Two marks for a satisfactory explanation or definition of ‘material deprivation’, such as
poverty, a lack of necessities or similar.
One mark for a partially satisfactory answer, such as an example only, or for a
definition or explanation of only one of the two words, e.g. ‘a lack of materials’.
"Explain what is meant by
the term ‘objectivity’."
Nota:
Two marks for a satisfactory explanation or definition of ‘objectivity’, such as absence
of bias or prejudice, being detached/neutral, keeping personal values or opinions out
of research, or similar.
One mark for a partially satisfactory answer, e.g. the truth/facts
6 mark questions
"Identify three government policies that
may have reduced social class
differences in educational achievement."
Nota:
Two marks for each of three appropriate policies identified, such as:
• Sure Start
• Operation Headstart
• comprehensive schooling
• expansion of higher education
• the tripartite system/eleven-plus
• raising of the school leaving age
• Education Maintenance Allowance
• maintenance/fees grants for higher education
• lotteries to allocate pupils to secondary schools
• vocational education.
One mark for each of three partially appropriate answers, such as equal
opportunities.
comprehensivisation
free school meals
Forster act
Butler act
bursaries/financial support
higher school leaving age
12 mark questions
"Outline some of the reasons why
pupils form subcultures in schools."
Nota:
1-4 Answers in this band will show only limited knowledge and understanding, and
will show limited interpretation, application, analysis or evaluation.
Lower in the band, there may be one or two insubstantial points about
education in general and answers are likely to lack focus on the question set.
Higher in the band, answers will present one or two insubstantial points about
pupil subcultures. Alternatively, more substantial accounts of education, at a
tangent to the question, may be offered.
5-9 Answers in this band will show reasonable knowledge and understanding, and
will show limited interpretation, application, analysis and evaluation.
Lower in the band, material on one or more reasons why pupils form
subcultures in schools will be presented and some limited description will be
offered. Some reasonable knowledge and understanding will be shown,
though analysis and evaluation will be very limited or non-existent. Some
material may be less well focused, for example on various causes of underachievement.
Higher in the band, material on two or more reasons why pupils form
subcultures in schools will be presented and some explanation offered. Some
reasonable knowledge and understanding will be shown, and interpretation
and application will begin to meet the demands of the question. Students may
begin to offer some analysis and/or evaluation.
10-12 Answers in this band will show sound, conceptually informed knowledge and
understanding of sociological material on two or more reasons why pupils form
subcultures in schools. This will be accurately and sensitively interpreted and
applied to the demands of the question. Students will show the ability to
organise material and to analyse and/or evaluate it explicitly so as to produce a
coherent and relevant answer.
Concepts and issues such as the following may appear: labelling; streaming;
selection; self-concept; self-fulfilling prophecy; polarisation; differentiation;
alternative status hierarchies; typologies of subcultures, e.g. pro- and
anti-school; laddism; ladettes; the myth of meritocracy; ideology; hegemony;
resistance; shopfloor culture; educational policies; sexual, gender, ethnic and
class identities.
Lower in the band, answers may outline a more limited range of material.
Higher in the band, answers may be more detailed and complete, and/or may
show a clear rationale in the organisation of material leading to a suitable and
distinct conclusion.
Sources may include: Ball; Francis; Fuller; Furlong; Hargreaves; Lacey; Mac an Ghaill;
Sewell; Willis; Woods.
teacher labelling
ethnic groups
gender and sexuality
social class
20 mark questions
"Using material from Item A and
elsewhere, assess sociological
explanations of gender differences in
achievement and in subject choice."
Nota:
1-7 marks: Answers in this band will show very limited interpretation, application, analysis
or evaluation and will show only limited knowledge and understanding.
Lower in the band, there may be one or two very insubstantial points about
education in general, or material ineffectually recycled from the Item, with little
understanding of relevant issues.
Higher in the band, answers will show limited, undeveloped sociological
knowledge, for example two or three insubstantial points about differences in
subject choice. Interpretation of material may be simplistic or at a tangent to the
question, eg drifting into a ‘class and achievement’ answer.
