Practice questions
Original questions written by HomiLabs in the style of the exam, with answers and mark schemes. They are not
Cambridge past paper questions and have not been reviewed by Cambridge. Try each one before opening the answer.
Q1Formal letter · Core · Paper 2 style · 25 marksRead Text 1 and Text 2, then answer the question.Text 1: Post on the school noticeboard by a parentThe tuck shop sells crisps, fizzy drinks and sweets every single day. My son comes home with no appetite and a headache. The school teaches us about healthy eating in science lessons, so why does it sell junk food at break? If the shop sold only fruit, sandwiches, yoghurt and water, children would concentrate better in the afternoon. Other schools in Lahore have done this successfully.Text 2: Reply posted by a Grade 10 studentI agree we should eat better, but banning everything will not work. Students will simply buy snacks from the vendor outside the gate, where nobody checks how clean the food is. Healthy items also cost more, and not every family can afford them. The tuck shop uses its profits to pay for sports equipment, so if sales fall, the cricket team suffers. A fairer idea is to offer healthy choices alongside a few treats.
- (a) Your principal is deciding whether the school tuck shop should sell only healthy food. You decide to write a letter to the principal giving your views.In your letter you should:• evaluate the ideas and opinions in both texts• give your own views, with reasons, about whether the tuck shop should sell only healthy food.Base your letter on what you have read in both texts, but use your own words.Begin your letter: 'Dear Principal,'Write 250 to 350 words. [25]
Show answer
- (a) Ideas in the texts and how convincing they are:Text 1: tuck shop sells unhealthy food daily – convincing, but based on one child's experience.Text 1: school is inconsistent (teaches healthy eating, sells junk) – strong point.Text 1: healthy food improves afternoon concentration – plausible but no evidence given.Text 1: other Lahore schools succeeded – vague, no names or results.Text 2: students will buy from the gate vendor – realistic and raises a hygiene risk.Text 2: healthy food costs more – fair, though some items (fruit, water) are cheap.Text 2: profits fund sports – relevant but suggests money matters more than health.Text 2: compromise of mixed choices – balanced.Content a strong answer could use:• School's message is inconsistent if it teaches nutrition but sells junk food• Concentration and health benefits are likely but the parent offers only one example• Risk that a ban sends students to the unchecked vendor at the gate – could worsen hygiene• Cost of healthy food – could be managed by pricing fruit and water cheaply• Loss of profits for sports equipment – could be replaced by selling healthy snacks well• Own view, e.g. phase in mostly healthy menu with occasional treats, ask students to taste-test new itemsShort model opening: I am writing as a Grade 10 student who buys lunch from the tuck shop most days, because I believe the proposal to sell only healthy food deserves careful thought before a decision is made.
Content (10 marks): 9–10 = ideas and opinions from BOTH texts are thoroughly evaluated (weighed, questioned, compared – e.g. pointing out what is unsupported, one-sided or realistic), and a clear, well-developed own view grows out of that evaluation; 7–8 = most main ideas from both texts evaluated with some development, and a clear own view; 5–6 = some evaluation, but uneven between the texts or stated rather than developed; own view given; 3–4 = mainly retells or lists ideas from the texts with little evaluation; own view thin or missing; 1–2 = a few relevant ideas, little grasp of the texts; 0 = nothing relevant.Credit any well-evaluated ideas such as those listed in the answer; an answer that uses only one text, or leaves out its own view, cannot go above 6.Quality of writing (15 marks): 13–15 = register exactly right for a school principal; correct letter conventions (a suitable greeting, the purpose stated in the first paragraph, polite formal register with no slang or contractions, a clear request or recommendation at the end, 'Yours faithfully' or 'Yours sincerely' with a name); logical paragraphs with linking; precise, varied vocabulary and sentence structures; accurate spelling, grammar and punctuation; 10–12 = mostly fluent and accurate, register and form conventions largely right, clear paragraphs, some range of vocabulary and sentence types; 7–9 = generally clear, with errors that do not obscure meaning, register not always consistent, simple linking; 4–6 = frequent errors, limited vocabulary, weak organisation or the wrong register; 1–3 = errors often obscure meaning; little sense of audience or form.Lifting long phrases from the texts, or writing well under or over the word range, keeps an answer out of the top band.
Read Text 1 and Text 2, then answer the question.Text 1: Message from a teacher in the school newsletterFrom next year, every student in Grades 9 and 10 could complete forty hours of community service, such as teaching younger children to read, helping at the hospital reception or cleaning the neighbourhood. Students learn responsibility and kindness that no textbook can teach. Universities and employers also like to see this kind of experience. Last year a small group of volunteers from Grade 10 ran a reading club for a nearby primary school, and the children's teachers said their confidence grew enormously.Text 2: Reply from a student on the school's online forumForty hours is a lot when we already have tuition after school and exams to prepare for. If something is compulsory, people do it half-heartedly just to get the hours signed. Some students live far away and have no transport to these places. Service should come from the heart, not from a rule. Why not reward volunteers with certificates instead of forcing everyone?
- (a) The school is considering making community service compulsory for Grades 9 and 10. Write a letter to the principal giving your views.In your letter you should:• evaluate the ideas and opinions in both texts• give your own views, with reasons, about whether community service should be compulsory.Base your letter on what you have read in both texts, but use your own words.Begin your letter: 'Dear Principal,'Write 250 to 350 words. [25]
Show answer
- (a) Ideas in the texts and how convincing they are:Text 1: develops responsibility and kindness – likely, but not guaranteed.Text 1: useful examples of service – shows the idea is practical.Text 1: universities and employers value it – a fair but selfish reason.Text 2: forty hours on top of tuition and exams – realistic workload concern.Text 2: compulsory service done half-heartedly – plausible.Text 2: transport problems – practical and fair.Text 2: rewards instead of rules – positive alternative.Content a strong answer could use:• Value of real-life experience and empathy• Benefit for university applications – useful but should not be the main reason• Workload and exam pressure – could reduce hours or spread over two years• Forced service may lose meaning; choice of activity could keep motivation• Transport – the school could organise service on its own campus or nearby• Own view, e.g. a smaller compulsory number of hours with free choice of activity and recognition for extraShort model opening: I am writing to share my views on the proposal that every student in Grades 9 and 10 should complete forty hours of community service.
Content (10 marks): 9–10 = ideas and opinions from BOTH texts are thoroughly evaluated (weighed, questioned, compared – e.g. pointing out what is unsupported, one-sided or realistic), and a clear, well-developed own view grows out of that evaluation; 7–8 = most main ideas from both texts evaluated with some development, and a clear own view; 5–6 = some evaluation, but uneven between the texts or stated rather than developed; own view given; 3–4 = mainly retells or lists ideas from the texts with little evaluation; own view thin or missing; 1–2 = a few relevant ideas, little grasp of the texts; 0 = nothing relevant.Credit any well-evaluated ideas such as those listed in the answer; an answer that uses only one text, or leaves out its own view, cannot go above 6.Quality of writing (15 marks): 13–15 = register exactly right for a school principal; correct letter conventions (a suitable greeting, the purpose stated in the first paragraph, polite formal register with no slang or contractions, a clear request or recommendation at the end, 'Yours faithfully' or 'Yours sincerely' with a name); logical paragraphs with linking; precise, varied vocabulary and sentence structures; accurate spelling, grammar and punctuation; 10–12 = mostly fluent and accurate, register and form conventions largely right, clear paragraphs, some range of vocabulary and sentence types; 7–9 = generally clear, with errors that do not obscure meaning, register not always consistent, simple linking; 4–6 = frequent errors, limited vocabulary, weak organisation or the wrong register; 1–3 = errors often obscure meaning; little sense of audience or form.Lifting long phrases from the texts, or writing well under or over the word range, keeps an answer out of the top band.
Read Text 1 and Text 2, then answer the question.Text 1: Suggestion from the Year 9 class representativeFor our annual trip we should visit the national museum in the capital. We will see objects from the Indus Valley civilisation that we study in history, and the museum offers a free guided tour for schools. It is also safe and indoors, which matters in the heat of May. The museum has recently opened a new gallery on the Gandhara period, with statues and coins that most of us have only seen in photographs. A day trip by train would also be easy to organise.Text 2: Suggestion from a student in the outdoor clubA two-day adventure camp in the hills would be far more exciting. We would learn rock climbing, map reading and how to work as a team. Students spend all year in classrooms – a trip should be different. The camp costs more, but it provides all meals and trained instructors. Last year's Year 9 group went to a similar camp and still talk about it. The site also has a doctor on call and proper first-aid facilities.
- (a) Your school is choosing between a museum visit and an adventure camp for the annual Year 9 trip. Write a letter to your principal giving your views.In your letter you should:• evaluate the ideas and opinions in both texts• give your own views, with reasons, about which trip the school should choose.Base your letter on what you have read in both texts, but use your own words.Begin your letter: 'Dear Principal,'Write 250 to 350 words. [25]
Show answer
- (a) Ideas in the texts and how convincing they are:Text 1: links to history syllabus – strong educational reason.Text 1: free guided tour – keeps costs down.Text 1: safe and indoors in May heat – sensible.Text 2: new skills and teamwork – valuable.Text 2: a change from classrooms – appealing but subjective.Text 2: costs more but includes meals and instructors – honest, but some families may not afford it.Content a strong answer could use:• Educational link of the museum to the syllabus• Low cost and safety of the museum trip• Practical skills and teamwork from the camp• Higher cost could exclude some students; safety depends on instructors• Own view, e.g. choose one with reasons, or museum now and camp in cooler autumnShort model opening: I am writing on behalf of many students in Year 9 who are excited about this year's trip and would like to share our views on the two choices.
