A-level POLITICS 7152/3

A-level POLITICS 7152/3 Paper 3 Political Ideas Mark scheme June 2020 Version: 1.0 Final *206A7152/3/MS* Mark schemes are prepared by the Lead Assessment Writer and considered, together with the relevant questions, by a panel of subject teachers. This mark scheme includes any amendments made at the standardisation events which all associates participate in and is the scheme which was used by them in this examination. The standardisation process ensures that the mark scheme covers the students’ responses to questions and that every associate understands and applies it in the same correct way. As preparation for standardisation each associate analyses a number of students’ scripts. Alternative answers not already covered by the mark scheme are discussed and legislated for. If, after the standardisation process, associates encounter unusual answers which have not been raised they are required to refer these to the Lead Examiner. It must be stressed that a mark scheme is a working document, in many cases further developed and expanded on the basis of students’ reactions to a particular paper. Assumptions about future mark schemes on the basis of one year’s document should be avoided; whilst the guiding principles of assessment remain constant, details will change, depending on the content of a particular examination paper. Further copies of this mark scheme are available from Copyright information 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. Copyright © 2020 AQA and its licensors. All rights reserved. Level of response marking instructions Level of response mark schemes are broken down into levels, each of which has a descriptor. The descriptor for the level shows the average performance for the level. There are marks in each level. Before you apply the mark scheme to a student’s answer read through the answer and annotate it (as instructed) to show the qualities that are being looked for. You can then apply the mark scheme. Step 1 Determine a level Start at the lowest level of the mark scheme and use it as a ladder to see whether the answer meets the descriptor for that level. The descriptor for the level indicates the different qualities that might be seen in the student’s answer for that level. If it meets the lowest level then go to the next one and decide if it meets this level, and so on, until you have a match between the level descriptor and the answer. With practice and familiarity you will find that for better answers you will be able to quickly skip through the lower levels of the mark scheme. When assigning a level you should look at the overall quality of the answer and not look to pick holes in small and specific parts of the answer where the student has not performed quite as well as the rest. If the answer covers different aspects of different levels of the mark scheme you should use a best fit approach for defining the level and then use the variability of the response to help decide the mark within the level, ie if the response is predominantly level 3 with a small amount of level 4 material it would be placed in level 3 but be awarded a mark near the top of the level because of the level 4 content. Step 2 Determine a mark Once you have assigned a level you need to decide on the mark. The descriptors on how to allocate marks can help with this. The exemplar materials used during standardisation will help. There will be an answer in the standardising materials which will correspond with each level of the mark scheme. This answer will have been awarded a mark by the Lead Examiner. You can compare the student’s answer with the example to determine if it is the same standard, better or worse than the example. You can then use this to allocate a mark for the answer based on the Lead Examiner’s mark on the example. You may well need to read back through the answer as you apply the mark scheme to clarify points and assure yourself that the level and the mark are appropriate. Indicative content in the mark scheme is provided as a guide for examiners. It is not intended to be exhaustive and you must credit other valid points. Students do not have to cover all of the points mentioned in the Indicative content to reach the highest level of the mark scheme. An answer which contains nothing of relevance to the question must be awarded no marks. Levels of response mark scheme for 9-mark questions Socialism Explain and analyse three ways in which socialist thinkers have viewed the concept of equality. [9 marks] Liberalism Explain and analyse three ways in which liberal thinkers have viewed the role of the state. [9 marks] Conservatism Explain and analyse three ways in which conservative thinkers have viewed the economy. [9 marks] Target AO1: 6 marks, AO2: 3 marks Level Marks Descriptors 3 7–9 • detailed knowledge of relevant political concepts, institutions and processes is demonstrated and appropriate political vocabulary is used (AO1). • thorough explanations and appropriate selection of accurate supporting examples demonstrates detailed understanding of relevant political concepts, institutions and processes (AO1). • analysis of three clear points will be structured, clearly focused on the question and confidently developed in to a coherent answer (AO2). 2 4–6 • generally sound knowledge of political concepts, institutions and processes is demonstrated and generally appropriate political vocabulary is used (AO1). • some development of explanations and generally appropriate selection of supporting examples demonstrates generally accurate understanding of relevant political concepts, institutions and processes, though further detail may be required in places and some inaccuracies may be present (AO1). • analysis will be developed in most places, though some points may be descriptive or in need of further development. Answers will, for the most part, be clearly expressed and show some organisation in the presentation of material (AO2). Students who only make two relevant points will be limited to this level. 