Compensatory Education Policies and Closing the Achievement Gap - Worksheets, Questions and Revision

12 original exam-style questions - 4 pages of questions with a full mark scheme - free printable PDF.

Download PDF Jump to mark scheme (page 5)Compensatory Education Policies and Closing the Achievement Gap revision guide

This topic is chapter 12 of GCSE Sociology: Education Practice Book.

4.12 Compensatory Education Policies and Closing the Achievement Gap

AQA 8192 · about 55 minutes

Total Marks

Name: _______________________________ Date: ____ / ____ / ______

Answer ALL questions. Write full sentences for the questions worth 4 marks or more. Allow about 60 minutes for the whole pack.

State one stated aim of Education Action Zones when they were introduced to support underperforming schools in deprived areas.

(Total for Question 1 is 2 marks)

Explain one limitation of Sure Start centres in improving long term educational attainment for children from poor families.

(Total for Question 2 is 2 marks)

Explain one method a sociologist could use to evaluate whether the Pupil Premium has narrowed the class achievement gap, and give one advantage of that method.

(Total for Question 3 is 2 marks)

Compare one similarity between the Pupil Premium and Education Action Zones in how they aim to reduce class differences in school attainment.

(Total for Question 4 is 4 marks)

Give one example of a short term outcome and one example of a long term outcome that policymakers expect from compensatory education policies aimed at closing the class achievement gap.

(Total for Question 5 is 2 marks)

Discuss how far sociologists would agree that compensatory education policies have narrowed the class achievement gap in the UK since 1997. In your answer, refer to at least two policies such as Sure Start, Education Action Zones, EMA and the Pupil Premium.

Discuss how far sociologists would agree that compensatory education policies have narrowed the class achievement gap in the UK since 1997. Refer to at least two named policies in your answer.

(Total for Question 6 is 12 marks)

Identify and explain one main aim of the Sure Start programme as a compensatory education policy in the UK.

(Total for Question 7 is 4 marks)

Identify and explain one way the Education Maintenance Allowance (EMA) was intended to reduce class differences in post 16 attainment in the UK.

(Total for Question 8 is 4 marks)

Describe one feature of Education Action Zones as a compensatory policy in disadvantaged neighbourhoods.

(Total for Question 9 is 3 marks)

Item A: A study of 200 primary schools reports that after receiving Pupil Premium funding for two years, 60 schools showed a rise in the percentage of disadvantaged pupils reaching expected standards by an average of 8 percentage points, while 140 schools showed no change. Using Item A and your own knowledge, suggest one reason why the Pupil Premium might appear to help attainment in some schools but not others.

(Total for Question 10 is 4 marks)

Identify one criticism of the Education Maintenance Allowance (EMA) based on its likely effect on social inequality in post 16 participation.

(Total for Question 11 is 2 marks)

Identify and explain two reasons why Sure Start centres might not fully close the early attainment gap between children from different social class backgrounds.

(Total for Question 12 is 4 marks)

Mark scheme · 4.12 Compensatory Education Policies and Closing the Achievement Gap

Question 1

B1 identifies a correct aim, e.g. to raise pupil attainment in disadvantaged neighbourhoods
B1 brief development, e.g. by encouraging partnerships between schools, businesses and community organisations
Answer: An aim was to raise pupil attainment in disadvantaged neighbourhoods, for example by encouraging partnerships between schools, businesses and community organisations to bring extra resources and expertise.

Question 2

B1 identifies a limitation, e.g. short term or variable quality of services across areas
B1 development, e.g. inconsistent provision means some centres have little lasting effect on school attainment
Answer: One limitation is the short term or variable quality of Sure Start services across areas; inconsistent provision means some centres may have little lasting effect on children's later school attainment.

Question 3

B1 identifies a method, e.g. longitudinal analysis of attainment data for disadvantaged and non disadvantaged pupils before and after Pupil Premium introduction
B1 gives an advantage, e.g. allows measurement of change over time and attribution of trends to the policy if other factors are controlled
Answer: One method is longitudinal analysis of attainment data for disadvantaged and non disadvantaged pupils before and after Pupil Premium introduction; an advantage is it allows measurement of change over time and helps attribute trends to the policy if other factors are controlled.

Question 4

B1 identifies a similarity, e.g. both provide extra resources targeted at disadvantaged pupils or disadvantaged areas
B1 explains the similarity, e.g. extra funding is intended to allow additional teaching or support that raises attainment
B1 identifies a second linked point, e.g. both aim to reduce barriers to participation and engagement in learning
B1 development, e.g. both rely on local implementation choices which affect their success
Answer: Both Pupil Premium and Education Action Zones provide extra resources targeted at disadvantage so schools can offer additional teaching or support to raise attainment, and both aim to reduce barriers to participation and engagement, with success depending on local implementation choices.

Question 5

B1 identifies a short term outcome, e.g. improved test scores or better school attendance
B1 identifies a long term outcome, e.g. higher rates of qualifications or improved employment prospects for disadvantaged pupils
Answer: A short term outcome is improved test scores or better school attendance; a long term outcome is higher rates of qualifications and improved employment prospects for disadvantaged pupils.