Content (10 marks): 9–10 = ideas and opinions from BOTH texts are thoroughly evaluated (weighed, questioned, compared – e.g. pointing out what is unsupported, one-sided or realistic), and a clear, well-developed own view grows out of that evaluation; 7–8 = most main ideas from both texts evaluated with some development, and a clear own view; 5–6 = some evaluation, but uneven between the texts or stated rather than developed; own view given; 3–4 = mainly retells or lists ideas from the texts with little evaluation; own view thin or missing; 1–2 = a few relevant ideas, little grasp of the texts; 0 = nothing relevant.Credit any well-evaluated ideas such as those listed in the answer; an answer that uses only one text, or leaves out its own view, cannot go above 6.Quality of writing (15 marks): 13–15 = register exactly right for a school principal; correct letter conventions (a suitable greeting, the purpose stated in the first paragraph, polite formal register with no slang or contractions, a clear request or recommendation at the end, 'Yours faithfully' or 'Yours sincerely' with a name); logical paragraphs with linking; precise, varied vocabulary and sentence structures; accurate spelling, grammar and punctuation; 10–12 = mostly fluent and accurate, register and form conventions largely right, clear paragraphs, some range of vocabulary and sentence types; 7–9 = generally clear, with errors that do not obscure meaning, register not always consistent, simple linking; 4–6 = frequent errors, limited vocabulary, weak organisation or the wrong register; 1–3 = errors often obscure meaning; little sense of audience or form.Lifting long phrases from the texts, or writing well under or over the word range, keeps an answer out of the top band.
Read Text 1 and Text 2, then answer the question.Text 1: Notice from the city development officeThe city plans to convert the eastern half of Gulshan Park into a multi-storey car park. Traffic around the market is now so heavy that ambulances are delayed and shoppers circle for half an hour looking for space. The car park will hold 600 vehicles and bring in parking fees that will pay for repairs to the remaining half of the park. Construction will take eighteen months.Text 2: Comment from a local resident on a community websiteGulshan Park is the only green space for thousands of families in flats. Old people walk there every morning and children play cricket there after school. Once trees are cut down they take decades to grow back. More parking will only encourage more cars – the traffic will return within a year. Why not run a shuttle bus from the outskirts instead? Nobody asked residents before this plan was drawn up.
- (a) Write a letter to the editor of your local newspaper giving your views on the plan to build a car park in half of Gulshan Park.In your letter you should:• evaluate the ideas and opinions in both texts• give your own views, with reasons, about whether half of the park should become a car park.Base your letter on what you have read in both texts, but use your own words.Begin your letter: 'Dear Editor,'Write 250 to 350 words. [25]
Show answer
- (a) Ideas in the texts and how convincing they are:Text 1: traffic delays ambulances – serious and persuasive.Text 1: shoppers waste time looking for parking – true but less important than health.Text 1: fees will repair the rest of the park – attractive but a promise, not a guarantee.Text 1: 18 months of construction – disruption the office does not discuss.Text 2: only green space for families in flats – strong, affects many people.Text 2: trees take decades to regrow – permanent loss, convincing.Text 2: more parking attracts more cars – a known effect, reasonable.Text 2: shuttle bus alternative – constructive but cost not discussed.Text 2: residents not consulted – fair criticism of process.Content a strong answer could use:• Ambulance delays are a genuine safety issue that must be solved somehow• Shopper convenience is a weaker reason than losing public green space• Promised repair money is uncertain; the park would shrink by half• Long construction would close more of the park for a year and a half• Green space is vital for health of residents in flats; trees cannot be replaced quickly• Extra parking may attract extra traffic, so the problem may return• Alternatives: shuttle buses, an emergency-vehicle lane, parking on unused land elsewhere• Own view with a call for public consultationShort model opening: Sir, the plan to pour concrete over half of Gulshan Park may ease the traffic outside the market for a few months, but I fear our city would pay for it for decades.
Content (10 marks): 9–10 = ideas and opinions from BOTH texts are thoroughly evaluated (weighed, questioned, compared – e.g. pointing out what is unsupported, one-sided or realistic), and a clear, well-developed own view grows out of that evaluation; 7–8 = most main ideas from both texts evaluated with some development, and a clear own view; 5–6 = some evaluation, but uneven between the texts or stated rather than developed; own view given; 3–4 = mainly retells or lists ideas from the texts with little evaluation; own view thin or missing; 1–2 = a few relevant ideas, little grasp of the texts; 0 = nothing relevant.Credit any well-evaluated ideas such as those listed in the answer; an answer that uses only one text, or leaves out its own view, cannot go above 6.Quality of writing (15 marks): 13–15 = register exactly right for the readers of a newspaper and its editor; correct letter conventions (a suitable greeting, the purpose stated in the first paragraph, polite formal register with no slang or contractions, a clear request or recommendation at the end, 'Yours faithfully' or 'Yours sincerely' with a name); logical paragraphs with linking; precise, varied vocabulary and sentence structures; accurate spelling, grammar and punctuation; 10–12 = mostly fluent and accurate, register and form conventions largely right, clear paragraphs, some range of vocabulary and sentence types; 7–9 = generally clear, with errors that do not obscure meaning, register not always consistent, simple linking; 4–6 = frequent errors, limited vocabulary, weak organisation or the wrong register; 1–3 = errors often obscure meaning; little sense of audience or form.Lifting long phrases from the texts, or writing well under or over the word range, keeps an answer out of the top band.
Read Text 1 and Text 2, then answer the question.Text 1: Proposal from the school sports departmentOur large cricket ground is used for only three months a year. We propose turning half of it into courts for basketball, badminton and volleyball. These sports can be played all year, in less space, by more students at once, including girls who rarely get time on the cricket field. Courts are also cheaper to look after than grass, which needs daily watering.Text 2: Letter from the captain of the school cricket teamCricket is part of our school's identity – our team has won the district cup four times. A smaller ground would mean we could no longer host matches, and young players would lose the chance to be noticed by regional coaches. Many students come to this school because of its cricket. Courts can be built on the unused land behind the science block instead.
- (a) Write a letter to the head of the sports department giving your views on the proposal to replace half of the cricket ground with courts.In your letter you should:• evaluate the ideas and opinions in both texts• give your own views, with reasons, about the future of the cricket ground.Base your letter on what you have read in both texts, but use your own words.Begin your letter: 'Dear Head of Sports,'Write 250 to 350 words. [25]
Show answer
- (a) Ideas in the texts and how convincing they are:Text 1: ground used only three months – strong if accurate.Text 1: more students, all year round – persuasive about fairness.Text 1: girls get little field time – important equality point.Text 1: cheaper upkeep, less water – sensible, especially in a dry climate.Text 2: cricket is school identity, cup wins – emotional, matters to some.Text 2: no home matches, fewer chances with coaches – real cost to talented players.Text 2: students choose the school for cricket – claim without evidence.Text 2: alternative site behind science block – could satisfy both sides if suitable.Content a strong answer could use:• Fairness: more students and more girls could play under the proposal• Efficient use of space and lower water and maintenance costs• Loss of tradition and of opportunities for talented cricketers• Claims about admissions and usage need checking (survey of how often the ground is used)• Alternative site could be a compromise; cost of preparing it must be considered• Own view with a recommendationShort model opening: I am writing to give my views on the proposal to convert half of our cricket ground into courts, a plan that affects almost every student who plays sport at this school.
Content (10 marks): 9–10 = ideas and opinions from BOTH texts are thoroughly evaluated (weighed, questioned, compared – e.g. pointing out what is unsupported, one-sided or realistic), and a clear, well-developed own view grows out of that evaluation; 7–8 = most main ideas from both texts evaluated with some development, and a clear own view; 5–6 = some evaluation, but uneven between the texts or stated rather than developed; own view given; 3–4 = mainly retells or lists ideas from the texts with little evaluation; own view thin or missing; 1–2 = a few relevant ideas, little grasp of the texts; 0 = nothing relevant.Credit any well-evaluated ideas such as those listed in the answer; an answer that uses only one text, or leaves out its own view, cannot go above 6.Quality of writing (15 marks): 13–15 = register exactly right for a member of school staff; correct letter conventions (a suitable greeting, the purpose stated in the first paragraph, polite formal register with no slang or contractions, a clear request or recommendation at the end, 'Yours faithfully' or 'Yours sincerely' with a name); logical paragraphs with linking; precise, varied vocabulary and sentence structures; accurate spelling, grammar and punctuation; 10–12 = mostly fluent and accurate, register and form conventions largely right, clear paragraphs, some range of vocabulary and sentence types; 7–9 = generally clear, with errors that do not obscure meaning, register not always consistent, simple linking; 4–6 = frequent errors, limited vocabulary, weak organisation or the wrong register; 1–3 = errors often obscure meaning; little sense of audience or form.Lifting long phrases from the texts, or writing well under or over the word range, keeps an answer out of the top band.
Read Text 1 and Text 2, then answer the question.Text 1: Announcement from the town committeeFrom next month, street vendors will no longer be allowed on the pavements of Saddar Bazaar. Their carts block the way, forcing pedestrians onto a busy road, and food stalls leave waste in the drains. Vendors may apply for a place in the new covered market two kilometres away, where water and electricity are provided.Text 2: Comment from a fruit sellerI have sold fruit on this corner for nineteen years. My customers are people walking home from work; nobody will travel two kilometres for a kilo of bananas. The new market charges rent that many of us cannot pay. We are willing to keep the pavement clear by using marked spaces and cleaning up each evening. Removing us will also make the street emptier and less safe at night. Many of my customers are office workers who stop for five minutes on their way to the bus stop.
