AQA A-Level • Your 2-year weapon • Built different
AQA A-Level Sociology is split into 3 papers, each 2 hours, each 80 marks. You'll sit all three at the end of Year 13. Here's the breakdown:
33.3% • 80 marks • 2 hours
33.3% • 80 marks • 2 hours
Section A: Families & Households (or other)
Section B: Beliefs in Society (or other)
33.3% • 80 marks • 2 hours
~33% of marks
Show you KNOW stuff: theories, concepts, studies, sociologists' names and dates.
Trigger words: "outline", "explain", "describe"
~33% of marks
Apply knowledge to the QUESTION. Use the Item. Give real examples. Answer what's being asked!
⚠️ Most marks lost here!
~33% of marks
JUDGE the theories. Strengths? Weaknesses? Counter-arguments? Your verdict?
Trigger words: "assess", "evaluate", "to what extent"
Sociology has LOWER boundaries than most subjects. Here's what you actually need:
| Grade | % Needed | Out of 240 | What It Means |
|---|---|---|---|
| A* | ~70-75% | ~168-180 | Elite. Top unis fighting for you. |
| A | ~60-65% | ~144-156 | Strong. Russell Group material. |
| B | ~50-55% | ~120-132 | Solid. Good uni options. |
| C | ~40-45% | ~96-108 | Average. Room to grow. |
💡 Compare: Many A-Levels need 85-90% for an A*. Sociology's ~70% is way more achievable with solid technique!
Examiners LOVE when you link topics together. Here's how they all connect:
"This links to [topic] because..." or "Similarly, [sociologist] found in their study of [other topic]..." = instant sophistication points!
Every essay needs multiple perspectives. These are your weapons - know them inside out.
Screenshot this. Print it. Tattoo it on your soul.
| Functionalist | Marxist | Feminist | Interactionist | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Core belief | Society is like a body - all parts work together for stability | Society is divided by CLASS - ruling class exploits workers | Society is PATRIARCHAL - men dominate women | Society is constructed through everyday INTERACTIONS |
| View of education | Socialisation, skills, meritocracy, role allocation | Reproduces inequality, serves capitalism, myth of meritocracy | Reproduces gender inequality, hidden curriculum | Labelling, self-fulfilling prophecy, negotiated identities |
| View of family | Essential functions: socialisation, stabilisation of personality | Reproduces labour power, ideological control, inheritance | Site of oppression, unpaid domestic labour, emotional work | Meanings constructed by family members, negotiated roles |
| View of crime | Inevitable, functional for boundary maintenance | Created by capitalism, laws protect ruling class | Reflects patriarchy, women controlled, DV ignored | Deviance is socially constructed through labelling |
| View of religion | Creates social solidarity, collective conscience | Opium of masses, legitimises inequality | Patriarchal institution, controls women | Meanings constructed, religion as identity |
| Key thinkers | Durkheim, Parsons, Davis & Moore | Marx, Althusser, Bowles & Gintis, Gramsci | Oakley, Delphy, Walby, hooks | Becker, Goffman, Cooley, Mead |
| Main criticism | Ignores conflict, too rosy, outdated | Too deterministic, ignores gender/ethnicity | Generalises women, ignores class differences | Ignores wider structures, small-scale only |
Hover or click to reveal key details. Master these!
Society works like a biological organism - all institutions work together to maintain stability.
Click to flip →Criticise with: Ignores conflict, power, inequality. Too idealistic. Outdated.
Society is divided by social class. The bourgeoisie exploit the proletariat.
Click to flip →Criticise with: Economic determinism. Ignores gender/ethnicity. Revolution didn't happen.
Society is male-dominated. Women are systematically disadvantaged.
Click to flip →Criticise with: Generalises women's experiences. Some ignore race/class. Outdated?
Society is constructed through everyday face-to-face interactions.
Click to flip →Criticise with: Ignores wider structures. Where do labels come from? Small-scale only.
Grand narratives are dead. Identity is fluid. Everything is relative.
Click to flip →Criticise with: Too relativistic. Ignores real inequalities. Is postmodernism itself a metanarrative?
Traditional values matter. Welfare creates dependency. Market forces work.
Click to flip →Criticise with: Blames victims. Ignores structural inequality. Ideological, not scientific.
This is your bread and butter. 30-mark essay territory. Know it COLD.
