OCR chief examiner reports on question 1

OCR Chief Examiner Reports on Question 1 (Report for each area of
representation).
June 2014: Downton Abbey – Class and Status
On the whole candidates answered the question well and with reasonable accuracy, though
there was some variation in the quality of the answers. The choice of Downton Abbey as the
focus of the investigation seemed to have been a popular and engaging choice and it was
heartening to see far more integration of terminology in candidate responses. The majority
were able to show that there were a variety of class groups represented and that characters'
status within the sequence fluctuated according to narrative events. Many candidates tackled
the sequence in order, which worked for the strongest candidates who were able to provide a
balanced, integrated analysis, covering all the micro-elements. However, lesser achieving
candidates struggled to achieve a satisfactory balance with this approach, frequently omitting
coverage of editing or lapsing into passages of description or analysis without reference to
class and status. These candidates would have been better advised to adopt a more
structured approach, basing their analysis around each technical area in turn or focussing
upon the working class and aristocracy in turn.
Camera shots, angle and movement – Many candidates dealt with this technical area well
especially with regards to the principles of pull focus, framing and camera movement,
examples include the tracking shot of Lord Grantham, and some excellent discussion about
the composition of the house juxtaposed to the set-up of the kitchen area. This in-depth
discussion by many candidates moved away from the usual discussion of low angle/high
angle shots which usually dominate these kinds of responses, a sort of ‘spot the camera shot’
approach. This session candidates seemed more prepared and confident to try much more
detailed analysis and this was pleasing to see.
Mise en scene – This was one of the strongest areas of response for candidates. Although
there was a lot of obvious ‘costume’ analysis between the servants and the ‘master’ of the
house, many of the more engaged candidates focused on the choice of attire for Carson and
how this subverted the expectation of a worker in the house. Comments were also drawn to
performance, as well as the choice of lighting and the differences in set décor between the
two areas of the mansion. Many candidates compared and contrasted the class and status
differences between the kitchen quarters and the master’s home to a very good degree.
Some candidates are still wedded to deterministic colour analysis, leading to clearly
inaccurate analysis, for example, stating that ‘the lady's white dress signifies her purity'; this
approach should be discouraged and candidates should be able to understand that analysis
is contextual rather than universal in value.
Sound – In this session there were a lot of detailed responses discussing the use of diegetic
dialogue, for example the response by Lord Grantham to the deaths of the lower class led to
some worthwhile discussion with regards to him breaking the supposed stereotype of the
upper classes of not caring as much for the lower classes in society. However, candidates
tended to cover dialogue as an element of sound rather than concentrating on the technical
use of sound. Some good candidates were able to show how the sequence creates a specific
soundscape and linked this to issues of class and status. Most candidates are able to
distinguish between diegetic and non-diegetic sound. The sequence offered plenty of relevant
examples of soundtrack and ambient sound features connected with class and status.
Editing –This technical area remains an area for development with regards to candidate
responses. The more able candidates, however, did make some excellent comments with
regards to the use of editing in the scene. The long tracking shots of Lord Grantham
‘motivated’ by his status within the household were excellently dissected by a number of
candidates, as was the use of parallel editing between the rich aristocracy and the lower
servants. On occasion excellent candidate responses would relate the technical features of
editing with examples of how different perspectives are constructed and how the diegesis
constructed a hierarchy of meaning. There was the repeated mistake of using ‘jump cuts’ to
mark a difference between scenes, which was a common error. On many occasions editing
was again marked by its absence or a few lines being sporadically applied with generic use in
referring to continuity and seamlessness without application to the issue of representation.
Candidates should be encouraged to examine how editing techniques set up perspective
within the sequence and encourage the audience to identify with a number of different
characters in different environments. Unfortunately, too many candidates simply omitted an
analysis of editing in the response. Centres should ensure that candidates are prepared to

address editing, at least in relation to pace, perspective and match on action of the extract.
June 2013: Doc Martin: Regional Identity
The topic of representation examined this session was regional identity in the TV drama
extract Doc Martin. Although this was the first session in which the candidates' knowledge of
representation in regional identity has been assessed, there was little evidence that the task
was more difficult than any other areas of representation. Candidates were able to correctly
identify the specific regional identity represented and many were able to build a cogent
argument around the general representations of rural lifestyles and the contrasts that are set
up with an urban- based character. The extract provided candidates with the opportunity to
engage with this key aspect of representation through the use of the four technical areas. The
most able candidates could provide a discussion of regional identity which integrated analysis
of the technical aspects and stereotyping and selected appropriately discriminated aspects of
regional identity that they wanted to discuss. These candidates offered insightful analysis of
regional identity that was developed beyond the use of accent/ dialect or the rural/urban
oppositional themes in the extract. They were able to offer discussion and analysis of identity
within the community and the arrival of Doc Martin, whilst at the same time explore the range
of characterisations through the region and the nuances of these relationships. Lesser
achieving candidates’ discussion of regional identity relied on the whole on the examination of
geographical divides and an over- reliance on ‘binary oppositions’ through the use of dialogue
and location which often led to some reductive analysis of ‘grumpy Londoner’ verses happy
and accepting community. At times these candidates would focus discussion on gender and
class and status, rather than regional identity. It is important that candidates are fully
prepared on all area of representational analysis including an understanding of the process of
stereotyping. Most candidates were able to discuss differences in the representations of rural
inhabitants to those of Doc Martin as an 'outsider'. However, only the strongest candidates
were able to discuss which representations audiences were being invited to identify with in
order to have a full understanding of the meaning of the sequence. There were many different
areas of the UK identified as the location, including Scotland, the North, the Midlands, W ales
and Ireland; only a few candidates identified the South West correctly. However, as long as
the analysis focussed on the differences between rural and urban communities this was not a
major obstacle to success.
Technical Aspects
Camera Shot, Angle, Movement
On the whole there was plenty of purposeful analysis by candidates. Those responses which
worked well identified the purpose of the establishing two at the start of the sequence, which
set up the location of the extract. Candidates who were able to identity a range of shots in a
sustained and methodical way could use this evidence to sustain an argument of how
meaning was constructed, for example, with the use of interior shots in the house with the
plumbers, although often there was confusion over the use of high and low angles and the
connotative meaning associated with these. Typical errors provided by candidates were to
argue for the use of bird’s eyes shots in the extract – there were none used. Camera
movement tends to be the most challenging for candidates with track or crane shots often
misidentified and the functions not fully understood.
Mise-en-scène
Candidates would use this technical aspect to demonstrate the cultural and regional
differences between characters. Most candidates were able to discuss mise-en-scène in
terms of the locations used, costume and key props. Stronger candidates were able to show
a coherent set of values attached to the rural community through the various locations and
the ways in which Doc Martin stood in opposition to this. There was also some awareness of
counter typical representations such as the receptionist's dreadlocks or the costume of the
young women who called Doc Martin 'Bodmin'. Weaker candidates tended to fall back on
clichéd analysis which leads to unsustainable assumptions - 'she is wearing red which
signifies danger'. There were many references to Doc Martin’s attire and how he stood out
from the more informally dressed ‘locals’. For many candidates this represented his
pompousness and status, whilst the inferior and poorer locals were dressed to reflect the
working rural community. Good contrasts were demonstrated through the use of the police
officer and the disrespect Doc Martin showed to him. Lighting was addressed much more this
session, particularly with the interior shots and candidates would link the dinginess of the
lighting, to fall below the expectations and standards of the Doctor and the status he has in