- (a) Write a letter to the chairperson of the town committee giving your views on the decision to remove street vendors from Saddar Bazaar.In your letter you should:• evaluate the ideas and opinions in both texts• give your own views, with reasons, about whether street vendors should be moved away from the bazaar.Base your letter on what you have read in both texts, but use your own words.Begin your letter: 'Dear Chairperson,'Write 250 to 350 words. [25]
Show answer
- (a) Ideas in the texts and how convincing they are:Text 1: carts block pavements, pedestrians pushed onto road – genuine safety problem.Text 1: waste in drains – a real hygiene issue.Text 1: covered market with water and power – a fair offer on paper.Text 2: 19 years, loyal passing customers – shows vendors depend on location.Text 2: rent unaffordable – strong practical objection.Text 2: marked spaces and cleaning – sensible compromise.Text 2: vendors make streets safer at night – plausible, 'eyes on the street'.Content a strong answer could use:• Pedestrian safety must be protected• Hygiene and waste problems need a solution• Vendors' livelihoods depend on passing trade; moving them may ruin them• Rent at the new market may be unaffordable• Compromise: licensed marked spaces, cleaning rules, fines for breaking them• Vendors bring life and safety to the street• Own view with a recommendationShort model opening: I am writing to express my concern about the committee's decision to remove street vendors from the pavements of Saddar Bazaar, a decision that will affect both shoppers and the families of the vendors.
Content (10 marks): 9–10 = ideas and opinions from BOTH texts are thoroughly evaluated (weighed, questioned, compared – e.g. pointing out what is unsupported, one-sided or realistic), and a clear, well-developed own view grows out of that evaluation; 7–8 = most main ideas from both texts evaluated with some development, and a clear own view; 5–6 = some evaluation, but uneven between the texts or stated rather than developed; own view given; 3–4 = mainly retells or lists ideas from the texts with little evaluation; own view thin or missing; 1–2 = a few relevant ideas, little grasp of the texts; 0 = nothing relevant.Credit any well-evaluated ideas such as those listed in the answer; an answer that uses only one text, or leaves out its own view, cannot go above 6.Quality of writing (15 marks): 13–15 = register exactly right for a local official; correct letter conventions (a suitable greeting, the purpose stated in the first paragraph, polite formal register with no slang or contractions, a clear request or recommendation at the end, 'Yours faithfully' or 'Yours sincerely' with a name); logical paragraphs with linking; precise, varied vocabulary and sentence structures; accurate spelling, grammar and punctuation; 10–12 = mostly fluent and accurate, register and form conventions largely right, clear paragraphs, some range of vocabulary and sentence types; 7–9 = generally clear, with errors that do not obscure meaning, register not always consistent, simple linking; 4–6 = frequent errors, limited vocabulary, weak organisation or the wrong register; 1–3 = errors often obscure meaning; little sense of audience or form.Lifting long phrases from the texts, or writing well under or over the word range, keeps an answer out of the top band.
Read Text 1 and Text 2, then answer the question.Text 1: Report summary from the education boardWe are considering adding one hour to the end of every school day for supervised homework. Teachers would be on hand to help, and students would go home with their work finished, leaving evenings free for family. Students without a quiet place to study at home would benefit most. A pilot scheme in twelve schools last year showed that students who used the homework hour handed in more of their work on time.Text 2: Letter from a parent in a national newspaperMy children already leave home at 7 a.m. and return at 2:30 p.m. tired and hungry. Another hour would leave no time for sport, chores or simply resting. Teachers are already overworked, so who will supervise? Homework is meant to build independent study habits – doing it at school with help defeats the purpose. Children also need time to help at home, visit grandparents and play outside – that is part of growing up too.
- (a) The education board is considering adding a supervised homework hour to the school day. Write a letter to the education board giving your views.In your letter you should:• evaluate the ideas and opinions in both texts• give your own views, with reasons, about whether the school day should include a supervised homework hour.Base your letter on what you have read in both texts, but use your own words.Begin your letter: 'Dear Members of the Education Board,'Write 250 to 350 words. [25]
Show answer
- (a) Ideas in the texts and how convincing they are:Text 1: teacher help available – useful for weaker students.Text 1: free evenings for family – attractive.Text 1: helps students with no quiet place at home – strongest fairness argument.Text 2: long day already, tiredness – realistic.Text 2: no time for sport or rest – health concern.Text 2: teachers overworked – fair, the board doesn't explain staffing.Text 2: homework should build independence – thoughtful, but help is not the same as doing it for them.Content a strong answer could use:• Equal opportunity for students with no study space at home• Help from teachers can stop students getting stuck• Longer day may cause tiredness and loss of exercise• Staffing and teacher workload need to be addressed• Independent study habits matter, but supervision can still encourage independence• Own view, e.g. optional homework club rather than compulsory extra hourShort model opening: I am a Grade 10 student, and I am writing to give my views on the proposal to add a supervised homework hour to the end of every school day.
Content (10 marks): 9–10 = ideas and opinions from BOTH texts are thoroughly evaluated (weighed, questioned, compared – e.g. pointing out what is unsupported, one-sided or realistic), and a clear, well-developed own view grows out of that evaluation; 7–8 = most main ideas from both texts evaluated with some development, and a clear own view; 5–6 = some evaluation, but uneven between the texts or stated rather than developed; own view given; 3–4 = mainly retells or lists ideas from the texts with little evaluation; own view thin or missing; 1–2 = a few relevant ideas, little grasp of the texts; 0 = nothing relevant.Credit any well-evaluated ideas such as those listed in the answer; an answer that uses only one text, or leaves out its own view, cannot go above 6.Quality of writing (15 marks): 13–15 = register exactly right for an official education body; correct letter conventions (a suitable greeting, the purpose stated in the first paragraph, polite formal register with no slang or contractions, a clear request or recommendation at the end, 'Yours faithfully' or 'Yours sincerely' with a name); logical paragraphs with linking; precise, varied vocabulary and sentence structures; accurate spelling, grammar and punctuation; 10–12 = mostly fluent and accurate, register and form conventions largely right, clear paragraphs, some range of vocabulary and sentence types; 7–9 = generally clear, with errors that do not obscure meaning, register not always consistent, simple linking; 4–6 = frequent errors, limited vocabulary, weak organisation or the wrong register; 1–3 = errors often obscure meaning; little sense of audience or form.Lifting long phrases from the texts, or writing well under or over the word range, keeps an answer out of the top band.
Read Text 1 and Text 2, then answer the question.Text 1: Article from a city magazineImagine the city centre on a Sunday with no cars at all: families cycling down the main road, street musicians on every corner and cafés putting tables outside. Cities such as Bogotá have closed roads to cars on Sundays for years, and air quality on those days improves noticeably. A weekly car-free day would remind everyone that streets belong to people. Local shops would benefit as walkers browse rather than drive past.Text 2: Letter from a shop owners' associationA car-free Sunday sounds charming, but most of our customers come from outside the centre and cannot carry heavy shopping on foot. Many shops make a third of their weekly sales on Sundays. Delivery vans would be forced to come at night, adding costs. Elderly and disabled people who rely on cars or taxis would be shut out. One clean day a week will not solve air pollution, which needs year-round action on old buses and factories.
- (a) Your city council is considering closing the city centre to cars every Sunday. Write a letter to the head of the city council giving your views.In your letter you should:• evaluate the ideas and opinions in both texts• give your own views, with reasons, about whether the city centre should be closed to cars every Sunday.Base your letter on what you have read in both texts, but use your own words.Begin your letter: 'Dear Sir or Madam,'Write 250 to 350 words. [25]
Show answer
- (a) Ideas in the texts and how convincing they are:Text 1: vivid picture of families and music – appealing but emotional rather than factual.Text 1: Bogotá example – real precedent, though conditions there may differ.Text 1: air quality improves on car-free days – true but only for one day.Text 1: walkers browse and help shops – directly contradicted by Text 2.Text 2: customers come from outside and carry heavy goods – practical and convincing.Text 2: one third of sales on Sundays – specific but from an interested group.Text 2: night deliveries cost more – fair.Text 2: elderly and disabled excluded – strong ethical point.Text 2: one day will not solve pollution – logical, but doesn't mean doing nothing.Content a strong answer could use:• Both texts have a motive: the magazine wants an attractive story, the shop owners protect sales – evaluate the bias• Bogotá shows the idea can work but local conditions (public transport, heat, distances) matter• Air quality gain is real but limited to one day; Text 2's call for year-round action is logical• Conflicting claims about shop sales – could be tested with a trial month• Access for elderly and disabled people must be guaranteed (shuttle, permits, taxis allowed on side roads)• Delivery costs could be reduced by allowing early-morning deliveries• Own view, e.g. support a monthly trial with park-and-ride buses, then review sales and pollution dataShort model opening: I am writing in response to the council's proposal to close the city centre to cars on Sundays, an idea which has divided opinion in my neighbourhood and deserves to be judged on evidence rather than on pleasant pictures.
Content (10 marks): 9–10 = ideas and opinions from BOTH texts are thoroughly evaluated (weighed, questioned, compared – e.g. pointing out what is unsupported, one-sided or realistic), and a clear, well-developed own view grows out of that evaluation; 7–8 = most main ideas from both texts evaluated with some development, and a clear own view; 5–6 = some evaluation, but uneven between the texts or stated rather than developed; own view given; 3–4 = mainly retells or lists ideas from the texts with little evaluation; own view thin or missing; 1–2 = a few relevant ideas, little grasp of the texts; 0 = nothing relevant.Credit any well-evaluated ideas such as those listed in the answer; an answer that uses only one text, or leaves out its own view, cannot go above 6.Quality of writing (15 marks): 13–15 = register exactly right for a senior council official; correct letter conventions (a suitable greeting, the purpose stated in the first paragraph, polite formal register with no slang or contractions, a clear request or recommendation at the end, 'Yours faithfully' or 'Yours sincerely' with a name); logical paragraphs with linking; precise, varied vocabulary and sentence structures; accurate spelling, grammar and punctuation; 10–12 = mostly fluent and accurate, register and form conventions largely right, clear paragraphs, some range of vocabulary and sentence types; 7–9 = generally clear, with errors that do not obscure meaning, register not always consistent, simple linking; 4–6 = frequent errors, limited vocabulary, weak organisation or the wrong register; 1–3 = errors often obscure meaning; little sense of audience or form.Lifting long phrases from the texts, or writing well under or over the word range, keeps an answer out of the top band.
