ADVANCED SUBSIDIARY (AS) General Certificate of Education Government and Politics Assessment Unit AS 2 assessing The British Political Process [SGP21] Assessment MARK SCHEME 12431.01 General Marking Instructions In

ADVANCED SUBSIDIARY (AS) General Certificate of Education Government and Politics Assessment Unit AS 2 assessing The British Political Process [SGP21] Assessment MARK SCHEME 12431.01 General Marking Instructions Introduction The main purpose of the mark scheme is to ensure that papers are marked accurately, consistently and fairly. The mark scheme provides teachers with an indication of the nature and range of students’ responses likely to be worthy of credit. It also sets out the criteria which they should apply in allocating marks to students’ responses. Assessment objectives Below are the assessment objectives for GCE Government and Politics. Students should be able to: AO1 Demonstrate knowledge and understanding of political institutions, processes, concepts, theories and debates. AO2 Analyse and evaluate political information, arguments and theories; identify parallels, connections, similarities and differences between the political systems studied. AO3 Construct and communicate coherent arguments making use of a range of appropriate political vocabulary. Not all AOs are assessed in every question. In shorter, factual recall questions only AO1 may be assessed. In longer extended writing responses all three AOs may be assessed. Quality of students’ responses In marking the examination papers, teachers should be looking for a quality of response reflecting the level of maturity which may reasonably be expected of a 17 or 18-year-old which is the age at which the majority of students sit their GCE examinations. Flexibility in marking Mark schemes are not intended to be totally prescriptive. No mark scheme can cover all the responses which students may produce. In the event of unanticipated answers, teachers are expected to use their professional judgement to assess the validity of answers. Positive marking Teachers are encouraged to be positive in their marking, giving appropriate credit for what students know, understand and can do rather than penalising students for errors or omissions. Teachers should make use of the whole of the available mark range for any particular question and be prepared to award full marks for a response which is as good as might reasonably be expected of a 17 or 18-year-old GCE student. Awarding zero marks Marks should only be awarded for valid responses and no marks should be awarded for an answer which is completely incorrect or inappropriate. Examples and evidence In a subject such as Government and Politics, the use of relevant examples and evidence is crucial. However, the amount of evidence/examples required depends upon the nature of the question. • shorter, factual recall questions may require no evidence/examples at all. • other short questions may require an example is given but not developed. • some source-based questions may identify an example and the task for students is to identify and then explain this example (and usually provide another). • extended essay responses require a range of examples/evidence. However, this should not be simply listed but the relevance of the material to the topic under discussion should be explained. There is no required number of examples for a response to achieve the top mark band: a response with four developed and applied pieces of evidence is superior to one with ten listed examples. • Further specific guidance is provided in the detailed Mark Scheme that follows. Sources of evidence and examples Evidence and examples can be drawn from political systems referred to in the specification. However, students are free to also draw upon evidence from systems not explicitly mentioned in the specification. For example, North Korea, Brazil, Myanmar. Accurate and relervant knowledge and understanding from all political systems is acceptable. Direct quotation, while acceptable, is not required in responses. Types of mark schemes Mark schemes for tasks or questions which require students to respond in extended written form are marked on the basis of levels of response which take account of the quality of written communication. Other questions which require only short answers are marked on a point for point basis with marks awarded for each valid piece of information provided. Levels of response In deciding which level of response to award, teachers should look for the ‘best fit’ bearing in mind that weakness in one area may be compensated for by strength in another. In deciding which mark within a particular level to award to any response, teachers are expected to use their professional judgement. The following guidance is provided to assist teachers. • Threshold performance: Response which just merits inclusion in the level and should be awarded a mark at or near the bottom of the range. • Intermediate performance: Response which clearly merits inclusion in the level and should be awarded a mark at or near the middle of the range. • High performance: Response which fully satisfies the level description and should be awarded a mark at or near the top of the range. Quality of written communication Quality of written communication is taken into account in assessing students’ responses to all tasks and questions that require them to respond in extended written form. These tasks and questions are marked on the basis of levels of response. The description for each level of response includes reference to the quality of written communication. For conciseness, quality of written communication is distinguished within levels of response as follows: Level 1: Quality of written communication is inadequate. Level 2: Quality of written communication is limited. Level 3: Quality of written communication is satisfactory. Level 4: Quality of written communication is good. Level 5: Quality of written communication is of a high standard. In interpreting these level descriptions, teachers should refer to the more detailed guidance provided below: Level 1 (Inadequate): The student makes only a very limited selection and use of an appropriate form and style of writing. The organisation of material may lack any clarity and coherence. There is very little use of specialist vocabulary. Presentation, spelling, punctuation and grammar may be such that intended meaning is consistently unclear. Level 2 (Limited): The student makes only a limited selection and use of an appropriate form and style of writing. The organisation of material may lack clarity and coherence. There is little use of specialist vocabulary. Presentation, spelling, punctuation and grammar may be such that intended meaning is not clear in places. Level 3 (Satisfactory): The student makes a reasonable selection and use of an appropriate form and style of writing. Relevant material is organised with some clarity and coherence. There is some use of appropriate specialist vocabulary. Presentation, spelling, punctuation and grammar are sufficiently competent to make meaning clear. Level 4 (Good): The student makes a good selection and use of an appropriate form and style of writing. Relevant material is organised with a good standard of clarity and coherence. There is good use of appropriate specialist vocabulary. Presentation, spelling, punctuation and grammar are of a sufficiently good standard to make meaning clear. Level 5 (High Standard): The student successfully selects and uses the most appropriate form and style of writing. Relevant material is organised with a high degree of clarity and coherence. There is widespread and accurate use of appropriate specialist vocabulary. Presentation, spelling, punctuation and grammar are of a sufficiently high standard to make meaning clear. Government and Politics is one of many subjects in which it is possible to confuse a well-presented response with one that actually contains relevant knowledge and understanding. It is imperative when assessing responses that relevant knowledge and understanding are appropriately rewarded even if the presentation is not of as high a standard as may be the case with other student’s work. It is also important to note that the level descriptors for QWC state that spelling, punctuation and grammar are relevant in so far as they affect the meaning of a student’s response. Some failings in spelling, punctuation and grammar should not prevent a response that contains clearly relevant material from being properly rewarded. Section A: The UK Parliament and Executive 1 Two marks for each debate identified. Debates in the Commons include those on the First, Second and Third Readings, Adjournment Debates, Budget Debates, Emergency Debates. Terms such as ‘Parliamentary Debates’ or ‘Commons Debates’ are not acceptable. Any other relevant type of debate. (AO1: 4 marks) [4] 2 Background MPs can perform their scrutiny role in a wide variety of ways including asking questions of ministers, participating in both Select and Public Bill Committees, participating in debates, producing research findings, criticising policies through the media, using social media platforms, asking questions during Question Time. Any other relevant form of scrutiny. Level 1 ([1]) The student identifies a valid way with little or no development. Level 2 ([2]–[3]) The student offers a limited explanation of a valid way. There will be some supporting evidence. Level 3 ([4]–[5]) The student provides a full explanation of a valid way. Relevant evidence will support the response. Apply criteria for other relevant strength. (AO1: 2  5 marks) Any other valid material will be rewarded appropriately. (AO1: 10 marks) [10] 3 (a) Background It would, until the election of the Johnson government, appear ridiculous to argue that Prime Ministers dominate their cabinets. His immediate predecessors as PM have been obviously weak and lacking in control. However, students should take a longer perspective and be able to explain the argument of PM dominance and explain the reasons why this was, until recently, frequently advanced. It is anticipated that students will refer to the powers of the PM, including patronage powers, control over the frequency and agenda of Cabinet meetings, the ability to pre-cook policy in Cabinet Committees, the support of the PM’s Office and ready access to the media. These should be explained even if an answer then goes on to argue that they have all failed to rescue recent PMs. For balance, an answer could explain the reasons why Cabinet Government is still in operation, especially the significance of the size of a government’s majority. The personality of the PM is only one of a range of factors determining the PM’s ability to control cabinet. Weaker answers will be limited in terms of argument and especially