Pearson Edexcel GCSE In History (1HI0)

Mark Scheme (Results) Summer 2024 Pearson Edexcel GCSE In History (1HI0) Paper P5: Period study Option P5 Conflict in the Middle East, 1945- 95 Edexcel and BTEC Qualifications Edexcel and BTEC qualifications are awarded by Pearson, the UK’s largest awarding body. We provide a wide range of qualifications including academic, vocational, occupational and specific programmes for employers. For further information visit our qualifications websites at or . Alternatively, you can get in touch with us using the details on our contact us page at Pearson: helping people progress, everywhere Pearson aspires to be the world’s leading learning company. Our aim is to help everyone progress in their lives through education. We believe in every kind of learning, for all kinds of people, wherever they are in the world. We’ve been involved in education for over 150 years, and by working across 70 countries, in 100 languages, we have built an international reputation for our commitment to high standards and raising achievement through innovation in education. Find out more about how we can help you and your students at: Summer 2024 Question Paper Log Number P75499A Publications Code 1HI0_P5_2406_MS All the material in this publication is copyright © Pearson Education Ltd 2024 General Marking Guidance • All candidates must receive the same treatment. Examiners must mark the first candidate in exactly the same way as they mark the last. • Mark schemes should be applied positively. Candidates must be rewarded for what they have shown they can do rather than penalised for omissions. • Examiners should mark according to the mark scheme not according to their perception of where the grade boundaries may lie. • There is no ceiling on achievement. All marks on the mark scheme should be used appropriately. • All the marks on the mark scheme are designed to be awarded. Examiners should always award full marks if deserved, i.e. if the answer matches the mark scheme. Examiners should also be prepared to award zero marks if the candidate’s response is not worthy of credit according to the mark scheme. • Where some judgement is required, mark schemes will provide the principles by which marks will be awarded and exemplification may be limited. • When examiners are in doubt regarding the application of the mark scheme to a candidate’s response, the team leader must be consulted. Crossed out work should be marked UNLESS the candidate has replaced it with an alternative response. • How to award marks when level descriptions are used 1. Finding the right level The first stage is to decide which level the answer should be placed in. To do this, use a ‘best-fit’ approach, deciding which level most closely describes the quality of the answer. Answers can display characteristics from more than one level, and where this happens markers must use the guidance below and their professional judgement to decide which level is most appropriate. For example, one stronger passage at L4 would not by itself merit a L4 mark, but it might be evidence to support a high L3 mark, unless there are substantial weaknesses in other areas. Similarly, an answer that fits best in L3 but which has some characteristics of L2 might be placed at the bottom of L3. An answer displaying some characteristics of L3 and some of L1 might be placed in L2. 2. Finding a mark within a level After a level has been decided on, the next stage is to decide on the mark within the level. The instructions below tell you how to reward responses within a level. However, where a level has specific guidance about how to place an answer within a level, always follow that guidance. Levels containing two marks only Start with the presumption that the work will be at the top of the level. Move down to the lower mark if the work only just meets the requirements of the level. Levels containing three or more marks Markers should be prepared to use the full range of marks available in a level and not restrict marks to the middle. Markers should start at the middle of the level (or the upper-middle mark if there is an even number of marks) and then move the mark up or down to find the best mark. To do this, they should take into account how far the answer meets the requirements of the level: • If it meets the requirements fully, markers should be prepared to award full marks within the level. The top mark in the level is used for answers that are as good as can realistically be expected within that level • If it only barely meets the requirements of the level, markers should consider awarding marks at the bottom of the level. The bottom mark in the level is used for answers that are the weakest that can be expected within that level • The middle marks of the level are used for answers that have a reasonable match to the descriptor. This might represent a balance between some characteristics of the level that are fully met and others that are only barely met. Indicative content Examiners are reminded that indicative content is provided as an illustration to markers of some of the material that may be offered by students. It does not show required content and alternatives should be credited where valid. P5: Conflict in the Middle East, 1945–95 Question 1 Explain two consequences of President Sadat of Egypt's visit to Israel (1977). Target: Analysis of second order concepts: consequence [AO2]; Knowledge and understanding of features and characteristics [AO1]. AO2: 4 marks. AO1: 4 marks. NB mark each consequence separately (2 x 4 marks). Level Mark Descriptor 0 No rewardable material. 