As examiners report

A-Level Media Studies

Investigating Media/Unit 1 MEST1 Report on the Examination 2570 June 2015 Version: 1.0

Further copies of this Report are available from aqa.org.uk Copyright Š 2015 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 – A-LEVEL MEDIA STUDIES – MEST1 – JUNE 2015

Section A: Text, Concepts and Contexts General The unseen product – the live action trailer ‘Epic Night Out’ for ‘Call of Duty: Ghosts’ – was a fast paced, action packed product which students responded to enthusiastically, engaging with the specific techniques used in the trailer as well as with some of the wider debates it provoked. As in previous years, the level of detailed reference that students are able to make to the product under exam conditions was impressive. The responses suggest that students are well prepared for this exam in terms of understanding the media concepts as well as in the skills of effective note taking.

There was also much more concise and effective use of the contextual material than in previous sessions.

Question focus (in both Section A and B) is an important discriminator. In Section A, students should make sure they are addressing the specific questions set and not just the more general concept heading. Questions 1 and 2 had two aspects to them which needed to be addressed explicitly; identification of camerawork (Q1) and brands (Q2) but these then needed to be linked to the idea of either excitement or promotion. Question focus is also an integral part of the assessment in Section B; descriptions of cross media studies and rote responses – often on film marketing – don’t allow the student to reach the higher levels of the mark scheme.

Section A Q1: Media Forms: How is camerawork used in the trailer to show the excitement of playing ‘Call of Duty: Ghosts’?

Students do seem to be more prepared now to focus on a specific aspect of media form (previous examples have included narrative techniques, mise-en-scène, cinematography) and therefore responses were far more successful in providing relevant analysis. Examples of camerawork which were frequently referred to included; the use of close ups to emphasise the facial expressions of the men’s excitement and establishing shots to allow the viewer to experience the range of settings and the spectacle of explosions and CGI. These examples were then discussed as ways of replicating the excitement of playing the game. This idea was often developed with reference to the concept of audience positioning through the use of moving camera and point of view shots which gave the impression of the spectator ‘being there’.

While students were clearly able to identify camerawork there were also examples where answers moved away from the specific focus; reference to editing could be made if it was directly linked to camerawork but this was often not the case. Reference to the use of sound suggested a lack of confidence in identifying camerawork given how many relevant examples there were.

Q2: Media Institutions: How are links with other brands and media products used in the trailer to promote ‘Call of Duty: Ghosts’?

This seemed to be the question that students struggled with the most, often able to produce a list of relevant brands and products referred to but unable to evaluate how these provided positive associations for the game and its target audience. The wording of the question which referred to both brands and media products (in keeping with the move away from the term ‘text’ across the specification) allowed students a wide choice in selecting aspects of the trailer to discuss. Students were confident in identifying the similarity to Hollywood film style in terms of the trailer itself but 3 of 8

REPORT ON THE EXAMINATION – A-LEVEL MEDIA STUDIES– MEST1 – JUNE 2015

also in the use of specific genre conventions and often referred to the concept of intertextuality in a relevant way. It was fine for students to simply refer to the wider categories of action, sci fi and comedy (the buddy film or bromance) but some students were also more specific in identifying film examples such as The Hangover and Gravity. The continued popularity of Friends was evident with many students picking up on Joey’s catchphrase (How you doin’?) in the scene with Megan Fox. While responses did often end at the level of identification many students did discuss how these references were a successful form of promotion as it situated the game with a similar range of genres and audiences. There were relatively wide interpretations of the concept of a brand but these worked well, arguing that the star persona of Megan Fox could be considered a brand through her link to the Transformers franchise. Interestingly there were many references to the city of Las Vegas - with its connotations of glamour, danger and crime - as a brand, through its repeated appearance in Hollywood film and TV series. It was unclear how many students knew who Frank Sinatra was (the track and singer were identified in the contextual material) and of course they weren’t being assessed on this knowledge. However attempts to suggest that fans of the singer might buy the game in order to hear the song seemed a little desperate and unlikely to be the case in any context.

