1. WJEC GCSE HISTORY UNIT 1 [Depth studies] UNIT 2 [Depth & Thematic studies] Feedback on the 2011 Examination

2. General observations Smooth transition to new Specification Completing the exam within one hour did not prove to be a problem Some outstanding performances at the top end with candidates demonstrating sustained output across all questions Weaker candidates tend to commit rubric offences

3. However, there was a noticeable increase in the number of bullet point style answers – this needs to be discouraged Sections A & B carry equal mark weightings [2 x 25 marks] Section A tests source evaluation skills Section B tests application of knowledge There was sometimes a marked discrepancy in candidate performance across both sections This was especially true for weaker candidates

4. Not all topic areas in new Specification had been covered – some Centres still teaching according to the old Specification Some Centres only taught two of the three sections [compulsory section and one other] Example: Germany 1929-1947 - very few Centres taught the third section [War and its Impact, 1939-1947] - Q.2. answered by 16,652 candidates [88.7%] - Q.3. answered by 2110 candidates [11.3%] - in many instances performance in the less popular question was much weaker

5. Comments on performance in Section A Q1(a) - answers often went beyond the source and included own knowledge - need to keep responses short - 2 sentences, 3 at most! - need to use source and caption [which was too often ignored]

6. Q1(b) - established question but there remains a pitfall - need a balance between development of information from source and also context via own knowledge - some able candidates ignore source in favour of just own knowledge [= answer capped at 3 marks]

7. Q1(c) - new style question with mixed performance - a COP style response is not required - need to develop what is in the source and use the caption - provide some context via own knowledge - provide a judgement upon the question - too often judgements were weak and lacking in support

8. Q1(d) - established question requiring a source to be evaluated in terms of its content value, its origin and it purpose [COP] - needs to be a sustained and balanced evaluation of all three for full marks - candidates from some Centres never advance beyond evaluation of content [= answer capped at half-marks]

9. Q1(e) - new style question with a focus on interpretation - need to compare and contrast two sources - evaluate ‘how’ they differ [comparing source content] - evaluate ‘why’ they differ [comparing the two authors] - well explained responses which address ‘how’ and ‘why’ they differ and display sustained explanation can reach Level 4 [7marks] - for maximum marks an integrated and sophisticated evaluation is required together with a reasoned judgement upon the question set

10. Comments on performance in Section B Q2/3(a) Ditto comment made for Q1(a) Q2/3(b) - describe question which requires demonstration of specific knowledge - too many generalised responses - need range and depth of detail for maximum marks - should aim to make three distinct points

11. Q2/3(ci) & (cii) - an established question but there remains a pitfall - too many ignore ‘explain why’ and merely describe, producing narrative type answers - must give two distinct and supported reasons ‘why’

12. Q2/3(d) - question is worded to invite a two-sided response - many used the scaffold provided and this proved especially useful to weaker candidates as it enabled them to consider two-sides - need specific detail and range of factors to advance up the mark scheme - essay should be concluded with a reasoned judgement upon the question set - were many examples of balanced, reasoned and well supported two-sided responses

13. Cycle of questions for 2012 Compulsory Section A for 2012 = Section Two of the course [Eg: Germany = Changing life for the German people, 1933-1939] [Eg: USA 1910-1929 = The Rise and Fall of the American Economy] Section B = Either Section One or Section Three of the Unit Specification

14. Marking the Depth/Thematic Studies Three specimen scripts to examine: Candidate (i) Candidate (ii) Candidate (iii) Please provide a level and mark for questions: 1(c), 1(e) and 2(d)

15. Generic mark scheme for Question C Level One [1-2 marks] - generalised answer, uses content of source mainly Level Two [3-4 marks] - some discussion of content, some context, attempt at a judgement but not sustained Level Three [5 marks] - answer addresses the issue clearly, using the source and contextual knowledge to offer a reasoned and supported judgement

16. Generic mark scheme for Question E Level One [1-2 marks] - generalised answer; paraphrases the sources; rambles Level Two [3-4 marks] - some consideration of how they differ (content); unbalanced re: sources; weak judgement Level Three [5-6 marks] - builds upon the how with some consideration of why the authors have different view (content & attributions); some judgement Level Four [7-8 marks] - balanced answer with detailed and supported consideration of how and why the sources have differing views; good contextual knowledge; clear and sustained judgement which addresses the question

17. Generic mark scheme for Q2/3(d) Level One [1-2 marks] - generalised; simple explanation; little support Level Two [3-5 marks] - [3-4 marks] one-sided with some support; very weak two-sided - [5 marks] one-sided with reasonable support; weak two-sided

18. Level Three [6-8 marks] - [6-7 marks] very good one-sided; unbalanced two-sided with some contextual support - [8 marks] good explanation / evaluation but lacking some detail / balance Level Four [9-10 marks] - [9 marks] reasoned & supported two-sided answer with good balance; mostly accurate detail - [10 marks] reasoned & well supported two- sided with very good balance; accurate detail; well reasoned conclusion

19. Total marks awarded to each candidate and grade Candidate (i) Total mark = /50 Grade: Candidate (ii) Total mark = /50 Grade: Candidate (iii) Total mark = /50 Grade: