Changing structures of inequality | AQA A-Level Sociology
Updated: Aug 30
For Specification 7192
AQA A-Level Sociology | Free Revision Notes
Estimated study time: 85-100 minutes
Structures of inequality are not fixed. Changes in employment, wealth, living standards and the organisation of the economy can alter both the inequalities people experience and the categories sociologists use to describe them. This Changing structures of inequality A-Level Sociology revision page examines declining manual employment, deindustrialisation, occupational change, insecurity, affluence and the concentration of wealth, before evaluating different sociological interpretations of these changes. AQA specifically requires students to understand changes in structures of inequality and their implications.
Learning Objectives 🎯
By the end of this revision page, you should be able to:
Explain what sociologists mean by changing structures of inequality.
Examine changes in the occupational and class structure.
Explain the significance of deindustrialisation, declining manual employment and growth in other forms of work.
Examine changing living standards, affluence and economic insecurity.
Compare explanations based on class polarisation, embourgeoisement, fragmentation and globalisation.
Evaluate whether contemporary changes have weakened, transformed or intensified social inequality.
Revision Notes 📚
Changing structures of inequality A-Level Sociology revision overview
AQA requires students studying Stratification and Differentiation to understand:
stratification and differentiation by social class, gender, ethnicity and age
class, status and power
differences in life chances
problems of defining and measuring social class
changes in structures of inequality, including globalisation and the transnational capitalist class, and the implications of these changes
social mobility
The course plan separates this broad requirement into two lessons. This page concentrates on changes in structures of inequality, while the next page examines globalisation and the transnational capitalist class [Globalisation and the transnational capitalist class] in greater depth.
What are structures of inequality?
A structure of inequality is a relatively organised pattern through which resources, opportunities, status and power are distributed unequally between social groups.
Structures of inequality may involve:
social class
occupation
wealth
income
employment security
status
power
life chances
A structure can therefore change if:
different types of jobs expand or decline
wealth becomes distributed differently
employment becomes more or less secure
traditional class boundaries weaken
new advantaged or disadvantaged groups emerge
opportunities for social mobility change
The key sociological question is not simply:
"Has society changed?"
It is:
"How have these changes altered the pattern of inequality?"
Change does not necessarily mean less inequality
This is one of the most important principles for the topic.
A structure of inequality can change without disappearing.
For example:
decline of traditional manual work
does not necessarily mean:
decline of all working-class disadvantage
Instead, inequality might be reorganised through:
insecure service-sector employment
low-paid work
unemployment
new occupational divisions
changing ownership and wealth
A strong answer therefore distinguishes between:
declining traditional class divisions
and
declining inequality itself.
These are not necessarily the same thing.
Changes in the occupational structure
Decline in manual employment
AQA's specimen assessment explicitly identifies a decline in the number of manual jobs as part of changing class structures in the UK.
Manual occupations have traditionally played an important role in sociological understandings of the working class.
If the number and type of manual occupations change, this can affect:
the size and composition of class groups
occupational identities
opportunities for mobility
the usefulness of traditional class categories
A possible chain is:
decline in manual employment → changing occupational distribution → changing class structure
Deindustrialisation
The specimen mark scheme directly links the decline of manual jobs with deindustrialisation.
Deindustrialisation refers to a decline in the relative importance of manufacturing and traditional industrial employment.
This may involve:
closure of industrial workplaces
declining manufacturing employment
disappearance of some traditional manual occupations
growth of employment elsewhere in the economy
Effects on inequality
Deindustrialisation can have different effects on different groups.
For some workers it may produce:
unemployment
downward mobility
reduced employment security
loss of established occupational communities
At the same time, new sectors of employment may expand.
The class structure therefore changes rather than simply becoming smaller.
Growth of the service sector
AQA's specimen mark scheme explicitly recognises growth of the service sector as relevant to changes in the class structure.
Service-sector employment can include a very wide range of occupations.
This matters because the growth of service work can make a simple model based on:
manual working class
versus
non-manual middle class
less convincing.
Some service jobs may involve:
substantial qualifications
high income
authority and autonomy
while others may involve:
low pay
insecurity
limited autonomy
The expansion of service work can therefore create greater occupational diversity.
Changing occupational boundaries
The 2025 AQA examination focused directly on the fact that distinctions between different types of work have become less clear.
The mark scheme explains that overlap between manual and non-manual employment can make occupation a less reliable indicator of social class.
This means occupational change has two consequences.
First consequence: the class structure itself changes
Traditional occupational groups may decline or become more internally diverse.
Second consequence: the structure becomes harder to measure
If occupations no longer fit traditional categories neatly, sociologists may struggle to classify people using older class schemes.
This links directly to measuring social class [Defining and measuring social class].
