GCSE
English Literature
Unit 1H
Report on the Examination
47101H
June 2013
Version: V1.0
Further copies of this Report are available from aqa.org.uk
Copyright © 20yy AQA and its licensors. All rights reserved.
AQA retains the copyright on all its publications. However, registered schools/colleges for AQA are permitted to copy material from this
booklet for their own internal use, with the following important exception: AQA cannot give permission to schools/colleges to photocopy any
material that is acknowledged to a third party even for internal use within the centre.
REPORT ON THE EXAMINATION – GCSE ENGLISH LITERATURE – 47101H – JUNE 2013
INTRODUCTION
This year‟s paper seems to have been well-received and there is clear evidence that English
Literature is being taught exceptionally well and thus enjoyed by students in schools. It is a
challenging discipline and in this exam candidates are required to write two essays in 90 minutes:
no mean feat. Armed with knowledge and understanding of their studied texts and the skills they
have acquired, they, almost without exception, produce these two essays and must be given great
credit for that. Once again, there were some exceptional responses offered and, once again, some
refreshing and original insights into familiar texts.
SECTION A
AQA Anthology: Sunlight on the Grass
Question 1 was the more popular of the two questions: best responses focused on the idea of an
unreliable narrator and the biased view point behind the story which was connected to the
narrator‟s apparent lack of self-belief, identity and confidence and explored whether the
presentation of the head and the other teachers was a product of how she had been treated in
reality or the narrator‟s assumption that she was being looked down upon because of her own
feelings of lack of self-worth. Most candidates explored the range of symbols in the story such as
the wad of papers to distance the head from his staff, the serving hatch as a metaphorical
representation of the barrier between Carla and the rest of the staff and the stale buns
representing the stale relationship between Carla and Valerie. Whilst weaker responses tended to
explain feelings and what the relationship is like without reference to Dunmore‟s methods, others
were able to address AO2 most productively by reference to „stitched‟, the „knot‟ of teachers and
the Head‟s hesitation when talking to Carla.
The most popular story for part b], and often the most successful, was „Compass and Torch‟ which
often produced delightful responses that not only explored the obvious symbolism of the compass
and torch and the third person narrative style but better responses also considered the possible
symbolic meaning of the wild ponies and the geographical description with its negative
connotations attaching these to the relationship between the son and the father. The most
sensitive responses showed an incredible maturity and empathy towards the man at the ending of
the story as the narrative focus suddenly switches to the father as he takes the torch from the
sleeping child and candidates explored how these final lines shed a whole new light on what had
previously been interpreted as the father‟s lack of care in his „dismissive‟ response to the child and
how the father‟s pain was briefly but powerfully presented at the end. Other choices included „Anil‟
and „Something Old, Something New‟, the latter proving a challenge for some who took refuge in a
narrative response.
For question 2, the named story may have been a factor in the decision a candidate made about
which question to do; despite the apparent challenge of this story, some responses were
perceptive. Better responses connected the title to the wedding in the story but also connected the
blue to the Nile and explored how the different perceptions of this iconic river highlighted the
different opinions of the man and the woman to Sudan - beautiful and blue versus lurking
crocodiles. These answers also explored the young man‟s attitude to the western hotel as
evidence of his unfamiliarity in this strange country and the inclusion of native language as a way
in which the reader could experience the unfamiliarity. Many were able to focus on the idea of
„disturbed‟ and on the isolation felt by the young man; they were also able to unpack the implication
of „human bone‟, „bone-coloured sky‟ and the sinister underside of the Nile. Nor did they baulk at
3 of 14
REPORT ON THE EXAMINATION – GCSE ENGLISH LITERATURE – 47101H – JUNE 2013
exploring the complex feelings of the young man as reflected in the surroundings. Weaker
responses were narrative driven and tended not to address AO2.
The other choice was often „On Seeing The 100% Perfect Girl.....‟ Ideas of alienation from one‟s
environment and loneliness resulting in the fantasy/fictional world of make believe that comprises
most of this story were considered / explored in the better responses This approach lead to
analysis of storytelling features and narrative style to support the idea of „make-believe‟.
Candidates often enjoyed the fairy-tale and surreal qualities of this story although weaker
candidates would have probably benefited from making the choice of a story with a stronger
narrative and more clearly defined characters. „Anil‟ was another popular, and appropriate, choice;
candidates considered Anil‟s feelings about his parents and about what lay beyond his village.
William Golding: Lord of the Flies
This text always elicits words such as „outstanding‟, „insightful‟, „conceptual‟, „sophisticated‟,
„exploratory‟ from senior examiners. However, it is far from simply the preserve of the most able
candidates: it engages and stimulates candidates across the tier.
