explicitly linked to ethnicity.

Notes from the mark scheme and report

• 2 marks for each of three reasons clearly outlined, 1 if only partially outlined
• e.g. poverty, diet, racism, language barriers, biological vulnerability
• answered well
• social class not linked to ethnicity got only 1

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

Examiner's comment

This question appeared very accessible to students. Most were able to outline at least one way that schools promote competition between pupils with half of the cohort achieving all of the available marks. The majority of successful answers included the way schools set assessments to rank pupils, school reward systems and competitive teams within schools. Unsuccessful answers focused on government policies such as league tables without any reference to the way that schools then promoted competition between pupils.

Notes from the mark scheme and report

• 2 marks for each of two ways clearly outlined, 1 if partial (e.g. ranking by tests, setting/streaming, reward systems such as merits, competitive teams, entrance exams)
• accessible, half the cohort scored full marks
• government policies such as league tables with no link to how schools make pupils compete were not credited

Mark scheme

Examiner's comment

This question was generally answered well. The majority of students were able to offer at least one or two ways that the education system may be seen as patriarchal. There was a wide range of responses which included male dominance in more senior roles within schools and gender bias in careers advice. Some students struggled to gain full credit for their answers where their response was generic and not linked clearly to differences in power. For example, some simply stated ‘subject choice’ whereas more successful answers included the way that females may be less encouraged to choose more prestigious subjects as a result of existing gendered stereotypes. A very small number of students did not seem to understand the term ‘patriarchy’ and their answers focussed instead, for example, on social class inequalities.

Notes from the mark scheme and report

• 2 marks for each of three ways clearly outlined, 1 if partial (e.g. male-centred curriculum, gendered careers advice, men in senior posts, teacher attention, male gaze, assessment changes favouring boys)
• bare 'subject choice' without a link to gendered power gets partial credit
• a few misunderstood patriarchy and wrote about social class

Mark scheme

Examiner's comment

Question 1 proved challenging for some students. It was noticeable that some did not have enough relevant knowledge of green crime. On the whole it was attempted by the majority of students, however in this question there were some no responses. Students who did attempt this could drift off the focus of the question and there was some overwriting. Centre recommendations are to assist students to not overwrite by sequencing practice style questions into teaching, underlining key aspects of the question, and to provide exemplars.

Notes from the mark scheme and report

• 2 marks for each of two problems clearly outlined, 1 if only partially outlined
• credited problems include no agreed definition, laws differ between countries, hard to detect, crosses legal borders, corporate power to conceal, no victim able to report
• many lacked knowledge of green crime and some drifted or overwrote

Mark scheme

Examiner's comment

Question 2 was answered well. The vast majority of students were able to provide three different crime prevention strategies. Students had deep and holistic knowledge of this area. There was some drift onto theory without providing a strategy and some students repeated their strategy. This question saw the most overwriting from students which may have had an impact on their timing in other questions. Centre recommendations are to assist students to not overwrite by sequencing practice style questions into teaching, underlining key aspects of the question, and to provide exemplars.

Notes from the mark scheme and report

• 2 marks for each of three different ways clearly outlined, 1 if only partially outlined
• naming a type of strategy (situational, environmental, social/community) plus how it reduces crime is credited
• drift into theory without a strategy and repeated strategies lost marks
• widely overwritten

Mark scheme

Examiner's comment

However, there was generally a lower quality and standard of answers in comparison to previous normal summer entries with a number of students finding Q1 and Q5 more difficult in particular. Similarly to previous years, some students wrote lengthy answers to the 4-mark and 6-mark questions which may explain why a few of these students seemed to run out of time in answering the final question(s). This question seemed to cause students some difficulties. There were a wide range of answers offered but many students appeared to be confused or demonstrate little knowledge and understanding of this area of the specification. There were a number of answers that focused either on globalisation or educational policies more generally rather than the ways that globalisation may have influenced educational policies. Stronger answers were able to outline international testing programmes and marketisation policies, in particular, as ways (or examples) of globalisation influencing educational policies in the UK.

Notes from the mark scheme and report

• 2 marks for each of two ways clearly outlined, 1 if partial
• credited: PISA and international comparison, STEM/EBacc for a global economy, marketisation and global education companies, internet-based learning
• many wrote about globalisation or education policy in general rather than the link between them

Mark scheme

Examiner's comment

Similarly to previous years, some students wrote lengthy answers to the 4-mark and 6-mark questions which may explain why a few of these students seemed to run out of time in answering the final question(s). Most students could offer at least one or two reasons why some working-class boys join anti- school subcultures. Answers tended to refer to labelling and the self-fulfilling prophecy as well as expressions of identity and/ or fatalistic attitudes. Some students outlined reasons linked more specifically to ethnicity, such as the ethnocentric curriculum, rather than working class boys and therefore were less successful in gaining marks.