Occupational convergence
Occupational convergence refers to distinctions between types of occupation becoming less clear.
AQA's 2025 examiner report specifically noted that relatively few students successfully developed this idea and connected it to problems of classifying people using systems such as the National Statistics Socio-economic Classification.
For example, a job may combine:
technical knowledge
manual tasks
digital skills
customer service
varying levels of autonomy
It can become difficult to label the occupation as simply "manual" or "non-manual".
The analytical chain is:
occupations converge → traditional occupational divisions blur → class categories fit less neatly → structure appears more complex
Deskilling and changing work
Changes in the occupational structure do not necessarily mean all workers become more skilled or advantaged.
AQA's 2025 Work, Poverty and Welfare examination recognised both:
upskilling
deskilling
as possible outcomes of changes in work. The examiner report noted that strong answers considered both positive and negative consequences of changes in the labour process.
This is useful when thinking about stratification.
Technological and organisational changes may create:
more highly skilled occupations for some
routine or deskilled work for others
This may reorganise rather than remove occupational inequality.
Growth of insecure employment
Job insecurity
AQA's specimen item explicitly identifies an increase in job insecurity and unemployment as part of changes in the UK class structure.
Job insecurity matters because social class is not just about current income.
Employment security affects:
economic stability
ability to plan for the future
risk of poverty
status
life chances
A person may have a job while still experiencing substantial economic insecurity.
The gig economy
AQA's 2025 mark scheme gives the gig economy as an example of changing inequality.
People may experience fluctuating:
income
working hours
employment security
This can create a less stable relationship between occupation and class position.
For example:
temporary or gig employment → unstable income and security → uncertain socio-economic position
The traditional assumption that one occupation represents a person's stable class position may therefore become less accurate.
Precarious employment
Precarious employment refers to work characterised by insecurity or instability.
AQA's 2024 mark scheme identifies contemporary working-class employment as potentially involving:
low wages
part-time work
short-term contracts
zero-hours contracts
deskilling
These forms of work may produce a structure in which employment itself becomes increasingly divided between:
relatively secure positions
relatively insecure positions
This may create new inequalities within broad class categories.
McJobs
The specimen mark scheme explicitly recognises the growth of "McJobs" when discussing changes in the class structure.
The term is used sociologically for forms of employment characterised by features such as:
relatively low pay
limited security
routine work
restricted progression
The important point is not the label itself.
It is the possibility that:
Traditional industrial working-class occupations may decline while new forms of relatively disadvantaged employment grow.
This challenges the argument that declining manual work automatically means declining class inequality.
Unemployment and inequality
Unemployment as structural change
The specimen item also identifies rising unemployment alongside the decline of traditional manual jobs.
If industries decline faster than replacement employment develops, some groups may experience:
unemployment
reduced income
poverty
downward social mobility
The occupational structure can therefore change in ways that disadvantage particular groups.
Unequal effects
Changes in employment are not necessarily experienced equally.
AQA's 2024 mark scheme on unemployment recognises, for example, that the decline of manufacturing employment can particularly affect groups previously concentrated in manual work.
This means economic restructuring can alter inequalities between social groups as well as changing the overall occupational structure.
Declining trade union power
Trade unions and inequality
AQA's specimen mark scheme links greater job insecurity with the decline of trade union membership.
Trade unions may help employees bargain collectively over:
pay
working conditions
security
employment rights
If their influence declines, workers may have less collective power to protect their economic position.
Globalisation and trade unions
AQA's 2024 mark scheme also recognises that globalisation may reduce the power of trade unions, weakening their ability to protect working-class life chances.
The chain might therefore be:
economic restructuring → weaker collective bargaining → reduced employee power → greater insecurity or inequality
This connects occupational change to power, not simply income.
Rising affluence and living standards
Affluence
Affluence refers to increased material prosperity or higher living standards.
The 2025 examination explicitly stated that some people have become more affluent and are enjoying higher living standards.
AQA's mark scheme says that increased affluence across social groups can blur traditional class distinctions based on wealth.
This creates an important debate:
If working-class and middle-class lifestyles become more similar, has class inequality become less important?
Embourgeoisement
AQA mark schemes recognise embourgeoisement as relevant to debates about changing stratification.
Embourgeoisement refers to the idea that increased affluence may make sections of the working class more similar to the middle class in areas such as:
living standards
consumption
lifestyle
attitudes
The argument suggests that traditional class boundaries may weaken as material prosperity increases.
Possible chain
rising wages and living standards
↓
greater access to consumer goods
↓
lifestyles of different classes become less distinct
↓
traditional class divisions become less visible
↓
class categories may become less meaningful
Evaluating embourgeoisement
Higher living standards do not necessarily eliminate deeper inequalities.
