Ethnicity Representation

Watch the extract 4 times and take notes.
Analyse the ways in which the extract constructs the representation of ETHNICITY using the following:
-Camera shots, angles, movement and composition
-Editing
-Sound
-Mise-en-scène

Comments on candidates’ responses to Question 1 – Television drama
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.
Candidates structured their responses in a 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 white authority of the police in contrast to the representation of the ethnicity and status of the illegal migrant workers. Candidates would then analyse 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.
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 ethnicity.
Both of these approaches to the structure of question 1 are valid and centres need to plan and help structure candidate responses in the classroom. It is advised against preparing candidates to word a long and lengthy introduction about what they are going to answer, or give theoretical introductions and/ or historical contexts to television drama. It is good advice for centres to

practice with candidates to start the written response with analysis. On occasion in this series, candidates offered quite general textual analysis and these candidates’ responses lacked a focused discussion of ethnicity and thus penalized themselves from gaining a level three or four mark for EAA.
The mark scheme enables credit to be awarded to students at three different levels: Explanation, Analysis and Argument (20 Marks); Use of Examples (20 Marks) and; Use of Terminology (10 Marks). Under the use of examples, the mark scheme does not credit a notional level four (16- 20) when only three technical areas are discussed, therefore making it less likely that a candidate can be awarded the highest possible marks.
On the whole the use of media vocabulary was very good, but could centres please note that there are up to 10 marks available for the use of media terminology – hence the previous recommendation that students should be encouraged to use the appropriate media terminology and good advice for centres is to encourage candidates to keep vocabulary lists.
There were a significant number of candidates who still adopted an overly simplistic approach in terms of media vocabulary. Centres need to encourage students to use appropriate technical language for precision in analysis and to make sure that they avoid superficial terms like cameras 'switching' or 'jumping', know the difference between zooms and tracking or avoid describing characters as 'goodies' and 'baddies'.
This mark scheme is more able to credit answers, which have different strengths, and this series, the marking of candidates’ papers revealed the flexibility in its application, according to the standards set. 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.
Finally it is important that candidates address a balance in their responses to all the technical features used in the extract to construct meaning, at times some candidates would focus too much on specific ‘micro’ aspect of the television drama, for example writing a whole side on the use of mise en scène.


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.

Camera Shot, Angle and Composition
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. 

Examiner's Report The Hustle

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.

Camera Shot, Angle and Composition
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.