In this question there was evidence of a more problematic use of the contextual material, with some students taking the reference to Sony PlayStation and Microsoft Xbox as the example of brands, even though they are not explicitly referred to in the trailer.

Q3: Media Audiences: How does the trailer attempt to appeal to a male audience?

This question (along with Q4) seemed to produce the most enthusiastic and engaged responses.

Responses identified the nature of the product’s address to men; the use of the action genre, reference to soldiers and warfare, an attractive woman, CGI explosions and loud bangs, in a way which demonstrated awareness that this was very much a stereotypical, hegemonic address which relied on a partial construction of masculinity. The identification of ‘things men like’ were in the stronger answers linked to audience positioning through camerawork, direct mode of address (‘there’s a soldier in all of us’) and identification with characters. Many responses made much of the ‘relateability’ of the four friends and in some instances were able to point to the paradox of the characters being both ordinary and extraordinary as part of the appeal to the target audience.

Successful application of theories included uses and gratifications where students talked about social identity and pleasures of fantasy and escapism. The theory of the male gaze was very effective here with many students pointing to the traditional objectification of the woman for the male characters and therefore the audience. The fact that Megan Fox was clearly represented as superior to the young man caused some confusion in the attempt to read her role as a ‘damsel in distress’, but many answers were able to discuss the humorous rejection of the character as another form of identification (as well as a reference to the Hollywood buddy movie style of comedy). In relation to this some students made the point that a female character coded for sexual objectification who was also a better shot than ‘you’ was particularly appealing to the target audience.

It was particularly encouraging that many students were able to identify the mode of address as exaggerated and humorous, with one student commenting that a better title for the trailer would be ‘Epic night in’ referring to the gap between address and reality. Several mentions of the use of phallic symbols also picked up on the knowing nature of the trailer.

4 of 8

REPORT ON THE EXAMINATION – A-LEVEL MEDIA STUDIES– MEST1 – JUNE 2015

Problems which did arise included a lack of explicit reference to a male audience and discussion which wasn’t rooted in the trailer but moved too far into identifying psychographics and demographics – this could be relevant but needed to come from evidence in the trailer.

Q4: Representations: How is gun violence represented in the trailer?

As with Q3 this was answered in an engaged way with students wanting to discuss a variety of debates raised by the issues of representations of violence, these worked well as long as points were rooted in evidence from the trailer. Students were confident in theories of representation, their understanding of media images as a partial view meant that they were able to talk confidently about the gap between the representation and the reality of gun violence. Many students pointed out that the trailer never shows the death of the enemy; an image which would inevitably disrupt the excitement and fun of the trailer (a particularly effective interpretation was that gun violence is represented as being ‘without consequence’). While some students discussed the problematic nature of this ‘positive’ and ‘glamorous’ representation, others argued that this representation was understood as fantasy by the audience and that the extreme nature of its imagery made the representation comic and fantastic. Many students referred to the normalising of the violence - as something that everyone did - and to it as a form of reward, with excellent reference to the stray bullet causing one of the characters to hit the jackpot at the casino. The reference to the characters as soldiers was used effectively in many answers to argue that this was being used to justify gun violence as a form of necessary protection rather than aggression. Overall, many students read the representation of gun violence in the trailer as being a specifically masculine trait.

Problems in the response to this question came when students identified the general representation (eg heroic, thrilling, everyday etc) without giving evidence from the trailer. There was also a temptation to discuss the effects debate prompted by the representation of gun violence as exciting and this meant that students spent too much time discussing audience theory rather than issues of representation.

Section B General Comments There was evidence of a lot of effective work on the cross-media study with students covering a variety of contemporary products, audiences and institutions. Once again there were some particularly strong case studies on music and sports coverage where the individual student’s research was well balanced with teacher input.

