4 marks Accurate and reasonably detailed Accurate and reasonably detailed description that demonstrates sound knowledge and understanding of research into conformity. There is appropriate selection of material to address the question. 4 marks Effective evaluation Effective use of material to address the question and provide informed commentary. Effective evaluation of research. Broad range of issues and / or evidence in reasonable depth, or a narrower range in greater depth. Clear expression of ideas, good range of specialist terms, few errors of grammar, punctuation and spelling. 3 marks Less detailed but generally accurate Less detailed but generally accurate description that demonstrates relevant knowledge and understanding. There is some evidence of selection of material to address the question. 3 marks Reasonable evaluation Material is not always used effectively but produces a reasonable commentary. Reasonable evaluation of research. A range of issues and / or evidence in limited depth, or a narrower range in greater depth. Reasonable expression of ideas, a range of specialist terms, some errors of grammar, punctuation and spelling. 2 marks Basic Basic description that demonstrates some relevant knowledge and understanding but lacks detail and may be muddled. There is little evidence of selection of material to address the question. 2 marks Basic evaluation The use of material provides only a basic commentary. Basic evaluation of research. Superficial consideration of a restricted range of issues and / or evidence. Expression of ideas lacks clarity, some specialist terms used, errors of grammar, punctuation and spelling detract from clarity. 1 mark Very / flawed or inappropriate Very brief or flawed description demonstrating very little knowledge. Selection and presentation of information is largely or wholly 1 mark Rudimentary evaluation The use of material provides only a rudimentary commentary. Evaluation of research is just discernible or absent. Expression of ideas poor, few
levels of conformity. Another way in which candidates could evaluate the explanations is to provide research evidence to support them. If they outlined the power of social roles then they could use Zimbardo’s prison study as evaluation. AO1 Knowledge and understanding AO2 Application of knowledge and understanding 4 Accurate and reasonably detailed Accurate and reasonably detailed answer that demonstrates knowledge and understanding of explanations of conformity. There is appropriate selection of material to address the question. 4 marks Effective evaluation Effective use of material to address the question and provide informed commentary. Effective evaluation of explanations 3 marks Less detailed but generally accurate Less detailed but generally accurate explanation that demonstrates relevant knowledge and understanding. Partial performance: only one explanation but in detail. 3 marks Reasonable evaluation Material is not always used effectively but produces a reasonable commentary. Reasonable evaluation of explanations. Partial performance; if only one explanation is evaluated then the evaluation is effective. 2 Basic Basic explanation that demonstrates some relevant knowledge and understanding but lacks detail and may be muddled. Partial performance: only one explanation; less detailed but generally accurate. 2 Basic evaluation The use of material provides only a basic commentary. Basic evaluation of explanations. Superficial consideration of a restricted range of issues and/or evidence. Partial performance; if only one explanation is evaluated then the evaluation is reasonable. 1 mark Very brief/flawed or inappropriate Very brief or flawed explanation demonstrating very little knowledge. Selection and presentation of information is largely or wholly inappropriate. 1 mark Rudimentary evaluation The use of material provides only a rudimentary commentary. Evaluation of research is just discernible or absent. 0 No creditworthy material. 0 marks No creditworthy material.