Notes from the mark scheme and report

• 2 marks for each of three reasons clearly outlined
• credited: status frustration, labelling and not being the 'ideal pupil', fatalism and immediate gratification, class identity, hegemonic masculinity with fewer jobs
• reasons tied to ethnicity (e.g. ethnocentric curriculum) rather than working-class boys were less successful

Mark scheme

Examiner's comment

Similarly to previous years, a significant number of students wrote lengthy answers to the 4-mark and 6-mark questions; this should be a focus for centres. All students attempted this question. Most students could identify two ways in which capitalism may cause people to commit crime. There was a tendency to write too much for this question, some students explained and named sociologists, and although this displayed excellent knowledge, it is not a requirement for this question and may have had an impact on the timing. This is something for centres to address.

Notes from the mark scheme and report

• 2 marks for each of two ways clearly outlined, 1 if partial
• creditable: poverty and inequality, status frustration and alienation, individualism, blocked opportunities, relative deprivation via consumerism
• most identified two ways
• many wrote far too much and named sociologists, which is not required and costs time

Mark scheme

Examiner's comment

Similarly to previous years, a significant number of students wrote lengthy answers to the 4-mark and 6-mark questions; this should be a focus for centres. This question was answered well; all students attempted the question. Most students could identify three reasons for gender differences in levels of rerecorded crime. There were some common errors, mainly that students discussed reported crime and victims of crime, this was a common error, as the question stated recorded crime.

Notes from the mark scheme and report

• 2 marks for each of three reasons clearly outlined, 1 if partial
• creditable: fewer opportunities under patriarchal control, male socialisation, accomplishing masculinity, chivalry, biology, labelling
• common error was writing about reported crime or victims instead of recorded crime

Mark scheme

Notes from the mark scheme and report

• 2 marks for each of three reasons clearly outlined, 1 if only partially outlined
• e.g. girls' motivation from women's employment, higher teacher expectations, feminisation of education, literacy, crisis of masculinity
• no examiners' report for this series

Mark scheme

Notes from the mark scheme and report

• no examiners' report for this series
• 2 marks for each of two problems clearly outlined, 1 if partial
• creditable: no guarantee of representativeness, no sampling frame for some populations, cost, need for a large sample, extra information needed to stratify

Mark scheme

Notes from the mark scheme and report

• 2 marks for each of three factors clearly outlined, 1 if partial
• creditable: shared history, religion, language, cultural traditions, reaction to racism
• developing mark usually needs an example (e.g. Urdu, Chinese New Year)

Mark scheme

Notes from the mark scheme and report

• 2 marks for each of three functions clearly outlined, 1 if partial
• functionalist, Marxist and feminist functions all creditable (economic, socialisation, reproduction, gender roles, reproducing patriarchy or capitalism)

Mark scheme

Notes from the mark scheme and report

• 2 marks for each of three features clearly outlined, 1 if partial
• creditable: body as machine, health as absence of disease, curative focus, scientific expertise, medicalisation of social problems

Mark scheme

Notes from the mark scheme and report

• 2 marks for each of three causes clearly outlined, 1 if partial
• creditable: pay, social contact, working conditions, management attitudes, autonomy, task variety

Mark scheme

Examiner's comment

Similarly to summer 2019, a significant number of students wrote very lengthy answers to the 4-mark and 6-mark questions which may explain why some seemed to run out of time in answering the final question. Unsurprisingly, this question seemed to pose very few problems for students. Most could identify two (with many offering more) external factors and of these, the majority could develop their point further to gain the additional mark. Common responses referred to material deprivation, cultural deprivation and cultural capital. Others gave specific examples such as poor diet, parental support and language codes as part of their answer. Unfortunately, a small number of students failed to gain marks as they offered internal factors.

Notes from the mark scheme and report

• 2 marks for each of two external factors clearly outlined, 1 if partial (e.g. financial capital, poor housing, parental attitudes, linguistic codes, subcultural values, cultural capital)
• few problems, common answers material and cultural deprivation and cultural capital
• internal (in-school) factors not credited

Mark scheme

Examiner's comment

Similarly to summer 2019, a significant number of students wrote very lengthy answers to the 4-mark and 6-mark questions which may explain why some seemed to run out of time in answering the final question. Most students could offer two or three functions that the education system performs. These drew from functionalist, Marxist and feminist perspectives, including such functions as role allocation, promotion of social solidarity, ideological purpose and supporting patriarchal values. Many were then able to develop their point further to gain the additional mark. For example, a number of students developed the point of role allocation in explaining that outcomes of exams help ‘sift and sort’ students into suitable occupations. In less successful answers, students gave responses that were too similar or overlapping to be credited separately.

Notes from the mark scheme and report

• 2 marks for each of three functions clearly outlined, 1 if partial
• functions from functionalist, Marxist and feminist views all credited (e.g. social solidarity, specialist skills, secondary socialisation, role allocation, reproducing class inequality or patriarchy)
• functions too similar or overlapping not credited separately

Mark scheme

Examiner's comment

Most students attempted this question. Most students could identify two ways in which media representations of crime may not reflect reality. There was a tendency to write too much for this question, some students explained the work of sociological studies, and although this displayed excellent knowledge it is not a requirement for this question and may have had an impact on timing.