Crisis of masculinity - decline of traditional male jobs, boys lack motivation. Epstein - "laddish" anti-school culture, trying hard seen as feminine. Francis - boys fear being labelled "swots". New Right - lack of male role models, especially in primary schools and single-parent families.
Conformists - accept school values. Innovators - want success but reject rules. Retreatists - disconnected. Rebels - reject school, embrace street culture. Shows agency - not all respond same way to racism!
Black girls face racism BUT develop strategies to succeed: working hard despite negative labelling, seeking help outside school, avoiding certain teachers. Shows intersectionality - race AND gender matter together.
Huge variation WITHIN ethnic groups. Chinese & Indian students outperform white British. Black African vs Black Caribbean differences. Class often matters more than ethnicity. Always acknowledge complexity in essays.
Lockdown widened class gap - middle-class had better home learning resources, quiet spaces, parental help.
Child poverty rising, free school meal demand up, families choosing between heating and eating.
ChatGPT use in schools, debates about cheating, digital literacy gaps by class.
Debates about removing tax breaks from private schools, wealth and educational privilege.
Schools closed due to crumbling buildings, mostly in poorer areas.
Experienced teachers leaving, worst in deprived areas.
Most popular optional topic. Know the debates on family diversity, gender roles, and childhood.
| March of Progress | Conflict View | |
|---|---|---|
| Main argument | Childhood has improved - children are protected, valued, educated | Childhood is based on adult power - not always golden age |
| Key thinkers | Ariès, Shorter | Firestone, Gittins, Hillman |
| Evidence for | Laws protect children, compulsory education, children's rights | Child abuse, neglect, global inequalities in childhood |
| Related concept | Cult of childhood, child-centred society | Age patriarchy, control over children |
TV & media blur boundaries between childhood and adulthood. Children exposed to adult world through screens. "Information hierarchy" collapsed.
Counter: Opie - childhood not disappearing, just changing. Childhood culture still exists (playground games, slang).
30-mark essay here too. Learn theories, patterns of crime, and control/punishment.
| Theory | Core Argument | Key Thinkers | Evaluation |
|---|---|---|---|
| Functionalist | Crime is inevitable & functional - boundary maintenance, social change, safety valve | Durkheim, Merton (strain theory), Cohen (status frustration) | ✗ Ignores victims, not all crime functional, can't explain individual crimes |
| Marxist | Crime caused by capitalism - inequality, alienation. Law protects ruling class. | Chambliss, Snider, Box | ✗ Not all crime is working class, ignores gender, too deterministic |
| Interactionist | Deviance is socially constructed through labelling. No act is inherently deviant. | Becker, Lemert, Cohen (moral panics) | ✗ Why do labels stick to some not others? Ignores original act. |
| Left Realist | Crime is real problem for working class. Relative deprivation + marginalisation + subculture. | Lea & Young, Kinsey | ✗ Relies on victim surveys, ignores corporate crime, still idealistic |
| Right Realist | Crime = rational choice. Target hardening, zero tolerance. Underclass lacks socialisation. | Wilson, Murray, Clarke | ✗ Blames poor, ignores white-collar crime, evidence mixed |
| Feminist | Crime stats reflect patriarchy. Women controlled, crimes against them ignored. | Heidensohn, Carlen, Smart | ✗ Not all women conform, ignores class/ethnicity, masculinity |
Women face more social control:
Gender socialisation differences:
Denscombe - girls now engage in more risk-taking. Female crime rising? Or just moral panic?
Understanding how crime is measured - and why those measurements are problematic - is essential for Crime & Deviance.
The dark figure = crimes that occur but don't appear in official statistics. Includes:
+ Free, large-scale, shows trends, allows comparison
- Dark figure, social construction (labelling), police bias, definitions change
Positivists like them; Interpretivists critique them
+ Captures unreported crime, victim perspective, more complete picture
- Memory issues, doesn't cover all crimes (corporate, victimless), still relies on what people define as crime
Left Realists (Lea & Young) use these
+ Offender perspective, can reveal middle-class crime, challenges stereotypes
- Validity issues (boasting or hiding), sample problems, doesn't capture serious crime
Shows crime more evenly distributed by class than stats suggest
Official stats: working class overrepresented. But is this real or...
Men commit ~80% of recorded crime. But...
Black people overrepresented in prison. But...
Peak age for offending: 15-18 for boys, 14-15 for girls. But...
