Winter 2009 AS1 and AS2 Exemplar Answers

AS1 Northern Ireland Two possible reasons in the Source Candidate clearly gets one : the destruction of the UUP Is a further loss of support from the UUP to the DUP a separate explanation or just elaboration on destruction? Resentment of UUP leadership is possible second.

AS1: Northern Ireland Two identified. 2 marks. Partial explanation of both. 2 for each. Total 6 marks.

AS1: Northern Ireland Question 2 Does focus on why and not just what happened Three reasons identified and explained Why association with the GFA discredited the UUP after 1998 needs explaining Level 4 response: 11 marks

AS1: Northern Ireland Question 3(a) Makes some sound points But these are not always fully developed Lacks balance: assumes ineffective Level 4 response but lower in the band because of limited development and lack of balance. 18 marks

AS1: Northern Ireland Question 3(b) Some reasons given but not always developed or made explicit If confused material is taken out then there is limited substance Level 3 response: 16 marks

AS2: British Political Process Question 1 First not accepted as proposing Second valid Example not required 2 marks awarded

AS2: British Political Process Question 2 Positives: reference to party discipline; sanctions of the whips Negatives: no focus on Chief Whip; limited account of whips role and whips powers; nothing on who the Chief Whip serves 3 marks awarded

AS2: British Political Process Question 3 Two valid criticisms identified: 2 marks No explanation of how hereditary peers can be criticised other than reflects badly: 1 mark Some more explanation of unelected nature but little beyond lacking legitimacy: 2 marks Total 5 marks

AS2: British Political Process Question 4 Identifies both representing party and constituency A range of ways identified but not always explained fully Useful distinction between inside and outside Parliament Level 4 response: 11 marks

AS2: British Political Process Question 5(a) Positives Candidate does understand what the issue is A range of relevant points are made, although not very effectively Some balance

AS2: British Political Process Negatives No real structure or coherence Very limited range of arguments No evidence at all Level 3 response: 11 marks

AS2: British Political Process Question 5(b) Positives Question clearly understood and addressed Balanced Good range of points made for executive dominance

AS2: British Political Process Negatives Limited on the case against executive dominance If irrelevant material left out, then very limited argument in favour of Parliaments role, especially Commons Limited evidence Level 4 response: 16 marks