Notes from the mark scheme and report

• 2 marks for each of two ways clearly outlined, 1 if only partially outlined
• credited: over-reporting violent and sexual crime, under-reporting property crime, exaggerated risk of victimisation, exaggerated police success
• describing studies not needed and many overwrote

Mark scheme

Examiner's comment

This question was answered well. Most students could identify three functions of the criminal justice system. A common error was that students presented a positive function of crime but did not link this to the criminal justice system. For example, using the warning device or safety valve function but not linking this to anything within the CJS or agents within the criminal justice system.

Notes from the mark scheme and report

• 2 marks for each of three functions clearly outlined, 1 if only partially outlined
• credited: deterrence, rehabilitation, restitution, reinforcing values, protecting the public, plus conflict views (controlling the working class, reinforcing patriarchy)
• common error: functions of crime (warning device, safety valve) not linked to the CJS

Mark scheme

Examiner's comment

This question seemed challenging to many students. Although some were able to successfully outline three criticisms, most struggled to offer more than one or two. Many answers were centred around the criticism of schools being a meritocracy and then explained the criticism with reference to Marxism or social class. The better answers were able to clearly identify the functionalist view on education in order to highlight a weakness of that view, for example that functionalism was overly positive; too deterministic; failed to look at micro interactions; and lacking in training students with specialist skills etc. Unfortunately, however, many students simply provided alternative views from alternative theories and perspectives, without applying their answer explicitly to functionalism.

Notes from the mark scheme and report

• 2 marks for each of three criticisms clearly outlined, 1 if only partially outlined
• criticisms must be explicitly of the functionalist view, not just alternative theories
• many managed only one or two, mostly the myth of meritocracy
• better answers: deterministic, over-positive, ignores micro interactions, fails to teach specialist skills

Mark scheme

Examiner's comment

Students who recognised that the key to this question was the idea of overt observation were largely successful. The most common responses then identified the ethical advantage of gaining consent from those being observed. Many answers pointed out the advantage of being able to record information openly and not rely on memory. It is helpful for students to explain how the suggested advantage is an advantage. For example, answers that just said that one of the advantages was that overt observation allowed questions to be asked without elaborating on how or why that was an advantage were credited as partial answers. There were a number of students who identified generic advantages of observation in general. These answers failed to score any marks.

Notes from the mark scheme and report

• AO grid not printed
• 2 marks for each of two advantages clearly outlined, 1 if partial
• credited: avoids deception because consent can be sought, open recording is more accurate than memory, questions can check understanding, easier access
• the advantage must be specific to overt observation and explained (just 'can ask questions' = partial)
• generic advantages of observation scored nothing
• AO split from AQA's standard grid for this paper (this year's mark scheme does not print it).

Mark scheme

Examiner's comment

Many students struggled with this question. Successful answers identified the way global culture can give individuals more choice to create hybrid identities. Other popular responses included the idea that global culture may strengthen local sense of identity as resistance to the perceived threat of global culture. However, a lot of answers just outlined examples of global culture without relating them to the idea of an individual’s sense of identity.

Notes from the mark scheme and report

• AO grid not printed
• 2 marks for each of three ways clearly outlined
• credited: hybrid identities through choice, local resistance to global culture, shared global identity, local cultures overwhelmed
• many just gave examples of global culture with no link to the individual's identity
• AO split from AQA's standard grid for this paper (this year's mark scheme does not print it).

Mark scheme

Examiner's comment

Some answers confused one-person households with lone parent households and therefore struggled to make appropriate points. Many students successfully identified and outlined three reasons for the increase in one-person households. The most common responses mentioned were an increase in the divorce rate, the decline of stigma in living alone, and women’s greater on focus on education and career. Partial answers failed to identify any change affecting the increase in one-person households or alternatively were sometimes unclear about the link to the increase to one-person households.

Notes from the mark scheme and report

• AO grid not printed
• 2 marks for each of three reasons clearly outlined
• credited: divorce, ageing population and widowhood, living apart together, less stigma, affluence, women's careers
• some confused one-person with lone-parent households
• reason must be linked to the increase
• AO split from AQA's standard grid for this paper (this year's mark scheme does not print it).

Mark scheme

Examiner's comment

Almost all students were able to suggest appropriate reasons for gender differences in patterns of mental illness. Most answers made reference to the effect of women’s roles in society, labelling by the medical profession, differences in willingness to seek medical help and gender role socialisation.

Notes from the mark scheme and report

• AO grid not printed
• 2 marks for each of three reasons clearly outlined
• common answers: women's roles and burdens, labelling and sexism by doctors, willingness to seek help, gender socialisation
• generally well answered
• AO split from AQA's standard grid for this paper (this year's mark scheme does not print it).

Mark scheme

Examiner's comment

Many students struggled with this question. Answers were often vague about government policies and how these policies might reduce the gap between rich and poor. For example, some answers referred to ‘the tax system’ without really explain how such a policy might work. Better answers were able to be specific about a policy. For example, making the income tax system more progressive, or targeting the wealth of the rich through a wealth tax.

Notes from the mark scheme and report

• AO grid not printed
• 2 marks for each of three ways clearly outlined
• policy must be specific and its effect on the gap explained, e.g. progressive income tax, wealth tax, minimum wage, benefits in cash or kind
• vague references to 'the tax system' = partial
• AO split from AQA's standard grid for this paper (this year's mark scheme does not print it).