Question 3 was the more popular question but both offered the opportunity for excellent
responses. There were many superb responses to both. This question gave all candidates the
opportunity to display their talents. Many candidates were awarded high marks but arrived there by
a wide range of routes. All understood the „beast‟ as a device for Golding to explore the „darkness
of man‟s heart‟ but a great majority were able to write about the beast conceptually using very
close analysis of the text to underpin their argument. Approaches varied: some tracked the use of
the beast at different stages of the novel purely through language, others analysing the effect of
the fear caused by a belief in the beast on each character and the effect on that character‟s
behaviour and its consequences, whilst others wrote about the beast at each point in the structure
of the novel exemplified by three or four passages. One candidate wrote about the order of the
various manifestations of the beast: the beast of the mind, the physical beast, becoming the beast
and points for mankind to learn from each of these stages. Many responses were a joy to read.
These responses were selective in their choice of detail, particularly of language and imagery, in
order to illustrate their answer and to explore the theme. Even weaker responses were able
successfully to work through the mentions of the beast in chronological order and use that to
indicate the stages of deterioration in the boys‟ behaviour.
Question 4 also elicited some excellent responses. The more able the candidate, the less they
focused on the actual ending [some weaker responses focussed on nothing else and had no
reference to the rest of the novel], using it as a springboard to writing about the „loss of innocence‟
in the novel or analysing the structure which ends the novel as it started, on the beach – the same
beach but also a very different beach. One excellent essay focused totally on the comparison
between Ralph and the Naval Officer, using close analysis of their clothes, their speech, even what
their eyes were focused on in order to explore Golding‟s themes and ideas.
Initial discussions by many tended to centre on the naval officer‟s lack of understanding of what
has happened on the island (and his embarrassment when trying to rationalise what has gone on)
and the immediate reversion to type in the young boys‟ behaviour; comments on Ralph‟s tears and
what they signify focused in most instances on the deaths of Simon and, especially, Piggy. „The
end of innocence‟ was equated to the savagery displayed by the majority of the boys; some of the
very best responses reminded us that they are about to return to a world where innocence is of
little value anyhow as the microcosm the boys have symbolically existed in is merely being
returned to the macrocosm of another world conflict. Some good points were made about the
structures of the novel e.g. changes in the boys‟ appearances from the opening scene on the
4 of 14
REPORT ON THE EXAMINATION – GCSE ENGLISH LITERATURE – 47101H – JUNE 2013
beach (and the warnings implicit in the discussion of the choir‟s appearance in particular)
compared to the final scene; the attempts to organise a signal fire compared to the (wholly
unintended) irony of the rescue having been facilitated by a fire intended to maim not save was
also fruitful territory.
There was, of course, much discussion about the Naval Officer, with his smug reference to British
expectations of behaviour and the fact that he is not a character of salvation but a representative of
an adult world at war that had both damaged and reflected the boys‟ own characteristics.
A few responses simply told the story and then made a brief comment on the ending.
Kevin Brooks: Martyn Pig
Responses to this text were seen only by a few senior examiners and comments are based on
their findings. There was some evidence of real engagement with the text; also, the text enables
candidates to address AOs with confidence.
Question 5 was the most popular choice. Candidates were able to understand Martyn‟s
relationships with the adults in the story, most choosing to write about his father and his Aunty
Jean. The author‟s use of first person and the language used to describe the characters were
obviously vivid in the candidates‟ minds. They had absolutely no trouble in writing well about the
presentation of character and the author‟s techniques. Stronger responses also addressed the
issue of an unreliable narrator and made judgements on the veracity of Martyn‟s opinions,
supported by evidence from the text. Some of the best responses chose an adult in Martyn‟s life
and an adult from his world of fiction to compare his responses. However, it must be said that
weaker responses simply explained Martyn‟s feelings with little use of detail or offered a character
study, skewed towards a dislike of the chosen adults.
Candidates who chose question 6 struggled to sustain their response and often ran out of ideas
before they had finished. Also, they limited the idea of „surroundings‟ to the house. One senior
examiner reported some „superb‟ responses in which candidates explored and analysed Brooks‟
methods, referring to Martyn‟s viewing the world through a window, his insecurities on the beach
and the weather.
Susan Hill: The Woman in Black
This is proving to be an increasingly popular text; candidates seem to readily engage with a ghost
story and ideas/conventions of a gothic nature. Candidates need to remember, of course, that
there are some differences between the book and the film and it is the former they should be
writing about.
Question 7 was the more popular question by some way and it elicited the full range of responses.
Almost without exception, candidates were able to address AO2 but there were pitfalls. Weaker
candidates, in the face of so many techniques to write about, decided to write about as many as
possible in chronological way; this usually involved referring to a technique, giving an example and
making a brief comment about negative connotation / tension / suspense – then moving on to the
next one. Often these comments were divorced from meaning and thus .5 in the mark scheme was
in the lowest band. Better candidates explained the effects of the devices and also acknowledged
that tension / suspense was brought about in other ways – e.g. through dialogue [Kipps / Bentley].