Crime statistics are socially constructed - they tell us as much about the CJS, media, and society's priorities as about actual crime patterns. Always question WHO is being counted and WHY.
Drug gangs using children to transport drugs to rural areas. Exploitation of vulnerable young people.
Sarah Everard case, debates about women's safety, police misconduct, #ReclaimTheseStreets
Disproportionate targeting of young Black men, institutional racism debates.
Post Office Horizon scandal - wrongful prosecutions, corporate cover-up, class & justice.
Cyber crime now most common crime type. Often unreported, hard to police.
Criminalisation of protest, debate about what counts as deviance vs legitimate action.
Religion, secularisation, ideology. Big theoretical debates here.
| Perspective | View of Religion | Key Argument | Criticisms |
|---|---|---|---|
| Functionalist | POSITIVE - integrates society | Durkheim: sacred vs profane, collective conscience, totemism. Parsons: answers ultimate questions, legitimises norms. | Ignores conflict, can't explain religious decline, based on small-scale societies |
| Marxist | NEGATIVE - tool of oppression | Marx: opium of the masses, legitimises inequality, promises afterlife. Religion = ideological control. | Ignores positive functions, religion can promote change, too deterministic |
| Feminist | NEGATIVE - patriarchal | De Beauvoir: religion = opium for women. Sacred texts written by men, exclude women from leadership, control sexuality. | Ignores religious feminism, some women empowered by religion, not all religions same |
| Weber | Religion can cause CHANGE | Protestant ethic → spirit of capitalism. Calvinism promoted hard work, saving, reinvestment. Ideas matter! | Correlation not causation, capitalism existed before, Marxist criticism |
Large, bureaucratic, claims monopoly, integrated with state, professional clergy, inclusive membership
Accepts other religions, less exclusive, doesn't demand total commitment, professional clergy
Small, exclusive, rejects wider society, charismatic leader, demands total commitment, often short-lived
Highly individualistic, often world-affirming, tolerant, loose structure, focus on self-improvement
Women are MORE religious than men. Why?
Ethnic minorities often MORE religious. Why?
Older people MORE religious. Why?
Historically, religion linked to class position
Wallis's Typology: Three types of NRMs based on their relationship to the world:
Accept the world - want to help you succeed in it
Reject the world - withdraw from corrupt society
Live alongside the world - focus on inner spirituality
Feel deprived compared to others - spiritual compensation for material lack. World-rejecting NRMs appeal to those who feel excluded from mainstream success.
Appeal to those outside mainstream society - young, ethnic minorities, women. Sects offer community and status denied elsewhere.
Rationalisation creates "disenchantment". NRMs offer meaning, magic, certainty that mainstream religion and science can't provide.
Rapid social change creates anomie and uncertainty. NRMs offer clear answers and strong community in unstable times.
Increasing people identifying as "no religion" in census data. 37% in 2021 UK Census.
COVID accelerated virtual worship. TikTok spirituality, Instagram preachers, Zoom church services.
Growth of evangelical Christianity in Global South, Islamic fundamentalism, Hindu nationalism.
Research methods + philosophy of sociology. PET factors are your best friend.
| Method | Strengths | Weaknesses | Used by |
|---|---|---|---|
| Questionnaires | Cheap, quick, large sample, reliable, quantifiable, can be anonymous | Low response rate, imposed meanings, no depth, can't probe | Positivists |
| Structured Interviews | Reliable, comparable, can explain questions, higher response | Interviewer bias, social desirability, can't probe deeply | Positivists |
| Unstructured Interviews | Valid, builds rapport, rich data, can explore meanings, flexible | Time consuming, unreliable, interviewer bias, hard to generalise | Interpretivists |
| Participant Observation | Very valid, first-hand, can study sensitive groups, natural setting | Going native, observer effect, unreliable, ethical issues, dangerous | Interpretivists |
| Official Statistics | Free, large-scale, reliable, can identify trends, representative | Social construction, definitions change, dark figure, political bias | Positivists |
| Documents | Cheap, can study past, unobtrusive, rich data, unique insights | Authenticity, credibility, representativeness, interpretation issues | Both |
Every methods question can be answered using PET. Memorise this framework!
These are the studies you NEED to cite. Methodology, findings, evaluation - all in one place. Memorise these and you'll never be short of evidence.
Method: Analysis of 237 New York high school students' grades vs personality traits
Findings: Schools reward obedience, not creativity. Correspondence principle - school mirrors workplace hierarchy. Hidden curriculum teaches punctuality, acceptance of authority.