Read Text 1 and Text 2, then answer the question.Text 1: Statement from the library committeeMost students now research online, and our shelves are full of books that nobody has borrowed for years. We propose removing two-thirds of the printed books and replacing them with thirty tablets giving access to an e-library of over 20,000 titles. E-books never go missing or get damaged, and students can read them at home at midnight if they wish.Text 2: Opinion piece in the student magazineScreens are already everywhere in our lives. A quiet library full of real books is one of the few places where students can read without notifications. Research suggests that many readers remember more from print than from screens. Not every student has a device or reliable internet at home, and thirty tablets for eight hundred students is hardly enough. And what happens when the subscription becomes too expensive? Books, once bought, are ours forever.
- (a) The school library committee wants to replace most printed books with an e-library. Write a letter to the head of the library committee giving your views.In your letter you should:• evaluate the ideas and opinions in both texts• give your own views, with reasons, about whether most printed books should be replaced by an e-library.Base your letter on what you have read in both texts, but use your own words.Begin your letter: 'Dear Chairperson,'Write 250 to 350 words. [25]
Show answer
- (a) Ideas in the texts and how convincing they are:Text 1: students research online – true for research, less so for leisure reading.Text 1: many books unborrowed – suggests weeding old stock, not removing two-thirds.Text 1: 20,000 titles and 24-hour access – attractive and convincing.Text 1: e-books don't go missing – true, but tablets can break or be stolen.Text 2: libraries give a screen-free space – thoughtful point.Text 2: memory better with print – 'research suggests' is vague but plausible.Text 2: not every student has a device or internet – strong equality point.Text 2: 30 tablets for 800 students – simple arithmetic exposes a weakness.Text 2: subscription costs and ownership – important long-term risk.Content a strong answer could use:• Remove only books that are outdated or never borrowed instead of a fixed two-thirds• Huge range and constant access of e-library is a real advantage• Equality: home access depends on devices and internet; 30 tablets far too few• Print may suit deep reading and concentration; screen-free spaces are valuable• Subscription cost is ongoing – the library could lose access if funds fall• Tablets can also be damaged or lost, so Text 1's claim is one-sided• Own view, e.g. a hybrid library: keep a core print collection, add e-books and more devices gradually, review borrowing dataShort model opening: I am writing to respond to the committee's proposal to replace most of our printed books with an e-library, because I believe the plan, though well-meant, could leave many students worse off.
Content (10 marks): 9–10 = ideas and opinions from BOTH texts are thoroughly evaluated (weighed, questioned, compared – e.g. pointing out what is unsupported, one-sided or realistic), and a clear, well-developed own view grows out of that evaluation; 7–8 = most main ideas from both texts evaluated with some development, and a clear own view; 5–6 = some evaluation, but uneven between the texts or stated rather than developed; own view given; 3–4 = mainly retells or lists ideas from the texts with little evaluation; own view thin or missing; 1–2 = a few relevant ideas, little grasp of the texts; 0 = nothing relevant.Credit any well-evaluated ideas such as those listed in the answer; an answer that uses only one text, or leaves out its own view, cannot go above 6.Quality of writing (15 marks): 13–15 = register exactly right for a committee chairperson; correct letter conventions (a suitable greeting, the purpose stated in the first paragraph, polite formal register with no slang or contractions, a clear request or recommendation at the end, 'Yours faithfully' or 'Yours sincerely' with a name); logical paragraphs with linking; precise, varied vocabulary and sentence structures; accurate spelling, grammar and punctuation; 10–12 = mostly fluent and accurate, register and form conventions largely right, clear paragraphs, some range of vocabulary and sentence types; 7–9 = generally clear, with errors that do not obscure meaning, register not always consistent, simple linking; 4–6 = frequent errors, limited vocabulary, weak organisation or the wrong register; 1–3 = errors often obscure meaning; little sense of audience or form.Lifting long phrases from the texts, or writing well under or over the word range, keeps an answer out of the top band.
Read Text 1 and Text 2, then answer the question.Text 1: Blog post by a travel writerThe valleys of the north are being loved to death. Last summer, queues of jeeps blocked the road to the lake for hours, rubbish piled up beside streams, and new hotels were built without proper drains. A daily limit on visitors, with permits booked online, would protect the landscape that brings people here in the first place. Bhutan charges every tourist a daily fee and keeps its mountains beautiful.Text 2: Comment by a hotel owner from the valleyTourism is the only real income for many families here. My hotel employs twelve local people, and porters, drivers and shopkeepers all depend on summer visitors. A permit system would favour rich foreigners and shut out ordinary Pakistani families who save all year for one holiday. The real problem is poor planning – we need rubbish collection and better roads, not fewer guests.
- (a) Write a letter to the editor of a national newspaper giving your views on whether the number of tourists visiting the northern valleys should be limited.In your letter you should:• evaluate the ideas and opinions in both texts• give your own views, with reasons, about whether visitor numbers should be limited.Base your letter on what you have read in both texts, but use your own words.Begin your letter: 'Dear Editor,'Write 250 to 350 words. [25]
Show answer
- (a) Ideas in the texts and how convincing they are:Text 1: traffic jams, rubbish and badly built hotels – vivid evidence of harm.Text 1: limit protects the landscape tourists come for – logical.Text 1: Bhutan example – relevant but Bhutan is a very different, wealthier tourism model.Text 2: tourism is main income, twelve jobs – real, though from someone with a financial interest.Text 2: permits favour the rich – strong fairness point about domestic tourists.Text 2: problem is planning not numbers – partly true; infrastructure could reduce harm.Content a strong answer could use:• The damage described (jams, litter, pollution of streams) is serious and threatens tourism itself• Livelihoods of local people depend on visitors – any plan must protect jobs• A fee or permit could exclude ordinary families – unless prices are low or locals are exempt• Infrastructure (rubbish collection, drains, roads) would help but may not be enough at peak times• Each writer has a bias: a visiting writer versus a hotel owner• Own view, e.g. limits only at the busiest sites and weekends, permit money spent locally on waste and roadsShort model opening: Sir, few places in our country are as precious as the northern valleys, and the debate over whether to limit visitors is really a debate about how to keep them both beautiful and alive.
Content (10 marks): 9–10 = ideas and opinions from BOTH texts are thoroughly evaluated (weighed, questioned, compared – e.g. pointing out what is unsupported, one-sided or realistic), and a clear, well-developed own view grows out of that evaluation; 7–8 = most main ideas from both texts evaluated with some development, and a clear own view; 5–6 = some evaluation, but uneven between the texts or stated rather than developed; own view given; 3–4 = mainly retells or lists ideas from the texts with little evaluation; own view thin or missing; 1–2 = a few relevant ideas, little grasp of the texts; 0 = nothing relevant.Credit any well-evaluated ideas such as those listed in the answer; an answer that uses only one text, or leaves out its own view, cannot go above 6.Quality of writing (15 marks): 13–15 = register exactly right for readers of a national newspaper; correct letter conventions (a suitable greeting, the purpose stated in the first paragraph, polite formal register with no slang or contractions, a clear request or recommendation at the end, 'Yours faithfully' or 'Yours sincerely' with a name); logical paragraphs with linking; precise, varied vocabulary and sentence structures; accurate spelling, grammar and punctuation; 10–12 = mostly fluent and accurate, register and form conventions largely right, clear paragraphs, some range of vocabulary and sentence types; 7–9 = generally clear, with errors that do not obscure meaning, register not always consistent, simple linking; 4–6 = frequent errors, limited vocabulary, weak organisation or the wrong register; 1–3 = errors often obscure meaning; little sense of audience or form.Lifting long phrases from the texts, or writing well under or over the word range, keeps an answer out of the top band.
Read Text 1 and Text 2, then answer the question.Text 1: Post on a student forumHaving a part-time job at sixteen taught me more than any lesson. Working at my uncle's shop on Saturdays, I learned to handle money, speak politely to customers and manage my time. I also earned enough to buy my own books. Every teenager should try it. I learned to apologise when I made a mistake with change, and to stay calm when the shop was busy. Those lessons have helped me in group projects at school as well.Text 2: Reply on the same forumGood for you, but most of us are already exhausted. Between school, tuition and homework, a job would leave no time to sleep or relax, and our grades would fall. Besides, many teenagers end up in jobs where they are underpaid or treated badly. Our job right now is to study. I tried working in a restaurant for a month and was paid far less than I was promised, with no breaks.
- (a) Your class is holding a discussion on whether students of your age should have part-time jobs. You have been asked to give a speech to your classmates.In your speech you should:• evaluate the ideas and opinions in both texts• give your own views, with reasons, about whether students your age should have part-time jobs.Base your speech on what you have read in both texts, but use your own words.Begin your speech: 'Good morning, everyone.'Write 250 to 350 words. [25]
Show answer
- (a) Ideas in the texts and how convincing they are:Text 1: learned money skills, politeness and time management – useful, but one person's experience.Text 1: earned money for books – practical benefit.Text 1: 'every teenager should try it' – too general.Text 2: already exhausted, grades would fall – realistic for many students.Text 2: risk of underpaid or unfair work – important protection point.Text 2: 'our job is to study' – fair but narrow view.Content a strong answer could use:• Practical skills learned at work (money, communication, time management)• Financial independence and pride• Effect on sleep, rest and schoolwork• Risk of exploitation; need for safe, fair work• One person's experience cannot be applied to everyone• Own view, e.g. short weekend or holiday jobs only, if grades and rest are protectedShort model opening: Good morning, everyone. How many of you have ever been paid for doing a job? Today I want to ask whether earning money at our age makes us better prepared for life – or simply more tired.