As has been discussed in detail in several previous reports, it is vital that students have a viable cross-media study in order to access the higher levels of the mark scheme. The focus should be on a case study which allows students to engage with contemporary media debates and also gives them a wide enough range of products in order to be able to select the most appropriate examples for the question focus. While there are interesting points to be made about the digital afterlife – and continued popularity – of programmes such as Friends and Sex and the City, the lack of current related products across platforms is problematic and therefore they work better as secondary examples. It is in the interests of students to have more than one core product for their crossmedia study. While it is possible for certain products, Dr. Who and Sherlock being obvious examples, to possibly have enough related products to provide the necessary range, this still limits students to a narrow choice of audiences and institutions and therefore limiting question choice in Section B. Cross-media studies which focus on one film, its poster and official website and/or trailer will never provide the requisite range referred to in the mark scheme at the higher levels. It is 5 of 8

REPORT ON THE EXAMINATION – A-LEVEL MEDIA STUDIES– MEST1 – JUNE 2015

also noticeable to examiners that whole class studies are still being taught which tend to result in rote answers which do not address the question set. Film case studies are still very popular but the focus on marketing, while important and relevant, often leads to the regurgitation of campaigns rather than focusing on the question set. Another problem with the choice of cross-media study was where students had chosen seemingly unconnected topic areas - broadcasting, news and music – or products which seemed to have little coherence in their groupings.

It is also worth noting that there is no need for students to describe the cross-media study in detail at the beginning of the essay; this doesn’t tend to be relevant and wastes their time. In a related point students should be reassured that long essays are not necessarily better; it is often the case that they suffer from repetition and lack question focus. On average the five A4 sheets provided in the answer booklet for Section B should be sufficient to produce a thorough response.

Q5: Convergence allows audiences to access media content from multiple platforms on one device. Assess the impact of convergence in your cross-media study.

This was the least popular option for this series and there was the impression that students weren’t that confident in their understanding of convergence. However the definition in the question and the familiarity with related concepts such as synergy meant that many students were able to use their cross-media studies effectively here. The question also allowed students to explicitly discuss the increasingly blurred boundaries between platforms in their case studies. While many sound responses emphasised the ease of access to media products as a great benefit and the main impact of convergence, there were also some impressive responses where students took a more complex view and often questioned the seemingly positive impact of convergence. Some answers described well the effect of convergence on the audience meaning that the user can never escape the media; that it has enabled a commercial saturation which becomes increasingly difficult to avoid.

There was also a recognition that convergence was often to the financial benefit of institutions rather than audiences – a point made effectively through examples from the print media.

Interestingly several responses questioned just how meaningful convergence was or whether it was simply speeding up a process that already existed. There was also the usual concern for ‘old people’ who can’t use new technology and were therefore missing out on the benefits of convergence (suggesting that the study of user demographics might be a useful area to include in future cross-media studies!)

Some very successful answers considered the technological impacts in original ways – the fact that apps don’t have the same range of information and functionality as websites, the change to our film spectatorship through watching on tablets and smart phones. One student referred to the ‘intimacy’ of viewing a film on a phone. Some of the strongest answers debated the idea of convergence as a democratic tool, providing access to the media outside of the mainstream institutions, but these optimistic points were often countered by recognition of institutional dominance.

There was a consensus that convergence was part of an increasing speed of turnover of content in the media (and life) which can have a variety of effects. One student discussed the reception of films through convergence and how this digital ‘word of mouth’ has a rapid and devastating impact on the film industry (one example used was the flop Grace of Monaco). It was notable that very few – if any – students referred to the impact on privacy and access to personal data enabled by convergence which would have been a relevant approach.

6 of 8

REPORT ON THE EXAMINATION – A-LEVEL MEDIA STUDIES– MEST1 – JUNE 2015

Problems in answering the question came through lack of focus when students described the existence of their cross-media study across the three media platforms but didn’t consider the effect of access through one device or the impact of convergence.

