AQA GCSE Citizenship Studies Paper 1, June 2025: Question 2

✅ Model Answers (Full 2 Marks)

Option A: Questionnaire

"I devised a questionnaire to survey Year 9 students regarding their awareness of local food bank shortages [1 mark]. This assisted our action because it gave us numerical data showing 78% were unaware, proving we needed to create educational leaflets rather than just a collection bin [1 mark]."

Option B: Observation

"We carried out a 15-minute observation of school bins at break time to count discarded plastic bottles [1 mark]. This helped us quantify the scale of waste to convince the headteacher that recycling points were urgently needed [1 mark]."

🧠 Exam Technique & Mark Breakdown

• 1st Mark: Accurately name a valid form of primary research (e.g., student questionnaire, interview with local councillor, direct observation).
• 2nd Mark: Provide a clear development explaining how it directly informed or helped your action.
• The "So What?" Rule: Don't just say what you did; say what the findings made you decide or do.

❌ Common Errors

• Confusing Primary with Secondary Research: Mentioning articles from the BBC, charities' websites, or existing textbooks.
• Stopping at Identification: Writing "I did a survey" without explaining how it assisted the next step of the action loses the second mark.

Mark Scheme Guidance: Award 1 mark for identifying the type of primary research and 1 mark for development showing how it assisted the action.

✅ Model Structure (Level 2: 4/4 marks)

"To plan our action, we combined both practical organisation and theoretical planning sheets:

• Task Delegation & Roles: We audited group skills and assigned roles (e.g., communications lead, data analyst) to ensure accountability.
• Permissions & Logistics: We wrote a formal letter to the headteacher to seek permission to hold a stall and booked room space following a health & safety risk assessment.
• Timeline & Deadlines: We produced an action plan with weekly milestones, integrating our primary survey findings to set realistic targets before our scheduled assembly."

💡 What Counts as "Planning"?

• Practical elements: Dividing team roles, meeting logistics, booking dates, gaining official permission.
• Theoretical elements: Action plan templates, SMART targets, risk assessments, contingency plans.
• Synthesis: Linking planning steps directly to earlier research findings.

🧠 Top-Level Examiner Insight

Level 2 (3–4 marks) requires a clear discussion linking planning directly to citizenship concepts and issues. Do not write a muddled story. Categorise your planning under sub-headings like "Permissions", "Resource Allocation", and "Role Division".

❌ Common Errors

• Pure narrative: Writing "First we met, then we talked, then we made posters" without explaining why tasks were planned that way.
• Ignoring permissions: Forgetting that democratic and community actions require contacting authorities (councils, school leadership, charities).

✅ Model Paragraph Structure

1. Evidence Summary (AO1 - 2 marks):

"Our secondary research from the Trussell Trust showed a 37% rise in local food bank use. Our primary survey revealed 82% of students were willing to donate, but 70% did not know which items were accepted."

2. Evaluation of Support (AO3 - 4 marks):

"To a strong extent, this evidence justified our decision to run a targeted 'Item of the Week' donation campaign. However, the evidence had limitations: the survey had a small sample size (40 students), meaning it didn't represent sixth formers, whose dietary awareness differed. Thus, while it supported our initial direction, it did not fully predict donation volumes."

🧠 The 2-Part Command Breakdown

• Part 1: Summarise (AO1): Give concrete facts, percentages, or quotes from your primary AND secondary findings.
• Part 2: Evaluate 'How Far' (AO3): Weigh up strengths vs limitations of that evidence. Did it give a reliable basis for your action? Did any evidence contradict your initial assumptions?

❌ Common Errors

• Summary only (max 2 marks): Merely listing survey results without critically judging if they were useful or biased.
• Uncritical evaluation: Claiming the evidence was "100% perfect" without acknowledging sample size, response bias, or out-of-date secondary stats.

Mark Scheme Bands:
Level 3 (5–6 marks): Comprehensive summary of evidence; developed and justified evaluation; coherent arguments.
Level 2 (3–4 marks): Basic summary; attempts evaluation but not fully justified.
Level 1 (1–2 marks): Little/no organisation of evidence; weak or absent evaluation.

1. Methods used 2. Outcome you achieved 3. Impact on you and others

✅ Essay Architecture (Level 4: 10–12 marks)

• Section 1: Methods & Initial Outcomes
  Detail the methods (e.g. social media campaign, petition, direct lobbying, awareness assembly) and pair each method with its immediate measurable outcome (e.g. collected 250 signatures, raised £180).
• Section 2: Impact on Others
  Examine the difference made to the target group or community. Contrast short-term shifts in awareness with long-term lasting change (e.g. policy change by governors vs. short-term awareness).
• Section 3: Impact on Yourself
  Reflect on skills acquired (public speaking, advocacy, negotiation, teamwork) and your understanding of active democratic participation.
• Section 4: Critical Conclusion ('How Far')
  Provide a balanced judgement: Where did the action fall short? (e.g. high awareness but low follow-through). Offer a concrete improvement you would make if repeating the action.

🧠 How Examiners Grade the 12 Marks

• AO2 (4 Marks) - Description & Application: Clear, realistic account of what was done and the direct outcomes produced.
• AO3 (8 Marks) - Critical Analysis & Judgement: Deep, honest evaluation. Top students don't pretend their campaign solved global poverty; they show critical maturity by highlighting bottlenecks and unintended outcomes.
• Use Evaluative Language: "Significantly improved...", "However, the impact was limited to...", "A major barrier was...".

❌ Pitfalls That Drop Responses to Level 2 (4–6 marks)

• Forgetting "Impact on You": Describing the charity or school benefits at length but omitting personal development, communication skills, or civic awareness.
• Confusing Outcome with Impact: An outcome is collecting 50 tins; the impact is feeding 15 families for a weekend or increasing empathy among students.
• No Evaluative Conclusion: Finishing abruptly without answering "how far" a real, measurable difference was achieved.

📐 Quick Reference: Mark Scheme Descriptors

• Level 4 (10–12 marks): Clear, precise analysis; well-chosen evidence from own action; developed, justified, coherent evaluation and conclusion.
• Level 3 (7–9 marks): Appropriate evidence; mostly relevant application; analysis/evaluation present but unevenly developed.
• Level 2 (4–6 marks): Some evidence selected; weak arguments; little critical reflection on impact.
• Level 1 (1–3 marks): Basic narrative of what happened; no real evaluation or analysis.