Groups may consume similar products but still differ in:
wealth
job security
ownership
educational opportunities
social networks
power
social mobility
Therefore:
greater affluence ≠ complete class equality
This point is especially important because the 2025 mark scheme states that affluence may make measurement more difficult, not that it proves social class has disappeared.
Similar lifestyles and unequal resources
Imagine two households that both own similar consumer goods.
Household A has:
secure high-income employment
substantial savings
accumulated wealth
useful social networks
Household B has:
insecure employment
limited savings
little protection against unemployment
Visible consumption may look similar, but their economic security and life chances differ.
This is why the previous lessons distinguish class position from lifestyle alone.
Concentration of wealth
Greater wealth at the top
The AQA specimen item describes an increased concentration of wealth in the hands of a small elite.
This appears to point in the opposite direction from embourgeoisement.
On one hand:
living standards may rise across social groups.
On the other:
wealth may become increasingly concentrated at the top.
Both processes can occur at the same time.
This is a crucial sociological distinction.
Rising living standards versus relative inequality
Suppose most groups become materially better off.
That does not necessarily mean that the gap between groups becomes smaller.
If the wealthiest gain much more rapidly, inequality may still widen.
The structure may therefore involve:
absolute improvement for many
alongside
continued or increasing relative inequality
This helps explain why sociologists disagree over whether affluence has weakened class divisions.
A small economic elite
The concentration of wealth can strengthen the social position of a relatively small elite.
Economic resources may provide advantages in:
investment
education
housing
influence
opportunities for children
protection against downward mobility
This links to social class and life chances [Social class, gender and life chances].
It also provides a bridge to the next lesson on a potentially globalised elite, the transnational capitalist class [Globalisation and the transnational capitalist class].
Class polarisation
What is class polarisation?
AQA's 2023 mark scheme recognises class polarisation as a relevant concept in debates about stratification.
Class polarisation refers to the idea that divisions between advantaged and disadvantaged class positions may become sharper.
From this perspective, contemporary change does not make class disappear.
Instead, it may create:
a highly advantaged group
greater insecurity lower down the structure
widening differences in wealth or power
Evidence within AQA assessment material
The specimen assessment provides a clear combination:
increased concentration of wealth among a small elite
increased job insecurity
unemployment
These developments can be interpreted as consistent with a more polarised structure.
Marxist interpretation of change
Marxists emphasise structural class inequality.
AQA's 2023 mark scheme recognises relevant concepts including:
capitalism
bourgeoisie
proletariat
class conflict
proletarianisation
class polarisation
inequality
power
From a Marxist perspective, changes in the occupational structure do not necessarily remove the fundamental division between those with control over economic resources and those dependent on selling their labour.
Marxist interpretation of occupational change
The decline of traditional factory work may alter the form of working-class employment.
However, employees in:
service work
insecure work
gig employment
may still depend on selling their labour.
A Marxist could therefore argue:
The appearance of the class structure has changed more than its fundamental basis.
Proletarianisation
AQA recognises proletarianisation within relevant material on stratification.
Proletarianisation refers to processes through which groups experience employment conditions increasingly similar to those associated with dependent wage labour.
The concept can challenge the idea that growth in non-manual occupations automatically represents movement into an advantaged middle class.
A non-manual job may still involve:
limited control
insecurity
routine work
dependence on wages
So:
more non-manual work ≠ necessarily less class inequality
Strength of the Marxist interpretation
Marxism draws attention to:
ownership
wealth concentration
insecurity
power
continued economic dependence
It is especially useful for explaining why rising consumption may coexist with continued inequality.
Limitation
A simple class-polarisation model may underestimate:
occupational diversity
differences within broad classes
status and power differences
changing lifestyles
social mobility
gender and ethnic inequalities
Other perspectives therefore argue that contemporary stratification is more fragmented.
Fragmentation of the class structure
What is fragmentation?
Fragmentation refers to increasing diversity within social groups and a weakening of simple, unified class divisions.
AQA's mark schemes recognise ideas such as postmodernism, hybridity and consumerism when evaluating contemporary stratification.
A fragmented class structure may contain many different combinations of:
occupation
income
security
status
lifestyle
identity
rather than a small number of clearly bounded class groups.
Why employment may create fragmentation
The growth of diverse service-sector and insecure occupations can produce many different employment situations.
For example, workers may differ in:
contract type
autonomy
qualifications
income
hours
security
Broad labels such as "working class" or "middle class" may therefore contain substantial internal differences.
The 2025 focus on blurred occupational distinctions supports the idea that older boundaries may be increasingly difficult to apply.
