Mark Scheme (selected)

1.1 (3): describes the trend with figures from Figure 2 (e.g. "unemployment rose from X% in 2010, peaked at Y% in …, then fell to Z%"); credit data manipulation and correct direction of change. 1.2 (3): a developed reason linked to Figure 3 (e.g. residents prioritise affordable housing/local jobs, which Option 3 provides, rather than luxury apartments they cannot afford). 1.3 (6): social advantage (e.g. skilled local jobs reduce out-migration) explained (3); economic advantage (e.g. long-term investment/income, attracts related industry) explained (3). 1.4 (9 + 3 SPaG, levels): a justified decision using evidence from the resources and own knowledge, with reasons for rejecting the other options. L3 7–9 (clear, evidenced, balanced), L2 4–6, L1 1–3.

2.1 (2): a sensible enquiry title (1) and a clear hypothesis/question (1). 2.2 (3): named primary method justified (suitable for the enquiry/data needed). 2.3 (3): sampling method (random/systematic/stratified) justified. 2.4 (6): evaluates a presentation method (suitability, strengths, limitations). 2.5 (9, levels): evaluates how data quality affected the conclusion, using the student's own enquiry, with a judgement.

Sample Answers with Examiner Commentary

Question 1.4 — Sample Answers

Grade 9 answer "I agree that Option 3 is the best option for this town. Figure 3 shows that residents' top priorities are affordable housing and local jobs, and Option 3 directly addresses both by supporting small local businesses and building affordable homes, so it has strong local backing — important for a scheme to succeed. It is also lower risk and cheaper than the marina, which matters given the town's economic decline shown in Figure 2.

I rejected Option 1 (the marina and luxury apartments) because, although it could attract wealthy visitors, the survey suggests residents fear it would raise house prices and create only seasonal, low-paid service jobs — repeating the town's reliance on tourism that has already declined. I partly rejected Option 2 (the wind farm): it would bring valuable skilled jobs and is sustainable, but the skilled roles may go to outside specialists rather than local unemployed residents in the short term, and the upfront cost is high.

Overall, Option 3 best matches residents' priorities, spreads benefits across the existing community and carries the least risk, so it is the most appropriate choice — though elements of Option 2 could be added later once the local economy is stronger." Mark: 9/9 (+3 SPaG). Examiner commentary: A clearly justified decision that uses the resources (Figures 2 and 3) and own knowledge, gives developed reasons for rejecting both alternatives, and reaches a balanced conclusion. Top of Level 3.

Grade 6 answer "I think Option 3 is best because it helps local people with jobs and housing, which is what the residents want in Figure 3. Option 1 is too expensive and only helps rich people. Option 2 makes jobs but they might not be for local people. So Option 3 is the best." Mark: 5/9. Examiner commentary: A clear decision that uses one resource and considers all three options, but the reasons are brief and not fully developed, and only one figure is used. Developing each point and bringing in more evidence/own knowledge would reach Level 3.

Question 2.2 — Sample Answer

"I used a questionnaire to collect primary data on shoppers' opinions of the town centre. This was a good method because it gave me first-hand, quantitative data I could compare across age groups, directly answering my enquiry question about who uses the town centre and why." Mark: 3/3. Examiner commentary: Named primary method, justified and clearly linked to the enquiry.