evidence and will lack balance. Stronger answers will display understanding of the issues, be able to support this with evidence and be balanced in coverage of both sides of the debate. If an answer contains no evidence/examples, a maximum of Level 3 can be awarded. If an answer is totally unbalanced, a maximum of Level 4 can be awarded. Level 1 ([1]–[6]) Responses at this level are characterised by brevity, often being not more than a few paragraphs long and contain little or no relevant material. The student demonstrates little knowledge and understanding of the debate over whether Cabinet Government still exists and makes little attempt to answer the question. The answer is ill-informed and/or has a high degree of irrelevant material and/or makes general statements and/or has no evidence. There is little analysis and evaluation of information, arguments and explanations. The quality of spelling, punctuation and grammar is poor. An argument, if present, is ill-informed and poorly constructed and the level of communication and the use of political vocabulary are both rudimentary. Level 2 ([7]–[11]) Responses at this level are characterised by a mix of broad sweeping statements only some of which are relevant to the question and all are under explained and imprecise. The student demonstrates basic knowledge and understanding of the debate over whether Cabinet Government still exists but there are major gaps in this knowledge and understanding and only a limited attempt is made to answer the question. The response contains some relevant material but also significant irrelevant or general material. General material is content that may be related to the topic under discussion but is not directly relevant. There is some basic analysis and evaluation of political information, arguments and explanations but this lacks depth. The quality of spelling, punctuation and grammar is limited. An argument is constructed although the level of communication and the structure and presentation of ideas are both basic. There is restricted use of appropriate political vocabulary. Level 3 ([12]–[16]) Responses at this level are characterised by a number of accurate and relevant points which are either under explained, have no supporting evidence, are limited in range or are entirely one-sided. The student demonstrates mostly accurate knowledge and understanding of the debate over whether Cabinet Government still exists but there are some gaps in this knowledge and understanding. The response makes a reasonable attempt at answering the question and contains relevant material along with more general material. General material is content that may be related to the topic under discussion but is not directly relevant. There is some limited analysis of political information, arguments and explanations but this is of limited depth. Limited analysis is incomplete and may contain errors. The quality of spelling, punctuation and grammar is satisfactory. An argument is constructed although the level of communication, the structure and presentation of ideas and the use of appropriate political vocabulary are limited. Level 4 ([17]–[21]) Responses at this level are characterised by a degree of balance in argument, a range of relevant points which are reasonably well explained and good use of appropriate evidence. The student demonstrates full and accurate knowledge and understanding of the debate over whether Cabinet Government still exists and deploys this to answer the question. The answer contains relevant evidence and examples. There is sound analysis of political information, arguments and explanations with a degree of depth. The quality of spelling, punctuation and grammar is generally good. An argument is constructed which displays clear communication and presentation of ideas. There is appropriate use of political vocabulary and a conclusion is reached. Level 5 ([22]–[26]) Responses at this level are characterised by a focus on analysis based on a detailed explanation of a wide range of points which account for all of the main issues on both sides of the argument. There is a consistent engagement with the question throughout and the evidence used clearly illuminates the points being made. The student demonstrates comprehensive, detailed and accurate knowledge and understanding of the debate over whether Cabinet Government still exists and deploys this consistently to answer the question. A range of relevant evidence is presented. There is thorough analysis of political information, arguments and explanations with arguments and evidence being fully considered in a balanced way. Spelling, punctuation and grammar are of a consistently high standard. An argument is constructed which displays effective communication and presentation of ideas. There is consistent use of appropriate political vocabulary and a clear and logical conclusion is reached. [26] (b) Background The small number of independent MPs in any Parliament is evidence of the power of party in the UK political system. MPs are tied to party by reason of the political culture in the UK, by the mechanisms controlling elections, for reasons of career advancement, by party loyalty and by the system of party discipline. Weaker answers may only focus on discipline as a factor but stronger answers will refer to a wider range of factors. Answers should identify, explicitly or implicitly, what the roles of MPs