8-15 Answers in this band will show some reasonable interpretation, application,
analysis and/or evaluation and will show reasonable knowledge and
understanding.
Lower in the band, some potentially relevant material will be presented and a
broadly accurate, if basic, account offered, for example of one or two reasons
for girls achieving more than boys, though interpretation and application to the
demands of the question may remain implicit.
Higher in the band, knowledge and understanding of material will be broader
and/or deeper. The answer will begin to deal explicitly with both achievement
and subject choice and may make limited use of the Item, for example to
discuss relevant educational policies. Material will be accurately interpreted,
but its relevance may not always be made explicit. There will be some limited
analysis and/or evaluation, for example of the role of internal as against
external factors in achievement.
16-20 In this band, analysis and evaluation will be explicit and relevant, and answers
will show sound, conceptually detailed knowledge and understanding of
sociological material on gender differences in both achievement and subject
choice, drawn from the Item and elsewhere. This will be accurately and
sensitively interpreted and applied to the demands of the question. Students
will deal with both boys and girls but not necessarily to the same extent.
Concepts and issues such as the following may appear: equal opportunities
policies; subject-choice policy initiatives (GIST, WISE, mentoring); gender
routes; single-sex schooling; feminisation of education; role models in school
and at home; changes in family structure; legislation; labour market
changes/career opportunities; girls’ changing priorities; de-industrialisation;
crisis of masculinity; ‘laddism’; absentee fathers; curriculum changes;
coursework; early socialisation; gender regimes; teacher attention; peer
pressure; stereotyping; sexual harassment; patriarchy; meritocracy; liberal
feminism.
Analysis and evaluation may be developed, for example through a debate
between perspectives (eg New Right, postmodernism, feminism) or different
varieties of feminism, or through consideration of the impact of class or
ethnicity on gender differences in achievement.
Lower in the band, interpretation and application may be less selective, and
analysis and evaluation less developed and more list-like.
Higher in the band, interpretation and application will be more focused,
analysis and evaluation more thorough, and answers may show a clear
rationale in the organisation of material leading to a distinct conclusion.
Item A
Nota:
Item A
The educational achievements of both boys and girls have improved since the 1980s,
but girls’ results have improved more rapidly. They have overtaken boys in Key Stage
tests, at GCSE and at A level. Girls are also more likely than boys to go to university.
However, gender differences in subject choice remain relatively unchanged in both
academic and vocational courses.
Sociologists argue that these patterns of achievement and of subject choice are the
result of factors both within the education system and in wider society
equal opportunities
policies
introduction
of GCSE's
impact of feminism
career diversity
female role models at
home and in school
"Using material from Item B and elsewhere,
assess the strengths and limitations of using one
of the following methods for investigating social
class differences in university entrance: EITHER
group interviews OR postal questionnaires."
Nota:
1-7 Answers in this band will show only very limited or no interpretation,
application, analysis and evaluation and will show only limited knowledge and
understanding.
Lower in the band, there may be one or two very insubstantial points about
methods in general or some material ineffectually recycled from the Item, or
some knowledge relating solely to the issue of social class differences in
university entrance, with very little or no reference to the selected method.
Higher in the band, answers will show limited, undeveloped sociological
knowledge, for example, in the form of two or three insubstantial points about
the selected method. Analysis and evaluation will be very limited or
non-existent.
8-15 Answers in this band will show some reasonable interpretation, application,
analysis and/or evaluation and will show reasonable knowledge and
understanding.
Lower in the band, answers will present some potentially relevant material,
including a broadly accurate (though probably list-like) account of some of the
strengths and/or limitations of the selected method. However, application to
the study of education or to the issue in the question will be very limited or
non-existent.
Higher in the band, there will be broader and/or deeper knowledge of the
strengths and limitations of the selected method and somewhat more
successful application of this knowledge. However, while material will be
interpreted accurately, some or all of it will be applied in a more generalised
way or a more restricted way; for example:
• applying the method to the study of education in general, not to the
specifics of studying social class differences in university entrance, or
• specific but undeveloped application to social class differences in
university entrance, or
• a focus on the research characteristics of social class differences in
university entrance, or groups/context etc involved in it, with implicit links
to some features of the selected method.