Q6: How do institutions ensure the audience’s enjoyment of a media product’s narrative is extended across the platforms?

This was the most popular choice of question in Section B and allowed students to employ detailed analysis of narrative techniques in their chosen products as well as considering the way narrative is used to attract and retain an audience. It was pleasing that in addition to the expected ability to discuss narrative in fictional forms, students were also able to apply the concept to other topics such as news and music in often interesting and thought provoking ways. This included a case study on Beyoncé which examined the way in which the narrative of her life was promoted across platforms and reflected back in her songs. Television series with related broadcasting and online content were rich areas for narrative analysis and there were some astute points about the experiences of watching the primary product with or without knowledge of the subsidiary narratives developed in spin-offs. One cross-media study on Wayward Pines identified the increasingly complex narratives of US television as requiring multiple narrative outlets. The X-Factor once again proved a very popular choice and students showed a keen understanding of the way in which the institution controlled the narrative of the contestants through coverage in the tabloid press as well as through the convention of celebrating their narrative ‘journey’.

Narrative theories were used appropriately particularly where students were able to identify different narrative stages across the various iterations of the primary product and linked that to audience response. This was often effective in film where students analysed the way the narrative enigmas in posters and trailers led to the fulfilment of narrative pleasure in the viewing of the film.

As with Q5 the main problem came with lack of question focus, in this instance it was particularly to do with ignoring the second part of the question which required students to discuss how the extension of the narrative could be linked to audience enjoyment.

7 of 8

REPORT ON THE EXAMINATION – A-LEVEL MEDIA STUDIES– MEST1 – JUNE 2015

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 8 of 8

A-Level Media Studies Creating Media/Unit 2 – MEST2 Report on the Examination 2570 June 2015 Version: 1.0

Further copies of this Report are available from aqa.org.uk Copyright Š 2015 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 – A-LEVEL MEDIA STUDIES – MEST2 – JUNE 2015

Introduction The vast majority of work seen in moderation showed that candidates were engaged and enthusiastic. Some candidates showed exceptional technical and creative skills. The briefs encouraged candidates to engage with some interesting technical and institutional issues in their work and it was pleasing to see a range of different approaches to the tasks. As ever, teachers are to be commended for finding a balance between teaching and supporting candidates and allowing them the space to develop their own approaches to the tasks.

The vast majority of centres are applying the mark scheme accurately. Where errors occur they tend to be most significant at the upper and lower end of the range - often, although not always, good work is rewarded too high in the mark scheme where the accuracy, polish and finish is not as consistent as the mark indicates. It is not uncommon for overly rewarded work to show inconsistencies of approach across the two tasks. For example, it is difficult for moderators to support marks in level 5 where one production demonstrates significant weaknesses. Similarly candidates whose work was assessed at the lower end of the mark scheme are sometimes treated harshly. In both cases it is important to consider both strengths and weaknesses across the productions in order to come up with a ‘best fit’ mark.

Due to the nature of the 'best fit' marking required across the two productions, students should be encouraged to divide their time equally across both tasks. When students favour one of the tasks and the second becomes more of an after thought this has a negative impact on the mark that can be awarded.

Centres are reminded that marked and annotated work is available on the e-AQA website http://www.aqa.org.uk/log-in Further information is provided on the A-level Media subject page http://www.aqa.org.uk/subjects/media-studies/a-level/media-studies-2570 Guidance for the briefs and submission of work can be found on the coursework page alongside the briefs for 2016 http://www.aqa.org.uk/subjects/media-studies/a-level/media-studies-2570/coursework

Administration The vast majority of centres are completing all documentation fully and accurately but there are some issues that arise occasionally: • •

Please ensure the marks on the Centre Mark Forms are the same as the totals on the Candidate Record Forms. Errors in addition or transcription aren't always picked up and they can disadvantage students; All candidate names and numbers should be added to the CRF and all parts of the candidate's submission. If pen drives or discs are not clearly marked it can be very difficult for moderators to know for sure that they have seen all the candidate's work. Stray discs can be very difficult to put back with the correct candidate's folders if labels are not clear and detailed. Using familiar names on documents and discs can sometimes be confusing 3 of 8