Mark scheme

Examiner's comment

A significant number of students wrote too much for the 4-mark and 6-mark questions, although fewer than in the two previous years. Centres are reminded that these small-mark questions are best answered with a clear ‘point’ and ‘development’ structure, rather than lengthy continuous prose. Most students could identify at least one criticism of selecting by ability and were able to explain their criticism adequately to get the additional mark. Common responses made reference to disadvantaging different social groups, the late developer, lowering student self-esteem and the problems of measuring and defining intelligence. A number of responses also focused on how schools selected externally using an entrance exam or internally, by way of setting and streaming. However, this question did create problems for some students. Less effective responses failed to focus on the ‘by ability’ element in the question and discussed schools selecting higher performing pupils by choice, rather than by testing ability. A significant number of responses failed to score any marks because they either did not identify a specific group that might be disadvantaged or instead outlined characteristics of the selection process, rather than a critiquing them. A number of students failed to gain a second mark by either not giving an adequate explanation of the criticism or by repeating their first explanation.

Notes from the mark scheme and report

• 2 marks for each of two criticisms clearly outlined, 1 if partial
• credited: late developers, middle-class coaching advantage, difficulty measuring ability, lower self-esteem and stigma, culturally biased tests
• must focus on selection by ability, not schools choosing pupils in general
• saying a group is disadvantaged without naming it, or describing the process rather than criticising it, scored nothing

Mark scheme

Examiner's comment

A significant number of students wrote too much for the 4-mark and 6-mark questions, although fewer than in the two previous years. Centres are reminded that these small-mark questions are best answered with a clear ‘point’ and ‘development’ structure, rather than lengthy continuous prose. The question produced a wide range of answers, with most students able to identify and explain at least two reasons. This question had the highest mean mark (79%), as a percentage of maximum mark. Common successful responses gave the examples of hierarchy, dress codes, attendance and punctuality, rewards and punishments and fragmentation of tasks. Students who wrote about the functions of schools from a theoretical perspective, without referring to a characteristic, were less successful. Many students were not awarded a second mark because they failed to give an example of how the characteristics of the school were mirrored in the workplace.

Notes from the mark scheme and report

• 2 marks for each of three ways clearly outlined
• each characteristic must be shown in both school and workplace for the second mark
• credited: hierarchy, fragmentation, extrinsic rewards, competition, alienation, punctuality and dress codes
• theoretical accounts of school functions without naming a characteristic did less well
• highest-scoring question on the paper

Mark scheme

Examiner's comment

This was generally well answered. Most students were able to identify two appropriate reasons why deviant subcultures exist, the most common being as some form of response to: blocked opportunities, status frustration or inability to achieve a society’s mainstream goals. A few students cited labelling, marginalisation or a criminal environment as their reasons. Some considered the role of gang subcultures in offering boys the male role models that their lone parent families may have failed to provide. However, a number of answers gave minimal explanation of either of their chosen reasons and others presented essentially the same reason twice, usually variants of blocked opportunities.

Notes from the mark scheme and report

• AO grid not printed in the mark scheme
• 2 marks for each of two reasons clearly outlined, 1 if partial
• creditable reasons include blocked opportunities, status frustration, labelling, streaming, lower-class focal concerns (Miller)
• generally well answered
• marks lost for giving the same reason twice (usually variants of blocked opportunities) or minimal explanation
• AO split from AQA's standard grid for this paper (this year's mark scheme does not print it).

Mark scheme

Examiner's comment

This question was also generally well done, with most students able to score four marks and many gaining all six. The reasons most frequently outlined were: lack of confidence or trust in the police's ability or their willingness to help, fear of retribution from the offender, the crime being too trivial to report, shame or embarrassment about being a victim, being unaware that one had been victimised, and unwillingness to go through the ordeal of giving evidence and re-living the experience. Domestic abuse or sexual assault and rape were often used to illustrate some of the reasons offered. Failure to gain full marks was generally due either to repetition of essentially the same reason, or to failure to explain the suggested reason clearly. Some students wrote unnecessarily long answers for this six-mark question for which they could not be credited.

Notes from the mark scheme and report

• AO grid not printed
• 2 marks for each of three reasons clearly outlined, 1 if partial
• common answers: lack of confidence in police, fear of retribution, crime too trivial, shame, unaware of being victimised, protecting the offender, victim precipitation
• marks lost for repeating essentially the same reason
• overlong answers gain nothing extra
• AO split from AQA's standard grid for this paper (this year's mark scheme does not print it).

Mark scheme

Examiner's comment

Students were able to offer a wide range of ways that the education system could be seen as fair to everyone. The most common responses referenced compensatory policies such as GIST/WISE, Sure Start and Free school meals. Other popular responses included ‘free education for all’, ‘taking the same exams’ and ‘following the same (National) curriculum’. Successful answers were then able to develop and qualify how this could be seen as fair for everyone. The most common error was to simply state that ‘students are able to work hard and achieve’ or to meritocracy more generally, without qualifying how this meant that the education system was fair to everyone.