Also, better responses attempted to group and synthesise ideas and were selective in what they
wrote about. All that said, there were many examples of top band responses which demonstrated
excellent analytical skills. Some interesting points were made by a number of candidates about the
5 of 14
REPORT ON THE EXAMINATION – GCSE ENGLISH LITERATURE – 47101H – JUNE 2013
train journey that the narrator was obliged to take, alerting the more sophisticated reader to the
potential disaster which its conclusion may engender - links to trains and their symbolic value in
C19th ghost stories by Dickens et al were sensitively handled. Other successful responses closely
related details in the given chapter to character and setting encountered elsewhere in the story,
maintaining a focus on how Hill creates tension and suspense through a variety of methods which
are connected and incremental in effect.
Question 8 was usually tackled well, leading to thoughtful responses about how Hill uses children
in the story. Weaker responses tended to look at just one main focus, such as the build up to the
spirit‟s attack on Arthur‟s baby. Stronger responses looked at various aspects about how children
appear in the story: from the naïve-seeming gaiety in the opening chapter, the local children
watching a funeral, the spectral tale of a child‟s cry in the mists to the overwhelming sense of loss
at the end and how these all combine to create a sense of dread, horror and, at times, shock.
Some candidates restricted their response to the presentation of the children in the cemetery,
forgoing, for instance, the opportunities offered by the chapter „In the Nursery‟. This was a task
which demanded that candidates were expected, to some extent, to „think on their feet‟ as they
may not have prepared for this topic; many responded well to the challenge, exploring the ways in
which innocent children add horror to an already horrific story.
Joe Simpson: Touching the Void
Responses to this text vary considerably – maybe depending on how far a candidate can engage
with what may be very unfamiliar subject matter. The best responses elicited real enthusiasm for
the text and for the situations and dilemmas it presents. Candidates should guard against including
extraneous material, e.g. details about mountaineering and quotes from Edmund Hilary, unless
they are in some way linked closely to text and task.
For Question 9, candidates usually tackled each of the climbers in turn and discussed how
courageous each one had been, with many candidates championing Simon as being equally
courageous to or more courageous than Joe because of the difficult decision he had to make.
Even the third climber left below had his supporters. Candidates had obviously engaged with the
problems they all faced and were able to support ideas about courage with apposite quotation and
textual reference. Mental and physical courage and the differences between them were discussed
in the work of candidates who achieved higher marks. Chapters 5 and 6 provided strong, raw
material for an exploration of courage [and, indeed, for tension and excitement in Question 10].
The best responses to question 10 showed evidence of engagement and empathy with the plight
of both climbers. Much was made of the split narrative technique and how that had been able to
increase tension and suspense for the reader. Figurative language (the rope „exploding‟ for
example) was discussed and also Joe‟s inner voice was cited as a feature that increased tension
through empathy. This task enabled candidates to address AO2 well as they focussed on
techniques although a less impressive approach was to base a response on two lines only [the
cutting of the rope] with no reference to what comes before or after; instead, the candidates
attempted to make some [often spurious] comment about every word. Some candidates also wrote
rather factually – explaining what happened in their chosen incident and not going any further.
Dylan Thomas: Under Milk Wood
Question 11 was well answered, on the whole, with sustained and thoughtful approaches to
Thomas‟ use of the key characters. There was also some impressive consideration/analysis of the
„poetic‟ nature of the language (especially that used by and about Captain Cat) and some
6 of 14
REPORT ON THE EXAMINATION – GCSE ENGLISH LITERATURE – 47101H – JUNE 2013
sympathetic understanding of character and predicament – Captain Cat, Polly Garter, etc. Weaker
responses, however, explained the steaming open of letters and effects of Captain Cat‟s blindness
but could not move to any type of consideration or thoughtfulness in their responses. The good
points were that these candidates clearly saw the two characters as constructs of Thomas and
some could sustain their responses. It seemed that they had listened to the play, so this might
have helped them. Overall I had the impression that candidates read the first two names and just
wrote about them rather than read the question properly and link these two to the impression of the
town and people; therefore the responses were limited as they were just about two characters in
the play, what they say and what they do.
Most candidates grasped the point of the close-knit community with everyone knowing everyone
else‟s business. They were also sensitive to the fact that it is a past world where gossip and word
of mouth rule.
Question 12 was a less popular choice, but still elicited quite a wide range of levels of response.
Many candidates took the opportunity to examine the language used to portray the sea and its
integral part in the lives of the inhabitants. The best answers explored the symbolism associated
with Thomas‟ presentation of the sea – the permanence of nature in contrast to the transience of
human life, for example. There was also close attention in many responses to the sea‟s influence
on the dreams of the characters.