1 1–2 • Simple or generalised comment is offered about a consequence. [AO2] • Generalised information about the topic is included, showing limited knowledge and understanding of the period. [AO1] 2 3–4 • Features of the period are analysed to explain a consequence. [AO2] • Specific information about the topic is added to support the explanation, showing good knowledge and understanding of the period. [AO1] Marking instructions Markers must apply the descriptors above in line with the general marking guidance (page 3). Performance in AO1 and AO2 is interdependent. An answer displaying no qualities of AO2 cannot be awarded more than the top of Level 1, no matter how strong performance is in AO1; markers should note that the expectation for AO1 is that candidates demonstrate both knowledge and understanding. Indicative content guidance Answers must be credited according to candidates’ deployment of material in relation to the qualities outlined in the mark scheme. While specific references are made in the indicative content below, this does not imply that these must be included; other relevant material must also be credited. Relevant points may include: • Sadat’s speech to the Israeli parliament led to criticism from other Arab nations and the breakdown in relations between Egypt and the other Arab nations. • In response to Sadat’s visit, Begin of Israel visited Egypt and agreed to start peace talks. • The attempts at a peace process that started with Sadat’s visit continued when both leaders attended Camp David at the invitation of President Carter. • The subsequent Treaty of Washington provided the groundwork for a more peaceful relationship between Israel and Egypt. The leaders of Israel and Egypt came to some territorial agreements, e.g. over Sinai, where Israel agreed to withdraw from Sinai and Egypt agreed to retain Sinai as a demilitarised zone. Question 2 Write a narrative account analysing relations between Israel and Egypt in the years 1949-56. You may use the following in your answer: • the abdication of King Farouk of Egypt (1952) • the Suez Canal You must also use information of your own. Target: Analytical narrative (i.e. analysis of causation/consequence/change) [AO2]; Knowledge and understanding of features and characteristics) [AO1]. AO2: 4 marks. AO1: 4 marks. Level Mark Descriptor 0 No rewardable material. 1 1–2 • A simple or generalised narrative is provided; the account shows limited analysis and organisation of the events included. [AO2] • Limited knowledge and understanding of the events is shown. [AO1] 2 3–5 • A narrative is given, showing some organisation of material into a sequence of events leading to an outcome. The account of events shows some analysis of the linkage between them, but some passages of the narrative may lack coherence and organisation. [AO2] • Accurate and relevant information is added, showing some knowledge and understanding of the events. [AO1] 3 6–8 • A narrative is given which organises material into a clear sequence of events leading to an outcome. The account of events analyses the linkage between them and is coherent and logically structured. [AO2] • Accurate and relevant information is included, showing good knowledge and understanding of the key features or characteristics of the events. [AO1] No access to Level 3 for answers that do not address three or more aspects of content. Marking instructions Markers must apply the descriptors above in line with the general marking guidance (page 3). Performance in AO1 and AO2 is interdependent. An answer displaying no qualities of AO2 cannot be awarded more than the top of Level 1, no matter how strong performance is in AO1; markers should note that the expectation for AO1 is that candidates demonstrate both knowledge and understanding. The middle mark in Levels 2 and 3 may be achieved by stronger performance in either AO1 or AO2. Indicative content guidance Answers must be credited according to candidates’ deployment of material in relation to the qualities outlined in the mark scheme. While specific references are made in the indicative content below, this does not imply that these must be included; other relevant material must also be credited. Relevant points may include: • Following its defeat by Israel in the 1948-49 war, Egypt retained control of Gaza, where the population was made up primarily of Palestinians, many of whom had fled their homes as a result of the war. • King Farouk of Egypt was held responsible for the Egyptian forces’ inability to defeat Israel, resulting in his abdication in 1952 and the rise of Colonel Nasser, who championed Arab nationalism against Israel. • Palestinian raids into Israel continued in the early 1950s, with the IDF responding with an attack on the Egyptian Army Headquarters in Gaza in February 1955, killing 38 soldiers. • In 1955, Nasser arranged to buy large quantities of weapons from Czechoslovakia to strengthen Egypt’s army and deter any future attacks from Israel, suggesting that relations had deteriorated to the point of possible war. Question