Question 6

Level 1 (1-3): Basic statements about compensatory policies with limited or no use of sociological ideas or examples. Little or no judgement on overall effectiveness.
Level 2 (4-6): Clear description of one or two compensatory policies and some sociological reasons for their impact. Limited evaluation with some balance, but conclusions are simple or unsupported.
Level 3 (7-9): Good explanation of how compensatory policies like Sure Start, EMA and the Pupil Premium can reduce barriers to attainment, and recognition of evidence showing mixed results. Some balanced evaluation using sociological concepts such as structural inequality and policy implementation differences.
Level 4 (10-12): Detailed, balanced discussion using multiple sociological perspectives and evidence. Shows how policies have produced local successes but limited national narrowing of the class gap, explains reasons such as structural poverty, variable implementation, and the dark figure of need, and reaches a supported conclusion on how far sociologists would agree.
Indicative content:
- Descriptions of named policies: Sure Start (early years support), Education Action Zones (area based funding), EMA (payments to encourage post 16 participation), Pupil Premium (per pupil funding).
- Evidence of positive impacts: targeted tutoring raising attainment in some schools, Sure Start improvements in early language in some evaluations, higher post 16 retention where EMA operated, some schools reporting improved disadvantaged pupil outcomes with Pupil Premium.
- Evidence of limited or mixed impact: national data showing persistent class gaps in GCSE and A level outcomes despite policy waves; evaluations noting many schools showed little change; variable take up and variable quality of provision.
- Sociological reasons for limited impact: structural causes such as poverty, housing and health that education policy alone cannot solve; cultural factors and parental resources; stigma and low take up limiting reach.
- Policy implementation issues: variation between schools and local areas, short term funding cycles, targets focusing on measurable outcomes leading to narrow interventions, and accountability pressures distorting use of funds.
- Different sociological perspectives: functionalist view might argue targeted support increases meritocratic opportunity; Marxist or conflict perspectives would argue policies are limited because they do not challenge broader class structures and reproduce inequality; feminist perspectives might note gendered effects and the need for family support; interactionist points on how teacher expectations and labelling affect disadvantaged pupils.
- Methodological points: difficulty attributing causation, need for longitudinal studies, issues of selection bias and the dark figure of unmet need, and differences between quantitative attainment data and qualitative improvements in wellbeing.
- Reasoned conclusion weighing evidence and perspectives, for example agreeing that compensatory policies have produced important local improvements but that many sociologists would argue they have not, on balance, eliminated the class achievement gap nationally.

Question 7

B1 identifies a correct aim, e.g. to improve early childhood development and school readiness for children from disadvantaged families
B1 explains how this works, e.g. by offering childcare, parenting support and health services to boost language and social skills before school
B1 identifies a linked outcome, e.g. raising attainment at entry to school and reducing early gaps
B1 development, e.g. this early intervention is intended to reduce longer term class-based attainment differences
Answer: Sure Start aimed to improve early childhood development and school readiness for disadvantaged children by offering childcare, parenting support and health services to boost language and social skills before school, so reducing early attainment gaps that feed class differences later.

Question 8

B1 identifies a correct mechanism, e.g. EMA provided regular payments to low income students staying in post 16 education
B1 explains how this reduces barriers, e.g. payments helped cover travel, books or lost earnings, making staying in education more affordable
B1 identifies a linked effect, e.g. increasing retention in further education among working class students
B1 development, e.g. higher retention should increase attainment and reduce long term class gaps in qualifications and opportunities
Answer: EMA provided regular payments to low income students staying in post 16 education to help cover travel, books or lost earnings, making it more affordable to remain in education, increasing retention among working class students and helping reduce class differences in qualifications.

Question 9

B1 identifies a correct feature, e.g. targeted extra funding for schools in a specific deprived area
B1 development, e.g. the funding could be used for specialist staff, after school programmes or community links
B1 further development, e.g. zones aimed to coordinate local services to tackle educational disadvantage holistically
Answer: Education Action Zones provided targeted extra funding for schools in specific deprived areas, used for specialist staff, after school programmes and stronger community links, aiming to coordinate local services to tackle disadvantage holistically.

Question 10

B1 identifies a plausible reason drawn from Item A, e.g. variation in how schools use the funding
B1 develops with reference to policy, e.g. some schools may use Pupil Premium for targeted tutoring while others spend it on general resources
B1 links to outcome, e.g. targeted use is more likely to raise measurable attainment, explaining the difference between the 60 and 140 schools
B1 further development or alternative reason, e.g. baseline differences or pupil intake make some schools harder to shift in short timescales
Answer: One reason is variation in how schools use the Pupil Premium: some schools use it for targeted tutoring and small group interventions that raise measurable attainment, while others spend it on broader resources with less immediate impact. Baseline differences in intake or greater levels of disadvantage may also make some schools harder to improve quickly, explaining the mixed results in Item A.

Question 11

B1 identifies a valid criticism, e.g. EMA payments may not be large enough to remove all barriers for the poorest students
B1 brief development, e.g. students still face childcare, travel or living costs that limit true equality of participation
Answer: One criticism is EMA payments may not have been large enough to remove all barriers for the poorest students; they could still face childcare, travel or living costs that limit equal participation in post 16 education.

Question 12

B1 identifies one reason, e.g. limited reach so not all disadvantaged families access services
B1 explains how this limits impact, e.g. non participants remain unsupported so overall class gaps persist
B1 identifies second reason, e.g. wider structural factors such as poverty and housing continue to affect development
B1 explains link, e.g. services cannot fully compensate for material deprivation that harms schooling readiness
Answer: Sure Start may not close the gap because not all disadvantaged families access its services, leaving some children unsupported, and because wider structural factors like poverty and poor housing continue to affect early development in ways services cannot fully offset.

Compensatory Education Policies and Closing the Achievement Gap - Worksheets, Questions and Revision

Related topics

4.12 Compensatory Education Policies and Closing the Achievement Gap

Question 1

Question 2

Question 3

Question 4

Question 5

Question 6

Question 7

Question 8

Question 9

Question 10

Question 11

Question 12

Mark your answers

Question 1

Question 2

Question 3

Question 4

Question 5

Question 6

Question 7

Question 8

Question 9

Question 10

Question 11

Question 12