Notes from the mark scheme and report

• 2 marks for each of three examples clearly outlined, 1 if partial
• common answers: free education for all, same exams and National Curriculum, compensatory policies such as GIST/WISE, Sure Start, free school meals
• saying pupils can simply work hard and achieve, or meritocracy in general, was not credited unless qualified

Mark scheme

Examiner's comment

Students who recognised that the key to this question was the idea of closed questions were largely successful. The most common responses then explored the lack of depth or the restricted answers that closed questions generate. Failure to elaborate was a factor in not getting the full marks. For example, answers that just said that one of the problems was that closed questions tended to produce quantitative data without elaborating on how or why that was a problem were credited as partial answers. There were a number of students who identified generic problems with questionnaires or of research in general and did not gain marks.

Notes from the mark scheme and report

• 2 marks for each of two problems clearly outlined, 1 if partially outlined
• credited: lack of depth (no reasons or meanings), imposition of the researcher's framework, restricted answers the researcher did not anticipate, tick-box format discourages considered replies
• problems must be specific to closed questions, generic questionnaire or research problems gained nothing
• saying it gives quantitative data without explaining why that is a problem = partial
• 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 made reference to characteristics such as, authentic, traditional and rooted in the experiences of ordinary people. Most of these answers were able elaborate on these to gain the additional mark. For example, folk culture is an authentic culture as opposed to culture manufactured by commercial organisations. A number of students seemed unfamiliar with the concept of folk culture.

Notes from the mark scheme and report

• 2 marks per characteristic clearly outlined
• credited: traditional/pre-industrial, made by people themselves, authentic not commercial, active participation, rooted in ordinary people's experience and passed down
• many unfamiliar with the term
• mark scheme omits the +1 on the 'created by people themselves' bullet
• AO split from AQA's standard grid for this paper (this year's mark scheme does not print it).

Mark scheme

Examiner's comment

Many students successfully identified and outlined three reasons for the fall in the death rate since 1900. The most common responses mentioned were medical improvements, better access to health care, less dangerous occupations and decreased smoking rates. Weaker answers failed to outline the reason and it was sometimes unclear how the factor influenced the death rate. A number of answers suggested that a falling birth rate was a reason for a falling death rate or suggested that people were living longer so the death rate had declined.

Notes from the mark scheme and report

• credited: sanitation, health education, diet, fewer dangerous jobs, health care access, medical advances
• must say how the factor lowers deaths
• errors: falling birth rate or 'people living longer' given as causes
• AO split from AQA's standard grid for this paper (this year's mark scheme does not print it).

Mark scheme

Examiner's comment

Some students seemed unfamiliar with the concept of geographical differences in life expectancy and just outlined differences based on gender or social class or ethnicity. Other unsuccessful answers failed to discuss variations across the United Kingdom and instead drew international comparisons. Good answers tended to identify reasons such as how some areas have poorer access to health resources; how the geographical pattern reflects social class pattern across the United Kingdom; different exposure to pollution. In order to score both marks for each point students needed to outline clearly for example, what the pattern of access to health care resources is across the United Kingdom rather than just state that there is a variation.

Notes from the mark scheme and report

• reasons for regional differences within the UK: class geography, local industries, housing, pollution, access to health care
• errors: class/gender/ethnicity differences only, or international comparisons
• second mark needs the actual regional pattern
• AO split from AQA's standard grid for this paper (this year's mark scheme does not print it).

Mark scheme

Examiner's comment

Many students struggled with this question. Some answers confused voluntary groups with private commercial providers or with informal carers. Many successful answers made reference to advantages such as: they may save the taxpayer money; they can benefit the individuals involved; they may meet needs not met by other providers. Some students gave examples of services that voluntary groups may provide without outlining the underlying advantages that these groups may bring. These were credited as partial answers.

Notes from the mark scheme and report

• credited: less bureaucratic, meet unmet needs, benefit volunteers, save taxpayers' money, lobby for users
• many confused voluntary with private or informal care
• examples of services without the advantage = partial
• AO split from AQA's standard grid for this paper (this year's mark scheme does not print it).

Mark scheme

Examiner's comment

Whilst not as frequently as in the first sitting of the new specification, a significant number of students are writing too much for the 4 and 6 mark questions. Centres are reminded that these small-mark questions are best answered with a clear ‘point’ and ‘development’ structure, rather than lengthy continuous prose. Most students could identify two ways in which marketisation may create inequality of educational achievement, usually via two specific policies. Common responses made reference to marketisation polices enabling middle class parents to choose a better school (due to cultural and/or economic, capital) and higher achieving schools being able to pick middle-class students to maintain their position on the league tables. However, this question did create problems for many students. A significant number misunderstood the question by stating policies of marketisation such as league tables as the identification rather than the reason why marketisation produces inequality. Sometimes the connection to inequality of achievement was not made effectively enough to gain full marks. A few students selected policies that were not associated with marketisation, for example, the 1944 Act, or referred to private schools producing inequality of achievement between the classes.