1 1–3 • limited knowledge of political concepts, institutions and processes is demonstrated and little or no appropriate political vocabulary is used (AO1). • limited development of explanations and selection of supporting examples demonstrates limited understanding of relevant political concepts, institutions and processes, with further detail required and inaccuracies present throughout (AO1). • analysis will take the form of description for the most part. Coherence and structure will be limited (AO2). Students who only make one relevant point will be limited to this level. 0 0 • nothing worthy of credit. 0 1 Socialism Explain and analyse three ways in which socialist thinkers have viewed the concept of equality. [9 marks] Indicative content In their explanations and analysis, students may be expected to cover areas such as the following: • explanation and analysis of how social democrats view equality as desirable. This may be linked to support for a mixed economy based on the assumption that capitalism can be humanised (or civilised). Expect possible use of the mixed economy, comprehensive education and a ‘free’ (at the point of use) health service • explanation and analysis of how democratic socialists support greater equality of outcome. This may be linked to their support for the state distributing resources in a more egalitarian manner than social democrats • explanation and analysis of how revolutionary socialists such as Engels view equality as based upon common ownership and a planned economy. Unlike parliamentary and evolutionary socialists, Marxists favour complete equality of outcome • explanation and analysis of the significance of equality to socialist thinkers (eg Marx and Engels’ notion of class struggle, Crosland’s emphasis upon social welfare, Webb’s support for the co- operative movement, etc). Students are required to consider only three ways in which socialist thinkers have viewed the concept of equality. If a student exceeds this number, reward only the best three. However, some may include relevant points not listed above and these should be credited. If a student gives only one or two examples they will receive a maximum of three and six marks respectively. 0 2 Liberalism Explain and analyse three ways in which liberal thinkers have viewed the role of the state. [9 marks] Indicative content In their explanations and analysis, students may be expected to cover areas such as the following; • explanation and analysis of how classical liberals favour a night watchman state. This may be linked to their concept of negative freedom. Expect possible use of limited government and laissez-faire economics • explanation and analysis of how modern (or new/progressive) liberalism favours an enabling state. This may be linked to their concept of positive freedom (John Rawls). Expect possible reference to the welfare state providing from the cradle to the grave • explanation and analysis of how liberal concepts and thinkers can be used to advocate a particular role for the state. For example, utilitarian thinkers such as John Stuart Mill wish to use the state in order to ensure the greatest happiness for the greatest number whereas John Locke outlined a social contract • explanation and analysis of how different liberals view the role of the state (eg Mill’s harm principle, the separation of powers, Friedan’s support for positive discrimination etc.) Students are required to consider only three ways in which liberal thinkers have viewed the role of the state. If a student exceeds this number, reward only the best three. However, some may include relevant points not listed above and these should be credited. If a student gives only one or two examples they will receive a maximum of three and six marks respectively. 0 3 Conservatism Explain and analyse three ways in which conservative thinkers have viewed the economy. [9 marks] Indicative content In their explanations and analysis, students may be expected to cover areas such as the following: • explanation and analysis of how traditional conservative thinkers such as Oakeshott have viewed the economy. This may be linked to the importance of tradition, a pragmatic mindset and a sceptical view of human nature within the economic realm • explanation and analysis of how conservative thinkers from the one-nation perspective have favoured a mixed economy. This may be linked to concepts such as noblesse oblige, paternalism and a safety net via the welfare state • explanation and analysis of how conservative thinkers from the new right have favoured rolling back the frontiers of the state in the economic realm. This may be linked to policies such as privatisation, deregulation and marketisation • explanation and analysis of how conservative thinkers have viewed the economy (eg Burke’s social contract, Nozick’s view that taxation is legalised theft, Rand’s support for laissez-faire capitalist ideas as seen in Atlas Shrugged and/or The Fountainhead). Students are required to consider only three ways in which conservative thinkers have viewed the economy. If a student exceeds this number, reward only the best three. However, some may include relevant points not listed above and these should be credited. If a student gives only one or two examples they will receive a maximum of three and six marks respectively. Levels of response mark scheme for 25-mark extract-based essay Analyse, evaluate and compare the arguments being made in the above extracts as to the significance of society within conservatism. In your answer you should refer to the thinkers you have studied. [25 marks] Target AO1: 5 marks, AO2: 10 marks, AO3: 10 marks Level Marks Descriptors 5 21–25 • detailed and accurate knowledge and understanding of relevant political concepts, institutions and processes are used to support analysis of the issue under discussion (AO1). • analysis of the extract is balanced and confidently developed. • evaluation of the above leads to well-substantiated conclusions that are consistent with the preceding discussion (AO3). • relevant perspectives and/or the status of the extract are successfully evaluated in the process of constructing arguments (AO3). • the answer is well organised, coherent and has a sustained analytical focus on the question (AO2). 