Content (10 marks): 9–10 = ideas and opinions from BOTH texts are thoroughly evaluated (weighed, questioned, compared – e.g. pointing out what is unsupported, one-sided or realistic), and a clear, well-developed own view grows out of that evaluation; 7–8 = most main ideas from both texts evaluated with some development, and a clear own view; 5–6 = some evaluation, but uneven between the texts or stated rather than developed; own view given; 3–4 = mainly retells or lists ideas from the texts with little evaluation; own view thin or missing; 1–2 = a few relevant ideas, little grasp of the texts; 0 = nothing relevant.Credit any well-evaluated ideas such as those listed in the answer; an answer that uses only one text, or leaves out its own view, cannot go above 6.Quality of writing (15 marks): 13–15 = register exactly right for classmates of the same age; a clear sense of a live audience (greeting, direct address with 'you' and 'we', signposting such as 'Let me turn to…', one or two well-placed rhetorical questions, a memorable ending that thanks the audience); logical paragraphs with linking; precise, varied vocabulary and sentence structures; accurate spelling, grammar and punctuation; 10–12 = mostly fluent and accurate, register and form conventions largely right, clear paragraphs, some range of vocabulary and sentence types; 7–9 = generally clear, with errors that do not obscure meaning, register not always consistent, simple linking; 4–6 = frequent errors, limited vocabulary, weak organisation or the wrong register; 1–3 = errors often obscure meaning; little sense of audience or form.Lifting long phrases from the texts, or writing well under or over the word range, keeps an answer out of the top band.
Read Text 1 and Text 2, then answer the question.Text 1: Message from the school's environment clubEvery week our school throws away more than a thousand plastic water bottles. Most of them are never recycled and end up blocking drains or floating in the river. We want to ban single-use bottles on campus and install filtered water coolers so everyone can refill their own bottle for free. Plastic takes hundreds of years to break down, and small pieces are now being found inside fish. Refilling bottles would also save each family money every month.Text 2: Reply from a student in the school magazineI support recycling, but a ban is unrealistic. Many students forget their bottles, and on hot days they will simply go thirsty. Water coolers break down, and who will keep them clean? Recycling bins in every corridor would solve the problem without making life difficult. The coolers in the staff room have been broken for weeks. We should not make students depend on machines that nobody repairs.
- (a) You have been asked to give a speech in school assembly about the proposal to ban single-use plastic bottles on campus.In your speech you should:• evaluate the ideas and opinions in both texts• give your own views, with reasons, about whether single-use plastic bottles should be banned at school.Base your speech on what you have read in both texts, but use your own words.Begin your speech: 'Good morning, teachers and fellow students.'Write 250 to 350 words. [25]
Show answer
- (a) Ideas in the texts and how convincing they are:Text 1: over 1,000 bottles a week – striking fact.Text 1: bottles block drains and pollute river – real harm.Text 1: free filtered water coolers – practical solution.Text 2: students forget bottles and go thirsty – health concern but solvable.Text 2: coolers break and need cleaning – fair maintenance question.Text 2: recycling bins instead – easier but Text 1 says most bottles aren't recycled.Content a strong answer could use:• Scale of waste and harm to drains and river• Refill coolers save money and reduce waste• Health on hot days – spare cups or bottles at the cooler could solve forgetting• Maintenance plan needed for coolers• Recycling is better than nothing but reduces waste less than not using bottles at all• Own view with a call to actionShort model opening: Good morning, teachers and fellow students. Look at the bin outside your classroom after break, and you will see the problem I want to talk about this morning.
Content (10 marks): 9–10 = ideas and opinions from BOTH texts are thoroughly evaluated (weighed, questioned, compared – e.g. pointing out what is unsupported, one-sided or realistic), and a clear, well-developed own view grows out of that evaluation; 7–8 = most main ideas from both texts evaluated with some development, and a clear own view; 5–6 = some evaluation, but uneven between the texts or stated rather than developed; own view given; 3–4 = mainly retells or lists ideas from the texts with little evaluation; own view thin or missing; 1–2 = a few relevant ideas, little grasp of the texts; 0 = nothing relevant.Credit any well-evaluated ideas such as those listed in the answer; an answer that uses only one text, or leaves out its own view, cannot go above 6.Quality of writing (15 marks): 13–15 = register exactly right for a whole-school assembly; a clear sense of a live audience (greeting, direct address with 'you' and 'we', signposting such as 'Let me turn to…', one or two well-placed rhetorical questions, a memorable ending that thanks the audience); logical paragraphs with linking; precise, varied vocabulary and sentence structures; accurate spelling, grammar and punctuation; 10–12 = mostly fluent and accurate, register and form conventions largely right, clear paragraphs, some range of vocabulary and sentence types; 7–9 = generally clear, with errors that do not obscure meaning, register not always consistent, simple linking; 4–6 = frequent errors, limited vocabulary, weak organisation or the wrong register; 1–3 = errors often obscure meaning; little sense of audience or form.Lifting long phrases from the texts, or writing well under or over the word range, keeps an answer out of the top band.
Read Text 1 and Text 2, then answer the question.Text 1: Note from the student councilWe suggest that students may wear their own clothes every Friday. It would let us express our personality and feel more relaxed at the end of the week. Each student could pay a small fee, with the money going to a local charity. Many schools around the world already have a weekly non-uniform day, and students there say it makes school feel friendlier.Text 2: Reply from a teacherSchool uniform makes everyone equal. On non-uniform days, students who cannot afford fashionable clothes may feel embarrassed or be teased. Uniform also saves time in the morning and keeps the focus on learning rather than appearance. We have seen arguments break out about trainers and phones; adding clothes to the list would only make it worse. Some families have several children and would feel pressure to buy new outfits.
- (a) The school is considering allowing students to wear their own clothes every Friday. You have been asked to give a short speech to students in your grade.In your speech you should:• evaluate the ideas and opinions in both texts• give your own views, with reasons, about whether students should be allowed to wear their own clothes on Fridays.Base your speech on what you have read in both texts, but use your own words.Begin your speech: 'Good morning, friends.'Write 250 to 350 words. [25]
Show answer
- (a) Ideas in the texts and how convincing they are:Text 1: expressing personality – reasonable.Text 1: relaxed end to the week – pleasant but minor.Text 1: charity fee – a good cause, but adds a cost.Text 2: uniform makes everyone equal – strong.Text 2: embarrassment and teasing – real risk.Text 2: saves time and focus on learning – sensible.Content a strong answer could use:• Self-expression and relaxation• Money raised for charity• Pressure to wear fashionable clothes; teasing• Extra cost for some families• Focus on learning• Own view, e.g. once a month with simple dress rules and an optional donationShort model opening: Good morning, friends. Imagine walking into school on Friday wearing your favourite shirt – exciting for some of us, but worrying for others.
Content (10 marks): 9–10 = ideas and opinions from BOTH texts are thoroughly evaluated (weighed, questioned, compared – e.g. pointing out what is unsupported, one-sided or realistic), and a clear, well-developed own view grows out of that evaluation; 7–8 = most main ideas from both texts evaluated with some development, and a clear own view; 5–6 = some evaluation, but uneven between the texts or stated rather than developed; own view given; 3–4 = mainly retells or lists ideas from the texts with little evaluation; own view thin or missing; 1–2 = a few relevant ideas, little grasp of the texts; 0 = nothing relevant.Credit any well-evaluated ideas such as those listed in the answer; an answer that uses only one text, or leaves out its own view, cannot go above 6.Quality of writing (15 marks): 13–15 = register exactly right for students of the same grade; a clear sense of a live audience (greeting, direct address with 'you' and 'we', signposting such as 'Let me turn to…', one or two well-placed rhetorical questions, a memorable ending that thanks the audience); logical paragraphs with linking; precise, varied vocabulary and sentence structures; accurate spelling, grammar and punctuation; 10–12 = mostly fluent and accurate, register and form conventions largely right, clear paragraphs, some range of vocabulary and sentence types; 7–9 = generally clear, with errors that do not obscure meaning, register not always consistent, simple linking; 4–6 = frequent errors, limited vocabulary, weak organisation or the wrong register; 1–3 = errors often obscure meaning; little sense of audience or form.Lifting long phrases from the texts, or writing well under or over the word range, keeps an answer out of the top band.
Read Text 1 and Text 2, then answer the question.Text 1: Letter from the school managementWe propose that students study online from home every Wednesday. During the pandemic we proved that online lessons work. One online day a week would save families transport costs, reduce traffic, and teach students to manage their own learning – a skill they will need at university. It would also free up classrooms one day a week for teacher training and repairs. Teachers could record lessons so that students could watch them again when revising.Text 2: Comment from a parentOnline learning was a disaster in our house. Three children shared one phone, the internet kept cutting out, and my youngest learned almost nothing. Children need friends and teachers in person. Working parents cannot stay home to supervise every Wednesday. My eldest daughter spent hours on her phone pretending to attend lessons while actually watching videos. Nobody could check whether she was really learning.
- (a) Your school is holding a parents' evening about the proposal for one online learning day each week. You have been asked to give a speech to the parents and teachers.In your speech you should:• evaluate the ideas and opinions in both texts• give your own views, with reasons, about whether the school should have one online learning day each week.Base your speech on what you have read in both texts, but use your own words.Begin your speech: 'Good evening, parents and teachers.'Write 250 to 350 words. [25]
Show answer
- (a) Ideas in the texts and how convincing they are:Text 1: pandemic proved online lessons work – debatable; many found it hard.Text 1: saves transport costs and traffic – real benefit.Text 1: builds independent learning – valuable for older students.Text 2: shared devices, poor internet – strong equality problem.Text 2: youngest learned almost nothing – vivid but one family.Text 2: need for friends and teachers in person – social and emotional point.Text 2: working parents cannot supervise – practical problem.Content a strong answer could use:• Cost and traffic savings• Independent learning skills for university• Unequal access to devices and internet• Younger children may struggle without supervision• Social value of being in school• Own view, e.g. optional online day for senior grades, school lends devices, younger classes stay in schoolShort model opening: Good evening, parents and teachers. Most of us remember the months when our homes became classrooms; tonight I want to ask what we really learned from that time.