There will be some limited explicit analysis and/or evaluation.
16-20 In this band, interpretation, application, analysis and evaluation will be explicit
and relevant. Answers will show sound, conceptually detailed knowledge and
understanding of the strengths and limitations of the selected method. This will
be accurately and sensitively interpreted and applied to the demands of the
question.
Lower in the band, answers may consider a more limited range of material or
may occasionally lack focus or structure and evaluation may be less
developed.
Higher in the band, interpretation and application will be more fully focused
and evaluation more thorough, and answers may show a clear rationale in the
organisation of material leading to a distinct conclusion.
Students will apply a range of relevant strengths and limitations of using the
selected method to research issues and characteristics relating to social class
differences in university entrance. These may include some of the following
and/or other relevant concerns, though answers do not need to include all of
these, even for full marks:
• The research characteristics of potential research subjects, e.g. pupils,
parents, teachers, HE admissions tutors, careers service (eg class
differences; parental educational level; stereotypes of class and of HE held
by research subjects).
• The research contexts and settings (e.g. classrooms; pupils’ homes;
universities).
• The sensitivity of researching social class differences in university
entrance (e.g. policy and resource implications for government, HE and
schools; political debates about equity; schools’ public image/market
position; parental consent).
Group interviews
Strengths and limitations, as applied to the particular issue in education, may include:
cost, time, access, validity, lack of reliability, unrepresentativeness, insight, verstehen,
group dynamics, qualitative data, lack of anonymity, psychological harm, informed
consent.
Postal questionnaires
Strengths and limitations, as applied to the particular issue in education, may include:
time, cost, access, informed consent, anonymity, quantitative data, reliability,
representativeness, generalisation, hypothesis testing, inflexibility, large scale, lack of
validity, low response rate.
Note: In any mark band, students will be rewarded for making relevant reference to
their own research experiences or to sociological studies using the selected
method, when such material is applied appropriately to the set question.
Item B
Nota:
Item B
Investigating social class differences in university entrance
Working-class students are less likely than middle-class students to go to university,
especially higher-status universities such as Oxford and Cambridge. This could
be because working-class students underachieve due to material factors. Cultural
factors, such as a lack of role models or feeling that university is ‘not for the likes of
us’, may also play a part. Fees policies, as well as bias in some universities, may also
affect students’ aspirations.
Some sociologists may use group interviews to study social class differences in
university entrance. For example, a trained sociologist can probe effectively to obtain
important insights into students’ motives and aspirations for the future. However,
status differences between the interviewer and interviewees may cause problems.
Furthermore, peer pressure to conform to group norms may distort the results of the
interview.
Other sociologists may use postal questionnaires to study social class differences
in university entrance. For example, postal questionnaires can be used to gather
straightforward factual data on income, qualifications and university choice, etc.
However, the researcher does not know who actually completed the questionnaire.
Furthermore, those with more interest in the subject of the questionnaire, or with
stronger views about it, are more likely to respond.
Paul Willis
"Examine the problems that
sociologists may face when
using covert participant
observation and covert
non-participant observation in
their research."
Nota:
1-7 Answers in this band will show only limited knowledge and understanding and
will show very limited interpretation, application, analysis or evaluation.
Lower in the band, there may be one or two very insubstantial points about
research in general.
Higher in the band, answers will show limited, undeveloped sociological
knowledge, for example two or three weak descriptive points about observation
in general. Interpretation and application of material may be simplistic or at a
tangent to the question. Analysis and/or evaluation will be very limited or
non-existent.
1-7 Answers in this band will show only limited knowledge and understanding and
will show very limited interpretation, application, analysis or evaluation.
Lower in the band, there may be one or two very insubstantial points about
research in general.
Higher in the band, answers will show limited, undeveloped sociological
knowledge, for example two or three weak descriptive points about observation
in general. Interpretation and application of material may be simplistic or at a
tangent to the question. Analysis and/or evaluation will be very limited or
non-existent.