are. Some attention should be paid in answers to how party can undermine MPs performance of their roles: the whipping of Public Bill Committees would be a suitable illustration. For balance, students may refer to how MPs can and do reject the control of their party in a variety of ways. Some supporting evidence of this should be given and, with the increase in rebellions by backbench MPs, this will probably be what most students refer to. Weaker answers will be limited in terms of understanding and will lack evidence and balance. Stronger answers will display understanding and be able to support this with a range of evidence and be balanced in coverage of the issue. If an answer contains no evidence/examples, a maximum of Level 3 can be awarded. If an answer is totally unbalanced, a maximum of Level 4 can be awarded. Level 1 ([1]–[6]) Responses at this level are characterised by brevity, often being not more than a couple of paragraphs long and contain little or no relevant material. The student demonstrates little knowledge and understanding of the extent to which MPs are controlled by their party and makes little attempt to answer the question. The answer is ill-informed and/or has a high degree of irrelevant material and/or makes general statements and/or has no evidence. There is little analysis and evaluation of information, arguments and explanations. The quality of spelling, punctuation and grammar is poor. An argument, if present, is ill-informed and poorly constructed and the level of communication and the use of political vocabulary are both rudimentary. Level 2 ([7]–[11]) Responses at this level are characterised by a mix of broad sweeping statements only some of which are relevant to the question and all are under explained and imprecise. The student demonstrates basic knowledge and understanding of the extent to which MPs are controlled by their party but there are major gaps in this knowledge and understanding and only a limited attempt is made to answer the question. The response contains some relevant material but also significant irrelevant or general material. General material is content that may be related to the topic under discussion but is not directly relevant. There is some basic analysis and evaluation of political information, arguments and explanations but lacks depth. The quality of spelling, punctuation and grammar is limited. An argument is constructed although the level of communication and the structure and presentation of ideas are both basic. There is restricted use of appropriate political vocabulary. Level 3 ([12]–[16]) Responses at this level are characterised by a number of accurate and relevant points which are either under explained, have no supporting evidence, are limited in range or are entirely one-sided. The student demonstrates mostly accurate knowledge and understanding of the extent to which MPs are controlled by their party but there are some gaps in this knowledge and understanding. The response makes a reasonable attempt at answering the question and contains relevant material along with more general material. General material is content that may be related to the topic under discussion but is not directly relevant. There is some limited analysis of political information, arguments and explanations but this is of limited depth. Limited analysis is incomplete and may contain errors. The quality of spelling, punctuation and grammar is satisfactory. An argument is constructed although the level of communication, the structure and presentation of ideas and the use of appropriate political vocabulary are limited. Level 4 ([17]–[21]) Responses at this level are characterised by a degree of balance in argument, a range of relevant points which are reasonably well explained and good use of appropriate evidence. The student demonstrates full and accurate knowledge and understanding of the extent to which MPs are controlled by their party and deploys this to answer the question. The answer contains relevant evidence and examples (AO1). There is sound analysis of political information, arguments and explanations with a degree of depth (AO2). The quality of spelling, punctuation and grammar is generally good. An argument is constructed which displays clear communication and presentation of ideas. There is appropriate use of political vocabulary and a conclusion is reached (AO3). Level 5 ([22]–[26]) Responses at this level are characterised by a focus on analysis based on a detailed explanation of a wide range of points which account for all of the main issues on both sides of the argument. There is a consistent engagement with the question throughout and the evidence used clearly illuminates the points being made. The student demonstrates comprehensive, detailed and accurate knowledge and understanding of the extent to which MPs are controlled by their party and deploys this consistently to answer the question. A range of relevant evidence is presented. There is thorough analysis of political information, arguments and explanations with arguments and evidence being fully considered in a balanced way. Spelling, punctuation and grammar are of a consistently high standard. An argument is constructed which displays effective communication and presentation of ideas. There is consistent use of appropriate political vocabulary and a clear and logical conclusion is reached. [26] Section A Section B: The Judiciary