Arthur Miller: The Crucible
Senior examiners reported that this text is becoming increasingly popular with a wider range of
candidates and also that most saw the text as a play and were able to comment on it as such.
Question 13 was overwhelmingly the more popular choice of task. Some candidates were able to
address it in a chronological way, charting – and understanding - the relationship and how it
changes throughout the play, using appropriate detail to support ideas and addressing AO2 along
the way. They were able to identify key moments in the acts, culminating in a conclusion that the
apparent lack of love at the start becomes something finer and stronger at the end. More probing
responses looked at complicated aspects behind the relationship that are connected to
social/historical context or characterisation. Some candidates noted that whilst Elizabeth‟s decision
and statement at the end might seem counterintuitive to a modern audience of movie-goers, who
crave a happy ending, within the context of the drama, Miller‟s choice was not only apt but
powerfully resonant of a relationship that has gained strength through adversity. These responses
explored the power of the final act and the intimacy and love presented in it. They seemed to find
the relationship fascinating. Miller‟s use of proxemics – especially in Act Two – to show John and
Elizabeth‟s lack of warmth/intimacy was commented on/ explored by nearly all candidates, as was
John‟s seasoning of the food with salt. Many candidates used the example of John being
downstairs while Elizabeth was upstairs singing to the children, and most commented on the
symbolic nature of the “low, dark and rather long living room”. Also, many candidates focused on
the way Elizabeth “receives” John‟s kiss in Act 2, showing their lack of intimacy, and the fact they
kiss passionately in Act Four to show the change. On the whole, these responses showed a real
sense of understanding the dramatic nature of the text while also showing real knowledge of the
character, themes, ideas and the significance of the context.
Question 14 invited, to some extent, candidates to set their own agenda in relation to witch-hunts.
The weakest responses offered a generalised approach, basing it on McCarthyism / contextual
issues and not referring closely enough to the text. Others looked carefully at how the witch hunts
begin in the play and at how different characters react to the growing hysteria. Limited responses
7 of 14
REPORT ON THE EXAMINATION – GCSE ENGLISH LITERATURE – 47101H – JUNE 2013
tended to lose focus as the trials progress, becoming side-tracked with discussion about the
Proctors, whereas the sharpest responses not only charted the changing attitudes of characters
such as Hale but also drew close attention to Miller‟s purposes and the context of McCarthyism in
America – maintaining close reference to the text. The less-developed responses tended to neglect
commenting closely on the writer‟s language, focusing more on ideas and attitudes, whilst the
more fully developed responses managed to look closely at the language of religion, power, fear
and panic deployed by Miller at various moments in the play. Some found it difficult to structure
their response and tended to „dot‟ about the text referring to different characters / events without a
coherent overview.
Diane Samuels: Kindertransport
Question 15 produced clearly structured responses to the two women, enabling candidates to
consider each separately, then compare them, and refer to Eva‟s own feelings about her
contrasting mothers. Details of Lil‟s lack of regard for Eva‟s culture were weighed against doubts
about the sincerity of Helga‟s motives and love in shipping off her young daughter (suggesting
sometimes lack of appreciation of the German context). The question elicited some detailed and
thoughtful responses. The assertion of „inadequacy‟ gives students a view to agree with or dispute,
and many thoughtfully argued it is more complex than being one or the other although some
candidates did want to conclude one way or the other. The two mothers, Helga and Lil, provide a
neat dichotomy for students to organise answers around. The question allowed students to refer
easily to ideas/themes; there was also a genuinely good response to writer‟s purposes. Better
responses considered Helga‟s lack of compassion to her daughter at the start and Lil‟s allowing her
to smoke, with many candidates managing to consider the implications of Helga‟s need to make
her daughter independent and Eva‟s struggle with identity throughout. Weaker responses focussed
only on what the characters said and did, showing little, if any, grasp of them as dramatic
constructs.
Question 16 too enabled structured answers, this time of course a paragraph on each male
character. Comments on the harshness of treatment from the first two were balanced with the
perception of the tactlessly jolly stereotyping of the postman. There was a good focus on the
dramatic effects used to accompany each appearance of The Ratcatcher – a figure linked in Eva‟s
mind to all the male characters – and an understanding that the connections were enhanced by the
male parts all being played by the same actor. Some candidates, however, were confused about
why The Ratcatcher assumed the persona of each of the male characters whilst others understood
that each one represented an aspect of the treatment Eva received as a refugee.