his ‘new’ community. This was in part reinforced through his actions as a non-acceptance of
the way of life in Portwyn.
Sound
This technical feature was dealt with well in the majority with candidates being enabled to
analyse the use of diegetic and non-diegetic sound well in relation to the location and the
character’s actions. There was also good discussion about the ambient sounds in the clip and
the use of score. Many candidates picked up on the use of the soundtrack in relation to the
character’s mood and associated behaviour and how this represented their oppositional
regional identities. Sound was best examined again through the use of dialogue which
focused on lines such as: ‘down here we go with the flow’ as an illustration of how relaxed
and laid back the rural community is in comparison to Doc Martin, as well as and the use of
the colloquial and regional phrase ‘Bodmin’ . Some candidates would pick up on the young
plumber’s discussion of the word ‘Bodmin’ as representing an articulate young local who
challenged expectations of the local plumbers with an impressive literary reference to Daphne
Du Maurier, thus providing a challenging to the dominant discourse within the text, suggesting
that locals were inferior to Doc Martin. Indeed this proved to be a fascinating counter
stereotype for many to discuss.
Editing
On the whole those candidates who achieved well with editing would be able to identify and
explain the use of shot reverse shot and conversations between characters, and the use of
ellipsis to explain the unfolding sets of events in the extract, for example in signifying the
frustrations of Doc Martin and his motivations when visiting the police station and being
greeted by the Police officer in a pinafore. Candidates dealt better with eyeline matches and
match on action sequences in this session and there were fewer guesses about editing
transitions used. At times there was a reliance on the use of jump cuts as a term which is not
present in the extract. Editing is used best when candidates are able to discuss the motivation
of characters actions and the need to integrate other technical aspects for example, the
comedic actions of the plumbers in the doctor’s surgery. For many editing was the weakest
area of analysis, with some candidates omitting it altogether. In a number of cases,
candidates were not well prepared with sufficient editing terminology to discuss the sequence
in detail. This led to superficial, common sense analyses or the adoption of inappropriate
language to describe what they are seeing.
January 2013: ER - Age
This was the first series in which non-British TV drama became available to use as an extract
in the exam. The choice of extract was ER and the representation was age. Question two
focused on media ownership and the impact ownership has on the range of products and
services to the audience. The paper achieved differentiation across the whole range of
candidates’ abilities and presented candidates with sufficient opportunity to engage with the
key media concepts required for this paper. However, this series also saw a number of
candidates who failed to engage with the representation of age in question one, and similarly,
a number of candidates who were not prepared well enough for the requirements of question
two, which resulted in a significant number of responses that were brief, minimal and in some
cases no responses. Entry for the exam was similar to the previous January however the
majority of candidates were sitting the examination for the first time, with the number of
candidates using the January series as a re-sit opportunity much lower than in previous
years.
Question 1
On the whole candidates engaged with the set question on the representation of age with
answers maturely and sensitively handled. Those candidates that performed to the highest
level did so with detailed and sustained analysis of age and with application of a range of
examples across the four technical areas. In their responses candidates would frequently
refer to oppositional and negotiated readings of the text, in relation to child/adult/elderly
representations. The most detailed responses considered a hierarchy of meaning in the text
in analysis of the discourse between adult/child and elderly age representations. In a few
cases this was quite a sophisticated analysis in which candidates commented on how the
extract challenged typical expectations and presentations of children and adults. This was
most pertinent in relation to the very ill child at the beginning of the sequence: for example,
stronger candidates recognising that there was a role-reversal at this point, with the doctor

