Cambridge IAS-Level · Analysis & Prediction

2026 Cambridge IAS-Level Sociology (9699) Past Paper: Analysis & Answers

The May/June 2026 series for Cambridge International AS Sociology (9699 Papers 13 and 23) represents a balanced and accessible set of papers. It assesses fundamental syllabus areas including research methods (questionnaires, structured interviews, practical vs theoretical choices), social identity (social class and media influence), family diversity, childhood experience across ethnicities, and functionalist versus egalitarian views of the family. The questions reward rigorous conceptual application and clear evaluative development while punishing generic answers.

Updated: Sep 23, 2026

Analysis Sample paper

Difficulty 3.2/5

Total marks

120

Duration

180 mins

Most tested

Theories of Family Roles and Methodological Decisions

Paper breakdown

Paper 1 Socialisation, Identity and Methods of Research (9699/13): 60 marks · 90 minsPaper 2 The Family (9699/23): 60 marks · 90 mins

Top chapters

Agencies of socialisation and social control · 26 marksResearch issues: theoretical, practical and ethical considerations · 26 marksGender equality and power in the family · 26 marks

Overall Exam Verdict

The 9699 May/June 2026 examination series across Paper 1 (Socialisation, Identity and Methods of Research) and Paper 2 (The Family) provided a well-calibrated assessment. Candidates faced predictable structures with direct, standard command stems. Paper 1 focused heavily on foundational methodological tensions (positivism vs interpretivism, practical vs theoretical constraints) and class/media influences on identity. Paper 2 explored contemporary family forms, postmodernist views on diversity, ethnic variations in childhood, conjugal equality, and traditional functionalist theory.

Where the Marks Were Won and Lost

Across both papers, high-scoring responses consistently demonstrated clear sociological terminology and precise conceptual frameworks:

Section A Short-Answers: On Q1 (4 marks) and Q2(b) (6 marks), full marks required contextualised points. For example, describing specific formats of questionnaires or explaining why structured interviews suffer from inflexibility and pre-coded schedules rather than merely stating broad weaknesses.
Q2(a) and Q3: In Paper 1 Q3(a) and Paper 2 Q3(a) (10 marks), top candidates developed two distinct, sustained points using recognized sociological studies (e.g. Bourdieu’s cultural capital, Willis, or Lareau). Marks were dropped when candidates discussed general societal issues (e.g. racism in society) rather than tying points directly to family dynamics and childhood experience.
Section B Essays (26 marks): High-band essays achieved top marks in AO3 by sustaining a structured debate. On Paper 1 Q5 (practical vs theoretical factors) and Paper 2 Q4 (equality in family relationships), top essays examined multiple relationship dimensions (parent-child, male-female, elder dynamics) and weighed methodological constraints against epistemological paradigms.

Key Examiner Traps and Pitfalls

Examiners highlighted key differentiating factors: listing examples instead of explaining causes (e.g., listing cohabitation rather than explaining secularisation or individualisation in Paper 2 Q2(a)), and producing one-sided descriptive accounts in Section B essays without explicit evaluative comparison.

Revision Strategy and Future Outlook

Ensure mastery over the standard question formats: 4-mark descriptions, 8-mark dual-concept explanations, 6-mark counter-arguments, and 26-mark structured essays. Focus revision on upcoming high-yield areas such as qualitative observation methods, Marxist and feminist critiques of social policy, and globalisation/hybridity in identity formation.

Ready to test yourself?

Turn these notes into exam-style practice. Get unlimited AI questions on this topic with instant marking and explanations.

Practice This Topic

Charts

Marks by chapter

See where the marks were concentrated so revision time goes to the highest-value topics.

Question type mix

Compare the mark share of each paper section and question type.

Short Answer (4 marks)8 marks · 2 questions
Explain Two Points (8 marks)16 marks · 2 questions
Explain One Strength and One Limitation / Two Strengths (6 marks)12 marks · 2 questions
Explain View (10 marks)20 marks · 2 questions
Argument Against (6 marks)12 marks · 2 questions
Extended Essay (26 marks)104 marks · 4 questions

Mark accessibility

Estimate which marks were basic, mid-level, or high-difficulty.

65%within easy or medium reach

easy: 36 marksmedium: 76 markshard: 60 marks

Difficulty trend

Compare difficulty across recent years.

Command word frequency

Spot common command words so answers match the expected response style.

Skill weighting

Shows the skill mix this paper tested most heavily.

Study ROI

Higher bubbles carry more marks; bubbles further left are easier. Start with the topics that sit high and to the left.

