AQA GCSE: The Conundrum of Marking the 9 Mark Question

Every teacher and examiner will have different viewpoints on how to guide their students as to the best way to structure their answers to a 9 mark question.

AQA can’t advocate one specific way, as there is more than one approach of tackling a 9 mark question to reach the higher levels of the mark scheme. Every year, there are so many different formats that are seen by examiners.

My recent blogs suggest just one way of how to help students to reach the top levels of the mark scheme, through structuring a 9 mark answer in a clear and effective manner.

Below is some guidance on how to award marks if students do NOT structure their answer as detailed in the blogs i.e. the evaluation at the end, after two analysis paragraphs.

Let’s take the question from the June 2013 paper 1:

1d) Paul and Arianna would have some freedom in the way they promoted their pet food products to local households. They are considering two options: * professionally designed and printed posters to be displayed in the 5 animal hospitals in the surrounding area for a year, these would cost £500 * a small advert in the local newspaper, which sells 10 000 copies, this would cost £250 a week. Advise Paul and Arianna on which is likely to be the better option to make customers aware of their new business.

Give reasons for your advice. (9 marks)

Structure 1: Students evaluating at the start with an undeveloped judgement:

I think the best option for Paul and Arianna to make people aware of their new business would be posters in the animal hospitals. One advantage of using posters…..(a chain of argument is seen, using connectives in context) On the other hand, the benefit of using a small advert in a local newspaper …. …..(a chain of argument is seen, using connectives in context)

Examiner Commentary:

This structure of response would gain 4 + 2; if there is only a short judgement at the start that is undeveloped and no further judgement can be found elsewhere in the answer, this would gain 2 marks (although in the past this level of evaluation may have achieved just one mark). It is clear from the answer that the judgement has stopped, when the student has said the words “One advantage of…” To gain 4 marks for analysis, there needs to be two developed points in context; there is no requirement for there to be pros and cons of both options given, as this could result in time being lost through repeatedly hitting the same levels in the mark scheme (four times rather than twice), rather than spending more time on the evaluation!

Structure 2: Conflicting judgement:

I think the best option for Paul and Arianna to make people aware of their new business would be posters in the animal hospitals. This is because….. I also think that a small advert in the local paper is the best option….. This is because Overall I think….

Examiner Commentary:

This structure of response would gain the top of E1 or at best the bottom of E2 for evaluation, 2 or 3 marks. This is because the judgement is conflicting and therefore not clear. The marks for analysis given would be dependent on the quality of the explanation given for each option i.e. if there is a chain of argument which is relevant and refers to the context set. If this is evidenced twice then 4 marks can be given; if only descriptive comments are given then L2 – 2/4 marks would be given for analysis.

Structure 3: Judgement at the start which is developed:

I think the best option for Paul and Arianna to make people aware of their new business would be posters in the animal hospitals. This is because….. Another reason I believe that posters are the best way is because…..

Examiner Commentary:

This structure of response means that the student evaluates right from the beginning of the answer. If the judgement is supported with one very well explained reason from start to finish, which shows analysis too (i.e. the effect/impact of the point in context), then analysis and evaluation marks would be awarded and it is possible to gain full marks. If there are two reasons that are given supporting the initial judgement (no conflict in decision), with one being well explained, together with analysis shown in this explanation, then full marks can be awarded again.

A Final note!

In a question like this, there is no requirement for the candidate to consider both options and definitely no requirement for the pros and cons of each option to be given. There could be a comparison given, as to why the advantage of one option is the drawback of another explained in context.

Essentially, the examiners are looking for the skills of analysis in the answer to be evidenced twice and a clear judgement to be given which is supported in detail and is relevant to the context set! Different structures can achieve this and the best one is dependent on your own preference!!!