Section A: Education with Research Methods

Annotations:

• 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’.

Annotations:

• 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

Annotations:

• 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.

1. comprehensivisation
2. free school meals
3. Forster act
4. Butler act
5. bursaries/financial support
6. higher school leaving age

Annotations:

• 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.

1. teacher labelling
2. ethnic groups
3. gender and sexuality
4. social class

Annotations:

• 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.

1. Item A

   Annotations:

   • 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
2. equal opportunities policies
3. introduction of GCSE's
4. impact of feminism
5. career diversity
6. female role models at home and in school

Annotations:

• 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.

1. Item B

   Annotations:

   • 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.
2. Paul Willis

Annotations:

• 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

1. Laud Humphreys: 'tearoom trade'
2. Maurice Punch: 'Policing in the Inner City'

Annotations:

• 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

Attachments:

• Research Methods

1. practical (TRAMP)
2. ethical (DRIP)

Annotations:

• 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

1. time consuming
2. costly
3. tracking participants
4. large amounts of data to process

Annotations:

• 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.

1. preferred by interpretivists
2. easy to process
3. requires less skilled researcher/interviewer
4. repeatable