Conclusion: Meritocracy is a myth that legitimises inequality.
Method: Participant observation + interviews with 12 working-class "lads" in a Midlands secondary school
Findings: Lads created counter-school culture - "having a laff", rejecting authority, valuing manual labour. Saw through meritocracy myth but still ended up in working-class jobs.
Conclusion: Pupils have agency but still reproduce class structure.
Method: Field experiment in California elementary school. Told teachers certain students were "spurters" (actually randomly selected).
Findings: "Spurters" showed significantly higher IQ gains after 1 year. Teachers gave them more attention, encouragement, feedback.
Conclusion: Teacher expectations create self-fulfilling prophecy.
Method: Interviews with 60 Chicago high school teachers
Findings: Teachers classify pupils against image of "ideal pupil" - middle-class, compliant, motivated. Working-class pupils labelled as lacking these qualities.
Conclusion: Labels based on class, not ability - affects treatment and outcomes.
Method: Interviews with parents and analysis of school admissions in 3 LEAs
Findings: Middle-class "skilled choosers" - cultural capital to research schools, navigate system. Working-class "disconnected choosers" - relied on local schools, less strategic.
Conclusion: Marketisation benefits those already advantaged.
Method: Ethnographic study of Black girls in two London schools
Findings: Black girls were ambitious and hardworking but faced negative labelling from teachers. Developed strategies to succeed despite institutional racism.
Conclusion: Intersectionality - race AND gender matter. Girls showed agency against discrimination.
Method: Large-scale survey of families in London
Findings: Trend towards "symmetrical family" - joint conjugal roles, both partners sharing domestic tasks and decisions. March of progress in gender equality.
Conclusion: Family becoming more democratic and equal.
Method: In-depth interviews with 40 London housewives
Findings: Housework is monotonous, isolating, low-status work. Men's "help" is minimal - only 15% had high participation in housework.
Conclusion: Gender role socialisation creates unequal division. "Symmetrical family" is a myth.
Method: Interviews with couples about emotional labour
Findings: Women perform TRIPLE shift: paid work + domestic labour + emotional labour (managing family emotions, remembering birthdays, maintaining relationships).
Conclusion: Gender inequality in families goes beyond visible housework.
Method: Review of demographic and social trends
Findings: 5 types of diversity: Organisational (structure), Cultural (ethnic differences), Class, Life-course (stage of life), Generational (cohort differences).
Conclusion: No single "normal" family type - diversity is the norm.
Method: Content analysis of media coverage of Mods vs Rockers (1964)
Findings: Media exaggerated, distorted, predicted more violence. Created "folk devils" (deviant stereotypes). Moral entrepreneurs demanded crackdown. Deviancy amplification spiral.
Conclusion: Media and moral entrepreneurs construct crime problems.
Method: Participant observation of two high school groups in USA
Findings: Both groups committed similar delinquency. Middle-class "Saints" seen as good kids going through a phase. Working-class "Roughnecks" labelled as troublemakers, arrested more.
Conclusion: Class affects how same behaviour is labelled and punished.
Method: Theoretical analysis + review of existing research
Findings: Women commit less crime due to patriarchal control: at home (domestic role), in public (fear of male violence), at work (male supervision). Social control is gendered.
Conclusion: Women have fewer opportunities for crime due to patriarchal restrictions.
Method: Islington Crime Survey - victim surveys in inner London
Findings: Crime is a REAL problem for working-class communities. Caused by: relative deprivation (feeling deprived compared to others), marginalisation (no political voice), subculture (collective solution).
Conclusion: Must take crime seriously AND address root causes.
Method: Study of Arunta Aboriginal clan in Australia - totemism
Findings: Totem (sacred object) represents the clan itself. Worshipping totem = worshipping society. Religion creates collective conscience, social solidarity, shared values.
Conclusion: Religion is society worshipping itself.
Method: Historical/comparative analysis of religion and economic development
Findings: Calvinist beliefs (predestination, calling, asceticism) created psychological anxiety. Work became sign of salvation. Reinvested profits → capitalism developed.
Conclusion: Religious IDEAS can cause social change - challenges Marx.
Method: Analysis of religious trends and survey data
Findings: "Believing without belonging" - people still have religious beliefs but don't attend church. Vicarious religion - clergy believe on our behalf.
Conclusion: Secularisation overstated - religion has changed form, not disappeared.