Postmodernist interpretations
A postmodernist interpretation can emphasise the decline of simple traditional class divisions.
People's lives may be increasingly shaped by:
consumption
lifestyle
individual choice
multiple identities
rather than a single fixed class identity.
AQA accepts postmodernism as an evaluative perspective within stratification questions.
Implication
From this perspective:
traditional occupational class categories become less able to explain contemporary social identities and differences.
Class may become one identity among several rather than the single organising principle of society.
Evaluating postmodernist interpretations
Evidence of:
occupational convergence
diverse lifestyles
rising affluence
can support claims that traditional class boundaries have blurred.
However, postmodernism may underestimate continuing inequalities in:
wealth
poverty
employment security
life chances
power
A small elite can hold increasing wealth even while consumer lifestyles become more varied.
This makes it possible for:
class identity to weaken
while
class inequality remains significant.
Weberian interpretations
Multidimensional inequality
A Weberian approach emphasises that stratification cannot necessarily be reduced to one economic class hierarchy.
AQA recognises Weberianism, status and power within theoretical debates about stratification.
Changes in society may therefore create new combinations of:
class
status
power
For example, two people may have similar incomes but very different:
occupational security
social prestige
workplace authority
This makes contemporary inequality more complex than a simple rich-poor division.
Strength
A multidimensional approach is well suited to a society in which occupational positions have become more diverse.
Limitation
The approach can make it harder to identify one clear underlying cause of inequality.
Marxists would argue that economic ownership and class remain fundamental despite growing complexity.
Functionalist interpretations
Changing division of labour
Functionalist sociology connects stratification to the division of labour and the allocation of people to different social roles.
Economic and technological change can alter which roles society requires.
As traditional industries decline and new occupations expand:
some occupational roles disappear
others grow
required skills may change
occupational rewards and statuses may change
The structure of inequality may therefore adapt to changes in the economy.
Meritocracy and changing opportunities
Functionalists may argue that changing occupational structures can create new opportunities for individuals with appropriate:
skills
qualifications
abilities
Social mobility may therefore occur as people move into newly expanding occupations.
This interpretation links changes in inequality with social mobility [Social mobility].
Evaluating functionalism
The existence of new occupations does not mean everyone can access them equally.
AQA's 2025 social mobility mark scheme recognises barriers including:
educational underachievement
limited cultural capital
limited social networks
structural restrictions created by capitalism
A changing economy can therefore create new opportunities while distributing those opportunities unequally.
Globalisation as a cause of structural change
Globalisation and employment
Globalisation is explicitly included within AQA's requirement on changing structures of inequality.
AQA's specimen mark scheme identifies globalisation and the mobility of capital as factors in deindustrialisation.
Businesses may move production in response to global economic opportunities.
This can affect:
employment
occupational structures
social mobility
class inequality
Outsourcing and relocation
AQA's 2023 mark scheme recognises that transnational corporations may outsource low-skilled work abroad, creating unemployment and fewer opportunities for some UK workers.
AQA's 2024 mark scheme similarly recognises that global competition may lead firms to move production, reducing working-class life chances.
A possible chain is:
greater mobility of capital → relocation of production → loss of traditional employment → unemployment or insecure work → changing class structure
Globalisation may also create opportunities
Globalisation should not be treated as automatically negative.
AQA's 2024 mark scheme recognises:
new employment in emerging global markets
increased opportunities through migration
cheaper consumer goods improving living standards
This reinforces an important principle:
Structural change can create both winners and losers.
Different groups can experience the same economic change differently.
The next lesson examines this relationship in depth in globalisation and the transnational capitalist class [Globalisation and the transnational capitalist class].
Deregulation and taxation
AQA's specimen mark scheme recognises deregulation and reduced taxation as possible explanations for an increased concentration of wealth.
These illustrate how political and economic arrangements can influence structures of inequality.
If policies allow greater accumulation of wealth among those already advantaged, the upper end of the class structure may become more economically distinct.
This reminds us that changing inequality is not caused only by technology or global markets.
Government policies and institutions can also affect how resources are distributed.
Changing power relationships
Changes in the structure of inequality can involve power as well as income.
Examples supported by AQA material include:
declining trade union power
increasing mobility of capital
ownership and control of transnational corporations
concentration of resources among economic elites
If employers or owners gain greater flexibility while employees lose collective bargaining power, the balance of power between social groups may change.
This connects directly with class, status and power [Class, status and power].
Gender and changing inequality
Structures of inequality also change as women's employment and social positions change.
AQA's 2024 examiner report notes that changes in the workplace and in the balance of domestic labour can help students develop answers about contemporary gender inequality.
Changing patterns may include:
greater female participation in employment
changes in domestic roles
changing access to occupational positions
These developments may reduce some traditional gender inequalities.