learning from the younger patient. Indeed many candidates that picked up on the
representation of the child as vulnerable also noted that the child was incredibly mature,
realistic and intelligent in relation to the discourse with the adult doctor on his medical
condition. Weaker performing candidates relied on simplistic binary oppositions, such as
elderly patients are all senile, with all children being weak and in need of protection. Many
weaker candidates chose to focus on superficial tasks such as looking at age differences,
ignoring particular values or ideologies linked with age groups. Some of these candidates
also focused on the discussion of gender or the medical profession rather than age.
Technical features
The analysis of camera angle, shot and movement was used by most to varying degrees.
Stronger candidates often correctly identified the use of high/low angled shots, the use of
steadicam and could in some instances also analyse the framing of shots as key to how
meaning is constructed, particularly with the doctor/ child in the private medical room.
A common error for many candidates was to confuse the use of low and high camera angles
and on a few occasions candidates referred to bird’s eye and worm’s eye camera shots which
were not present in the extract. On the whole terminology was used correctly by candidates.
Candidates’ discussion of mise-en-scène included analysis of the medical environment being
used as a context for the study of age. The mise-en-scène was referred to in the use of
costume to demonstrate the doctor’s age and experience versus the child as a patient and
the use of tubes and make up to represent him as weak and fragile. The key prop of the
Sudoku book and the child’s technical vocabulary were well discussed to illustrate how typical
representations of childhood were challenged. Candidates were also able to analyse t he use
of location and the characters’ actions in relation to the construction of age representations in
this medical drama, for example, the professional adult doctors working under stress in busy
waiting rooms were often contrasted to the irresponsible actions of the older women who was
simply there to ‘breathe the air’ and also the supposedly drunk older male. There was a lot
less colour determinism used in analysis of mise-en-scène this series, whilst aspects like
lighting are still under- utilised, except on occasion, for example some candidates analysed
the low lighting of the room with the ill child at the start and noted the sombre atmosphere this
created around his situation. Lesser performing candidates simply relied upon the dress of
characters and the role they had in the extract, leading to quite simplistic analysis.
Candidates engaged with the use of editing and sound. Many candidates could mention
editing and continuity, through the use of shot reverse shot or eyeline matches. The most
able candidates examined editing in an analytical way. These candidates could clearly link
meaning constructed in the extract and state something purposeful about the representation
of age, for example they focused their attention on the use of long takes and how the camera
followed key characters who dominated the frame and there were also some excellent
musings on the use of cross cutting within the sequence. Most candidates could identify
transitions used, though a common error was the use of the term jump cut. Lesser achieving
candidates simply mentioned the word edit or commented on editing without actually using
any examples of discussing how editing through shot sequencing helped create
representations of age. At times there was little attempt to understand how editing created
particular viewpoints from which the sequence made most sense or how it was used to
privilege particular characters and age groups.
Sound proved to be the most problematic technical area for candidates, although through the
evaluation of the use of dialogue, particular attention was focused on the first boy’s use of
language and the mature way he confronted the illness that was enveloping him. This stoic
manner was compared to another young adult doctor’s childish construction, which focused
on his immaturity. Many candidates relied on dialogue as a valued aspect of sound and would
refer to key dialogue between characters. A few candidates exemplified the use of monitor
blips for the ill child or indeed the use of silence to reflect the seriousness of the child’s
situation, though many noted how calm the female doctor was in the ER waiting area, making
reference to diegetic sounds. There was some common misunderstanding of diegetic and
non-diegetic sound and that which is synchronous and asynchronous. At times it was
encouraging to see that candidates examined sound and editing alongside each other and in
relation to mise-en- scène. This integrated approach should be encouraged more as it often
leads to more advanced responses from candidates.
June 2012: Coming Down the Mountain – Ability
The question required candidates to move from description of key technical areas to analysis

of how representations of ability and disability were constructed. Most candidates addressed
the key media concept of representation in the extract, contrasting a discussion of the
representation of Ben’s disability with the representation of his able brother, David. Most
candidates were able to engage with analysis of ability/disability and the hierarchal relations
between the two principal characters.
In approaching the set question, candidates pre-dominantly analysed their chosen examples
of representation in a chronological address of the extract, whilst integrating different
technical aspects, for example, combining the analysis of camera composition with sound.
Stronger candidates provided an integrated analysis of the extract through analysis of key
examples identified. These candidates explored how the technical features could be applied
in combination with each other.
However, lesser achieving candidates struggled to achieve a satisfactory balance with the
chronological approach, frequently omitting coverage of editing or lapsing into passages of
description or analysis without reference to representation. These candidates would have
been better advised in preparation to adopt a more structured approach, basing their analysis
around each technical area in turn or focussing upon ability and disability in turn. These
candidates could list many technical aspects, with varying degrees of accuracy, but struggled
to say anything meaningful about the representation of ability/disability, at times focusing on
character analysis alone or just re-telling the narrative of the piece without appropriate textual
exemplification of the micro aspects of the TV drama extract.
Representation
Confident candidates were able to analyse the ways in which the extract attempted to position
the audience in relation to Ben and David and their sibling relationship. Candidates showed
maturity in terms of their understanding of the juxtaposition of ability and disability.
Frequently, candidates were able to explore the status of David as a confident, able bodied
young male in comparison to his brother Ben. As a result candidates were able to explore the
nuances of the representation of ability/disability, in relation to the micro technical elements,
for example, candidates were able to explore David’s ‘angst’ as a teenager and the
alternative viewpoints presented of him as both carer and a selfish, young individual. Stronger
responses also showed a good grasp of the brother’s ambivalent abilities, in terms of his
maturity and expectations of behaviour and these were compared with Ben’s expectations as
a disabled child. Also, candidates tended to comment on the stereotypical representation of
disability as burdensome and either lonely, isolated or incapable of relatively straightforward
activities. Some candidates rightly brought out that the Ben is not entirely helpless, noticing
the little smirk at the breakfast table, and the fact that he does inhabit his world quite happily
at times – the negative sides of `ability` were also brought out – for example the unruly
behaviour of David. Indeed more subtle interpretations offered the view that even the able
bodied characters exhibited weaknesses and more commonly that David felt trapped and
isolated by the responsibility of his brother.
Those candidates that did less well with the analysis of representation would focus on a
discussion of sibling identity and power, rather than ability/disability. Lesser achieving
candidates used sweeping generalisations or simply had little to discuss on the topic, some
candidates simply suggested that Ben, had few if any abilities.
Camera Shot, Angle and Composition
Most candidates used the correct terminology and could identify shot composition,
movement, framing, and angles in relation to each of the characters and their situations and
link these to the construction of ability/disability. There was more evidence than previous
series that candidates engaged with the exploration of cinematography and composition of
shots; for example plenty mentioned the use of shallow focus. The establishing shot of a
bird’s eye view, which then zoomed and panned around the main character, were all
identified well and most candidates took the time to analyse what such an aerial shot allowed
the audience to see of the boys’ bedroom and what this said about them as individuals.
Candidates also engaged with the prolonged use of close-ups, which were explored, in detail
and with sensitivity highlighting the maturity of media students to explore these complex
topics of representation. The terms panning and tracking were commonly confused with each
other, as were the identification and use of high and low angles.
Mise en scene