Method: Statistical analysis of religious trends
Findings: Multiple evidence of secularisation: declining church attendance, membership, rites of passage. Rationalisation, structural differentiation, social diversity all cause decline.
Conclusion: Religion is in terminal decline in modern societies.
Technique wins marks. Here's how to structure essays that examiners love.
20-markers are DIFFERENT from 30-markers. Shorter, sometimes no Item, but still need all three AOs.
Aim for: 2-2.5 sides of A4
| Aspect | 20-mark | 30-mark |
| Time | 25-30 mins | 45 mins |
| Paragraphs | 3 main | 4-5 main |
| Depth | Good depth, fewer points | Deep + wide coverage |
| Sociologists | 3-4 minimum | 5-6 minimum |
| Item | Sometimes yes, sometimes no | Always has Item |
Define key terms • Outline debate/perspectives • State your argument • USE THE ITEM
Point → Explain → Expand with evidence → Criticise/Evaluate
Cover: Functionalist • Marxist • Feminist • Interactionist • Contemporary • Your judgement
Weigh up perspectives • Give your verdict WITH reasons • Reference Item again • Contemporary relevance
Role allocation refers to the process by which education sifts and sorts individuals according to their abilities and allocates them to appropriate occupational positions. As Item B suggests, functionalists view this as education's primary purpose, arguing it ensures "the most talented people end up in the most important positions." This essay will evaluate this functionalist view by examining Marxist critiques which argue education reproduces class inequality rather than identifying talent, feminist perspectives on gendered outcomes, and interactionist insights into how labelling processes operate within schools. I will argue that while education may appear meritocratic, evidence suggests it primarily serves to legitimise and reproduce existing social inequalities.
Parsons (1961) argues education acts as the primary mechanism of secondary socialisation, bridging the gap between the family's particularistic standards and society's universalistic standards. Unlike parents who judge children as individuals, schools judge everyone against the same criteria through examinations. This links to Item B's claim that education identifies talent through "fair assessment." Davis and Moore (1945) extend this, arguing role allocation is functionally necessary because society needs the most talented people in the most important jobs. Education identifies these individuals, and unequal rewards motivate competition. However, Tumin criticises this view for ignoring how the powerful define which jobs are "important" - surgeons are highly rewarded while nurses do equally vital work for much less. Furthermore, the assumption of meritocracy ignores inherited wealth and private schooling which give middle-class children advantages regardless of ability.
Marxists fundamentally reject the functionalist view. Bowles and Gintis (1976) argue education does not reward ability but instead reproduces class inequalities through the correspondence principle - schools mirror the hierarchy of capitalist workplaces. The hidden curriculum teaches obedience, acceptance of hierarchy, and motivation by external rewards, preparing working-class children for subordinate roles. They argue meritocracy is a myth that legitimises inequality by making failure appear to be individuals' own fault. Contemporary evidence supports this: despite decades of educational policies, the class gap in achievement persists, suggesting structural barriers rather than individual ability determine outcomes. However, this view can be criticised for being too deterministic - it cannot explain how some working-class individuals do succeed, as Willis's "lads" demonstrate some agency in rejecting school values, even if they ultimately reproduce their class position.
Continue with: Paragraph 3 (Bourdieu - cultural capital), Paragraph 4 (Interactionist - labelling), Paragraph 5 (Contemporary evaluation + your judgement), then Conclusion weighing up all perspectives with final verdict.
This is what separates the A* students from everyone else. Same knowledge, different execution. Master this and you're unstoppable.
For 30-mark essays, there are 5 levels. Here's the REAL difference between them:
"Sound, conceptually detailed knowledge... sophisticated understanding... well-developed and balanced argument... appropriate material applied... clear conclusions drawn."
Same topic. Same question. Completely different execution. Study these side-by-side:
"Marxists believe that education is not meritocratic. They think that education reproduces class inequality and helps capitalism. Bowles and Gintis said there is a hidden curriculum that teaches students to obey rules and accept hierarchy. This prepares working-class kids for boring jobs. They also said meritocracy is a myth because rich kids always do better. However, some people disagree with this view."