However, AQA also recognises continuing:
career breaks
workplace discrimination
glass-ceiling barriers
The significance of change must therefore be evaluated rather than assumed.
Age and changing inequality
AQA has also assessed the claim that age may be an increasingly important dimension of inequality during a period of rapid change.
The 2021 item identifies:
generation gaps in economic opportunities
generation gaps in values and attitudes
ageism affecting younger and older people
This demonstrates that changing structures of inequality are not limited to class.
As society changes, the relative importance of different social divisions may also change.
Have traditional class divisions declined?
There are two broad positions.
Argument that traditional divisions have weakened
Support may come from:
decline in traditional manual jobs
occupational convergence
rising living standards
increased affluence
diverse lifestyles
fragmented employment patterns
These changes make simple occupational class categories harder to apply.
Argument that class remains important
Support may come from:
concentration of wealth
insecure employment
unemployment
differences in economic resources
differences in power
continued barriers to social mobility
AQA's assessment material supports both sides of this debate.
The strongest conclusion therefore distinguishes between the form and the extent of inequality.
Has inequality become more complex?
A strong interpretation is that contemporary stratification has become more complex.
Older divisions may have weakened while new distinctions develop.
For example:
traditional factory worker
may be less dominant as a class position.
But this may be replaced by divisions involving:
secure and insecure employment
highly skilled and deskilled work
stable and fluctuating incomes
wealthy elites and economically vulnerable workers
The result may be transformation rather than disappearance.
Has inequality become less visible?
Rising consumption can make class differences appear less obvious.
People from different socio-economic positions may use similar:
technologies
consumer goods
leisure services
However, less visible inequality is not necessarily less significant inequality.
Differences may remain in:
ownership
savings and wealth
employment security
education
social networks
power
This explains why consumption alone is a poor test of whether class inequality has disappeared.
Changes and class measurement
Changing structures have important implications for sociological research.
This was tested directly by AQA in 2025.
The mark scheme identified:
overlap between manual and non-manual work, making occupation a less reliable class measure
increased affluence, blurring traditional class distinctions
gig-economy employment, producing fluctuating income and security
This means social change affects not only inequality itself, but also our ability to measure it.
Key chain
structure changes
↓
traditional categories become less representative
↓
measurement becomes more difficult
↓
sociologists may need revised or multidimensional measures
This links back to occupation and social class [Occupation, gender and social class].
Changes and social mobility
Changes in the occupational structure may also alter opportunities for mobility.
For example:
declining occupations can create downward mobility
expanding occupations can create opportunities for upward mobility
global migration can create new opportunities
insecure work can restrict stable progression
AQA's 2022 mark scheme recognises that globalisation may produce either upward or downward mobility depending on how individuals are affected.
The implications of changing inequality therefore depend partly on whether people can move between positions.
This is examined fully in social mobility [Social mobility].
Winners and losers from structural change
A useful way to evaluate any change is to ask:
Who benefits and who is disadvantaged?
For example:
Change | Possible advantage | Possible disadvantage |
Decline of traditional manual work | Expansion of new occupational opportunities | Unemployment or downward mobility for displaced workers |
Growth of service employment | More diverse employment opportunities | Growth of low-paid or insecure service work |
Rising affluence | Higher living standards | May conceal continued relative inequality |
Gig economy | Flexibility and new work opportunities | Fluctuating income and weak security |
Globalisation | New markets, jobs and migration opportunities | Outsourcing, unemployment and weaker bargaining power |
Concentration of wealth | Greater resources among economic elites | Wider economic distance between groups |
A strong sociological answer avoids assuming that one change affects everyone in the same way.
Sociological explanations compared
Perspective | Interpretation of change | Main evaluation |
Marxism | Capitalist inequality remains fundamental; change may involve polarisation or new forms of proletarianisation. | May underestimate growing occupational complexity and other dimensions of inequality. |
Embourgeoisement argument | Rising affluence weakens traditional working-class differences. | Similar consumption does not necessarily mean equal wealth, security or power. |
Postmodernism | Class divisions and identities become fragmented and less fixed. | May underestimate continued material inequalities and wealth concentration. |
Weberianism | Contemporary stratification is multidimensional, involving class, status and power. | Complexity can make it difficult to identify the most important underlying inequality. |
Functionalism | Occupational change reflects changing division of labour and can create new mobility opportunities. | Access to new opportunities may remain unequal. |
Feminism | Changes in women's employment may alter gender inequality, but patriarchal barriers can continue. | Gender needs to be considered alongside class and other divisions. |
AQA mark schemes accept Marxist, Weberian, functionalist, postmodernist and feminist perspectives in debates about contemporary stratification.