Overall most candidates had plenty to comment on the micro feature of mise en scene,
ranging from some excellent detailed analysis of the set design; principally the contrasting
sides of the boys’ bedroom, in particular the child like and innocent props associated with Ben
and his toys. Candidates also frequently commented on the use of outside locations, such as
the activities of the able bodied versus the less abled activities of Ben, for example, David
climbing the tree with a low angled shot of Ben looking up and supping on an ice cream. Most
candidates also engaged with the end of the extract, with Ben sitting on the double decker
bus amongst a noisy set of school children on their way home. Here candidates wrote plenty
in interpretation of Ben’s loneliness and isolation on the school journey home and paid an
equivalent amount of attention to the way in which he appeared to clutch his schoolbag in the
playground, as a sign of insecurity. In contrast most candidates also recognised David’s
ability represented by an artistic drawing in the classroom.
In general, Centres appear to be heeding advice from previous reports about discarding
simplistic colour determination in analysis of characters and their actions, which is
encouraging. Also more candidates attempted to engage with the issue of lighting to varying
degrees. The most able candidates offered detailed and at times quite sophisticated analysis
of the representation of ability and disability, because they linked analysis to informed
exemplification from the extract. Lesser achieving candidates could describe the mise en
scene, but often lacked reference to how the representation was constructed or focused too
much on character function, status, family and/or power relations over ability and disability.
Sound
The analysis of sound is continuing to improve with candidates attempting to link music with
the representation of the characters. Some candidates were able to discuss the ways in
which sound in the extract represented David’s frustration at having a disabled brother, for
example with the use of the diegetic soundtrack “Wouldn’t it be nice’. Most candidates could
associate the use of diegetic sound with empathy for Ben, exemplified by the close up of Ben
on the bus juxtaposed with a shallow focus and muffled diegetic sounds, signifying
detachment and vulnerability.
There seemed to be more confident use of terminology in relation to the soundtrack this
series, for example the most able candidates recognised the irony of the pop song used from
the Beach Boys. Many candidates were proficient in analysing diegetic/non diegetic sound
(however a number of candidates did get diegetic and non diegetic sound mixed up).
Candidates also made frequent reference to the dialogue in the extract, especially the use of
the voiceover at the beginning of the extract when David anchors his personal feelings for
Ben when he narrates his co-existence and lifestyle in terms of his relationship to his disabled
brother. Candidates also understood the voiceover technique and acquainted this with
David’s burden. Lesser achieving candidates relied solely on dialogue in analysis of the
sequence, sacrificing analysis of other uses of sound in the extract to analyse the
representations offered.
Editing
Candidates were able to discuss the shot-reverse shot technique, for example in the family
home and the positioning of the two main characters. In addition, most candidates were able
to identify and discuss the significance of the use of slow motion at the end of the extract,
discussed with varying degrees of success. The most able candidates also made reference to
a range of editing techniques, which included the use of crosscutting, pacing and the
montage of black and white evolutionary images. The montage of evolutionary images used
was identified by most candidates, some offering in analysis, an examination of the David’s
thoughts and an evolutionary scale, whilst some candidates were simply confused about the
context and use of these images; or even omitted any analysis of this sequence of shots.
‘Jump cut’ remains a term that is misused and overused, for example, when candidates
labelled the transition from the establishing external shot to the interior shot of the family
home.
Editing remains the most challenging area for analysis, although there are some encouraging
signs that fewer candidates this series seemed to omit this area altogether. Some less able
candidates had gaps in their knowledge and understanding of editing terminology, for
example editing transitions were often identified as ‘switched’ or ‘flicked’ or ‘choppy editing’.
Advice offered to centres is keep working on editing as a micro aspect examined for question
one and focus on how meaning is constructed through shot sequencing and what is being

represented by the edited TV drama extract.
January 2012: Fingersmith – Sexuality
The question required candidates to move from description of key technical areas to analysis
of how representations of sexuality are constructed. Some candidates began by addressing
the concept of representation in the extract and a discussion of the representational
differences between Maud (the aristocratic wealthy female), the male character Richard and
Sue (the Fingersmith). Most Candidates were able to engage with analysis of sexuality and
the relations between the three principal characters. Some candidates analysed their
examples chronologically, integrating different technical aspects; most candidates addressed
the technical areas one by one, with a small number of stronger candidates providing an
integrated analysis of how the technical features could be applied in combination with each
other.
Weaker candidates could list many technical aspects, with varying degrees of accuracy, but
struggled to say anything meaningful about the representation of sexuality, at times focusing
on gender and or class and status. Long introductions were unnecessary for this question; the
best responses got straight on with analysis.
It is advisable that centres make the mark scheme available to candidates so that they are
aware of how the work is assessed. This could also be used for the marking of timed
assignments in the classroom. It is important that candidates balance their responses to
include all the technical features used in the extract that construct meaning if they are to
score highly.
Representation
the audience in relation to Maud and Sue and the sexual/romantic relations between the two
often embedded in a discussion of desire, passion and emotion. This relationship was often
juxtaposed with Sue’s relationship with Richard and how this was secretive in terms of her
feelings of falling in love with Maud. The most able candidates showed maturity in terms of
understanding the delicacy of homosexuality in a rather more sexually repressed era,
alongside a good range of examples connecting the technical elements in a consistent and
focused way.
Frequently, candidates were able to identify a ‘love triangle’, the power relationship of Richard
as heterosexual with Sue’s hidden love for Maud. As a result candidates were able to explore
the nuances of the representation of sexuality, in relation to the micro technical aspects used.
Stronger responses also showed a good grasp of the ambivalent nature of the representation
of sexuality in past Victorian times and contemporary society. There was plenty of evidence
that candidates understood the representation of sexuality with a variety of interpretations, for
example: homosexuality as taboo, as stereotypical/counter stereotypical and how the
character Sue had desire for Maud as opposed to rejection of the heterosexual male Richard.
Those candidates that did less well with the analysis of representation focussed on a
discussion of gender and power, rather than sexuality, or at times had basic or minimal
understanding of the concept of sexuality, as if they were not fully prepared for the topic.
Lesser achieving candidates used sweeping generalisations such as ‘most lesbians are
usually quite masculine, but this lesbian was feminine’ or ‘men are dominant over women’
rather than entering into any deeper discussions about the representations presented to the
audience.
Most candidates used the correct terminology and could identify shot composition,
link these to the construction of sexuality. Better responses identified the use close up shots
and framed composition of Sue’s desire for Maud, taking place in the country home and on
location with the held shots of Maud in an artistic pose. Candidates could also discuss the
oppositions constructed between Sue and Richard; for example, in discussion of the shot
composition of Richard’s aggressive advances towards Sue, which strengthened their
analysis. Common errors made by candidates with terminology included the use of the term
‘twin shot’ instead of two shot. Lesser able candidates were able to describe key shots used
in exemplification, but they tended to lack explicit links to how these shots assisted in the