"Marxists fundamentally reject the functionalist view that education is meritocratic. Bowles and Gintis (1976) argue that education reproduces class inequality through the correspondence principle - schools mirror the hierarchy of capitalist workplaces. The hidden curriculum teaches obedience, acceptance of hierarchy, and motivation by external rewards, preparing working-class children for subordinate roles. As Item B suggests, this challenges the notion that education identifies 'the most talented'. However, this view is criticised for being too deterministic - it cannot explain working-class success or why some students, like Willis's (1977) 'lads', actively resist schooling yet still reproduce their class position, suggesting some agency within structural constraints."
Take any sentence and upgrade it using these patterns:
"Some sociologists argue that labelling affects achievement."
"Rosenthal and Jacobson's (1968) 'Pygmalion in the Classroom' study demonstrated that teacher expectations create a self-fulfilling prophecy, significantly affecting student achievement."
"However, this view has been criticised."
"However, postmodernists critique this view for its structural determinism - it assumes people are passive puppets of the system, ignoring individual agency and the diverse ways students negotiate their identities within education."
"Working-class students do worse because they lack resources."
"Howard (2001) found that children in low-income families often lack basic educational resources, while Ridge (2002) demonstrated that financial constraints force many to miss school trips and lack internet access - both forms of material deprivation that Item A identifies as key barriers to achievement."
"Functionalists think education is good for society."
"While functionalists like Parsons (1961) view education as essential for social solidarity and meritocratic role allocation, Marxists counter that this 'consensus' masks how education legitimises class inequality. This theoretical tension reflects the broader debate between consensus and conflict perspectives in sociology."
10-markers are deceptively important - they're quick wins if you nail the technique.
"One way cultural factors affect achievement is through language. Working-class children speak differently to middle-class children which affects how they do at school. The Item says cultural deprivation is important.
Another way is parental attitudes. Some parents don't value education as much which means their children don't try as hard. Middle-class parents help more with homework."
"As Item A suggests, cultural deprivation affects achievement through language differences. Bernstein distinguished between the restricted code used by working-class families (limited vocabulary, context-bound) and the elaborated code favoured in schools. This disadvantages working-class pupils as education is conducted in the elaborated code. However, critics like Labov argue working-class speech is not inferior, just different - schools unfairly privilege middle-class linguistic norms.
The Item also implies that parental attitudes affect achievement. Douglas found middle-class parents showed more interest in education, attending parents' evenings and reading to children. Sugarman linked this to working-class values of fatalism and present-time orientation which conflict with deferred gratification required for educational success. Nevertheless, this view is criticised for victim-blaming - Keddie argues working-class culture is simply different, not deficient, and schools should adapt rather than expecting families to change."
Writing everything you know without answering the actual question. If it asks about class, don't spend half the essay on gender.
Fix: Read the question 3 times. Underline key words. Keep referring back.
Completely ignoring the Item or mentioning it once then never again. Instant marks lost.
Fix: Quote Item in intro + at least one body paragraph. "As Item A suggests..."
"However, this view has strengths and weaknesses" at the end. Lazy, vague, no marks.
Fix: Evaluate within EVERY paragraph. Name WHO criticises and WHY specifically.
Only discussing Marxism, or only Functionalism. Shows limited understanding.
Fix: Hit at least 3-4 perspectives per 30-marker. Show you know the debate.
"Some sociologists argue..." or "Many people believe..." WHO?! Name them!
Fix: Always name + date. "Bowles and Gintis (1976) argue that..."
"In conclusion, there are many factors and all views have merit." Take a position!
Fix: "On balance, I would argue X because..." Give YOUR reasoned judgement.
Spending 60 mins on a 30-marker and rushing the rest. Terrible mark economy.
Fix: 1.5 mins per mark. 30-mark = 45 mins MAX. Set a timer when practicing.
Every sentence earns marks. Ask yourself: "Is this showing AO1, AO2, or AO3?" If you can't answer, rewrite it.
The difference between A and A* is CONSISTENCY - doing all the right things in every paragraph, not just some of them.
Run through this before you hand in ANY essay:
A* students don't know MORE than B students - they just show what they know BETTER. Same knowledge, elite execution.
Straight from examiner reports, teacher forums, and people who've marked thousands of papers. This is what they don't put in the textbooks.
These are ACTUAL quotes and insights from AQA's official examiner reports. Pay attention:
"Common errors include failing to apply methods TO EDUCATION... many candidates wrote generic answers about methods without linking to educational research settings."
Translation: You MUST talk about schools, pupils, teachers, gatekeepers, ethical issues with children - not just generic method strengths/weaknesses.