in the UK 4 Background Strengths of Judicial Inquiries include the high profile and media attention that many attract, the open nature of the evidence given, the expertise and impartiality of the Chair of the inquiry, the access enjoyed by those wanting to give evidence, the impact upon government of critical findings. Any other valid strength. Level 1 ([1]) The student identifies a valid way with little or no development. Level 2 ([2]–[3]) The student offers a limited explanation of a strength. Level 3 ([4]–[5]) The student provides a full explanation of a valid strength. Any other valid information will be rewarded appropriately. (AO1: [5] marks) [5] 5 Background It is anticipated that, in response to this question, most students will identify and explain the strengths of Judicial Review. These may include the openness of the process to individuals and organisations, the impartiality of the judiciary, the publicity often given to reviews that find against the government, the fact that a government cannot ignore the findings if policy is held to be “ultra vires”. However, answers should seek to demonstrate that Judicial Review can check the Executive and this will most likely take the form of presenting evidence of where government policy has been successfully challenged. It is not necessary that an answer should include any content that deals with the ineffectiveness of Reviews. Weaker answers will be limited in range and evidence. Stronger answers will have a broader range of strengths and evidence. Level 1 ([1]–[3]) Responses at this level are characterised by brevity, often being not more than a couple of paragraphs long and contain little or no relevant material. The student demonstrates little knowledge and understanding of the effectiveness of Judicial Review as a check on the Executive and makes little attempt to answer the question. The answer is ill-informed and/or has a high degree of irrelevant material and/or makes general statements and/or has no evidence. There is little analysis and evaluation of information, arguments and explanations. The quality of spelling, punctuation and grammar is poor. An argument, if present, is ill-informed and poorly constructed and the level of communication and the use of political vocabulary are both rudimentary. Level 2 ([4]–[6]) Responses at this level are characterised by a mix of broad sweeping statements only some of which are relevant to the question and all are under explained and imprecise. The student demonstrates basic knowledge and understanding of the effectiveness of Judicial Review as a check on the Executive but there are major gaps in this knowledge and understanding and only a limited attempt is made to answer the question. The response contains some relevant material but also significant irrelevant or general material. General material is content that may be related to the topic under discussion but is not directly relevant. There is some basic analysis and evaluation of political information, arguments and explanations but this lacks depth. The quality of spelling, punctuation and grammar is limited. An argument is constructed although the level of communication and the structure and presentation of ideas are both basic. There is restricted use of appropriate political vocabulary. Level 3 ([7]–[9]) Responses at this level are characterised by a number of accurate and relevant points which are either under explained, have no supporting evidence, are limited in range or are entirely one-sided. The student demonstrates mostly accurate knowledge and understanding of the effect of the effectiveness of Judicial Review as a check on the Executive but there are some gaps in this knowledge and understanding. The response makes a reasonable attempt at answering the question and contains relevant material along with more general material. General material is content that may be related to the topic under discussion but is not directly relevant. There is some limited analysis of political information, arguments and explanations but this is of limited depth. Limited analysis is incomplete and may contain errors. The quality of spelling, punctuation and grammar is satisfactory. An argument is constructed although the level of communication, the structure and presentation of ideas and the use of appropriate political vocabulary are limited. Level 4 ([10]–[12]) Responses at this level are characterised by a degree of balance in argument, a range of relevant points which are reasonably well explained and good use of appropriate evidence. The student demonstrates full and accurate knowledge and understanding of the effectiveness of Judicial Review as a check on the Executive and deploys this to answer the question. The answer contains relevant evidence and examples. There is sound analysis of political information, arguments and explanations with a degree of depth. The quality of spelling, punctuation and grammar is generally good. An argument is constructed which displays clear communication and presentation of ideas. There is appropriate use of political vocabulary. Level 5 ([13]–[15]) Responses at this level are characterised by a focus on analysis based on a detailed explanation of a wide range of points which account for all of the main issues on both sides of the argument. There is a consistent engagement with the question throughout and the evidence used clearly illuminates the