Notes from the mark scheme and report

• 2 marks for each of two reasons clearly outlined, 1 if only partially outlined
• credited cream-skimming, silt-shifting, selection by catchment/mortgage, middle-class cultural capital in school choice
• naming a policy (e.g. league tables) is not itself a reason
• must link to class inequality of achievement
• some cited non-marketisation policies (1944 Act) or private schools

Mark scheme

Examiner's comment

Whilst not as frequently as in the first sitting of the new specification, a significant number of students are writing too much for the 4 and 6 mark questions. Centres are reminded that these small-mark questions are best answered with a clear ‘point’ and ‘development’ structure, rather than lengthy continuous prose. This question was, in the main, dealt with very effectively, with most students able to identify and explain at least two reasons. Common successful responses included laddish subcultures, the feminisation of education, coursework, changing employment opportunities for males and teacher labelling of males. Some students gave reasons that were too vague to be rewarded such as socialisation and peer group, while others focussed on gender differences in subject choice rather than achievement. Many students were not rewarded the second mark as they failed to apply their reason fully to gender or educational achievement.

Notes from the mark scheme and report

• 2 marks for each of three reasons clearly outlined, 1 if only partially outlined
• common answers: laddish subcultures, feminisation of education, coursework, changing job market, teacher labelling of boys
• vague reasons (socialisation, peer group) not credited
• subject choice is not achievement
• second mark often lost for not linking to gender and achievement

Mark scheme

Examiner's comment

Most students successfully identified two ways in which gender may influence being a victim of crime. Most answers referred to the vulnerability of women or the influence of patriarchy; many linked this with domestic abuse or sexual crimes. References to male victims usually referred to socialisation and/or to violence related to masculinity, leading to men becoming victims of the violence of other men when they became gang members or spent time in the wrong places. The main reason for failing to score marks was to write about committing crime rather than about being a victim. Some gained partial reward for identifying a particular type of crime of which men or women are likely to be victims but without going on to elaborate on this.

Notes from the mark scheme and report

• 2 marks for each of two ways clearly outlined, 1 if partial (e.g. trafficking of women, domestic violence and financial dependence, men's tough masculinity leading to assaults, transphobic violence)
• main reason for losing marks was writing about committing rather than suffering crime
• naming a crime type without elaborating = partial
• AO split from AQA's standard grid for this paper (this year's mark scheme does not print it).

Mark scheme

Examiner's comment

This question was generally answered well. The most frequently cited criticism was that labelling theory is deterministic; this was usually explained correctly. Other frequently cited criticisms included the theory’s failure to explain primary deviance, its romanticised view of deviants or its neglect of structural factors. A significant minority of answers outlined criticisms of the labelling process (for example that labelling is discriminatory or unfair), rather than of the theory. Some students tended to recycle the same criticism in different guises. A few wrote excessively long answers to this question.

Notes from the mark scheme and report

• 2 marks for each of three criticisms clearly outlined, 1 if partial (e.g. ignores primary deviance, deterministic, ignores where labels come from, ignores reintegrative shaming)
• criticisms of the labelling process (unfair, discriminatory) rather than of the theory not credited
• same criticism recycled in different guises
• over-long answers
• AO split from AQA's standard grid for this paper (this year's mark scheme does not print it).

Mark scheme

Examiner's comment

This question required students to outline ways in which schools mirror work in a capitalist society, which then needed development to show how each one is found in both school and in the work place. Many students were keen to show their knowledge of the correspondence principle and were able to identify Bowles and Gintis as authors of the study. Although this showed good knowledge, it was not explicitly necessary in this question. Popular responses referred to hierarchy, rewards, dress codes and fragmentation. A number of responses did not score an additional mark for an outline due to not identifying a specific example from school and work, with some referring to capitalist society in general. Some students missed the second point, having assumed that the mirror didn't need further, explicit development when only providing an example from either school or work. Some students gave two ways, which were too similar to both be credited, for example, the existence of a hierarchy and the requirement to show respect to superiors. Some students described functions rather than mirroring.

Notes from the mark scheme and report

• 2 marks for each of three ways clearly outlined, 1 if partial
• each way needs a parallel in both school and work (e.g. hierarchy, rewards, fragmentation, uniform, legitimation)
• naming Bowles and Gintis not required
• two ways too similar (hierarchy and respect for superiors) not both credited
• describing functions rather than mirroring missed the point

Mark scheme

Examiner's comment

The most common successful responses made references to problems such as the artificial environment not reflecting real life. Reference to the Hawthorne effect was also quite common. The most common reason not to get full marks was stating a problem without any explanation (for example ‘lacks validity’) or making references to general problems with research methods that are not specific to laboratory experiments, such as time and money.

Notes from the mark scheme and report

• 2 marks for each of two problems clearly outlined, 1 if partial
• mark scheme misprint says 'advantage' for the partial mark
• common answers: artificial setting not like real life, Hawthorne effect
• stating 'lacks validity' without explanation or giving general problems such as time and money not specific to lab experiments loses marks

Mark scheme

Examiner's comment

Additionally, some students are writing far too much on the 6 mark questions. This time could be better spent on the longer essay questions. Some answers gave numerous examples of age-related stereotyping and consequently were only credited once. More successful answers made reference to aspects of society, such as age-related legislation, work opportunities and involvement in education, as well as status and independence.