"Some students wrote lengthy answers to the 4-mark and 6-mark questions which may explain why a few seemed to run out of time answering the final question(s)."
Translation: Don't overwrite! 4 marks = 4-6 sentences max. Save your energy for the big essays.
"There was a tendency for answers to progressively lose sight of the question and become a list of different views."
Translation: Keep linking back to the question! Don't just dump everything you know - stay relevant.
"Many answers focused on the first aspect of the question at the expense of the second. For example, detailed responses on changing gender roles but little on how these affected childhood."
Translation: Read the WHOLE question. If it asks about TWO things, cover BOTH equally.
"Theory & Methods questions were generally weaker than previous series. It appeared that students had prepared less well for these topics."
Translation: Don't neglect Theory & Methods! It's 20 marks on BOTH Paper 1 and Paper 3. Easy marks if you prepare.
"A lot of students seemed to run out of time to answer the final 10-mark theory question. It's almost certainly easier to get 4/10 for a 10-mark question than to go from 12/20 to 16/20 on a methods question."
Translation: Getting SOME marks on every question beats perfecting one and missing another. Time yourself!
Knowledge is easy. Application is hard. Students write great explanations of theories then don't link them to the question. Every paragraph should answer: "So what? Why does this matter for this specific question?"
A* students don't know more - they do all the right things in EVERY paragraph. B students might have one great paragraph then slip up. A* is about discipline, not genius.
Examiners can tell who just memorised Haralambos vs who actually engages with sociology. Read the news. Watch documentaries. Use contemporary examples. It shows genuine understanding.
5 minutes planning saves 10 minutes of waffle. Students who dive straight in often repeat themselves or forget key points. Even a quick bullet list helps.
Most students neglect it. Learn 3-4 points for each method applied to education specifically (access, gatekeepers, ethical issues with children, practical issues in schools). It's predictable and scoreable.
Different command words need different approaches. Get this wrong and you lose marks even with good knowledge:
What it means: Briefly describe - just AO1
What to do: State key points clearly. No evaluation needed. Keep it short.
Used in: 4-mark and 6-mark questions
What it means: Show understanding of HOW/WHY - AO1 + some AO2
What to do: Don't just state - show you understand the logic. Give reasons.
Used in: 6-mark and 10-mark questions
What it means: Break down and examine - AO1 + AO2 + AO3
What to do: Use the Item. Show how parts relate. Include some evaluation.
Used in: 10-mark questions with Item
What it means: Judge the value/validity - heavy AO3
What to do: Weigh up strengths AND weaknesses. Come to a judgement. Use multiple perspectives.
Used in: 20-mark and 30-mark essays
What it means: How far do you agree? - AO1 + AO2 + heavy AO3
What to do: Argue both sides. Quantify your agreement (largely, partially, not at all). Justify your position.
Used in: 20-mark and 30-mark essays
What it means: Use theory/method in specific context - heavy AO2
What to do: Link to the specific situation. Don't be generic. Show how it works in practice.
Used in: Methods in Context questions
These are FREE marks if you don't overcomplicate them:
Format: "Outline two [reasons/ways/factors]..."
Time: 6 minutes MAX
Structure:
NO evaluation needed! Just clear, accurate knowledge.
Format: "Outline three [reasons/ways/factors]..."
Time: 9 minutes MAX
Structure:
Still NO evaluation! Just three well-explained points.
This 20-mark question trips up SO many students. Here's how to nail it:
Don't just write about the method generically - apply everything to the educational context:
Practical +: Can observe natural behaviour in classrooms/playgrounds. Sees what pupils DO not just say.
Practical -: Very time-consuming. Hard to record notes while teaching. May disrupt normal school routines.
Ethical +: Can be overt - pupils know they're being observed.
Ethical -: Children can't fully consent. Power imbalance with adult observer. Sensitive topics may emerge.
Theoretical +: High validity - sees real classroom interactions. Good for understanding pupil subcultures (Willis).
Theoretical -: Observer effect - Hawthorne effect in classrooms. Going native. Not replicable.
Real-style questions for each topic. Practice these and you'll be ready for anything.
Exam tomorrow? Didn't revise? Here's your last-minute survival kit.