4 16–20 • accurate knowledge and understanding of relevant political concepts, institutions and processes are used to support analysis of the issue under discussion, though further detail may be required in places (AO1). • analysis of the extract is balanced and developed, though some elements of the analysis could be expanded and/or developed further. • evaluation of the above leads to conclusions that show some substantiation and are consistent with the preceding discussion (AO3). • relevant perspectives and/or the status of the extract are evaluated in constructing arguments, although in some places there could be further development of the evaluation (AO3). • the answer is well organised, analytical in style and is focused on the question as set. 3 11–15 • generally sound knowledge and understanding of relevant political concepts, institutions and processes are used to support points made, though inaccuracies will be present (AO1). • analytical points relating to the extract are made and developed in places, showing some balance, though some points are descriptive rather than analytical (AO2). • evaluation of the above leads to conclusions that are consistent with the preceding discussion, but that lack substantiation (AO3). • relevant perspectives and/or the status of the extract are commented on in constructing arguments, though evaluation is lacking depth (AO3). • the answer is organised, occasionally analytical and focused on the question as set. 2 6–10 • some knowledge and understanding of relevant political concepts, institutions and processes are used to support points made, though these contain inaccuracies and irrelevant material (AO1). • analysis of the extract takes the form of description in most places, with some attempt at balance, though many points are unsupported assertions (AO2). • some attempt to draw conclusions is made, but these lack depth and clear development from the preceding discussion (AO3). 1 1–5 • limited knowledge and understanding of relevant political concepts, institutions and processes, with inaccuracies and irrelevant material present throughout (AO1). • analysis of the extract takes the form of description and assertion, with little or no attempt made at balance (AO2). • conclusions, when offered, are asserted and have an implicit relationship to the preceding discussion (AO3). • little or no evaluation of relevant perspectives and the status of the extract is present (AO3). • the answer shows little organisation and does not address the question (AO2). 0 0 • nothing worthy of credit. 0 4 Analyse, evaluate and compare the arguments being made in the above extracts as to the significance of society within conservatism. In your answer you should refer to the thinkers you have studied. [25 marks] Indicative content In the analysis and evaluation of the significance of society within conservatism as made in the extracts, students should be expected to cover areas such as the following: • analysis and evaluation of the importance of the concept of society within conservatism • a comparison of how the various strands of conservatism view the significance of society. For instance, students may evaluate the significance of society within the traditional one-nation school of thought via concepts such as an organic society. There may also be reference to the argument that ‘it becomes a partnership’ and the ‘little platoons’ to which we belong (Edmund Burke) • analysis and evaluation of how theorists from the new right emphasise the individual over society. This may reference Robert Nozick’s emphasis upon natural rights held by individuals with reference to the ‘tale of the slave’ • analysis and evaluation of how the main contrast within conservatism is that of a contract ‘between those who are living, those who are dead, and those who are to be born’ against the new right claim there is no such thing as society, merely individuals and families. The means to achieve conservatism derives from a fundamentally distinct way of viewing society and individuals. There may be some reference to the implications for the role of the state within the economic and social realm • a comparison of how the one-nation perspective and the new right begin from different starting points. There may be reference to the argument that ‘individuals have rights’ against ‘society is indeed a contract.’ This may be linked towards policies concerning taxation, welfare and the environment • the analysis and evaluation of any political information is affected by: • who the author is – their position or role • the type of publication – newspaper, academic journal, electronic media • the overt or implicit purpose of the author – to inform, persuade or influence • the relevance of the extracts to a political issue or concern, and how representative the extracts are of a particular viewpoint. Students will be expected to address some of these factors in their analysis and evaluation of the extracts • in relation to the extracts for this question, reference should be made to when they were published and that the intention was to persuade and influence. Students are required to analyse and evaluate the arguments presented in the articles. Students who identify which arguments support which of the different views may be awarded marks for analysis (AO2). To gain marks for evaluation (AO3) students must assess the relative strengths of the differing arguments. The analysis and evaluation must clearly focus on the arguments presented in the articles. Students would not need to cover each and every one of the above points to gain high marks; equally, some may introduce further relevant points and these should be credited. The conclusion should clearly focus on the issue in question. In their evaluation, it does not matter what views students reach. However, their position must be supported by their arguments and examples. Students who fail to focus their discussion on the arguments in the articles, however complete their answer may otherwise be, cannot achieve above Level 2. Levels of response mark scheme for 25-mark extract-based essay Nationalism ‘Nationalism is not always a peaceful ideology.’ Analyse and evaluate this statement with reference to the nationalist thinkers that you have studied. [25 marks] Feminism ‘Feminists are divided over how to achieve a fairer society.’ Analyse and evaluate this statement with reference to the feminist thinkers you have studied. [25 marks] Multiculturalism ‘There is significant disagreement about the recognition of diversity and minority rights.’ Analyse and evaluate this statement with reference to the multiculturalist thinkers that you have studied. [25 marks] Anarchism ‘Anarchists differ over the means to achieve their goals.’ Analyse and evaluate this statement with reference to the anarchist thinkers you have studied. [25 marks] Ecologism ‘Ecologists disagree about the importance of human beings in comparison to other life forms.’ Analyse and evaluate this statement with reference to the ecologist thinkers that you have studied. [25 marks] Target AO1: 5 marks, AO2: 10 marks, AO3: 10 marks Level Marks Descriptors 5 21–25 • detailed and accurate knowledge and understanding of relevant political concepts, institutions and processes are used to support analysis of the issue under discussion (AO1). • analysis is balanced and confidently developed (AO2). • synoptic links are well explained, are focused on the question and fully supported with relevant and developed examples (AO2). • evaluation of the above leads to well-substantiated conclusions that are consistent with the preceding discussion (AO3). • relevant perspectives are successfully evaluated in the process of constructing arguments (AO3). • the answer is well organised, coherent and has a sustained analytical focus on the question (AO2). 4 16–20 • accurate knowledge and understanding of relevant political concepts, institutions and processes are used to support analysis of the issue under discussion, though further detail may be required in places (AO1). • analysis is balanced developed, though some elements of the analysis could be expanded and/or developed further. • synoptic links are relevant to the questions as set, and supported with examples (AO2). • evaluation of the above leads to conclusions that show some substantiation and consistency with the preceding discussion (AO3). • relevant perspectives are evaluated in the process of constructing arguments, although in some places there could be further development of the evaluation (AO3). • the answer is well organised, analytical in style and is focused on the question as set. 3 11–15 • generally sound knowledge and understanding of relevant political concepts, institutions and processes are used to support points made, though inaccuracies will be present (AO1). • analytical points are made and developed in places, showing some balance, though some points are descriptive rather than analytical. • synoptic links will be made, may be supported by examples, though explanation will lack depth (AO2). • evaluation of the above leads to conclusions that are consistent with the preceding discussion, but that lack substantiation (AO3). • relevant perspectives are commented on in the process of constructing arguments, though evaluation is lacking depth. (AO3). • the answer is organised, occasionally analytical and focused on the question as set. 2 6–10 • some knowledge and understanding of relevant political concepts, institutions and processes are used to support points made, though these contain inaccuracies and irrelevant material (AO1). • analysis takes the form of description in most places, with some attempt at balance, though many points are unsupported assertions (AO2). • synoptic links tend to be limited and undeveloped (AO2). • some attempt to draw conclusions is made, but these lack depth and clear development from the preceding discussion (AO3). • relevant perspectives are identified, though evaluation will be superficial (AO3). • the answer shows some organisation and makes some attempt to address the question (AO2). 1 1–5 • limited knowledge and understanding of relevant political concepts, institutions and processes, with inaccuracies and irrelevant material present throughout (AO1). • analysis takes the form of description and assertion, with little or no attempt made at balance (AO2). • few if any synoptic links are offered (AO2). • conclusions, when offered, are asserted and have an implicit relationship to the preceding discussion (AO3). • little or no evaluation of relevant perspectives is present (AO3). • the answer shows little organisation and does not address the question (AO2). 0 0 • nothing worthy of credit. 0 5 Nationalism ‘Nationalism is not always a peaceful ideology.’ Analyse and evaluate this statement with reference to the nationalist thinkers that you have studied. [25 marks] Indicative content In the analysis and evaluation of the statement, students may be expected to cover areas such as the following: • analysis of how nationalism can be used to secure peace (such as via national unity) • analysis of how nationalism can be used to justify political violence. This may be linked to conflict between nations and national groups • an evaluation of the extent to which nationalism sometimes leads to violence. For instance, Charles Maurras’ concept of integral nationalism justifies the use of military strength. In addition, Jean-Jacques Rousseau’s argument that we should be “forced to be free” may be associated with the French revolution. However, Mazzini’s concept of popular sovereignty sought to unite Italians in a peaceful manner • an evaluation of how nationalist concepts can be used to justify peaceful progress and political violence. This may even apply to the same concept (such as the general will of Jean-Jacques Rousseau, the ‘thought and action’ argument of Giuseppe Mazzini and the pan-Africanism of Marcus Garvey) • expect possible use of concepts such as civil nationalism, volksgeist and the various strands of nationalism. Students who make no reference to thinkers must not be rewarded marks above Level 2. Synoptic links may be found in areas such as democracy, electoral behaviour, interest groups, media, party policies and programmes, and political agenda. Any response that does not include synoptic points cannot achieve above Level 4. Students would not need to cover each and every one of the above points to gain high marks; equally, some may introduce further relevant points and these should be credited. The conclusion should clearly focus on the issue in question. In their evaluation, it does not matter what views students reach. However, their position must be supported by their arguments and examples. 0 6 Feminism ‘Feminists are divided over how to achieve a fairer society.’ Analyse and evaluate this statement with reference to the feminist thinkers you have studied. [25 marks] Indicative content In the analysis and evaluation of the statement, students may be expected to cover areas such as the following: • analysis of how divisions amongst feminists relate to the changing nature of patriarchy. There may be reference here to the various waves of feminist thought, and how various feminists have sought to create a fairer society • analysis of how feminists offer various prescriptions for a fairer society (such as bell hooks’ insights into intersectionality and Charlotte Gilman’s emphasis upon economic independence from domestic duties) • an evaluation of the various strands of feminist thought. Liberal feminists argue that society should be based upon individual choice. Socialist feminists such as Sheila Rowbotham argue that society should be egalitarian, whereas radical feminists emphasise the superiority of feminine values. There may also be an evaluation of the debate concerning the politics of sameness versus politics of difference • an evaluation as to the similarities amongst feminists over how to achieve a fairer society (such as Simone de Beauvoir and Kate Millett’s support for abolishing the family as the root cause of female oppression). This may be linked to the argument that feminists are not divided • expect reference to concepts such as gynocentric, androgyny and sisterhood alongside various feminist perspectives (even post-modern feminism). Students who make no reference to thinkers must not be rewarded marks above Level 2. Synoptic links may be found in areas such as democracy, electoral behaviour, interest groups, media, party policies and programmes, and political agenda. Any response that does not include synoptic points cannot achieve above Level 4. Students would not need to cover each and every one of the above points to gain high marks; equally, some may introduce further relevant points and these should be credited. The conclusion should clearly focus on the issue in question. In their evaluation, it does not matter what views students reach. However, their position must be supported by their arguments and examples. 0 7 Multiculturalism ‘There is significant disagreement about the recognition of diversity and minority rights.’ Analyse and evaluate this statement with reference to the multiculturalist thinkers that you have studied. [25 marks] Indicative content In the analysis and evaluation of the statement, students may be expected to cover areas such as the following: • analysis of the view that multiculturalism seeks to promote a positive view of both diversity and minority rights • analysis of how multiculturalist thinkers have viewed diversity and minority rights (such as Isaiah Berlin’s argument that state intervention can be used to uphold diversity and minority rights). Tariq Modood’s emphasis upon freedom of choice and his critique of illiberal measures that arise from radical secularism may also be considered • an evaluation as to how the various strands of multiculturalism seek to recognise diversity and minority rights. Liberal multiculturalism endorses cultural diversity compatible with tolerance and personal autonomy within a liberal framework. Pluralist multiculturalism supports diversity as a value in its own right in which all cultures are equal and cultural recognition is the basis for civic participation. However, cosmopolitan multiculturalism claims that diversity strengthens cultural hybridity and undermines cultural identity as a driving force in society • an evaluation of Bhikhu Parekh’s prescription of how to achieve a multicultural society. This may include the recommendations put forward in The Parekh Report, and the notion that the individual is culturally embedded • an evaluation of Will Kymlicka’s support for