How significant are the changes?
Evidence of major change
The sources supplied by AQA identify substantial changes in:
occupational structure
manual employment
employment security
living standards
wealth distribution
global economic relationships
These changes mean contemporary stratification cannot simply be understood through assumptions based on earlier occupational structures.
Evidence of continuity
At the same time, AQA assessment repeatedly recognises continuing inequalities in:
resources
poverty
employment security
social mobility
status
power
Traditional categories may become less precise without inequality disappearing.
Best overall judgement
The most useful conclusion is therefore:
The structure of inequality has changed considerably, but change has transformed the form of inequality more clearly than it has removed inequality altogether.
Whether inequality has increased, decreased or become more complex depends on:
which social group is examined
which dimension of inequality is measured
whether absolute or relative advantage is considered
the period being compared
Applying changing structures of inequality in an examination
Consider this item:
Manufacturing employment has declined and more people now work in a mixture of professional, technical and service occupations. At the same time, some workers experience insecure contracts while wealth is increasingly concentrated among a relatively small group.
A descriptive answer might say:
"The class structure has changed because there are fewer factory jobs."
A stronger answer develops a sociological mechanism.
Change 1:
deindustrialisation → fewer traditional manual occupations → expansion of different forms of employment → traditional occupational class divisions become less clear
Change 2:
insecure employment + concentration of wealth → greater economic differences between secure elites and vulnerable workers → possible class polarisation
Then evaluate:
Does occupational diversity support postmodernist fragmentation?
Does wealth concentration support Marxist arguments about continued class inequality?
Have higher living standards weakened traditional class boundaries?
Does globalisation create both opportunities and insecurity?
Are traditional class measures still appropriate?
That movement from change → mechanism → consequence → theoretical interpretation → evaluation is the core skill for this lesson.
Key Words 🔑
Key word | Student-friendly definition | How it may be used in an exam |
Structure of inequality | An organised pattern through which resources, opportunities, status or power are distributed unequally. | Use when explaining how the overall pattern of stratification changes. |
Deindustrialisation | Decline in the relative importance of traditional manufacturing and industrial employment. | Use to explain declining manual employment and changes to the class structure. |
Occupational convergence | The process through which distinctions between different kinds of work become less clear. | Link occupational change to blurred class categories and measurement problems. |
Affluence | Increased material prosperity and higher living standards. | Use in debates about whether traditional class differences have weakened. |
Embourgeoisement | The idea that greater affluence makes some working-class lifestyles and attitudes more similar to those of the middle class. | Use to explain claims that traditional class boundaries are weakening. |
Class polarisation | Increasing separation between more advantaged and disadvantaged class positions. | Use when discussing wealth concentration and insecurity. |
Proletarianisation | A process through which groups experience conditions increasingly similar to dependent wage labour. | Use to challenge the idea that growth of non-manual work necessarily removes class inequality. |
Fragmentation | Increasing diversity within social groups and weakening of simple class divisions. | Use in postmodernist interpretations of changing stratification. |
Precarious employment | Employment characterised by insecurity, unstable hours or uncertain income. | Use when explaining new forms of class disadvantage. |
Globalisation | Increasing economic and social interconnectedness across national boundaries. | Use as a cause of changes in employment, mobility and inequality. |
Hints from the Examiner Reports 💡
Examiner hint: Do not stop at describing the social change. In the 2025 question, some students struggled to develop the item hooks into effective explanations. You need to show what the change does to the structure of inequality or the way class is measured.
Examiner hint: Occupational convergence needs a full analytical chain. The 2025 examiner report noted that only a minority developed examples of occupational convergence into problems of categorisation for class schemes such as NS-SEC.
Examiner hint: If the item tells you that different types of work are becoming less distinct, do not simply give examples of new jobs. Explain: occupations overlap → conventional categories fit less well → occupation becomes a less reliable indicator of class.
Examiner hint: Keep effects separate from causes. For example, deindustrialisation may be a cause of declining manual work, while unemployment or downward mobility may be consequences. Clear causal chains make analysis much stronger.
Examiner hint: Do not assume globalisation has only one effect. In 2022 and 2024, AQA reports and mark schemes recognised both new opportunities and threats to employment or mobility.
Examiner hint: Evaluation should test the precise claim. AQA's 2025 report states that the strongest evaluation weighs strengths and limitations and reaches a reasoned judgement, rather than simply stating that two perspectives differ.
Examiner hint: For a 20-mark essay, select a limited number of theories and develop them properly. AQA advises against allowing essays to become lists of perspectives that progressively lose focus on the question.
Common Mistakes ⚠️
Mistake: Assuming declining manual employment means the working class has disappeared
Why this is incorrect: Traditional industrial employment may decline while other forms of low-paid, insecure or dependent employment expand.
