summarise this:

From the 2023 Assessment Report on Section A:
To successfully address C2, there needs to be a synthesis between understanding the significant events of the time of production and the features of the texts. 
Students must integrate their knowledge of the importance of historical and socio-cultural context with their analysis of the texts. A snapshot of historical and social contexts without relating these to an analysis of the relevant texts is not enough. 
To be awarded an A, students must interrogate aspects of the socio-cultural and historical context of texts and how these have influenced the construction of the text and its meaning. 
Areas for students to improve when writing on texts in context: 
• include a discussion of attitudes, beliefs and values of the era – not just historical events
• focus on distinctive features of the form (novel, play, film) and genre (tragi-comedy)
• specifically, address the question using its phrasing extensively and directly
• use detailed textual evidence that is linked to a cogent thesis and topic sentences about the meaning of the play which is relevant to the set question 
• sustain a skilful control of language and ideas. 

From the 2022 Exam:
How does the author of one (1) substantial text you have studied in Module 2 show the ways an individual’s gender may hinder or enhance their experiences? 
Consider the experiences of two (2) characters in your chosen text. In your response, you should explore the influence of the author’s historical and cultural context on the ideas in the text and refer to the compositional features* used.

From the 2022 Assessment Report:
This question was challenging, requiring the selection of two characters, a discussion of the way gender hindered or enhanced their experiences and how this was conveyed through compositional features and then, further, the influence of context on the ideas presented. The gender element clearly suited some texts more than others where gender (particularly the experiences of women) was revealed in key characters, and a feminist reading position was suggested (Trojan Women, Dracula, The Rover, Emma). It was significantly less applicable to The Tempest, with only one minor female character. More successful students writing on The Tempest grappled with the question’s requirements: Prospero’s authoritarian attitude and wielding of power as a specifically masculine trait; Miranda as a pawn or tool in Prospero’s project, reflective of dynastic marriages. One answer cleverly suggested that gender was less critical to the experiences of Caliban than his depiction as being less than human. While students made good points about Claribel and Sycorax, it was something of a long bow to suggest that either was a ‘character’ in the play. 
Some students had trouble connecting their discussion to the question or discussing more than two characters, which meant that the depth of discussion was a little lost. Students are reminded that using the critical interpretations of others in Section A takes away from their time to demonstrate their understanding of context. 
Weaker responses lacked strong essay structure, and needed to figure out how to go about answering the question. This was more evident in responses to The Tempest. There were clearly elements of the text (and characters) that students wanted to discuss but were unsure how to connect this to the question focus. Critical aspects of relevant context were often omitted. 
It is perhaps important to note that generalised statements about life for women being worse ‘back then’ are insufficient in examining the context's impact. The tendency of students to provide general assumptions that women from earlier periods had zero agency led them to hyperbole and misrepresentation. The ability to examine the nuances in the portrayal of the female characters and to allow that their experiences were not uniformly negative was a feature of the better responses.