A-Level GOVERNMENT AND POLITICS GOVP1 People, Politics and Participation Report on the Examination Specification 2150 2014 Version: 1.0
Further copies of this Report are available from aqa.org.uk Copyright 2014 AQA and its licensors. All rights reserved. AQA retains the copyright on all its publications. However, registered schools/colleges for AQA are permitted to copy material from this booklet for their own internal use, with the following important exception: AQA cannot give permission to schools/colleges to photocopy any material that is acknowledged to a third party even for internal use within the centre.
Topic 1: Participation and Voting Behaviour Question 01 Given that pluralism is of such central importance to the study of politics, and to GOVP1 Topics 1 and 4 more specifically, it was disappointing to see that a number of students appeared to have difficulty defining and explaining the term. Many answers at the lower levels of response ignored the concept, focusing instead on the extract provided. In some cases students chose to discuss the merits/demerits of plurality voting systems. Those students that did engage with the question more directly made reference to the existence of a myriad competing interests (in some cases mentioning countervailing groups) or the existence of widely available access points. Some referenced the work of writers such as Dahl and/or contrasted pluralist theory with the elite theory advanced by C Wright Mills and others. Question 02 This question was generally better-answered than Q01. Most students were able to make use of the material on media theory provided in the extract. Some were able to give examples from the 2010 General Election or earlier contests. Those writing at the higher levels of response were generally able to combine the two in a more developed way. Surprisingly few students chose to define the term at the heart of the question (ie mass media ). Those that did often wrote in a more focused and analytical style. Question 03 This question was generally well-answered. Most students were well-versed in the decline in traditional forms of participation, often regarding declining turn-out not only as a participation crisis but also as a crisis in democracy; bringing into question the legitimacy of government and undermining its mandate. Most students were aware of declining party membership and electoral turnout. Virtually all of those who answered the question looked to contrast the decline in such activities with the rise in pressure group activity. However, for the vast majority of candidates, the exercise became little more than a numbers game (ie quantity of participation); few made any real attempt to consider the quality of participation or the relative importance of different forms of participation and how this might impact on the debate. Topic 2: Electoral Systems Question 04 This term was clearly topical, so it was welcome to see that most students were able to offer some kind of definition. Whilst those at the lower levels of response tended to become rather bogged down in discussion of The Coalition, those at the higher levels focused more on the circumstances that might result in a coalition government and the consequences of it. As this was the Electoral Systems Topic, it was no surprise that many students looked to touch upon different systems when considering such themes. 3 of 6
Question 05 Many of those students who tackled this question wrote at great length, in truth, far greater length than was required; which would, no doubt, have had consequences for them when they came to later questions on the paper. This tendency appeared to result both from a desire to reproduce prepared 25-mark essays on referendums and democracy and from a separate, though related reluctance to focus on two ways that referendums can be said to enhance democracy, as demanded by the question. Students should be reminded that these 10-mark questions require a more focused and concise approach. Question 06 Students at all levels of response were able to provide a general overview of how FPTP works and offer basic arguments for and against the system. Far fewer were able to offer sufficient evidence in support of those points advanced. Phrases such a wasted votes and winners bonus were routinely raised without any attempt to explain or support them with suitable examples. Only at the higher levels of response was there any convincing attempt to evaluate the system as a means of addressing the precise terms of the question posed. Even then, few candidates picked up on the use of the word overwhelming ; with most simply advancing arguments for and against. Those students who discussed the merits/demerits of other systems were credited for doing so, where they related it back to the question posed. Topic 3: Political Parties Question 07 Although the Political Parties Topic has been the least popular of the four Topics ever since the first series in January 2009, those students who tackle it have generally acquitted themselves well. It was surprising, therefore that so many students failed to deal effectively with the term identified in Q07. The Specification clearly requires students to have an awareness of the organisation of political parties at different tiers and this theme also appeared in the extract that accompanied Topic 3 on the June 2013 paper. Those that demonstrated their knowledge of the term, unsurprisingly, scored more highly. Question 08 Those students who select Topic 3 tend to have some understanding of party structures and the extent to which the main parties can be considered to be internally democratic. At the lower levels of response, students tended to focus upon internal party democracy in general terms with no real attempt to hone in on the policy-making process. Those students writing at the higher levels of response were generally able to offer detailed analysis of just how much influence ordinary party members have over policy-making and how their influence may be said to have changed in recent years. It was pleasing to see so few students confusing ordinary party members with ordinary members of parliament ; a common failing in earlier series. 4 of 6
Question 09 Most of the students answering this question focused on party ideology or, more accurately, the end of ideology. Those at the lower levels of response not surprisingly tended to focus on the generalities of parties moving towards the centre ground. Those at the higher levels of response often focused on specific areas of policy to illustrate the point or cited the efforts of Blair and Cameron to re-brand their respective parties after lengthy periods in opposition. It was encouraging to see so many students challenging the question ie arguing that parties were becoming more ideologically distinct. Such a line of argument often led students to move beyond the main UK parties to consider some of the smaller, more ideological parties, who field candidates at UK elections without sacrificing their ideological principles. It was surprising that so few chose to approach the question from the other obvious angle ie putting electioneering into context alongside the other functions/roles that the main UK parties are traditionally said to perform. Topic 4: Pressure Groups and Protest Movements Question 10 The term in question is clearly covered by references on the specification s Key Concepts section for Topic 4. Moreover, the topic 4 extract on the January 2013 paper was entitled Policy Networks and Communities. In that context it was surprising that a number of students had difficulty with this question. Only those students at the higher levels of response were able to offer a convincing definition of the term. Most simply saw policy communities as analogous to insider groups and proceeded to write at length about the latter. Question 11 This question returned to a theme that had provided the focus for a 10-mark question in an earlier series; namely internal pressure group democracy. Whilst students at all levels of response were generally able to offer some explanation of what internal democracy might be and many were able to offer examples of groups who appeared to offer it (or not) far fewer were able to address the terms of the question posed ie explain why internal pressure group democracy might be desirable. As with some earlier questions on the paper, there was some evidence of students using prepared arguments on the theme of pressure groups and democracy without really demonstrating the level of understanding that would normally accompany such knowledge. Question 12 As was the case with Q11, too many of those students answering this question defaulted to overly generic arguments on the theme of factors affecting pressure group success. Some focused on pressure group status alone (insider/outsider), whilst others at least tried to offer a range of factors that might affect a group s chances of achieving its core aims. Only at the higher levels of response, however, was there any real attempt to test the statement ie consider whether or not some groups do, in fact, have significant influence over government policy. Even then, however, the evidence offered in support was often limited in scope and depth with few moving beyond references to the BMA (health reforms), Shelter (homelessness legislation) or the Snowdrop Campaign (gun control). 5 of 6
Mark Ranges and Award of Grades Grade boundaries and cumulative percentage grades are available on the Results Statistics page of the AQA Website. Converting Marks into UMS marks Convert raw marks into Uniform Mark Scale (UMS) marks by using the link below. UMS conversion calculator 6 of 6