Notes from the mark scheme and report

• must be apart from leisure choices
• 2 marks for each of three ways clearly outlined
• several examples of age stereotyping were credited only once
• good answers used age-related laws, work opportunities, education, status and independence

Mark scheme

Examiner's comment

Additionally, some students are writing far too much on the 6 mark questions. This time could be better spent on the longer essay questions. This question generated a wide range of responses. Many students successfully identified three effects on society of an ageing population. Common responses were focused around increase in dependency ratio, strain on public/health services, the impact on housing or other issues, such as the increase in extended/beanpole families. Weaker responses suggested a vague idea of the issues but some students seemed to have problems articulating the precise nature of the problem as they saw it. Other weaker answers repeated dependency ratio, but in another form, or referred to public services/health twice. Some students were very confused about the effects and argued that the birth rate would increase because more old people were dying. Some answers were far too long given the amount of marks (and therefore time) available for the question.

Notes from the mark scheme and report

• 2 marks for each of three effects clearly outlined
• common answers: dependency ratio, demand on health and care services, housing, beanpole families
• repeating the same effect in another form not credited twice
• some answers far too long for the marks

Mark scheme

Examiner's comment

Additionally, some students are writing far too much on the 6 mark questions. This time could be better spent on the longer essay questions. The most common reasons suggested by students involved the effect of women‘s roles, an aspect of gender role socialisation, and more contact with medical staff. Most students were able to gain the full two marks for each of these points by explaining how they led to women being more likely than men to be treated for mental illness. A common mistake was to make points that were the reverse of each other. For example, saying that women are more likely to be socialised to discuss emotions and seek help with mental health problems, then as an separate point say that men are socialised not to open up about mental health. In these cases, this was credited as one reason rather than two separate reasons.

Notes from the mark scheme and report

• 2 marks for each of three reasons clearly outlined
• common answers: women's roles and triple shift, gender role socialisation, more contact with doctors
• a point and its reverse (women open up, men do not) credited as one reason only

Mark scheme

Examiner's comment

Additionally, some students are writing far too much on the 6 mark questions. This time could be better spent on the longer essay questions. In general, many students struggled with this question. They seemed to be unfamiliar with the idea that economically inactive did not include those who are unemployed (ie looking for work). Many answers therefore defaulted into an explanation for unemployment. Some students took this question as an opportunity to express the idea that those on benefit were lazy and undeserving of support. These answers often struggled to address the actual question. Successful answers made reference to groups such as full time carers, those who were disabled or long term sick and therefore unable to work, people who had taken early retirement and people who were in higher education.

Notes from the mark scheme and report

• 2 marks for each of three reasons clearly outlined
• economically inactive excludes the unemployed (who are seeking work), so many wrongly explained unemployment
• credited: full-time education, carers, early retirement, long-term sick or disabled

Mark scheme

Examiner's comment

However, in the 4 and 6 mark questions, some students are writing far too much, thereby losing focus on the precise wording of the question. Most students answered this question successfully and were able to identify two cultural factors. Common responses included reference to family structure, language and parental attitudes. However, a significant number of partial responses failed to specify a link to a particular ethnic group in their answers or had class-based developments. Incorrect answers included generalised discussions about cultural deprivation and cultural capital, or examples of material rather than cultural factors.

Notes from the mark scheme and report

• 2 marks for each of two cultural factors clearly outlined, 1 if only partially outlined
• common answers: family structure, language, parental attitudes
• partial answers did not link the factor to a particular ethnic group or developed it in class terms
• material factors and generalised cultural deprivation/cultural capital points not credited

Mark scheme

Examiner's comment

However, in the 4 and 6 mark questions, some students are writing far too much, thereby losing focus on the precise wording of the question. This question was, in the main, dealt with very effectively, with most students able to identify and explain at least two factors. Common successful responses included coursework, peer group pressure, textbooks containing gender stereotypes and the gender of teachers. Many of these were then able to go on and explain how it influenced their subject choice. Where marks were not awarded was often the result of overlapping factors being presented, or through making general points about gender and achievement, losing focus on subject choice. Other incorrect responses discussed external socialisation or career expectations without linking these to internal factors.

Notes from the mark scheme and report

• 2 marks for each of three in-school factors clearly outlined, 1 if only partially outlined
• common answers: peer pressure, gender of teachers, stereotyped textbooks, coursework
• overlapping factors, drift into gender and achievement, or external socialisation/career expectations not linked to school lost marks

Mark scheme

Examiner's comment

This was generally well answered. The most common responses identified racism (institutional or other), stereotyping or labelling by police or other actors in the criminal justice system, which then leads to the targeting of ethnic minorities. Other popular responses identified material deprivation, lack of parental role models, and the targeting of urban, working-class areas for policing as possible reasons. Where students failed to score full marks, this was usually due to repetition of the same point or a failure to explain the consequence of the point identified, such as the impact of racist attitudes among the police upon their behaviour in terms of targeting particular ethnic groups for arrest. A number of answers gave accounts of ethnic differences in sentencing (that is, of those already convicted), rather than of differences in conviction rates, which was not creditworthy.