Content (10 marks): 9–10 = ideas and opinions from BOTH texts are thoroughly evaluated (weighed, questioned, compared – e.g. pointing out what is unsupported, one-sided or realistic), and a clear, well-developed own view grows out of that evaluation; 7–8 = most main ideas from both texts evaluated with some development, and a clear own view; 5–6 = some evaluation, but uneven between the texts or stated rather than developed; own view given; 3–4 = mainly retells or lists ideas from the texts with little evaluation; own view thin or missing; 1–2 = a few relevant ideas, little grasp of the texts; 0 = nothing relevant.Credit any well-evaluated ideas such as those listed in the answer; an answer that uses only one text, or leaves out its own view, cannot go above 6.Quality of writing (15 marks): 13–15 = register exactly right for an audience of parents and teachers; a clear sense of a live audience (greeting, direct address with 'you' and 'we', signposting such as 'Let me turn to…', one or two well-placed rhetorical questions, a memorable ending that thanks the audience); logical paragraphs with linking; precise, varied vocabulary and sentence structures; accurate spelling, grammar and punctuation; 10–12 = mostly fluent and accurate, register and form conventions largely right, clear paragraphs, some range of vocabulary and sentence types; 7–9 = generally clear, with errors that do not obscure meaning, register not always consistent, simple linking; 4–6 = frequent errors, limited vocabulary, weak organisation or the wrong register; 1–3 = errors often obscure meaning; little sense of audience or form.Lifting long phrases from the texts, or writing well under or over the word range, keeps an answer out of the top band.
Read Text 1 and Text 2, then answer the question.Text 1: Post by a young craftsman on social mediaMy grandfather taught me to carve wood the way our family has done for generations. These skills are disappearing because young people only want screen jobs. A youth club workshop in crafts like wood carving, embroidery or pottery would keep our culture alive and give people something real to make with their hands. When an old craftsman dies without a student, a whole tradition can disappear with him. Tourists also pay well for genuine handmade work.Text 2: Reply from a software studentCulture matters, but we must be realistic. Coding skills lead to well-paid jobs, and anyone can work for international companies from a small town. A coding workshop would open more doors for young people in our area than a pottery class ever could. Several of my classmates already earn money building websites for shops in our town while they study.
- (a) Your youth club can afford only one new weekly workshop: traditional crafts or coding. You have been asked to give a speech to club members.In your speech you should:• evaluate the ideas and opinions in both texts• give your own views, with reasons, about which workshop the youth club should choose.Base your speech on what you have read in both texts, but use your own words.Begin your speech: 'Hello, everyone, and thank you for coming.'Write 250 to 350 words. [25]
Show answer
- (a) Ideas in the texts and how convincing they are:Text 1: family tradition – personal, emotional appeal.Text 1: skills disappearing – credible concern.Text 1: keeps culture alive, hands-on work – valuable, hard to measure.Text 2: coding leads to well-paid jobs – strong economic point but not guaranteed.Text 2: remote work from small towns – true for some jobs, needs good internet.Text 2: dismissive of pottery – crafts can also earn money (tourism, online selling).Content a strong answer could use:• Cultural heritage and pride• Practical, relaxing value of making things by hand• Job prospects and income from coding• Remote work depends on internet and experience• Crafts can be sold online – combining both ideas• Own view, e.g. alternate terms, or a craft workshop that also teaches online sellingShort model opening: Hello, everyone, and thank you for coming. Tonight we have to choose between two very different futures for our Saturday afternoons: one shaped by the hands of our grandparents, and one typed on a keyboard.
Content (10 marks): 9–10 = ideas and opinions from BOTH texts are thoroughly evaluated (weighed, questioned, compared – e.g. pointing out what is unsupported, one-sided or realistic), and a clear, well-developed own view grows out of that evaluation; 7–8 = most main ideas from both texts evaluated with some development, and a clear own view; 5–6 = some evaluation, but uneven between the texts or stated rather than developed; own view given; 3–4 = mainly retells or lists ideas from the texts with little evaluation; own view thin or missing; 1–2 = a few relevant ideas, little grasp of the texts; 0 = nothing relevant.Credit any well-evaluated ideas such as those listed in the answer; an answer that uses only one text, or leaves out its own view, cannot go above 6.Quality of writing (15 marks): 13–15 = register exactly right for members of a youth club; a clear sense of a live audience (greeting, direct address with 'you' and 'we', signposting such as 'Let me turn to…', one or two well-placed rhetorical questions, a memorable ending that thanks the audience); logical paragraphs with linking; precise, varied vocabulary and sentence structures; accurate spelling, grammar and punctuation; 10–12 = mostly fluent and accurate, register and form conventions largely right, clear paragraphs, some range of vocabulary and sentence types; 7–9 = generally clear, with errors that do not obscure meaning, register not always consistent, simple linking; 4–6 = frequent errors, limited vocabulary, weak organisation or the wrong register; 1–3 = errors often obscure meaning; little sense of audience or form.Lifting long phrases from the texts, or writing well under or over the word range, keeps an answer out of the top band.
Read Text 1 and Text 2, then answer the question.Text 1: Statement from the district roads departmentA new road linking the industrial area to the motorway will cut journey times for lorries by forty minutes and bring new factories and jobs to Faisalabad. The route passes through an old orchard and a strip of farmland, but the owners will be paid fair compensation. Lorries currently travel through narrow streets in the old town, causing traffic jams and damage to buildings. The new road would take them away from homes and schools.Text 2: Speech notes by a local environmental groupThe orchard is home to birds and bees, and its trees cool the surrounding homes in summer. The district is already short of green spaces. We propose planting 5,000 trees along the existing road and improving it instead. Jobs that depend on destroying our environment are not progress. Many of the orchard trees are over sixty years old. Once they are gone, no compensation payment can bring back the shade and fruit the whole community enjoys.
- (a) Your community is meeting to discuss a plan to build a new road through an orchard. You have been asked to give a speech at the meeting.In your speech you should:• evaluate the ideas and opinions in both texts• give your own views, with reasons, about whether the new road should be built through the orchard.Base your speech on what you have read in both texts, but use your own words.Begin your speech: 'Good evening, ladies and gentlemen.'Write 250 to 350 words. [25]
Show answer
- (a) Ideas in the texts and how convincing they are:Text 1: 40 minutes saved – specific and persuasive for business.Text 1: new factories and jobs – likely but not guaranteed.Text 1: fair compensation – money cannot replace trees or farmland.Text 2: birds, bees and cooling – strong environmental points.Text 2: short of green spaces – relevant.Text 2: improve existing road and plant trees – constructive alternative, cost unclear.Text 2: 'not progress' – emotional slogan.Content a strong answer could use:• Economic benefits: faster transport, jobs• Compensation helps owners but loss of orchard affects whole community• Environmental value: wildlife, shade, cooling, air• Improving the existing road might give some benefit with less damage• Own view, perhaps a different route or replanting commitmentShort model opening: Good evening, ladies and gentlemen. We all want our district to grow, but tonight we must decide what we are prepared to lose for that growth.
Content (10 marks): 9–10 = ideas and opinions from BOTH texts are thoroughly evaluated (weighed, questioned, compared – e.g. pointing out what is unsupported, one-sided or realistic), and a clear, well-developed own view grows out of that evaluation; 7–8 = most main ideas from both texts evaluated with some development, and a clear own view; 5–6 = some evaluation, but uneven between the texts or stated rather than developed; own view given; 3–4 = mainly retells or lists ideas from the texts with little evaluation; own view thin or missing; 1–2 = a few relevant ideas, little grasp of the texts; 0 = nothing relevant.Credit any well-evaluated ideas such as those listed in the answer; an answer that uses only one text, or leaves out its own view, cannot go above 6.Quality of writing (15 marks): 13–15 = register exactly right for local adults at a community meeting; a clear sense of a live audience (greeting, direct address with 'you' and 'we', signposting such as 'Let me turn to…', one or two well-placed rhetorical questions, a memorable ending that thanks the audience); logical paragraphs with linking; precise, varied vocabulary and sentence structures; accurate spelling, grammar and punctuation; 10–12 = mostly fluent and accurate, register and form conventions largely right, clear paragraphs, some range of vocabulary and sentence types; 7–9 = generally clear, with errors that do not obscure meaning, register not always consistent, simple linking; 4–6 = frequent errors, limited vocabulary, weak organisation or the wrong register; 1–3 = errors often obscure meaning; little sense of audience or form.Lifting long phrases from the texts, or writing well under or over the word range, keeps an answer out of the top band.
Read Text 1 and Text 2, then answer the question.Text 1: Suggestion from the physical education teacherEvery student should play a competitive sport each term, in a team or as an individual. Competition teaches us to cope with losing, to keep trying, and to cooperate. Regular exercise also improves mood, sleep and concentration. Students who play in teams also make friends across different classes and grades. Some of our best athletes discovered their talent only because they were made to try.Text 2: Reply from a studentNot everyone enjoys competition. Students who are less sporty are often laughed at and end up hating exercise altogether. Why not let students choose activities such as yoga, dance or walking clubs? Being active matters more than winning. In my last school, the same students were always picked last for teams. Many of them started bringing notes from home to avoid games altogether. Exercise should be something we enjoy for life.
