Edexcel A-Level Politics | Paper 2 | 2026 Predicted Paper | Question 2(a) Mark Scheme
Question 2 is a 30-mark non-source essay, worth 10 marks for AO1, 10 for AO2 and 10 for AO3. The command word “Evaluate” requires students to develop arguments both supporting and challenging the stated view, weigh those arguments and reach a reasoned conclusion. Pearson recommends roughly 45 minutes for this question.
Unlike Question 1, students are working from their own knowledge, not a source. There is also an important synoptic requirement: answers must make relevant links to Component 1: UK Politics and Core Political Ideas. Pearson states that an answer with no synoptic points cannot reach Level 5. A response which fails to consider both sides in a balanced way cannot progress beyond Level 2.
The Supreme Court question draws on judicial review, judicial independence and the Court's influence over Parliament and the executive, while the devolution question draws on the powers and impact of devolved bodies and debates about further reform.
Levels of response
Level | Marks | Characteristics |
Level 1 | 1–6 | Superficial knowledge, limited analysis and evaluation, with limited synoptic links. Conclusions are largely unsupported. |
Level 2 | 7–12 | Some accurate knowledge and analysis. Some relevant evaluation and synoptic links, but arguments and conclusions are only partly supported. |
Level 3 | 13–18 | Mostly accurate, appropriately selected knowledge. Mostly focused analysis, generally effective evaluation and relevant synoptic points. |
Level 4 | 19–24 | Accurate and carefully selected knowledge, coherent analysis, mostly substantiated judgements and focused synoptic connections. |
Level 5 | 25–30 | Thorough and effectively selected knowledge, perceptive and sustained analysis, consistently substantiated evaluation, convincing synoptic connections and a fully focused conclusion. |
This follows Pearson's Paper 2 Question 2 level descriptors.
Question 2(a)
Question
Evaluate the view that judicial review has strengthened the influence of the Supreme Court over Parliament and the executive.
A strong answer needs to distinguish influence from sovereignty. Judicial review can allow the Supreme Court to impose significant legal limits on executive action, but the Court does not possess the same constitutional relationship with Parliament because parliamentary sovereignty means it cannot simply strike down an Act of the UK Parliament.
Indicative content
The following is indicative rather than exhaustive. Credit should be given to any accurate, relevant argument within the specification.
Arguments supporting the view
Judicial review allows the courts to place legal limits on executive power.
Judicial review examines whether a public authority has acted lawfully.
It therefore gives the judiciary an important mechanism for holding the executive to legal and constitutional limits.
Want to read more?
Subscribe to revision-notes.com to keep reading this exclusive post.