REPORT ON THE EXAMINATION – A-LEVEL MEDIA STUDIES – MEST2 – JUNE 2015

•

•

for the moderator as they do not always clearly align with names on forms and printouts; All sections of the CRF should be completed. If the candidate has used found images, video footage, sound etc. this should be made clear. Details of software used should also be provided. Teacher annotations are crucial for the moderator to be able to understand the reasoning behind the marks allocated. Do use the descriptors from the mark scheme but also personalise the comments so the moderator can see how the mark scheme is being applied. Notes are sufficient for practical work but evaluations should be annotated; Information must be provided (on the CRF or separately) regarding the individual contribution of students in groups. This should be done as a matter of course but it is especially important where students within one group are awarded different marks. See further comments below regarding group work.

Some centres are sending far too much research and planning materials. Each student should select 5-6 A4 pages as a sample of the scope of pre-production work undertaken. Please avoid sending any more than this and note that there is no need to send large portfolios or folders. Not only are massive folders costly to send in the post they often make finding and accessing work difficult for moderators.

For some reason, this year saw a rise in moderators needing to remind centres to send Centre Declaration Sheets. Please note that one completed and signed CDS should be sent with the work and each student folder should have a completed CRF. Most centres are allowing students to select the brief and tasks they wish to work on. There is evidence that some centres are more prescriptive with all students working on the same briefs, tasks and at times creating very similar work. This makes differentiation in the marks very difficult.

Some schools and colleges still misunderstand the rules regarding group work. Please note: • • • •

• •

Groups should consist of no more than four students. Groups of 2 to 3 are more manageable in terms of identifying individual contributions; Each student should submit their own research and planning material and an individually written evaluation; One task can be a group production. The second must then be an individual piece of work; It is most usual for broadcast work to be constructed in a group as the workload for this type of production can be heavy but if print or e-Media is produced in a group, the amount of material created must be increased in line with the size of a group. For example, when the task asks for 3-4 pages of A4 a group of three candidates should produce 9-12 pages between them; Assessment must consider the individual contribution of each group member and so the moderator needs this information if they are to assess the way the mark scheme has been applied; Where students have worked together please give information to the moderator as to who worked with who (names and candidate numbers please). The moderator also needs information on each individual's contribution to the group and explanations from the marker showing why assessment decisions have been made. This is especially important if different students have been awarded different marks. If there is not enough space for this on the form, a separate document will be fine - and could save admin time. As moderation is a sampling process, please do not use one student’s folder to store this information and/or the group productions.

4 of 8

REPORT ON THE EXAMINATION – A-LEVEL MEDIA STUDIES – MEST2 – JUNE 2015

Submission of Work Please note: an updated guidance document to help with the submission of practical work is available on the AQA website.

In summary: • • •

•

print work should be printed; moving image and audio should be sent in files that are easy to access regardless of the moderator's home computer set-up (mp3s and mp4s tend to cause less accessibility problems). Quicktime files should be avoided please as these seldom play properly; E-media work should be submitted to be viewed through a browser. E-media sent as print outs cannot be described as ‘fully realised’ (a specification requirement) and moderators are unable to see the technical features of the site in full working order. Where work is submitted offline on a disc or pen-drive, please check that websites work before submission; It is good practice to send screen grabs of the students’ work in case there are any technical issues. This should not, however, replace sending work that is fully realised.

Increasingly work is being submitted on-line. This is an acceptable way to get e-Media, audio or moving image work to your moderator. There have been instances though where handwritten urls are submitted that are illegible or contain transcription errors. This delays moderation and creates extra work for the centres.

Best practice is to copy and paste the urls from the browser into a 'Word' document. The urls will convert to links and they can be checked by the centre before submission. This then helps moderators to access and view the students’ work.