construction of the representation of sexuality. These candidates would also tend to focus on
just identifying the narrative flow of the extract through the naming of the shots. There was
also a common tendency to discuss the camera zooming when in fact it is tracking or cutting
closer to a particular action.
Mise en scene
The majority of candidates discussed this area with confidence. Location, character
appearance and body language were all handled well. Some analysis of colour symbolism
was less successful because it tended to be based on assumptions, which could not be
substantiated from the sequence. There is still a tendency for candidates to treat colour
palettes and lighting deterministically as if whites, reds, blacks and shadows always carry the
same meanings irrespective of context. Stronger responses offered analysis in the context of
the extract, for example, with the symbolism of the glove and the hovering of Sue’s hand over
Maud’s body suggesting that the act itself was taboo or forbidden.
Sound
the representation of the characters. Music was generally well recognised and analysed with
better candidates linking the slow paced, stringed music to heighten the sense of desire that
existed within the female character Sue, whilst painting the portrait of Maud. There seemed to
be more confident use of terminology in relation to soundtrack this session. Many candidates
were proficient in analysing diegetic/non diegetic sound (although at times there was a
common error by candidates in getting this correct). The importance of the ambient sounds
and soundbridges were analysed by candidates, in relation to how meaning is constructed,
particularly in the use of change of tempo upon Richard’s dramatic actions in the rural scene
where he forces Sue into declaring her love for him. Candidates made frequent reference to
the dialogue in the extract, especially the use of the voiceover at the beginning of the extract.
Candidates understood the voiceover technique and it’s dual function of illustrating the
forbidden nature of sexuality and its use to position the audience sympathetically in relation to
the protagonist defying social convention. Most candidates used this voiceover to establish
the relations between the two women in the Victorian country house.
Editing
Editing remains the most challenging area for analysis, although there were some
encouraging signs in that fewer candidates this session seemed to leave this area out
altogether. There were some strong analyses of the ways in which the editing created
perspective within the sequence, helping us to understand the privileging of the gay
relationship or the contrast between the editing style depicting the softer, more romantic
relationship between the women and the coercive nature of heterosexuality on show. Many
candidates misnamed the dissolves used in the sequence as fades or wipes, but were able to
discuss how they implied connections between the various scenes shown.
Candidates often engaged well with the nuances of editing and the ways in which the use of
long and short takes represented power and how eye line matches were used to reinforce a
sense of dominance, for example between Richard as dominant heterosexual male and Sue’s
rejection of him. There was consistent reference to the editing transitions and the use of
ellipsis editing for the narrative sequence, which unravels, and links made to sound bridges
and pacing in the extract.
June 2011: Merlin – Class and Status
The extract allowed candidates the opportunity to negotiate their own reading, which they
could justify through analysis of the four technical codes.
The question requires candidates to move from description of key technical areas to analysis
of how representations are constructed. Some candidates began by addressing the concept
of representation in the extract and a discussion of the representational differences between
Arthur, the ‘knight in shining armor’ and the pauper/magician, Merlin and this mentor, Gaius.
Candidates would then analyse their chosen examples of representation in a chronological
address of the extract, whilst integrating different technical aspects, for example, combining
the analysis of camera composition with sound.
A slightly more popular approach saw many candidates addressing the technical areas one

by one. Stronger candidates could provide an integrated analysis of the extract through
analysis of key examples identified. These candidates explored how the technical features
could be applied in combination with each other. Weaker candidates could list many technical
aspects, with varying degrees of accuracy, but struggled to say anything meaningful about
the representation of class and status.
Long introductions were unnecessary for this question; the best responses got straight on
with analysis. It is advisable that centres make the mark scheme available to candidates so
that they are aware of how the work is assessed. This could also be used for the marking of
timed assignments in the classroom. It is important that candidates balance their responses
to include all the technical features used in the extract that construct meaning if they are to
score highly.
Representation
the audience in relation to the young knight, Arthur, and the young magician, Merlin, and how
it used cross cutting to the elderly and concerned Gaius. As a result candidates were able to
explore the nuances of status representation, in terms of the representations used:
Stronger responses showed a good grasp of the ambivalent nature of the representation of
class in the form of Prince Arthur and the pauper/magician, Merlin. There was plenty of
evidence that candidates understood the representation of class and status with a variety of
interpretations, for example, with the armed conflict in the medieval market between Prince
Arthur and Merlin and the ambivalent status that emerges.
Where candidates often relied on the use of binary oppositions and generalised analytical
assumptions, in discussion of class and status representation, they did not take this
opportunity to explore a range of representations offered by the extract, for example that
Merlin had the respect of Gaius/Prince Arthur, despite his lower status in the medieval
hierarchy.
Most candidates used the correct terminology and could describe shot composition,
to link these to the construction of class from Morgana to Merlin and Gaius. The best
responses identified the use of over the shoulder shots when Merlin is talking to Morgana,
giving her dominance and the composition of Prince Arthur being in the centre of the frame
with his guards behind him to show his power. Candidates could also discuss the binary
oppositions constructed with the use of shot-reverse-shots, which strengthened their analysis.
Less confident candidates confused high and low angles and were unclear on panning and
tracking, and though able to describe key shots used in exemplification, they tended to lack
explicit links to how these shots assisted in the construction of the representation of social
class and status. These candidates would also tend to focus on just identifying the narrative
flow of the extract through the naming of the shots.
Mise en scène
The majority of candidates discussed this area with confidence. Location, character
appearance and body language were all handled well, with some excellent attention to detail
on objects in all settings. Some analysis of colour symbolism was less successful as it tended
to be based on assumptions which could not be substantiated from the sequence.
Sound
the representation of the characters. Music was generally well recognised and analysed with
better candidates linking the choral, mystical music to the 'witch' and her status, the majestic
music to Arthur and Merlin's own theme. There seemed to more confident use of terminology
in relation to soundtrack this session. Many candidates were proficient in analysing
diegetic/non diegetic sound and recognising the synchronous/asynchronous sounds, the
importance of the ambient sounds and soundbridges in relation to how meaning is
constructed.