J.B. Priestley: An Inspector Calls
Although the minority choice, question 17 was by and large successfully tackled and most
candidates were able to see the ending as a way to discuss the themes of the play, recognising the
links between the doorbell at the beginning of the play and the telephone ringing sharply at the
end, leading them to write about the structure of the play [often in terms of its cyclical nature] as
well as the themes. There was some very good writing to show the threats made by the Inspector
of the consequences becoming real if people did not change their ways through a close
comparison of Birling‟s actions, words and tone in the opening act compared to the same in the
closing of the play. Indeed there was some excellent analysis of Birling‟s syntax in this section
compared to his earlier confidence and assured opinions. These answers focused heavily on the
dramatic structure of the play and the final twist connecting it to audience response in a
sophisticated way by analysing how Priestley had constructed Mr and Mrs Birling to create
8 of 14
REPORT ON THE EXAMINATION – GCSE ENGLISH LITERATURE – 47101H – JUNE 2013
audience dislike and how the audience is left disappointed when they apparently get away with it
on the discovery of the „hoax‟ inspector.
Weaker responses only covered the actual ending with little reference to the rest of the play, often
relying on comments such as „on the edge of my seat‟ without any reference to precisely how
Priestley created that feeling.
Much was made of „the curtain falls‟, including several candidates who said it was symbolic of the
French guillotine: one may or may not find this convincing – less convincing perhaps if candidates
do not really understand the reference.
Question 18 was highly successful for the range of candidates on this tier: maybe it was because
Eric is young and candidates can relate to him and his relationship with his family or maybe the
stage direction was a useful stimulus – certainly most candidates used it as a starting point for their
discussions about Eric. Some candidates felt safe in a chronological approach to the question,
tracking the changes in Eric and supporting ideas effectively; not many responses were pure
character studies and there was usually some reference to Priestley‟s purpose in presenting him
the way he did. Maybe it‟s a sign of our times, but some candidates suggested that Eric is an
alcoholic and the odd one suggested that Priestley may have had something to say about drink
awareness. The best responses really grasped the subtleties of Eric‟s character and saw him as a
product of his upbringing but uncomfortable in his smug, middle class environment. Certainly, he is
a spoilt young man who enjoys his drink and steals from his father; he probably committed the
worst atrocities against Eva too – but it is probably he for whom the audience feels the most
sympathy – and empathy. The best responses were also able to analyse how Priestley
manipulates our feelings in this way and how also Eric is in the play as a contrast to other
characters, such as Gerald, for example, to further denote the differences between capitalism and
more socialist ideas. Eric was perceived as a representative of young men from the upper classes
who, after the war, began to explore a different view on life from the one they had imbibed since
birth, as a wake-up call to the upper classes that living a selfish life on the back of the masses
could only end in disaster unless there was an awakening. Eric‟s relationship and dialogue with
both his father and mother were also fruitful sources of analysis. One candidate saw Eric as a
Robin Hood type character who stole from the rich to give to the poor: an interesting thought!
Dennis Kelly: DNA
There is little doubt that candidates – of all abilities – continue to engage with this text and respond
to it in very much their own way, rather than relying on any received ideas. One senior examiner
commented, „It was rewarding to see a relatively slight text given such close scrutiny and analysis
and yielding such a bounty of profound thought.‟
Question 19 was the more popular of the two questions. Most used the chronology of the play as
a framework for their responses but, when they got to the point where Phil takes over as leader,
they began to range through the text as they began to draw comparisons with John Tate. The
behaviour and reactions of the other characters were brought in to support arguments about the
leadership styles and there was considerable emphasis placed on the staging of scenes. The
candidates clearly saw the text as a drama and the positioning of the characters and their body
language were commented upon almost as much as the language.
The latter was analysed in considerable detail, as was the use of silence by Phil. The fact that they
were comparing made the candidates really think about the differences and many of them were
9 of 14
REPORT ON THE EXAMINATION – GCSE ENGLISH LITERATURE – 47101H – JUNE 2013
soon hitting Band 5.3 and 5.4. The different methods of leadership and an assessment of which
was the more successful also encouraged an exploratory approach.
Many also achieved in the higher bands for ideas. The play had encouraged them to think about
the nature of bullying and manipulation and one could imagine that there had been some
interesting discussions in class. They were obviously in tune with the mindsets of the characters
and understood them. Candidates were able to unpick John Tate‟s demise as leader, issuing
empty threats, being unable to cope with the word „dead‟ and his eventual disappearance from the
play. Some candidates broadened their responses into ideas about power and how it is
administered: Phil encourages and talks, rather than intimidates.
Question 20 was much less popular. Weaker responses tended to list examples of peer pressure
without offering any comment and there was a minority of candidates who did not understand the
term „peer pressure‟ but chose the question anyway. There were better responses, however, which
considered / explored the nature of the concept and the dynamics of gangs in the play and how
they operate. The best responses, of course, were consistently mindful of the fact that this is a play
to be performed and used that to address AO2.
SECTION B
John Steinbeck: Of Mice and Men
This is the most widely studied text on the paper and, once again, has engaged candidates and
inspired them to write.