It is important to note that online work should not be added to or amended in any way after the work has been marked as this may make the internal assessment appear inconsistent and could cause the whole cohort's marks to be adjusted. This includes any social media pages that are submitted for assessment.

Candidates are expected to submit original work for the assessment. Whilst some found images can be used, the majority of the images submitted should have been created by the student.

Where templates are used for practical production, students should focus on creating content that can be assessed against the descriptors in the mark scheme.

Occasionally centres send the whole cohort’s broadcast work as one continuous file on a disc.

Where this is the case, please provide your moderator with a written list showing where on the timeline each candidate’s work can be found. It would also be very helpful if information regarding who created each piece is included on screen too. As with all other labelling, please ensure that the candidate name (in full) and number is provided.

The Briefs and Tasks Moderation seemed to show that all three briefs are popular with students with Briefs 1 and 3 being undertaken by slightly more students. Many students create broadcast work which is mostly moving image although it is good to see that some audio productions are being created - although they are still few and far between. Both print and e-Media are well represented in the choices made by the students.

5 of 8

REPORT ON THE EXAMINATION – A-LEVEL MEDIA STUDIES – MEST2 – JUNE 2015

It is clear though that there is a disparity on the way centres/students use the briefs. Stronger students carefully consider the institutional contexts provided in the given scenario and use this as the basis of their research and productions. Each brief has some specific requirements within the scenarios and stronger students take a focused approach to the issues raised. Weaker students tend to use the brief as a starting point but then create products loosely based on the tasks. This makes rewarding higher in the mark scheme difficult as part of the assessment is based on the students’ abilities to respond to the tasks provided. Students’ preparation for their coursework should include clarifying definitions and contemporary institutional practices in their research. For example, Brief 2 asks for a focus on Lifestyle programming. This has been 'loosely' interpreted on occasion. Creating a film trailer and pages from Empire magazine is not appropriate for this brief.

Creating products that look at film-making as a hobby would, however, work. The brief asks that the link between the TV programme is clear in the print and/or e-Media productions. Weaker students often miss this in the work they produce.

Similarly, very few students approach Brief 1 as a pitch for funding using the products to show how audiences can engage with a TV programme across platforms. Moving image products for Brief 2 (promo spots or an extract from a magazine programme) are often indiscernible from the broadcast task of Brief 1 (opening scenes). Similarly, the focus on creating viral interest is often missed in the second broadcast option for Brief 2.

The new Brief 3 has proved popular with some excellent work being produced. Many students have clearly appreciated the creative freedom the broadcast task offers. Some students, rather than create a music video (to promote the sale of a song), created moving image work that met the old brief's requirements and used interviews and/or a documentary approach. Stronger students showed a real grasp of the visual codes and conventions of musical genres and approaches were varied from lip-syncing to a musical track, live performances of original tracks and 2 minute narratives reflecting the lyrics or conventions of the genre. Stronger work used a range of locations and shots in an appropriate way. Work awarded in the upper level showed considerable attention to detail in the filming and post production. Some work was really ambitious and it was a great pleasure to be able to see work that demonstrated fantastic knowledge and clear creative talent.

As with all broadcast work, productions that were clearly unplanned and, increasingly often sadly, filmed in an amateurish way on a mobile phone tended not to achieve marks in the upper end of the mark scheme. Students should be advised not to film in 'portrait' unless they have a genuine institutional reason to do so. If this is the case this should be addressed in the evaluation. There were several examples of work that swapped between portrait and landscape - sometimes several times in one production - and this was not commented on by the student or the assessor.

E-media for Brief 3 often used online templates as a structure. Where students opt for this approach they should provide evidence of their technical and creative skills in the content they create as this is not demonstrated by simply using a pre-prepared template. Stronger students showed that a marketing strategy was being employed to attract and appeal to a specific audience.

One example of this is where tweets promoting the artist were put out as part of a national conversation about The X-Factor.