Most candidates identified and analysed the jovial nature of the music during the fight to link
with status – some analysing it as mocking Arthur, others as mocking Merlin. Candidates
made frequent reference to the dialogue in the extract, especially the conversation between
Arthur and Merlin, for example Merlin's use of the terms 'prat' and ‘ass’ and the sarcastic 'my
lord' were particularly commented on showing that Merlin has lower status but does not
comply with it. Many candidates also commented on Merlin's final speech as an example of
his understanding of his low status. Some candidates commented on the sound of Morgana’s
footsteps as a presence and the accompanying music, which added to her sense of
superiority, as well as the tone of her voice.
Editing
Candidates often engaged well with the nuances of editing and the ways in which the use of
long and short takes represented power and how eye line matches were used to reinforce a
sense of dominance. Slow motion was identified as linking to status, either showing the power
of Arthur through his skill or the uncaring nature of his class in destroying the villagers’
livelihoods.
Shot-reverse-shots were also linked very well to class/status. Many candidates referred to the
use of this during the conversations between Merlin and Morgana and made references to
eyeline matches to show equality between the characters. As in previous series, this
technical area proved to be the most challenging for candidates and the one technical area of
analysis that was often omitted in responses.
January 2011: The Hustle – Gender
The extract provided candidates with the opportunity to negotiate their own reading, which
they could justify through analysis of the four technical codes. There were a number of
different interpretations provided by candidates; most of these were entirely valid. There was
a good range of technical examples for candidates to analyse.
As noted in previous series, it is important that candidates move from description of key
technical areas to analysis of how representations are constructed. This enables candidates
to achieve higher marks for their responses. Candidate responses which did not link the
technical analysis to representation often lacked focus with a common misconception being to
discuss class, rather than gender.
Candidates tend to structure their responses in one of two ways for question one. Some
began by addressing the concept of representation in the extract and a discussion of the
representational differences between the male sales assistant/manager and the poorer, older
female character and then introduce the affluent, younger and elegant female character,
comparing this further with the representation of gender in the gentlemen’s club. Candidates
would then analyse these examples in a chronological approach to the extract, whilst
integrating different technical aspects, for example, combining the analysis of camera
composition with sound.
On the other hand, and a slightly more popular approach, would see the candidates address
the technical areas one by one. Stronger candidates could provide an integrated analysis of
the extract through analysis of key examples identified. These candidates explored how the
technical features could be applied using a combination of the technical features. Weaker
candidates could list many technical aspects, with varying degrees of accuracy, but struggle
to say anything meaningful about the representation of gender.
Candidates should be advised to keep introductions brief and to avoid theoretical
introductions and/ or historical contexts to television drama; analysis of the extract itself
should begin straight away. On occasion in this series, candidates offered quite general
textual analysis and these responses often lacked a focused discussion of gender and thus
penalised themselves from gaining a level three or four mark for EAA.
The mark scheme enables credit to be awarded to candidates in three different categories:
Explanation, Analysis and Argument (20 Marks); Use of Examples (20 Marks); and Use of
Terminology (10 Marks). Under use of examples, candidates cannot reach level 4 (16-20)
when only three technical areas are discussed. This mark scheme is able to credit answers
which have different strengths, and in this series, the marking of candidate papers revealed
this flexibility in its application. It is advisable that centres make the mark scheme available to
candidates for the summer series so that they are aware of how the work is assessed. This

could also be used for the marking of timed assignments in the classroom and for the marking
of mock exam papers.
Comments on the ‘micro’ aspects of Question one on Television Drama
The following comments are selected examples points and use examples to assist centres
with the delivery of the topic and to help advise on candidate answers, it is by no means an
exhaustive list.
Representation
Most candidates were able to discuss differences in the status of gender within the sequence,
though only a very small number of candidates were able to develop their answer further by
showing how the audience were positioned in relation to these representations.
More confident candidates were able to analyse the ways in which the extract attempted to
position the audience in relation to the sales manager and the female clientele, the second
male in the shop and the cross cutting to the gentlemen’s club and as a result were able to
explore the nuances of gender representation. These stronger responses showed a good
grasp of the changing ambivalent nature of the representation of women and men, for
example, either commenting on how the female protagonist played up to gender stereotypes
or the centrality of this performance to the ongoing hustle. In relation to masculinity,
candidates identified the stereotypical inability of men to multitask. Most candidates made
reference to the sales manager’s character (David Walliams) as being feminised and
confident candidates asserted that the second male character in the shop was able to
dominate Walliams’ character as he was constructed as more stereotypically masculine –
chewing gum, open shirt without tie, use of male colloquialisms – for example reference to
‘bird’ as stereotyped slang. However, many candidates formulated a much simpler version of
gender representation with arguments such as ‘women like shopping’, the men in the club
represent gender because ‘men like drinking whiskey and smoking’. Weaker candidates often
relied on the use of binary oppositions in discussion of gender representation, rather than
take this opportunity to explore a range of representations offered by the extract.
The majority of candidates attempted to formulate an argument about the representation of
gender in the extract with the vast majority moving beyond the minimal descriptor for EAA.
Candidates that scored less well tended to make points about the representation of gender in
an isolated fashion rather than linking their points as part of a coherent analysis or argument.
Overall, this technical feature was well addressed by the candidates. Most candidates used
appropriate media vocabulary, commenting on shot composition, analysing the high and low
angled shots in the extract and commenting on the ‘hand held’ camera techniques during the
search for the ring. The tilt up of the camera on the woman’s dress was commonly
misidentified as a pan but generally a wide range of terminology was accurately used. More
able candidates were able to link the composition and the framing to the representation of
gender by discussing the apparent significance of the hustler in the background of the frame,
when the sales manager was speaking to the less affluent female character introduced at the
beginning of the extract. Many candidates were able to comment on the direct mode of
address by both male and female characters, commenting upon its unconventionality and
function in linking the male and female hustlers. Candidates also commented on how the
shots of the direct address to the audience conveyed control of the situation and therefore
represented a form of dominance in character relations.
Weaker candidates were able to describe key shots used in exemplification, but would often
lack explicit links to how these shots assisted in the construction of the representation of
gender. These candidates would also tend to focus on just identifying the narrative flow of the
extract through the naming of the shots.
Mise en scène
The majority of candidates discussed this area with confidence. The extract itself was rich in
mise en scène that contributed to representation. The contrast of the affluent clothing
boutique, with the gentlemen’s club was the setting most compared, at times in a
sophisticated way. Candidates made most use of the accent, performance of characters and
it was pleasing to see many candidates making reference to lighting with more able