Question 21, Part a] - Slim seems to be something of an icon to candidates; there is no doubt that
the vast majority like him. Responses to this part of the question spanned the full mark range,
going from the somewhat unconvincing [and, it must be said, on occasions ridiculous] to the deeply
moving and profound. After years of examining this text, senior examiners still come across some
original insights into the text – and, in this case, to Steinbeck‟s presentation of Slim. There were
those who saw him as big-headed – an ego maniac and a power junkie: not, one feels, what
Steinbeck intended and hardly founded in the text. The majority perceived him as the „good guy‟ –
like in a Western movie. He was seen as a benchmark by which to judge others: a guide, a mentor
and a friend. The regal images were handled well at varying levels and often candidates went on to
explore these set against the fact that Slim was also „like the others‟. The best responses explored
Steinbeck‟s purpose in creating Slim and addressed the idea that the character challenges the
hierarchical structure on the ranch in that he has more respect and authority than Curley as the
boss‟s son. He was seen as a representation of kindness in a hostile environment but is also part
of the harsh culture of the ranch showing pragmatic cruelty in his decision to have Candy‟s dog
shot. Many candidates picked up the sense of grandeur Steinbeck creates through emphatic
language and imagery. Some developed this to consider the paradox of such language being
applied to a mere labourer, and the most able discussed Steinbeck's elevation of manual labour to
a position of dignity within a society which regarded labourers as of little worth, meaning that they
picked up marks for context from part a] very naturally. Many commented interestingly on the
hyperbole of his description, and quite a few saw the regal and divine imagery as an expression of
the workers' naivety in trusting leaders who would inevitably let them down through frail human
nature, linking this to Slim failing to stop the killing of Candy's dog. The „crushed Stetson‟ inspired a
remarkable array of interpretations, some more convincing than others! The references to Slim‟s
hands elicited some interesting analysis of Steinbeck‟s use of hands in the novel as a whole: here,
candidates often compared the way that Curley‟s hands were destructive or used for sexual
pleasure with Slim‟s being used for mastery of his job. For many candidates this task was a
10 of 14
REPORT ON THE EXAMINATION – GCSE ENGLISH LITERATURE – 47101H – JUNE 2013
chance to show off an impressive ability to analyse language perceptively and intelligently. One
candidate commented that “if Slim seems like an impossible character, it is because Steinbeck
intended him to be just that; a representation of how the American Dream was enduringly attractive
yet always just out of reach.” Such insightful interpretations were a pleasure to read, and a
reminder of why this text is such a perennial favourite.
Part b] - There is no doubt that all candidates know about the contexts which surround this novel
but they are assessed on how they use their knowledge in relation to the task and to details from
the text. In part b] there were fewer paragraphs than in previous years [but still some] describing
the American Dream, the Depression and the Dust Bowl.... However, weaker responses tended
either to fail to address the idea of „important‟ in the task or did not relate ideas about importance to
the „society in which the novel is set‟. That said, there was some excellent exploration of the range
of characters and their relative importance on the ranch and how Steinbeck exposes this;
candidates were then able to move out to context in an unforced and convincing way. The best
responses considered Steinbeck‟s methods, for example, the way in which Candy exposes us as
readers to the lack of importance of Curley‟s wife by the way he introduces her to George and
Lennie, „Well you look her over mister, you see if she ain‟t a tart‟. Then the way in which we are
also exposed to Candy‟s lack of importance by another character, Carlson, with his discriminatory
views of the old. A few candidates observed that Candy‟s dog was at the bottom of the social pile –
an interesting view!
Chimamanda Ngozi Adichie: Purple Hibiscus
One senior examiner commented, „Responses to this text were rich and a delight to read.‟
Question 22, Part a] - Some responses paid very close attention to the detail in the passage, such
as the scar: the scar was seen as a symbol of both recent abuse and a long term, permanent
problem. One candidate discussed how a face is closely associated with a person‟s identity, so
Papa leaves a permanent impact on Mama‟s identity. The scar represents Papa‟s dominance in
the home and in Nigerian society. It is „jagged‟ so won‟t heal easily, which mirrors how Papa‟s
abuse of his family isn‟t straight forward or simple, as it is caused by his self-loathing and his fear
of God. One senior examiner observed: „It was a pleasure to read such close analysis without any
need to detour into fanciful possibilities; candidates „got it‟ and had the scope to write in as much
depth and detail as the clock allowed. Much was made of the evidence of violence in the passage,
from the broken figurines to Mama‟s scar. AO2 was well served both in the passage and in the
opportunities opened up by the question in part b).
