Discuss the influence of poverty and/or socio-economic status on human development.

Refer to the paper 2 assessment criteria when awarding marks. These can be found under the “Your tests” tab > supplemental materials.

The command term “discuss” requires candidates to offer a considered review of the influence of poverty and/or socio-economic status on human development.

Candidates may discuss the influence of poverty/socio-economic status on one specific element of human development or may provide a general response of the influence of poverty/socio-economic status on human development. Both approaches are equally acceptable.

Relevant research may include, but is not limited to:

• Bhoomika et al.’s (2008) research on the effect of malnutrition on cognitive performance in Indian children
• Wertheimer’s (2003) research on the correlation between academic achievement and living in poor families
• Schoon’s (2002) longitudinal study investigating the long-term effect of poverty on academic achievement and attainment in adult life
• Evans & Kim’s (2007) study on the effects of long-term exposure to poverty in childhood on both physical and mental health
• Montgomery et al.’s (1996) research on the link between poverty and health of children and adolescents
• Hoyert et al.’s (1999) research on the correlation between death rates in middle age and poverty
• Russell et al.’s (2008) research on the influence of poverty on parenting.

Critical discussion may include, but is not limited to:

• methodological and ethical considerations in research related to the influence of poverty and/or socio-economic status
• how the findings of research have been interpreted and applied
• implications of the findings
• cultural considerations
• areas of uncertainty
• assumptions and biases in research related to the influence of poverty and/or socio-economic status.

Candidates may address one or a small number of potential effects of poverty/socio-economic status in order to demonstrate depth of knowledge or may address a larger number of potential effects of poverty/socio-economic status in order to demonstrate breadth of knowledge. Both approaches are equally acceptable. 

Question 4 was not extremely popular with candidates, but some did a good job of responding to this. Candidates alternatively discussed malnutrition and/or poverty with relevant research discussed as well. Critical thinking seemed to be a bit weak for this response.