25 mins focus → 5 mins break → repeat
Click Start to begin your study session
The 5 perspectives: Functionalism, Marxism, Feminism, Interactionism, Postmodernism
Methods factors: Practical, Ethical, Theoretical
Theoretical issues: Validity, Reliability, Representativeness
Paragraph structure: Point, Explain, Expand, Criticise
Correspondence, Hidden Curriculum, Myth of Meritocracy
Conformity, Innovation, Ritualism, Retreatism, Rebellion
These aren't just concepts - they're chains of reasoning. Follow the flow to see HOW ideas connect and WHY they matter for your essays.
Hover over branches to see details • All roads lead to the center
"While Marxists emphasise material deprivation, interactionists like Becker show how labelling creates self-fulfilling prophecies. Bourdieu bridges both with cultural capital - it's not just money, but the 'wrong' knowledge being valued."
Hover over branches to see details • Three causes, one outcome
Hover over branches • Two explanations, both have truth
"While Right Realists argue crime reflects real deprivation, labelling theorists show policing patterns amplify statistics. Left Realists bridge both: take crime seriously while recognising systemic bias."
Hover over branches • Four causes converging
Nuclear family breaking down → children suffer → society weakens. Murray: "underclass" created.
More choice → can leave toxic relationships → diverse families meet diverse needs.
Hover over branches • Two sides of the argument
Secularisation is happening in Western Europe but NOT globally. The thesis is Eurocentric. Religion is CHANGING (more private, more diverse) rather than simply declining.
Hover over branches • Each method suits different topics
In Methods in Context, ALWAYS connect: method → topic characteristics → PET issues. "Questionnaires would be difficult because studying gangs involves..." - that's the connection examiners want!
Drop these in your essays to show synoptic understanding
"Bourdieu's cultural capital shows how middle-class family environment translates into educational advantage through shared cultural knowledge with teachers."
"Secularisation has enabled family diversity - as religious norms weakened, divorce and cohabitation became socially acceptable."
"Labelling theory applies to both - being labelled 'deviant' at school (Becker) mirrors being labelled 'criminal' by police. Both create self-fulfilling prophecies."
"Hirschi's control theory suggests religious belief acts as a bond to conventional society, reducing likelihood of crime through 'belief' in moral order."
"Class inequality runs through every topic - educational achievement, family structure, crime rates, and religious participation all show class patterns."
"Gender patterns appear everywhere - girls' educational success, women's domestic burden, male crime dominance, and women's higher religiosity all need feminist analysis."
🎯 The Secret: Every essay should reference at least ONE other topic!
"This connects to debates in [other topic] about..." = instant synoptic marks
Put your revision to the test! Choose a topic and difficulty level. Track your scores and identify weak areas.
Achievement, labelling, policies, class/gender/ethnicity gaps
Diversity, childhood, feminism, conjugal roles
Theories, gender, ethnicity, globalisation
Secularisation, NRMs, ideology, science
PET, sampling, positivism vs interpretivism
Key theorists, concepts, criticisms
Get a ready-made essay structure for any topic. Fill in the blanks with your knowledge!
Select a topic and click "Generate" to get your essay skeleton!
Point → Explain → Evidence → Criticise/Counter
For every "for" point, have an "against" point
Connect to other topics for extra marks
Include sociologist names + dates where possible
Unlock badges by completing challenges. Can you collect them all?
Click topics to mark as complete. Your progress saves automatically!
Paper 2 has two sections and you pick ONE topic from each. Here's how to decide:
Best if you:
Key debates: Is nuclear family still dominant? Are roles more equal? Is childhood improving?
Synoptic links: Links well to Education (parental involvement) and Crime (domestic violence)
Best if you:
Warning: Fewer resources, fewer students take it, can feel isolated in revision.
Best if you:
Warning: Very theoretical, fewer concrete studies to cite.
Best if you:
Warning: Heavy on statistics and policy knowledge.
Best if you:
Key debates: Is secularisation happening? Is religion conservative or radical? Why do people join NRMs?
Synoptic links: Links to Education (faith schools), Families (religious values), Theory (Durkheim)
Best if you:
Bonus: Very relevant to modern life, easy contemporary examples (TikTok, Instagram, news bias).
Best if you:
Warning: Can feel disconnected from UK sociology. Fewer resources.
Best if you:
Warning: Very theoretical and overlaps with other topics.
For most students: Families & Households + Beliefs in Society
This is the most common combination. Maximum resources, past papers, and peer support. Both topics have clear debates that examiners love.
If you want to be different: Families + Media is a good alternative - Media is very relevant to Gen Z and has great contemporary examples.
Topics Mastered