Part b] - The best responses discussed how both family and political freedom are linked through
the symbol of the purple hibiscus. They explored and evaluated ideas such as how readers are
introduced to the flowers at the beginning but their significance is only appreciated at the end of the
novel. Papa is associated with the red hibiscus but the purple are associated with compromise
because of the connotations of combining red with blue; Father Amadi with his blue tanktop
symbolises freedom, whereas Papa symbolises oppression. The purple buds are described as
„sleepy‟, because progress is still to be made in terms of freedom in Nigeria. Mama cutting the
purple hibiscuses foreshadows the poisoning of papa. Aunty Ifeoma‟s „experimental purple
hibiscuses: rare, fragrant with the undertones of freedom‟ were unknown by Jaja before his visit to
her house; through them (and her) Jaja learns about freedom and turns it into personal rebellion.
The flowers are „experimental‟ as they are new and have never tried before, as with freedom in
both the family and at a national level. They are „rare‟ as true freedom is hard to find. The
government is afraid of the fight for freedom, as shown by the way the government agents „yanked‟
at the purple hibiscuses.
11 of 14
REPORT ON THE EXAMINATION – GCSE ENGLISH LITERATURE – 47101H – JUNE 2013
Some candidates found connecting the purple hibiscus to ideas of personal or political rebellion
was too removed, remote or uncertain. So saying, there were some very well thought out
discussions looking at how Adichie introduces the plant so early in the story and develops it
throughout, not always making the use of it fully transparent, much like the characters who feel
they have to talk with looks or silences rather than with direct words.
Lloyd Jones: Mister Pip
Question 23, Part a] - Weaker responses tended to describe Matilda‟s feelings and narrate her
experiences with little reference to the text, let alone the passage. Some candidates became a little
confused about why the mothers in the pictures had left their children at the Foundling Hospital and
became preoccupied with feeling angry with them for abandoning their children seemingly with the
„slightly bored faces at a supermarket checkout‟ [a reference which some candidates analysed
beautifully]. Better responses understood that these pictures were another inaccurate and
unreliable depiction of reality and merely a fictionalised version of a traumatic event. Many
students successfully linked the imagery of being orphaned with the experience of losing your
identity and home and wrote sensitively about the way in which Jones uses the orphanage as a
device to evoke Matilda‟s own memories and feelings of being effectively orphaned. Some
insightful responses evaluated the description of the paintings of emotionless mothers and their
children, linking this with the horror of both Matilda and the reader seeing her mother killed so
brutally. One thoughtful and poignant response drew attention to the unspoken pain, sense of
regret and sense of loss conveyed by the words “their old history would end and new one would
begin”.
Part b] - The presentation of Mr Watts as an outsider on the island was dealt with particularly
thoughtfully; as was Matilda‟s own continual cultural renegotiation, initially via Great Expectations,
but then ultimately through her own migration to Australia and then London. Some candidates
offered extensive responses to outsiders in the novel, not just Mr Watts. They were able to discuss
the nature of the „redskins‟ and how even they could evoke some sympathy (the officer who
seemed sick of killing). They discussed the value of culture and how outsiders could enrich culture.
One delightful response talked about the enriching effect of migration: Matilda develops when she
herself migrates and even Pip migrates into Matilda‟s life and teaches her lessons (which were
then exemplified by the candidate).
Indeed, there were many approaches to the idea of outsiders, be they incomers to a strange-tothem culture or how another culture receives and copes with an outsider in their midst. Most
candidates looked at Mr Watts being a white man in a strange land and how both the natives and
he cope with the experience. Other candidates took this further and commented on Matilda as well;
how her later experiences in foreign lands were presented - and drawing comparisons with Watts.
Some carefully crafted responses looked at how not just the outsiders experience discomfort but
also the natural inhabitants of the culture in which they chose to live experience discomfort, too;
better still, those candidates who drew attention to how one can become an outsider within one‟s
own culture – Grace, the rebels, Matilda and, of course, the central reference point, Pip. However,
weaker candidates did struggle to think beyond Mr Watts and his status as the only white person
on the island.
Harper Lee: To Kill a Mockingbird
Question 24, Part a] - Many candidates seemed to enjoy writing about this passage and some
really appreciated the humour in it and how this is created for the reader. Sadly, a minority of
12 of 14
REPORT ON THE EXAMINATION – GCSE ENGLISH LITERATURE – 47101H – JUNE 2013
candidates confused the „red little rooster‟ image and thought it was a reference to Mr Gilmer,
rather than Bob Ewell. Most candidates commented successfully on this image, however, and were
able to consider / explore the idea of Ewell as a puffed-up, self-important character in contrast to
the ultimately heroic mockingbird figures. One candidate referred to him as „a songless bird who
crows instead of singing‟. There was much excellent comparison of Ewell to Atticus in this extract
with reference to the latter‟s fairness and dignity compared to the implications of the „rooster‟ image
and that of Ewell growing „ruddy‟ and about to „burst his shirt‟. Sometimes, as part of this
comparison, candidates analysed Atticus‟ leisurely / confident movements, mainly with the pen,
and explored the theatrical / cinematic effects of them. There was also consideration of Scout as
narrator and the effects of the double narrative of the young /adult Scout and the corresponding
filters of innocence and experience through which she views the trial. There was also some
interesting analysis of the „fragrant gardenia in full bloom‟ and what it implies.