candidates confident in using terms such as high key, artificial and low key. Most candidates
were able to discuss how the characters’ appearances linked to gender characteristics.
More able candidates could contrast the gender representation of different characters through
the mise en scène and how power and status is represented. Candidates are also advised to
look for the range of representations within the extract with more able candidates commenting
on each character’s apparent gender and how that held some status within the scene, for
example of the way in which the female hustler held equal if not more power than males in
the scam. The representation of the cockney male was contrasted to the more proper sales
manager, who candidates often pointed out, was well spoken, tailored and legitimate.
Weaker candidates are still wedded to simplistic colour analysis and ignore all contradictory
evidence to claim that characters dressed in white must be 'pure and innocent' while
characters dressed in red are either 'passionate' or 'in danger', for example. This often
appeared in discussion of the representation of the female hustler. This ‘binary’ approach
needs refining by centres in relation to debating how meaning is constructed in an extract and
it is suggested that comparing and contrasting different elements of representation deserves
more attention in the classroom.
Sound
The analysis of sound was better than in previous series; for example, candidates attempted
to link music with the representation of the characters, looking at how it was used to
underscore characters’ actions. The use of terminology was generally better than previously
in this area.; centres seem to be heeding the advice that an analysis of the dialogue is not
sufficient.
Most students were able to differentiate between diegetic and non-diegetic sound and to
demonstrate that the soundtrack was closely linked to our understanding of the protagonist,
though few went further by discussing how the sound mix and sound effects were used. Most
candidates were also able to use terminology confidently and could describe the tempo and
use of music, for example, the manic use of jazz music with the female shopper. Often
weaker candidates showed confusion with technical terminology, referring to ambient sound
which was not heard in the part of the sequence they referred to, or simply getting diegetic
and non-diegetic sound the wrong way round.
Editing
As previous series, this technical area proved to be the most problematic for candidates and
the one technical area of analysis that was often omitted in responses. Those that did cover it
were able to make meaningful links to representations by showing how the editing created
particular viewpoints with which we are encouraged to identify or how screen time indicated
the shifting relationship between characters in the sequence, for example through the
discussion of rule of thirds. Most candidates made reference to the pace of editing to reflect
the frantic situation and actions of the characters in the extract, for example in describing the
affluent female shopper and the confidence she exudes in the hustle. Many candidates could
identify the use of transitions; shot reverse shot and cuts to aid continuity and the use of cross
cutting between the two situations to enhance tension. Many candidates identified the editing
transitions, though the use of the term ‘jump cut’ was not accurately applied and candidates
often misidentified the wipe transition as a ‘swipe’. Only a minority of candidates interpreted
the function of the wipe as highlighting the juxtaposition between a female and male
environment. The most able of candidates even interpreted the editing through the comedic
style imbued within the extract, highlighting that candidates can be articulate and imaginative
with the analysis of editing.
More able candidates demonstrated the ability to link the use of editing to the representation
of characters, such as the use of long and short takes to represent power and the use of eye
line matches to reinforce a sense of dominance.
However, many candidate responses seemed to be very limited in address of the issues of
editing and all too frequently editing was absent from candidate responses – which again,
does not enable candidates to reach a level four on the marking criteria for the use of
examples. Weaker candidates often omitted any discussion of editing or offered quite
simplistic accounts of how editing was used, for example in the use of the shot reverse shot
sequence between characters. Many candidates identified the types of transition without
discussing how these were connected with representations, in particular the use of wipe

transitions or freeze frames. There was little sense of the way in which the editing created a
perspective from which the sequence made sense and most candidates confined themselves
to discussing the pace of cutting.
This series has shown that with the right preparation, candidates can engage with the
nuances of editing under exam conditions, with evidence that candidates are able to discuss
crosscutting, eye line match and ellipsis in an extract. As in the previous report, the advice
offered to centres is to encourage as much practice on the concept of editing as possible and
how this assists in the construction of representation. Centres should begin by identifying
editing techniques and encourage candidates to apply these to a range of examples in class
and importantly, test them on this.
January 2010: Hotel Babylon – Ethnicity
There was plenty of evidence that the question set on ethnicity and representation and the
extract Hotel Babylon achieved the desired differentiation of candidate responses. The
extract was approximately five minutes in length and enabled the candidates to engage with
the key skill of textual analysis of the four technical features: Camera shot, angle and
composition, mise en scène, editing and sound. Examiners appeared in agreement that this
was an excellent extract because it provided candidates with the opportunity to negotiate their
own reading which they could justify through analysis of the four technical codes. There were
a number of different interpretations provided by candidates; most of these were entirely
valid. There was a wealth of technical examples for candidates to analyse.
It is also important that candidates move from description of key technical areas to analysis of
how representations are constructed. This will enable candidates to achieve higher notional
marks for their responses. Of these technical areas, camera work and mise en scène were by
far the most comfortable concepts the candidates addressed, with editing and sound the
least, despite improved attempts to address these technical features. Candidate responses
which did not link technical analysis to representation often lacked focus in their answers on
how ethnicity was constructed through the technical features of the extract.
Comments on the ‘micro’ aspects of Question one on Television Drama
The following comments are selected example points to assist centres with the delivery of the
topic and to help advise on candidate answers, it is by no means an exhaustive list.
Representation
The sequence offered plenty of opportunities to discuss the representations of ethnicity. Most
candidates were able to discuss differences in the status of various ethnicities within the
sequence, though only a very small number of candidates were able to develop their answer
further by showing how the audience were positioned in relation to these representations. For
example, the police clearly have more status than the immigrant workers, but the audience
are encouraged to identify with the workers by putting more emphasis on their points of view.
More confident candidates were able to analyse the ways in which the extract attempted to
position the audience in relation to the immigration officials and the immigrants. Many
identified the construction of the lead immigration officer as antagonist and argued that the
extract positioned the audience to be sympathetic to the plight of the immigrants. A smaller
number of more able candidates went further by exploring either the apparent contradiction of
an antagonist acting within the law or commenting on the way that the extract challenged
typical representations of illegal immigrants in the media.
The majority of candidates attempted to formulate an argument about the representation of
ethnicity in the extract with the vast majority moving beyond the minimal descriptor for EAA.
Candidates that scored less well tended to make points about the representation of ethnicity
in an isolated fashion rather than linking their points as part of a coherent analysis or
argument.
This technical feature was overall, well addressed by the candidates. Most candidates had a
media vocabulary, which addressed the technical features of television drama. Where
candidates used the correct terminology and could describe shot composition, this on the
whole, was well done. Stronger responses considered a wide range of shots as well as