equitable treatment of minority groups. This may entail the recognition that some groups claim unique rights. Expect students to differentiate between good and bad group rights (probably in the context of women and their position within society) • expect reference to concepts such as value pluralism, laïcité and the multiculturalist view that the individual is culturally embedded. Students who make no reference to thinkers must not be rewarded marks above Level 2. Synoptic links may be found in areas such as democracy, electoral behaviour, interest groups, media, party policies and programmes, and political agenda. Any response that does not include synoptic points cannot achieve above Level 4. Students would not need to cover each and every one of the above points to gain high marks; equally, some may introduce further relevant points and these should be credited. The conclusion should clearly focus on the issue in question. In their evaluation, it does not matter what views students reach. However, their position must be supported by their arguments and examples. 0 8 Anarchism ‘Anarchists differ over the means to achieve their goals.’ Analyse and evaluate this statement with reference to the anarchist thinkers you have studied. [25 marks] Indicative content In the analysis and evaluation of the statement, students may be expected to cover areas such as the following: • analysis of how the main strands of anarchism differ in their view of a stateless society, and the means by which they seek to achieve anarchism. This may refer to divisions amongst them (such as Kropotkin’s claim that the collectivist model offered by Bakunin was a wage system by another name) • analysis of how hierarchy might still arise even within a stateless society, how the state might respond to anarchists (eg with the full force of the agents of the state) and the view that anarchism has no effective mechanism to deal with the negative consequences of human nature • an evaluation of the means by which anarchists have sought to achieve their goals. For instance, propaganda of the deed as advocated by Mikhail Bakunin could be seen as either adequate or impractical. This may be linked to human nature and the role of the state • an evaluation of the practicality or otherwise of anarchist concepts (such as the Union of Egoists advocated by individualist anarchists such as Stirner and the collectivist anarchist argument from Pierre-Joseph Proudhon that “all property is theft”) • expect reference to time store, credit unions and Peter Kropotkin’s concept of mutual aid. This may also include recent examples of anarchism in practice (eg the Occupy movement, Anonymous and the Five Star group in Italy). Students who make no reference to thinkers must not be rewarded marks above Level 2. Synoptic links may be found in areas such as democracy, electoral behaviour, interest groups, media, party policies and programmes, and political agenda. Any response that does not include synoptic points cannot achieve above Level 4. Students would not need to cover each and every one of the above points to gain high marks; equally, some may introduce further relevant points and these should be credited. The conclusion should clearly focus on the issue in question. In their evaluation, it does not matter what views students reach. However, their position must be supported by their arguments and examples. 0 9 Ecologism ‘Ecologists disagree about the importance of human beings in comparison to other life forms.’ Analyse and evaluate this statement with reference to the ecologist thinkers that you have studied. [25 marks] Indicative content In the analysis and evaluation of the statement, students may be expected to cover areas such as the following: • analysis and evaluation of the extent to which all ecologists place considerable emphasis on life forms other than humans • analysis of the argument that anthropocentric sustainable development is a legitimate and acceptable way of measuring human activity. Students may cite the work of Carson in the silent spring • analysis of other human-centred approaches or “light green” ecology. This may include Ernst Schumacher’s support for Buddhist economics and use of appropriate technologies • analysis of dark green views on humans as life forms. Students may cite the work of Leopold and his theories of biocentrism and the extent to which there is inherent value in all living things • analysis of the Gaia hypothesis and the maintenance of homeostasis on earth, and the extent to which humans are seen as a threat to this rather than being seen as morally separate. Students may cite the work of Carolyn Merchant and the argument that human needs are subordinate to the needs of “mother earth” • analysis of the extent to which recent developments in ecologism reflect anthropocentrism such as the Paris climate accord, deep-green groups in the animal rights movement and recent policies of green parties in the developed world • evaluation of the extent to which the differences between ecologists is significant on the moral status of humans and other life forms. Students who make no reference to thinkers must not be rewarded marks above level 2. Synoptic links may be found in areas such as democracy, electoral behaviour, interest groups, media, party policies and programmes, and political agenda. Any response that does not include synoptic points cannot achieve above level 4. Students would not need to cover each and every one of the above points to gain high marks; equally, some may introduce further relevant points and these should be credited. The conclusion should clearly focus on the issue in question. In their evaluation, it does not matter what views students reach. However, their position must be supported by their arguments and examples.