Part b] - Although the trial offers a wealth of opportunity to discuss the attitudes of Maycomb, not
all candidates took those opportunities, instead discussing prejudices / attitudes in the town without
reference to the trial at all. Maybe this was simply a case of not reading the question properly. The
vast majority of candidates did, however, root their comments in details from the text and most
used incidents surrounding the trial as springboards. There was reference to „baby steps‟, the
paradox of the separate balcony, the lynch mob, Dolphus Raymond, the black community rising as
Atticus walked past and giving Scout and Jem respect because of Atticus‟ defence of Tom
Robinson, the „Roman‟ nature of the way the white community treat the trial in comparison with the
more serious attitude of the black community, attitudes of Miss Maudie / Mrs Dubose / Aunt
Alexandra and, of course, the verdict. Many candidates acknowledged that although the white
community knew events at the trial were wrong, including Judge Taylor, they would not risk
challenging dominant ideologies in Maycomb. Whatever the focus, most candidates demonstrated
a genuine engagement with the issues and a strength of feeling which was often palpable.
Doris Pilkington: Rabbit-Proof Fence
Question 25 - These comments are based on the responses of one small school seen by a senior
examiner. The question included an accessible passage with plenty of opportunity to comment in
detail; part b enabled candidates to reflect on the rest of the text and write about attitudes in the
context of the whole book.
A significant minority had very little to say about the passage in part a. Some answers were
extremely thin then were followed by a long exposition in part b, much of which had been clearly
taught; answer after answer included exactly the same comments on colonisation which could
have, in some way, fitted any question on the text. Thus, response to part a tended to be a
discriminator and some addressed AO2 much better than others. It is important in the part which
tests context, that candidates direct their comments at the precise demands of the task.
A few ideas follow which may inform teaching and preparation for future exams:

Once again, attention must be drawn to how some candidates interpret texts – particularly,
small parts of texts – maybe a few words; this is especially evident in responses to
Steinbeck. One applauds an imaginative interpretation but only insofar as it remains within
the boundaries of a writer‟s purpose. Interpretations must be convincing and must be
sensible. There could be some useful discussion with candidates about this perhaps.
13 of 14
REPORT ON THE EXAMINATION – GCSE ENGLISH LITERATURE – 47101H – JUNE 2013





Obviously, candidates who demonstrate analytical skills are rewarded in the top bands but
some candidates are not clear about what analysis is – or what it isn‟t. There were many
examples of candidates quoting a sentence and then making [usually spurious] comments
on every single word in it, and often the punctuation as well, without any real reference to
meaning or an overarching idea.
When a question requires a candidate to refer to a passage or chapter in a text, then
candidates must be selective in the choices they make in response to AO2. A long list of
phrases / sentences, each followed by a brief comment of some sort, will rarely take a
candidate out of Band 2. A chronological approach does not really work here – it is better to
try to group ideas and always remain in touch with meaning. The listing approach is very
disjointed and so not „sustained‟.
It may be fruitful to have some teaching focus on how to approach questions which relate to
the beginning or ending of text. Candidates must guard against ignoring the rest of the text.
Contexts are much better handled by candidates now but, if there was an area to single out
for improvement, it would be details relating to context.
In Section B, each task has a passage – these passages may be taken from anywhere in
the text and will vary in length [although there are never overly long passages]. The criteria
for a choice of passage are that candidates can answer the question set on it and can
address the appropriate assessment objectives. One cannot choose a passage that one
thinks candidates will know; one assumes that they know the text and have the appropriate
skills to apply to any passage.
I conclude with a new senior examiner‟s comment at the end of her report:
„I have very much enjoyed reading so many different responses to the texts this year. Despite the
fact that many of the texts on the syllabus have been used for years, they always appear to remain
completely relevant to today‟s candidates who clearly relish responding to them. What never fails
to surprise me is how vastly different candidates‟ perceptions of the same text can be and how,
after marking so many responses to a text, a candidate can come up with a completely new
perspective that I have never read nor even thought of before. It is precisely this that keeps me
engaged and ensures that the whole marking process remains fresh.‟
Mark Ranges and Award of Grades
Grade boundaries and cumulative percentage grades are available on the Results Statistics
page of the AQA Website.
Converting Marks into UMS marks
Convert raw marks into Uniform Mark Scale (UMS) marks by using the link below.
UMS conversion calculator
14 of 14