The AQA GCSE Sociology examiner reports are always full of useful insight into where students performed well, where common misconceptions appeared and what separated stronger responses from weaker ones.

So, to save you some time, here are some of the key messages from the 2026 Paper 1 and Paper 2 examiner reports, along with a few practical classroom takeaways.

Paper 1 - Families and Education

What was done well?

Students were generally well prepared and showed noticeably better time management, with far more attempting the final extended-writing questions than in previous years. There was also evidence of improving exam technique, particularly on questions requiring students to refer to a context rather than simply reproduce stock answers.

Some areas of sociological knowledge were particularly strong. Students used Parsons’ functions of the family effectively, showed good understanding of conjugal roles and produced some strong responses on divorce. The extended question comparing feminist and functionalist views of the family was the strongest extended response on the paper, with Delphy and Leonard, Oakley, Willmott and Young commonly used to construct arguments.

There were also encouraging responses in Education. Students generally understood the correspondence principle, with hierarchy, uniform and punctuality commonly used as examples, and many showed a good grasp of gender differences in educational achievement, including subcultures and the feminisation of education.

Areas for improvement

Research methods terminology remains a major issue. Students continued to confuse quantitative and qualitative data, validity, reliability and representativeness, while the vague term “accurate” was often used when students really meant valid or reliable.

Context also needs more than a passing mention. Students often gained some credit simply by naming the context, but stronger answers developed why a methodological strength or weakness mattered in that particular study. This was especially evident in questions on longitudinal studies, group interviews and questionnaires.

There were also some significant gaps in key terminology. Question 14 was the weakest question on the paper, with many students not knowing the relevant term at all, while the extended question on social cohesion was also poorly answered because students sometimes confused it with social mobility.

The final 12-marker on material deprivation was challenging too. Many students could discuss material deprivation, but struggled to complete the full chain from material deprivation → social class → educational achievement.

So, what the key takeaways for the classroom?

• Build regular retrieval around precise sociological terminology, particularly research-method concepts and easily confused key terms. Students also need repeated practice taking a generic methodological point and explicitly applying it to the context in the question.
• For extended writing, encourage students to prioritise analysis and evaluation over adding extra perspectives for the sake of it. AQA noted that introducing Marxism into the family question sometimes actually weakened an otherwise strong feminist-versus-functionalist argument because it reduced the depth of evaluation.
• It is also worth reinforcing the wording of the question. If students are asked for one way, they should develop one way fully rather than giving several undeveloped points; if a question asks about both genders, both need addressing.

Paper 2 - Crime and Deviance and Social Stratification

What was done well?

Paper 2 was accessible to the vast majority of students, with another clear improvement in time management and fewer unanswered extended-writing questions. AQA also noted continuing improvement in analysis and evaluation, with increasing numbers of students evaluating throughout their essays rather than saving everything for the conclusion.

Crime and Deviance produced some particularly strong answers. Students generally understood the chivalry thesis, informal social control and covert observation, while the 12-mark question on Becker’s labelling theory was one of the strongest extended responses. Better answers used ideas such as societal reaction, self-fulfilling prophecy and master status and evaluated labelling against alternative perspectives.

There was also plenty to celebrate in Social Stratification. Students generally understood age stereotypes, the relationship between wealth and life chances and Walby’s feminist explanation of patriarchy. The final extended questions on individual responsibility for poverty and functionalist role allocation generated many strong, balanced and well-structured arguments.

Areas for improvement

Again, research methods is the most obvious area for continued attention. Validity, reliability and representativeness were still confused, and students continued to use “accurate” without saying what they actually meant.

Application remained one of the main things separating the highest-scoring responses from the rest. Students might correctly identify a methodological issue, but fail to explain why it mattered when researching deviance, anti-social behaviour, unemployment or patriarchy.

There were also some knowledge gaps. Students sometimes confused Cohen with Merton or failed to identify Cohen as a Functionalist. In Social Stratification, achieved power was sometimes confused with ascribed power, with inherited wealth or family background offered as examples of something achieved.

Question 11 also exposed a common exam issue - students knew lots about crime but didn't always answer the question about the representativeness of official crime statistics. Some drifted into causes of crime or simply described victim surveys and self-report studies without explaining what these revealed about the limitations of official statistics.

So, what the key takeaways for the classroom?

• Keep drilling methods in context. A useful classroom routine might be - methodological point → what does it mean? → why does it matter in this study? That extra contextual step is repeatedly what distinguishes full-mark answers from partial ones.
• Students should also practise identifying the correct perspective or sociologist where the question explicitly requires it. Missing the perspective can mean losing an otherwise very accessible mark.
• For extended writing, the big message is to keep evaluation running through the argument. Stronger students did not simply describe Functionalism, Marxism, Feminism or Interactionism in separate blocks; they compared perspectives and continually returned to the exact claim in the question.

Across both papers, the recurring messages are really consistent - students generally know the sociology and are becoming better at completing the papers and constructing extended answers. The areas where marks are still being lost are more about precision...

• using the correct methodological language
• answering every part of the question, applying points to the context
• turning knowledge into analysis and evaluation

So, for 2027, the biggest gains may come from helping students move from 'I know this topic' to 'I know exactly how to use this sociology to answer this question'.