- (a) You have been asked to give a speech on Sports Day to students and parents about whether competitive sport should be compulsory for all students.In your speech you should:• evaluate the ideas and opinions in both texts• give your own views, with reasons, about whether competitive sport should be compulsory for all students.Base your speech on what you have read in both texts, but use your own words.Begin your speech: 'Good afternoon, everyone, and welcome to Sports Day.'Write 250 to 350 words. [25]
Show answer
- (a) Ideas in the texts and how convincing they are:Text 1: coping with losing, perseverance, cooperation – valuable life lessons.Text 1: exercise helps mood, sleep and concentration – well supported.Text 2: not everyone enjoys competition – true.Text 2: less sporty students laughed at – real risk that puts people off exercise.Text 2: choice of non-competitive activities – practical.Text 2: activity matters more than winning – the health benefit doesn't need competition.Content a strong answer could use:• Life skills from competition• Health benefits come from any regular exercise• Risk of humiliation and lasting dislike of sport• Choice keeps students active and motivated• Own view, e.g. compulsory activity, optional competition, mixed-ability leaguesShort model opening: Good afternoon, everyone, and welcome to Sports Day. As we cheer the winners today, I want us to think about every student who is not on the track.
Content (10 marks): 9–10 = ideas and opinions from BOTH texts are thoroughly evaluated (weighed, questioned, compared – e.g. pointing out what is unsupported, one-sided or realistic), and a clear, well-developed own view grows out of that evaluation; 7–8 = most main ideas from both texts evaluated with some development, and a clear own view; 5–6 = some evaluation, but uneven between the texts or stated rather than developed; own view given; 3–4 = mainly retells or lists ideas from the texts with little evaluation; own view thin or missing; 1–2 = a few relevant ideas, little grasp of the texts; 0 = nothing relevant.Credit any well-evaluated ideas such as those listed in the answer; an answer that uses only one text, or leaves out its own view, cannot go above 6.Quality of writing (15 marks): 13–15 = register exactly right for students and parents at a school event; a clear sense of a live audience (greeting, direct address with 'you' and 'we', signposting such as 'Let me turn to…', one or two well-placed rhetorical questions, a memorable ending that thanks the audience); logical paragraphs with linking; precise, varied vocabulary and sentence structures; accurate spelling, grammar and punctuation; 10–12 = mostly fluent and accurate, register and form conventions largely right, clear paragraphs, some range of vocabulary and sentence types; 7–9 = generally clear, with errors that do not obscure meaning, register not always consistent, simple linking; 4–6 = frequent errors, limited vocabulary, weak organisation or the wrong register; 1–3 = errors often obscure meaning; little sense of audience or form.Lifting long phrases from the texts, or writing well under or over the word range, keeps an answer out of the top band.
Read Text 1 and Text 2, then answer the question.Text 1: Article by an education columnistFinal exams test what a student can remember on one hot afternoon. A student who is ill or anxious can lose a whole year's work in three hours. Coursework – projects, essays and practical work marked throughout the year – rewards steady effort and real understanding. Several countries have already reduced their reliance on exams. Coursework also lets students explore a topic they care about in depth, which is how real research and real jobs work.Text 2: Letter from a retired head teacherCoursework sounds kinder, but it is easier to cheat: parents, tutors and now computer programs can do the work. Teachers marking their own students face pressure from families. Exams are the same for everyone, in the same room, at the same time. That is why they are fair. Learning to perform under pressure is itself a life skill. When I was a head teacher, I saw parents pay tutors to write whole projects for their children.
- (a) Your school debating society is discussing whether final exams should be replaced by coursework. You have been asked to give a speech to the society.In your speech you should:• evaluate the ideas and opinions in both texts• give your own views, with reasons, about whether final exams should be replaced by coursework.Base your speech on what you have read in both texts, but use your own words.Begin your speech: 'Madam Chair, members of the society,'Write 250 to 350 words. [25]
Show answer
- (a) Ideas in the texts and how convincing they are:Text 1: exams test memory on one day – partly true, but good exams test skills too.Text 1: illness or anxiety can ruin results – strong fairness point.Text 1: coursework rewards steady effort – persuasive.Text 1: 'several countries' – vague evidence.Text 2: coursework easier to cheat, including with computer programs – very relevant today.Text 2: pressure on teachers from families – realistic in a competitive system.Text 2: exams are identical for all – the main fairness argument.Text 2: coping with pressure is a life skill – true, though extreme pressure can harm.Content a strong answer could use:• Both writers define 'fairness' differently – equal conditions versus equal opportunity• One-off exams can be unfair to ill or anxious students• Coursework measures sustained effort and deeper understanding• Cheating and outside help, including AI tools, threaten coursework's reliability• Teacher-marking pressure – could be solved by external moderation• Pressure is a life skill, but measurement should not depend on it alone• Own view, e.g. a mix: exams plus supervised coursework done in classShort model opening: Madam Chair, members of the society, if one bad afternoon can undo two years of hard work, we must ask whether we are measuring learning or measuring luck.
Content (10 marks): 9–10 = ideas and opinions from BOTH texts are thoroughly evaluated (weighed, questioned, compared – e.g. pointing out what is unsupported, one-sided or realistic), and a clear, well-developed own view grows out of that evaluation; 7–8 = most main ideas from both texts evaluated with some development, and a clear own view; 5–6 = some evaluation, but uneven between the texts or stated rather than developed; own view given; 3–4 = mainly retells or lists ideas from the texts with little evaluation; own view thin or missing; 1–2 = a few relevant ideas, little grasp of the texts; 0 = nothing relevant.Credit any well-evaluated ideas such as those listed in the answer; an answer that uses only one text, or leaves out its own view, cannot go above 6.Quality of writing (15 marks): 13–15 = register exactly right for a debating society audience; a clear sense of a live audience (greeting, direct address with 'you' and 'we', signposting such as 'Let me turn to…', one or two well-placed rhetorical questions, a memorable ending that thanks the audience); logical paragraphs with linking; precise, varied vocabulary and sentence structures; accurate spelling, grammar and punctuation; 10–12 = mostly fluent and accurate, register and form conventions largely right, clear paragraphs, some range of vocabulary and sentence types; 7–9 = generally clear, with errors that do not obscure meaning, register not always consistent, simple linking; 4–6 = frequent errors, limited vocabulary, weak organisation or the wrong register; 1–3 = errors often obscure meaning; little sense of audience or form.Lifting long phrases from the texts, or writing well under or over the word range, keeps an answer out of the top band.
Read Text 1 and Text 2, then answer the question.Text 1: Article in a science magazineSpace exploration has given us weather satellites, GPS and better medical imaging. Studying other planets helps us understand climate change on our own. Exploration inspires young people to become scientists and engineers. The money spent is small compared with what governments spend on many other things. Satellites now warn farmers of droughts and help rescue teams find people after floods. Without earlier space missions, none of this would exist.Text 2: Blog post by a development workerMillions of people still lack clean water, electricity and schools. Every rocket launch costs enough to build hundreds of wells. Satellites are useful, but we already have them. We should solve the problems on Earth before we spend fortunes looking for life on Mars. Children in some villages still walk for hours each day to collect water instead of going to school. Their problems cannot wait for the results of a mission to another planet.
- (a) Your school science club is holding a discussion on whether countries should spend money on space exploration. You have been asked to give a speech to the club.In your speech you should:• evaluate the ideas and opinions in both texts• give your own views, with reasons, about whether countries should spend money on space exploration.Base your speech on what you have read in both texts, but use your own words.Begin your speech: 'Good afternoon, fellow members of the science club.'Write 250 to 350 words. [25]
Show answer
- (a) Ideas in the texts and how convincing they are:Text 1: satellites, GPS, medical imaging – real practical spin-offs.Text 1: helps understand climate change – true, e.g. studying Venus and Mars atmospheres.Text 1: inspiration – likely, hard to measure.Text 1: spending is relatively small – fair, but no figures given.Text 2: clean water, electricity, schools lacking – morally powerful.Text 2: rocket launch = hundreds of wells – emotive comparison, no figures.Text 2: we already have satellites – overlooks that they need replacing and improving.Text 2: 'solve Earth first' – assumes it is either/or.Content a strong answer could use:• Practical spin-offs of space technology• Satellites monitor floods, crops and weather, which helps poor countries too• Inspiration for science careers• Urgent human needs and moral priorities• False either/or: budgets can do both; space spending is a small share• Neither text gives precise figures – both rely partly on emotion• Own view, e.g. focused, useful space programmes that support life on EarthShort model opening: Good afternoon, fellow members of the science club. Every time you check the weather on your phone or find your way with a map app, you are using the results of space exploration.
Content (10 marks): 9–10 = ideas and opinions from BOTH texts are thoroughly evaluated (weighed, questioned, compared – e.g. pointing out what is unsupported, one-sided or realistic), and a clear, well-developed own view grows out of that evaluation; 7–8 = most main ideas from both texts evaluated with some development, and a clear own view; 5–6 = some evaluation, but uneven between the texts or stated rather than developed; own view given; 3–4 = mainly retells or lists ideas from the texts with little evaluation; own view thin or missing; 1–2 = a few relevant ideas, little grasp of the texts; 0 = nothing relevant.Credit any well-evaluated ideas such as those listed in the answer; an answer that uses only one text, or leaves out its own view, cannot go above 6.Quality of writing (15 marks): 13–15 = register exactly right for a school science club; a clear sense of a live audience (greeting, direct address with 'you' and 'we', signposting such as 'Let me turn to…', one or two well-placed rhetorical questions, a memorable ending that thanks the audience); logical paragraphs with linking; precise, varied vocabulary and sentence structures; accurate spelling, grammar and punctuation; 10–12 = mostly fluent and accurate, register and form conventions largely right, clear paragraphs, some range of vocabulary and sentence types; 7–9 = generally clear, with errors that do not obscure meaning, register not always consistent, simple linking; 4–6 = frequent errors, limited vocabulary, weak organisation or the wrong register; 1–3 = errors often obscure meaning; little sense of audience or form.Lifting long phrases from the texts, or writing well under or over the word range, keeps an answer out of the top band.