points being made. The student demonstrates comprehensive, detailed and accurate knowledge and understanding of the effectiveness of Judicial Review as a check on the Executive consistently to answer the question. A range of relevant evidence is presented. There is thorough analysis of political information, arguments and explanations with arguments and evidence being fully considered in a balanced way. Spelling, punctuation and grammar are of a consistently high standard. An argument is constructed which displays effective communication and presentation of ideas. There is consistent use of appropriate political vocabulary. [15] Section B Section C: Pressure Groups in the UK 6 Background A “social movement” is a loosely organised but sustained campaign in support of a social goal, typically either the implementation or the prevention of a change in society’s structure or values. Although social movements differ in size, they are all essentially collective. That is, they result from the more or less spontaneous coming together of people whose relationships are not defined by rules and procedures but who merely share a common outlook on society. Level 1 ([1]) The student offers a valid explanation with little or no development. Level 2 ([2]–[3]) The student offers a limited explanation. There will be a relevant example. Level 3 ([4]–[5]) The student provides a full explanation. A relevant example will support the response. (AO1: [5] marks) Any other valid information will be rewarded appropriately. [5] 7 Background An answer to this question should, at least implicitly, include an explanation of what is meant by an “outsider” pressure group. Weaker answers may consist of a list of examples of “outsider groups” but with limited analysis of why such groups have this status. Stronger answers will include analysis of reasons and these may include issues such as size, finance, nature of the membership, nature of the group’s objectives, nature of the government in power, political culture and whether the group wishes to remain an outsider. Insider groups may be referred to as a way of illustrating why other groups lack this status. Any other relevant arguments. Level 1 ([1]–[3]) The student demonstrates little knowledge and understanding of the reasons why some groups are “outsiders” and makes little attempt to answer the question. The answer is ill-informed and/or has a high degree of irrelevant material and/ or makes general statements and/or has no evidence. There is little analysis and evaluation of information, arguments and explanations. The quality of spelling, punctuation and grammar is poor. An argument, if present, is ill-informed and poorly constructed and the level of communication and the use of political vocabulary are both rudimentary. Level 2 ([4]–[6]) The student demonstrates basic knowledge and understanding of the reasons why some groups are “outsiders” but there are major gaps in this knowledge and understanding and only a limited attempt is made to answer the question. The response contains some relevant material but also significant irrelevant or general material. General material is content that may be related to the topic under discussion but is not directly relevant. There is some basic analysis and evaluation of political information, arguments and explanations but this lacks depth. The quality of spelling, punctuation and grammar is limited. An argument is constructed although the level of communication and the structure and presentation of ideas are both basic. There is restricted use of appropriate political vocabulary. Level 3 ([7]–[9]) The student demonstrates mostly accurate knowledge and understanding of the reasons why some groups are “outsiders” but there are some gaps in this knowledge and understanding. The response makes a reasonable attempt at answering the question and contains relevant material along with more general material. There is some limited analysis of political information, arguments and explanations but this is of limited depth as it is incomplete and may contain errors. The quality of spelling, punctuation and grammar is satisfactory. An argument is constructed although the level of communication, the structure and presentation of ideas and the use of appropriate political vocabulary are limited. Level 4 ([10]–[12]) The student demonstrates full and accurate knowledge and understanding of the reasons why some groups are “outsiders” and deploys this to answer the question. The answer contains relevant evidence and examples. There is sound analysis of political information, arguments and explanations with a degree of depth. The quality of spelling, punctuation and grammar is generally good. An argument is constructed which displays clear communication and presentation of ideas. There is appropriate use of political vocabulary. Level 5 ([13]–[15]) The student demonstrates comprehensive, detailed and accurate knowledge and understanding of the reasons why some groups are “outsiders” and deploys this consistently to answer the question. A range of relevant evidence is presented. There is thorough analysis of political information, arguments and explanations. Spelling, punctuation and grammar are of a consistently high standard. An argument is constructed which displays effective communication and presentation of ideas. There is consistent use of appropriate political vocabulary. [15] Section C Total