16-20 Answers in this band will display sound, conceptually detailed knowledge and
understanding of sociological material relating to the problems of both covert
participant observation and covert non-participant observation in sociological
research. This will be accurately and sensitively interpreted and applied to the
demands of the question. Answers will consider a range of problems of using
these two covert observational methods. Answers will be more balanced in
their coverage of practical, ethical and theoretical concerns. Students will
show the ability to organise material and analyse and/or evaluate it explicitly so
as to produce a coherent and relevant answer. Evaluation will be closely
related to the problems identified in the answer, or may consider the
inter-relationship between practical, ethical and theoretical concerns.
Concepts and issues such as the following may appear: methodological
preference; reliability; validity; representativeness/generalisation; quantitative
and qualitative data; cost; time; informed consent/deception; danger; illegality;
access/getting in, staying in/‘going native’ and getting out; grounded
theory/hypothesis formation; data analysis; publication of findings; utility in
relation to different research contexts and issues.
Lower in the band, answers may examine a more limited range of material.
Higher in the band, answers may be more detailed and complete, and/or may
show a clear rationale in the organisation of material leading to a distinct conclusion
Laud Humphreys:
'tearoom trade'
Maurice Punch: 'Policing
in the Inner City'
"Examine the problems that
sociologists may face when using
covert participant observation and
covert non-participant observation
in their research."
Nota:
1-7 Answers in this band will show only limited knowledge and understanding and
will show very limited interpretation, application, analysis or evaluation.
Lower in the band, there may be one or two very insubstantial points about
research in general.
Higher in the band, answers will show limited, undeveloped sociological
knowledge, for example two or three weak descriptive points about observation
in general. Interpretation and application of material may be simplistic or at a
tangent to the question. Analysis and/or evaluation will be very limited or
non-existent.
1-7 Answers in this band will show only limited knowledge and understanding and
will show very limited interpretation, application, analysis or evaluation.
Lower in the band, there may be one or two very insubstantial points about
research in general.
Higher in the band, answers will show limited, undeveloped sociological
knowledge, for example two or three weak descriptive points about observation
in general. Interpretation and application of material may be simplistic or at a
tangent to the question. Analysis and/or evaluation will be very limited or
non-existent.
16-20 Answers in this band will display sound, conceptually detailed knowledge and
understanding of sociological material relating to the problems of both covert
participant observation and covert non-participant observation in sociological
research. This will be accurately and sensitively interpreted and applied to the
demands of the question. Answers will consider a range of problems of using
these two covert observational methods. Answers will be more balanced in
their coverage of practical, ethical and theoretical concerns. Students will
show the ability to organise material and analyse and/or evaluate it explicitly so
as to produce a coherent and relevant answer. Evaluation will be closely
related to the problems identified in the answer, or may consider the
inter-relationship between practical, ethical and theoretical concerns.
Concepts and issues such as the following may appear: methodological
preference; reliability; validity; representativeness/generalisation; quantitative
and qualitative data; cost; time; informed consent/deception; danger; illegality;
access/getting in, staying in/‘going native’ and getting out; grounded
theory/hypothesis formation; data analysis; publication of findings; utility in
relation to different research contexts and issues.
Lower in the band, answers may examine a more limited range of material.
Higher in the band, answers may be more detailed and complete, and/or may
show a clear rationale in the organisation of material leading to a distinct conclusion
"Suggest two disadvantages
of longitudinal studies in
sociological research"
Nota:
Two marks for each of two appropriate disadvantages suggested, such as:
• sample attrition
• problems processing the large amounts of data produced
• costly to run
• risk of Hawthorne/experimenter effect
• demographic changes in the research population.
One mark for each of two partially appropriate answers, e.g. funding
time consuming
costly
tracking participants
large amounts of data
to process
"Suggest two advantages of
using structured interviews in
sociological research"
Nota:
Two marks for each of two appropriate advantages suggested, such as:
• cheap
• quick
• training of interviewers is straightforward
• can cover large samples
• can produce easily quantified data
• can produce reliable data/research is easily repeated by others
• can produce high response rate
• useful for gathering basic/factual data
• answers of interviewees can be compared.
One mark for each of two partially appropriate answers, e.g. everyone is asked the
same questions.