Quantitative and Qualitative Research Methods Comparison

36 marks · Difficulty 2.5

Interpretivism, Positivism and Methodological Factors

34 marks · Difficulty 3.4

Theories of Family and Conjugal Equality

30 marks · Difficulty 2.8

Social Construction of Childhood and Identity

26 marks · Difficulty 3

Time vs marks

Compare marks with suggested time allocation to plan exam pacing.

marksmins

Next-year prediction

Topics worth watching next year, and why. These are informed guesses from past papers, not a forecast.

Qualitative methods (Participant Observation and Unstructured Interviews)

Paper 13 focused on questionnaires and structured interviews; observation and unstructured interviews are heavily overdue for Section A and Section B methods testing.

The State, Social Policy and the Family

Social policy influences have not appeared in depth in recent variants and are prime targets for Paper 2 Section B.

Globalisation, Hybrid Identities and Subcultures

Paper 13 featured traditional class and media identity questions; hybridity and global youth cultures are strongly predicted next.

Cumulative marks ladder

The line is your running mark total question by question; dashed lines are the estimated grade boundaries, taken from the table below when this year's are known. See which question the line crosses your target grade at, so you know how far you must answer cleanly and which questions decide a band.

Topic-year heatmap

Compare topic weight by year to spot recurring and returning areas.

Jun 2023 (V1)

Jun 2023 (V2)

Jun 2023 (V3)

Nov 2023 (V1)

Nov 2023 (V2)

Nov 2023 (V3)

Jun 2024 (V1)

Jun 2024 (V2)

Jun 2024 (V3)

Nov 2024 (V1)

Nov 2024 (V2)

Nov 2024 (V3)

Jun 2025 (V1)

Jun 2025 (V2)

Jun 2025 (V3)

Nov 2025 (V1)

Nov 2025 (V2)

Nov 2025 (V3)

Jun 2026 (V1)

Jun 2026 (V2)

Jun 2026 (V3)

The process of learning and socialisation

Functionalist and Marxist perspectives on the family

Gender equality and power in the family

Types of data: primary, secondary, quantitative, qualitative

Social identity: class, gender, ethnicity and age

The social construction of childhood

Family and household forms and dimensions of diversity

Research issues: theoretical, practical and ethical considerations

Qualitative methods: observation, unstructured and group interviews

Agencies of socialisation and social control

Examiner insights

Official report

Common pitfalls

Giving generic limitations that apply to all interview types rather than specific issues relating directly to structured interviews (e.g. lack of flexibility and pre-coded schedules).
Describing examples of family diversity (e.g. rise in cohabitation or same-sex couples) instead of explaining the societal causes of diversity (e.g. secularisation, policy changes).
Confusing Parsons' industrialisation fit thesis with diversity; shifting from extended to nuclear is a change in dominant type, not diversity itself.
Discussing broader societal discrimination/racism without explicitly linking it to children's experiences within the family dynamic for Paper 2 Q3(a).

Misconceptions

Believing feral children or under-socialisation is a valid sociological argument for family having little influence on class identity, rather than analyzing agentic or alternative institutional influences.
Assuming domestic abuse is a sociological 'role' in itself, rather than understanding it as an abusive mechanism serving the patriarchal maintenance of power.
Thinking that simply stating women do expressive work and men do instrumental work answers questions on family role evaluations without explaining functional fit or ideological critique.

Where marks are lost

Failing to supply the second explanation mark (E2) in Q2(a) and Q2(b) by not demonstrating how the chosen sociological concept or study directly supports the identified point.
In Q3(a), leaving alternative agency comparisons implicit rather than explicitly stating why schools, peer groups, or media exert stronger influence than the family.
In Section B essays, discussing only one dimension of relationships (such as husband and wife) while ignoring parent-child and intergenerational dynamics when evaluating family equality.

Estimated grade boundary

Updated: Sep 23, 2026

Source: Cambridge International grade thresholds (official)

Grade	Mark	Percentage
A	77/120	64%
B	68/120	57%
C	58/120	48%
D	49/120	41%
E	40/120	33%

Official grade boundaries published by Cambridge International grade thresholds (official).

Know what the examiners want. Now go get those marks

thinka is an AI practice app used by 100,000+ students to drill questions and get instant feedback on every answer. You already know the high-frequency topics and where marks are lost. Now practice those specifically on thinka and turn this analysis into actual marks.

Start Practicing Free See pricing

Know what's tested? Drill those topics on thinka. AI questions, instant marking.

Start Practicing Free