How to improve: Distinguish between change in the type of working-class employment and disappearance of class inequality.
Mistake: Treating deindustrialisation as simply "technology replacing jobs"
Why this is incorrect: AQA's specimen mark scheme also links deindustrialisation to globalisation and the mobility of capital.
How to improve: Explain the wider restructuring of industries and employment rather than reducing it to one cause.
Mistake: Assuming affluence proves class no longer matters
Why this is incorrect: Higher living standards may blur visible differences while inequalities in wealth, security and power continue.
How to improve: Distinguish absolute prosperity from relative inequality.
Mistake: Saying occupations have changed without explaining the significance
Why this is incorrect: Description of occupational change does not answer a question about structures of inequality.
How to improve: Develop:
occupational change → changing class composition or blurred boundaries → implications for inequality or class measurement
Mistake: Treating the gig economy as automatically creating a new social class
Why this is incorrect: AQA uses the gig economy as an example of fluctuating income and job security that can blur class lines. It does not prescribe a separate "gig class".
How to improve: Focus on insecurity and its implications for class position.
Mistake: Assuming postmodernism means inequality has ended
Why this is incorrect: A postmodernist argument may emphasise fragmented identities and weakened traditional class boundaries. This does not itself demonstrate equal wealth or life chances.
How to improve: Evaluate postmodernism with continuing economic inequalities.
Mistake: Assuming Marxists claim the occupational structure never changes
Why this is incorrect: Marxist analysis can recognise changing forms of work while arguing that fundamental economic class relationships persist.
How to improve: Distinguish the form of employment from the underlying relationship to economic resources and labour.
Mistake: Writing the whole next lesson on the transnational capitalist class
Why this is incorrect: Globalisation is part of changes in structures of inequality, but the transnational capitalist class is examined in depth separately.
How to improve: Use globalisation here as a cause of structural change, then develop the TCC fully in globalisation and the transnational capitalist class [Globalisation and the transnational capitalist class].
Exam-Style Questions ✍️
Questions
1. Identify one process that may lead to a decline in traditional manual employment.[1 mark]
2. Identify one term describing the idea that increased affluence may make sections of the working class more similar to the middle class.[1 mark]
3. Explain what sociologists mean by a changing structure of inequality.[4 marks]
4. Explain two ways in which changes in employment may alter the class structure.[6 marks]
5. Outline and explain two reasons why traditional social class divisions may have become less clear.[10 marks]
6. Read Item A below and answer the question that follows.
Item A Traditional manufacturing employment has declined and employment in service occupations has expanded. At the same time, some workers experience less secure employment and fluctuating income.Changes in employment may alter the structure of inequality.
Applying material from Item A, analyse two ways in which changes in employment may alter the structure of inequality.[10 marks]
7. Read Item B below and answer the question that follows.
Item B Living standards have increased for many people and members of different social classes may consume similar goods. However, economic resources and wealth remain unequally distributed.Changes in living standards may affect traditional social class divisions.
Applying material from Item B, analyse two ways in which changes in living standards may affect traditional social class divisions.[10 marks]
8. Read Item C below and answer the question that follows.
Item C Some sociologists argue that changing occupations, rising living standards and increasingly diverse lifestyles have weakened traditional class boundaries.Other sociologists argue that insecurity among workers and the concentration of wealth among a relatively small group show that major class inequalities remain.
Applying material from Item C and your knowledge, evaluate the view that changes in contemporary society have made social class less important.[20 marks]
9. Read Item D below and answer the question that follows.
Item D Economic restructuring has reduced some forms of traditional industrial employment and produced new occupational opportunities. Global economic change has also increased insecurity for some workers, while advantaged groups continue to possess significant economic resources and power.Sociologists disagree about whether these changes have reduced inequality or simply altered its form.
Applying material from Item D and your knowledge, evaluate sociological explanations of changes in structures of inequality.[20 marks]
Mark Scheme
Question 1
Award 1 mark for:
deindustrialisation
Other clearly valid processes within the specification context may be credited.
Question 2
Award 1 mark for:
embourgeoisement
Question 3
Award up to 4 marks.
Indicative content:
A structure of inequality is a patterned distribution of unequal resources, status, power or opportunities.
A changing structure occurs when the organisation or distribution of these inequalities alters over time.
Examples may include changes in occupations, wealth, employment security or class boundaries.
Example answer: A changing structure of inequality means that the pattern through which different social groups receive resources and opportunities changes over time. For example, declining manual employment and growth of insecure service work may alter the composition of the class structure even though economic inequality continues.
Question 4
Award up to 6 marks for two developed ways.