camera movement and the use of framing and composition to further reinforce representation,
for example, the framing of all the characters together in hiding and later through panning in
the canteen creating a sense of community. Some candidates confuse the meaning of low
and high angles and are reminded to be careful when discussing the connotations of these
shot types.
Weaker candidates were able to describe key shots used in exemplification, but would often
lack explicit links to how these shots assisted in the construction of the representation of
ethnicity. These candidates would also tend to focus on just identifying the narrative flow of
the extract through the naming of the shots. As with the past two exam series, please be
aware that ‘insert’ shots and ‘wide’ shots and the ‘tilt’ shot and ‘jump’ shot are common
misconceptions/ vocabulary used by candidates.
It would be useful to see a wider range of examples of shot sizes and camera movement
referenced in relation to a sequence's representations, for example very few candidates were
able to recognise the focus pull, for example, when Ibrahim was arrested, or could recognise
how it reflected his sudden awareness of danger.
Mise en scène
The majority of candidates discussed this area with confidence. The extract itself was rich in
mise en scène that contributed to representation. The contrast of the luxury hotel with the
cramped storage room in which the immigrants were hiding was mentioned by many
candidates, as were the costume of suits for some characters and cleaners and maid
uniforms for others. It was pleasing to see many students making reference to lighting with
more able
candidates confident in using terms such as high key, artificial and low key. The use of colour
with the white suit of the receptionist juxtaposed with the dark suit of other the female
character was also well linked to representation. Most candidates were able to talk about the
contrasting uniforms and the messages and values implied. Most candidates focused on the
clothing as denoting power and where they fitted into the hierarchy.
More able candidates would be able to contrast the ethnic representation of different
characters through the mise en scène and how power and status is defined by ethnic
relations, the most able could reflect on the cleaner who used to be a doctor and explore the
nuances of ethnicity and status through the use of the character of Jackie as a supervisor and
carer of the immigrant workers. Candidates are also advised to look for the range of
representations within the extract with more able candidates commenting on the characters of
ethnic minority that held some status within the scene, for example the well dressed black
male employee Ben and in the final scenes the wealthy African couple with the female in
traditional dress at the reception.
Weaker candidates are still wedded to simplistic colour analysis and ignore all contradictory
evidence to claim that characters dressed in white must be 'pure and innocent' while
characters dressed in red are either 'passionate' or 'in danger'. This ‘binary’ approach needs
refining by centres in relation to debating how meaning is constructed in an extract and it is
suggested that to compare and contrast different elements of representation does involve
more examination in the classroom. In addition, too many candidates are still being
encouraged to consider the acting/body language/non-verbal communication as part of the
mise-en-scène. This leads to candidates spending far too long discussing the acting at the
expense of the technical elements, which are constructing representations. Weaker
candidates’ responses could identify key aspects of the mise en scène but not always
explicitly link this to ethnicity and tended to ‘demonise’ the white characters and over simplify
the portrayal of the immigrants.
Sound
The analysis of sound in analysis of the TV drama was satisfactory. Those candidates that
could offer a balanced approach to the analysis of the extract did so with a degree of
proficiency in relation to identifying the use of diegetic and non-diegetic sound (as opposed to
televisual terminology of synchronous and asynchronous sound). Again the analysis of sound
was used in contrast to the characters’ different roles in the drama, with more candidates
steering away from a reliance of an examination of the dialogue used in the drama; centres
seem to be heeding the advice that an analysis of the dialogue in the drama is not sufficient
technical analysis.

Most candidates were able to use terminology confidently and could describe the tempo and
use of music in relation to the representation of characters. Most made reference to the use
of foreign languages and accents to reinforce representation of the characters as different or
other. Key dialogue was also referred to such as the line 'I wasn’t always a cleaner' and many
candidates examined the significance of this statement.
Often weaker candidates showed confusion with technical terminology, referring to ambient
sound where there was none in the part of the sequence they referred to, or simply getting
diegetic and non-diegetic sound the wrong way round. The analysis of sound is more than
just dialogue and weaker candidate responses may interpret the soundtrack/ use of music in
too general analysis. It is advised that centres do cover the technical features of sound
thoroughly in order to give candidates an opportunity to fully engage with the analysis of the
extract.
Editing
As with the January and June 2009 series, this technical area proved to be the most
problematic for candidates and the one technical area of analysis that was often omitted in
candidates’ answers.
Many candidates ignored editing altogether and only a few of those that did cover it were able
to make meaningful links to representations by, for example, showing how the editing created
particular viewpoints which we are encouraged to identify with or how screen time indicated
the shifting relationship between characters in the sequence, for example through the
discussion of the rule of thirds.
Most candidates made reference to the pace of editing to reflect the frantic situation and
emotions of the immigrant characters. The use of shot reverse shot and cuts to aid continuity
were mentioned by many candidates, as was the use of cross cutting between the two
situations to enhance tension. More able candidates demonstrated the ability to link the use
of editing to the representation of characters, such as the use of long and short takes to
represent power and the use of eye line matches to reinforce a sense of dominance. Most
candidates who addressed editing were able to address the type of transitions used and
could comment on the pace of the editing. There was evidence on occasion where students
engaged with the rule of thirds and juxtaposition of characters in the narrative using editing
devices, which is very encouraging.
However, many candidates’ responses seem to be very limited in address of the issues of
editing and all too frequently it was absent from their responses – which does not enable
candidates to reach a level four on the marking criteria for the use of examples. Weaker
candidates often omitted any discussion of editing or offered quite simplistic accounts of how
editing was used, for example in the use the shot reverse shot sequence between characters.
A common error in the terminology of editing continues to be with the use of jump cuts.
With the right preparation, candidates can engage with the nuances of editing under exam
conditions, with evidence that they could discuss crosscutting, eye line match and ellipsis in
the extract. As in the previous report, the advice offered to centres is to encourage as much
practice on the concept of editing as possible and how this assists in the construction of
representation. Again begin with identifying the techniques and encourage students to apply
these to a range of examples in class and importantly, test them on this. A balanced and high
level notional mark requires all the technical features to be addressed in a candidate’s
answer.

OCR chief examiner reports on question 1

OCR chief examiner reports on question 1

More Related Content

Similar to OCR chief examiner reports on question 1

More from Nicola Naisbett

Recently uploaded

OCR chief examiner reports on question 1