Notes from the mark scheme and report

• 2 marks for each of two reasons clearly outlined, 1 if partial
• common answers: police racism, stereotyping and targeting, relative deprivation, younger age profile
• marks lost by repeating a point or not explaining its consequence
• accounts of sentencing (after conviction) not credited

Mark scheme

Examiner's comment

This question was generally well answered. The functions most commonly outlined were crime and deviance as boundary maintenance, as a source of adaption and change, as a safety valve, as a warning sign and as a source of employment. Some were able to identify ways in which crime and deviance might perform functions for capitalism, although others drifted into a ‘functions of law’ response. A few legitimately identified a function of crime as that of providing an alternative route to material success.

Notes from the mark scheme and report

• 2 marks for each of three functions clearly outlined
• credited: boundary maintenance, social change, safety valve, warning, employment, and functions for capitalism
• drifting into functions of law not credited

Mark scheme

Examiner's comment

A wide range of policies from both within and outside the education system were identified, such as GIST or WISE, the Equal Pay Act, the Sex Discrimination Act, the Divorce Law Reform Act and the introduction of coursework. Most students who identified such policies were able to explain how these may have affected girls’ achievement. However, others misunderstood the policy thrust of the question and offered examples of non-policy factors, such as the influence of feminist ideas on girls. These responses failed to score.

Notes from the mark scheme and report

• 2 marks for each of three policies clearly outlined, 1 if only partially outlined
• creditworthy policies included GIST/WISE, coursework, equal opportunities legislation, expansion of higher education
• answers giving non-policy factors (e.g. feminist ideas) scored nothing

Mark scheme

Examiner's comment

Most students could identify two ethical issues, but some were unable to develop their answer sufficiently for the second mark. Informed consent was the issue most cited, often with reference to covert observation. Harm, illegality, deceit and anonymity also often appeared. The most frequent mistakes were to discuss practical issues rather than ethical ones, such as danger for the researcher; getting permission (particularly for children); and to offer vulnerable groups as an issue, without explaining an ethical problem.

Notes from the mark scheme and report

• 2 marks for each of two ethical issues clearly outlined, 1 if partially outlined
• credited issues include deception, anonymity, informed consent, involvement in illegal activity
• informed consent most common, often linked to covert observation
• common error: practical issues (researcher danger, getting permission) instead of ethical ones
• naming vulnerable groups without an ethical problem not enough
• mark scheme omits the +1 on the informed consent bullet (misprint)

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. This question proved quite difficult. A number of students seemed unfamiliar with the term and instead discussed changing aspects of popular culture, with limited reference to the question. Successful answers identified the passive, commercial, trivial and mass produced aspects of mass culture.

Notes from the mark scheme and report

• 2 marks per characteristic clearly outlined
• credited: commercial, passive audience, mass produced, inauthentic, trivial
• many did not know the term and drifted into popular culture
• found difficult

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. On the whole this was answered well. Most students could identify reasons that potentially led to delayed childbirth, though some did not receive the second mark as they developed their response in relation to not having children at all, rather than just a delay. Typical responses identified the growth of the female labour force, increased numbers staying in education, more opportunities, and more independence as reasons. Other reasons used effectively were the need for financial stability, later marriage and longer life expectancy, the expense of parenthood, and the decline in stigma towards older mothers.

Notes from the mark scheme and report

• reasons for delay, not for remaining childless (second mark lost when developed as not having children)
• credited: career, education, contraception, later marriage, financial stability, cost of children

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. Many students took this question as an opportunity to discuss the social class/ethnic/gender biases of medical treatment without being able to relate these comments back to how these aspects of provision benefited the medical profession. Similarly, many students discussed iatrogenesis, the various practices of drug companies or the inverse care law, but failed to explain how these benefited the medical profession. More successful responses identified ways such as: recommending treatment that benefited the medical profession financially; the ability of the medical profession to restrict access to the profession, so again benefiting financially; the medicalisation of social problems that has led to increased power and status in society for the medical profession.

Notes from the mark scheme and report

• must show the benefit to the medical profession
• credited: high rewards via monopoly, medicalisation increasing power, covering up iatrogenesis, unnecessary treatment
• many discussed class/ethnic/gender bias, drug companies or inverse care law without linking to professional self-interest

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

Mark scheme

Notes from the mark scheme and report

• specimen paper, no examiners' report
• must be material (not cultural) factors
• 2 marks for each of two factors clearly outlined, 1 if partial
• credited: overcrowding and no study space, poor nutrition and absence, cost of uniform leading to bullying, private tuition, parents' long working hours

Mark scheme

Notes from the mark scheme and report

• specimen paper, no examiners' report
• 2 marks for each of three reasons clearly outlined
• credited: hard to change home socialisation, education alone cannot overcome poverty, stigma lowering uptake of means-tested help, poor implementation or misuse of funds (Pupil Premium), middle-class take-up (assisted places scheme)

Mark scheme

Notes from the mark scheme and report

• specimen paper, no examiners' report
• 2 marks for each of two ways clearly outlined, 1 if partial
• creditable: over-representing violent and sexual crime, exaggerating police success, romanticising criminals, moral panics, exaggerating risk of victimisation

Mark scheme

Notes from the mark scheme and report

• 2 marks for each of three reasons clearly outlined, 1 if partial
• creditable: social control of women, gender socialisation, caring and nurturing roles, less involvement in delinquent subcultures