Possible answers include:
Decline of manual employment
Deindustrialisation may reduce the number of traditional industrial occupations. This changes the size and composition of traditional working-class groups and may weaken older occupational class boundaries.
Growth of insecure work
Gig, temporary or short-term employment may create greater variation in income and job security. This may produce new forms of economic disadvantage and make class positions less stable.
Growth of service employment
Expansion of diverse service occupations may increase occupational differentiation and make simple manual/non-manual categories less useful.
Each point should explain the consequence for the structure of inequality.
Question 5
This is an outline and explain question.
Students should develop exactly two reasons.
Indicative content may include:
occupational convergence
decline of manual work
growth of service-sector employment
increased affluence
higher living standards
more similar consumption patterns
fragmentation of employment
greater lifestyle diversity
For each reason:
identify the social change
explain how it affects traditional class boundaries
explain why social classes may become less clearly distinguishable
Evaluation is not required.
Question 6
Students should explicitly use both hooks from Item A.
Way 1: Decline of manufacturing and growth of service work
Item A refers to declining manufacturing employment.
Deindustrialisation reduces traditional manual employment.
Growth in diverse service occupations changes the occupational distribution.
Older occupational divisions may therefore become less representative of the class structure.
Way 2: Employment insecurity
Item A refers to unstable employment and fluctuating income.
Workers in similar occupational categories may experience very different levels of security.
Class position may therefore become less stable or harder to identify.
New divisions between secure and insecure workers may become important.
For high marks, the answer must develop the structural consequence rather than merely describe employment changes.
Question 7
Students should use both sides of Item B.
Way 1: Rising living standards
Item B states that living standards have increased.
Greater affluence can make consumption patterns across classes more similar.
This may weaken visible distinctions between traditional working and middle classes.
Embourgeoisement can therefore be used to argue that traditional class boundaries have blurred.
Way 2: Continuing economic inequality
Item B states that wealth remains unequally distributed.
Similar consumption does not mean groups possess equal accumulated resources.
Wealthier groups may retain greater economic security and opportunities.
Traditional differences may therefore have changed form rather than disappeared.
Question 8
This is a 20-mark evaluative essay.
A high-level answer should maintain focus on whether social class has become less important.
Arguments supporting the view may include:
decline in traditional manual employment
occupational convergence
growth of service occupations
rising affluence
embourgeoisement
increasingly similar consumption
fragmentation
postmodernist arguments
greater diversity of identities and lifestyles
Arguments challenging the view may include:
concentration of wealth
precarious employment
poverty
job insecurity
unequal economic capital
barriers to social mobility
differences in life chances
Marxist arguments about continued capitalism and class inequality
class polarisation
proletarianisation
Weberian evaluation may include:
inequality has become more multidimensional
class remains relevant but needs to be examined alongside status and power
Further evaluation may include:
gender
ethnicity
age
increasing importance of other dimensions of inequality
A strong conclusion should distinguish between:
decline in traditional class identities or occupational boundaries
and
decline in material class inequality.
A reasoned judgement might argue that traditional forms of class have changed considerably, but continuing inequalities in resources, security and mobility mean that class itself remains significant.
Question 9
This is a broad 20-mark evaluative essay on sociological explanations of structural change.
Marxist explanations may include:
capitalism
concentration of wealth
class polarisation
proletarianisation
changing forms of wage labour
insecurity
continuing unequal ownership and power
Evaluation of Marxism:
occupational structure is more diverse
broad two-class accounts may underestimate fragmentation
status, gender and ethnicity also shape stratification
Embourgeoisement arguments may include:
rising affluence
higher living standards
changing consumption
weakened traditional working-class differences
Evaluation:
similar consumption does not demonstrate equal wealth
insecurity and unequal life chances continue
Postmodernist explanations may include:
fragmentation
weaker traditional class identities
consumerism
greater lifestyle diversity
Evaluation:
material inequalities remain
wealth concentration and insecure employment challenge claims that class has lost significance
Weberian explanations may include:
multidimensional stratification
changing relationships between class, status and power
occupational diversity
Functionalist explanations may include:
changing division of labour
changing skills and occupational roles
new opportunities for mobility
Evaluation:
opportunities are not equally distributed
structural barriers continue
Globalisation may be used as a cause of change:
mobility of capital
deindustrialisation
outsourcing
new employment opportunities
declining trade union power
more precarious work
The strongest answers should continuously address both:
what has changed
what those changes mean for inequality
A reasoned conclusion might argue that contemporary society has experienced major structural change through deindustrialisation, occupational diversification, affluence and globalisation. However, these changes have not simply reduced inequality. They have produced a more complex structure in which some traditional class boundaries are less clear while major differences in wealth, security, power and life chances continue.
Comments