Some creative approaches to the newsletter were taken by stronger students who created work that provided information that was both appropriate and aimed to engage their target audience.

Stronger work demonstrated creativity in the creation of images and visual design features.

Weaker students tended to create print work that felt more suited to the old brief basing work on magazine feature articles and tour posters. Students should be encouraged to consider the two tasks (plus the third) as a coherent campaign. Students can be rewarded for showing a knowledge and understanding of a marketing strategy within their work.

6 of 8

REPORT ON THE EXAMINATION – A-LEVEL MEDIA STUDIES – MEST2 – JUNE 2015

When making websites, students should be encouraged to research contemporary design conventions (see guidance document for more details). Some websites follow very dated codes and conventions of layout and design and this may be a lack of detailed analysis of existing websites when researching for the project. Some students use web building facilities such as wix.com. This can be useful where students would struggle to create websites ‘off-line’ but students should consider how they are to demonstrate their technical and creative skills in their work as students cannot be rewarded highly for adding basic content to a template. Technical and creative skills can be shown in the construction of photographs, videos and animations as examples. Students should be encouraged to consider the multi-media, dynamic and interactive nature of contemporary websites.

Evaluations Students’ evaluations can vary enormously. Stronger students are engaged with the brief and tasks’ requirements throughout and their evaluations show both conceptual and institutional knowledge. Weaker students offer personal responses and centres are urged to note that there are only limited amounts of marks awarded to description. Work at the lower end of the mark scheme is often characterised by the description of research, the process of production and/or the product itself. This is not required.

Some students seemed to have misunderstood what is meant by a discussion on the ‘strengths and weaknesses’ of their work. Strengths and weaknesses should be considered in light of the requirements of the chosen brief. Strengths and weaknesses should be considered in light of the knowledge and understanding gained during research into the way existing texts work to appeal to the target audience and meet institutional requirements.

Target audience is not always explored fully in the evaluations. Weaker students tend to make lots of declarations about who their audience is and what they like. Primary research into audience is not necessary but students can learn how existing media products identify, target and address audiences in order to get their attention, create an appeal and importantly help ensure the function of the productions is fulfilled.

Some students, however, were producing insightful evaluative work that analysed their productions and assessed the strengths and weaknesses in some detail. Students who used media concepts as an integral part of the evaluation tended to produce more relevant evaluations than those who added conceptual ideas, terms or theories as a bolt on to the discussion.

The third platform was addressed in some evaluations to varying degrees of success. In a few cases, a simple repetition of the task from the brief was offered that didn’t add anything to the evaluation. Stronger students engaged (briefly) with the third platform in light of the scenario provided in the brief. Less successful approaches to the third platform tended to be personal stating why the platform had not been selected by the student (sometimes because it ‘looked hard’ or the student ‘didn’t have the right technology’). These students have missed that this is an opportunity for them to show their knowledge of the benefits or limitations of the third platform and their creative and imaginative ways of bringing the platform into the project they have worked on.

7 of 8

REPORT ON THE EXAMINATION – A-LEVEL MEDIA STUDIES – MEST2 – JUNE 2015

Despite some technical issues (but not very many) and some misunderstandings of the rubric for the briefs, this year’s moderation went very well with the vast majority of the work appropriately presented for moderation and the admin completed efficiently. Moderators have spoken of the enthusiasm and engagement evidenced in so much of the work we have seen. It is always a pleasure to see how students take the opportunity to develop their knowledge and skills for this unit and so many submit appealing, witty, engaging and creative work.

Further Support

Please do access the guidance material on the AQA website. In addition, you will have a coursework adviser allocated to your centre. If you do not have their contact details by the end of September, do contact the subject department on mediastudies@aqa.org.uk and they will pass on your adviser’s email address. A range of support courses will be offered across the academic year. Standardising meetings will be held in the Autumn/Winter and other subject and assessment related courses will also be available.

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 8 of 8