Read Text 1 and Text 2, then answer the question.Text 1: Email from the head of IT to all staffAI chatbots are here to stay. Instead of pretending they do not exist, we should teach students to use them well: to explain hard ideas, check grammar and generate practice questions. Students who learn this now will have an advantage at university and at work. Banning chatbots will not stop students using them at home; it will only stop teachers from showing them how to use them responsibly.Text 2: Opinion from an English teacherIf a machine writes the essay, the student learns nothing. Chatbots sometimes invent facts with complete confidence, and students may not notice. Homework is practice, like training for a match – you cannot ask someone else to run for you. Homework should be done without them. I have already received essays that were clearly not written by the student – the style changed completely halfway through. Marking these wastes time and tells me nothing about what the student can do.
- (a) Your school is deciding whether students may use AI chatbots for homework. You have been asked to give a speech to students in Grades 9 and 10.In your speech you should:• evaluate the ideas and opinions in both texts• give your own views, with reasons, about whether students should be allowed to use AI chatbots for homework.Base your speech on what you have read in both texts, but use your own words.Begin your speech: 'Good morning, everyone.'Write 250 to 350 words. [25]
Show answer
- (a) Ideas in the texts and how convincing they are:Text 1: chatbots here to stay – realistic.Text 1: useful for explanations, grammar, practice questions – genuine uses.Text 1: advantage later – plausible.Text 2: machine-written essays mean no learning – strong.Text 2: chatbots can invent facts – true and important.Text 2: training analogy – effective comparison.Text 2: total ban – hard to enforce outside school.Content a strong answer could use:• Chatbots will be part of future study and work• Helpful uses: explanation, feedback, practice• Copying answers prevents learning• Accuracy problems: students must check facts• A ban is difficult to enforce at home• Both writers agree learning is the goal – they differ on method• Own view, e.g. allowed for explanation and checking with honesty rules; essays written by the studentShort model opening: Good morning, everyone. Some of you may already have asked a computer to help with last night's homework – so the question is not whether we will use these tools, but how.
Content (10 marks): 9–10 = ideas and opinions from BOTH texts are thoroughly evaluated (weighed, questioned, compared – e.g. pointing out what is unsupported, one-sided or realistic), and a clear, well-developed own view grows out of that evaluation; 7–8 = most main ideas from both texts evaluated with some development, and a clear own view; 5–6 = some evaluation, but uneven between the texts or stated rather than developed; own view given; 3–4 = mainly retells or lists ideas from the texts with little evaluation; own view thin or missing; 1–2 = a few relevant ideas, little grasp of the texts; 0 = nothing relevant.Credit any well-evaluated ideas such as those listed in the answer; an answer that uses only one text, or leaves out its own view, cannot go above 6.Quality of writing (15 marks): 13–15 = register exactly right for students in Grades 9 and 10; a clear sense of a live audience (greeting, direct address with 'you' and 'we', signposting such as 'Let me turn to…', one or two well-placed rhetorical questions, a memorable ending that thanks the audience); logical paragraphs with linking; precise, varied vocabulary and sentence structures; accurate spelling, grammar and punctuation; 10–12 = mostly fluent and accurate, register and form conventions largely right, clear paragraphs, some range of vocabulary and sentence types; 7–9 = generally clear, with errors that do not obscure meaning, register not always consistent, simple linking; 4–6 = frequent errors, limited vocabulary, weak organisation or the wrong register; 1–3 = errors often obscure meaning; little sense of audience or form.Lifting long phrases from the texts, or writing well under or over the word range, keeps an answer out of the top band.
Read Text 1 and Text 2, then answer the question.Text 1: Message from your cousin AyeshaI've been offered a place at a university in Malaysia to study engineering! It's exciting – I'd improve my English, meet people from everywhere and maybe get a better job. But I'd be so far away from all of you, and the fees and living costs are high. They also have a scholarship that covers part of the fees if I keep my grades high. My best friend is going there too.Text 2: Advice from Ayesha's fatherOur local universities have good engineering departments, and Ayesha could live at home and save money. She is only eighteen. Later, for a master's degree, she could go abroad when she is more mature and knows exactly what she wants. Living abroad means paying rent, food and travel, and we would worry about her every day. Family support matters when studies become difficult.
- (a) Your cousin Ayesha has asked for your advice on whether she should study abroad or at home. Write an email to Ayesha giving your views.In your email you should:• evaluate the ideas and opinions in both texts• give your own views, with reasons, about where Ayesha should study.Base your email on what you have read in both texts, but use your own words.Begin your email: 'Dear Ayesha,'Write 250 to 350 words. [25]
Show answer
- (a) Ideas in the texts and how convincing they are:Text 1: improve English, international friends, better job – real benefits, last one uncertain.Text 1: far from family – emotional cost.Text 1: high fees and costs – serious practical issue.Text 2: good local universities – fair.Text 2: saving money by living at home – practical.Text 2: 'only eighteen' – protective, but many students go abroad at that age.Text 2: go abroad later for master's – sensible compromise.Content a strong answer could use:• Benefits: language, independence, wider experience• Job advantage not guaranteed• Cost and possible scholarships• Homesickness and family support• Local quality and option to go abroad later• Own view with friendly encouragementShort model opening: Dear Ayesha, congratulations on your offer – I've been thinking about your message all day and I want to help you decide.
Content (10 marks): 9–10 = ideas and opinions from BOTH texts are thoroughly evaluated (weighed, questioned, compared – e.g. pointing out what is unsupported, one-sided or realistic), and a clear, well-developed own view grows out of that evaluation; 7–8 = most main ideas from both texts evaluated with some development, and a clear own view; 5–6 = some evaluation, but uneven between the texts or stated rather than developed; own view given; 3–4 = mainly retells or lists ideas from the texts with little evaluation; own view thin or missing; 1–2 = a few relevant ideas, little grasp of the texts; 0 = nothing relevant.Credit any well-evaluated ideas such as those listed in the answer; an answer that uses only one text, or leaves out its own view, cannot go above 6.Quality of writing (15 marks): 13–15 = register exactly right for a cousin of about the same age (friendly but thoughtful); an email layout (a short subject line, a greeting and sign-off that suit the reader, a register matched to the relationship, short focused paragraphs); logical paragraphs with linking; precise, varied vocabulary and sentence structures; accurate spelling, grammar and punctuation; 10–12 = mostly fluent and accurate, register and form conventions largely right, clear paragraphs, some range of vocabulary and sentence types; 7–9 = generally clear, with errors that do not obscure meaning, register not always consistent, simple linking; 4–6 = frequent errors, limited vocabulary, weak organisation or the wrong register; 1–3 = errors often obscure meaning; little sense of audience or form.Lifting long phrases from the texts, or writing well under or over the word range, keeps an answer out of the top band.
Read Text 1 and Text 2, then answer the question.Text 1: Message from the football club coachFrom next month, training will move from 5 p.m. to 6:30 a.m. It's cooler in the morning, the ground is free and players will start school feeling energetic. At the moment the afternoon heat is over forty degrees, and two players felt dizzy last week. In the morning the grass is also softer and safer to play on.Text 2: Message in the team's group chat6:30 is far too early – some of us live forty minutes away and there's no bus at that time. We'll be tired all day in class. Couldn't we just train later in the evening when it's cooler, say 7 p.m., with the floodlights? Some of us also have early school lessons and would have to rush straight from training without breakfast. Evening training would let us go home, eat and do our homework first.
- (a) Your football club coach has asked players for their views on moving training to the early morning. Write an email to the coach.In your email you should:• evaluate the ideas and opinions in both texts• give your own views, with reasons, about the time of football training.Base your email on what you have read in both texts, but use your own words.Begin your email: 'Dear Coach,'Write 250 to 350 words. [25]
Show answer
- (a) Ideas in the texts and how convincing they are:Text 1: cooler mornings – sensible in hot weather.Text 1: ground is free – practical.Text 1: energetic at school – possible, but early starts could also tire students.Text 2: forty-minute journey, no early bus – strong practical problem.Text 2: tired in class – plausible.Text 2: 7 p.m. with floodlights – cooler too, but electricity costs not mentioned.Content a strong answer could use:• Heat and safety in afternoon training• Ground availability• Transport problems in the early morning• Tiredness and school performance• Evening floodlit option and its cost• Own view politely expressedShort model opening: Dear Coach, thank you for asking us what we think about the new training time; I've spoken to several teammates and would like to share our views.
Content (10 marks): 9–10 = ideas and opinions from BOTH texts are thoroughly evaluated (weighed, questioned, compared – e.g. pointing out what is unsupported, one-sided or realistic), and a clear, well-developed own view grows out of that evaluation; 7–8 = most main ideas from both texts evaluated with some development, and a clear own view; 5–6 = some evaluation, but uneven between the texts or stated rather than developed; own view given; 3–4 = mainly retells or lists ideas from the texts with little evaluation; own view thin or missing; 1–2 = a few relevant ideas, little grasp of the texts; 0 = nothing relevant.Credit any well-evaluated ideas such as those listed in the answer; an answer that uses only one text, or leaves out its own view, cannot go above 6.Quality of writing (15 marks): 13–15 = register exactly right for a club coach (polite and respectful); an email layout (a short subject line, a greeting and sign-off that suit the reader, a register matched to the relationship, short focused paragraphs); logical paragraphs with linking; precise, varied vocabulary and sentence structures; accurate spelling, grammar and punctuation; 10–12 = mostly fluent and accurate, register and form conventions largely right, clear paragraphs, some range of vocabulary and sentence types; 7–9 = generally clear, with errors that do not obscure meaning, register not always consistent, simple linking; 4–6 = frequent errors, limited vocabulary, weak organisation or the wrong register; 1–3 = errors often obscure meaning; little sense of audience or form.Lifting long phrases from the texts, or writing well under or over the word range, keeps an answer out of the top band.
Read Text 1 and Text 2, then answer the question.Text 1: Message from your friend BilalA group from the youth centre is going to the flooded villages for two weeks to rebuild homes and hand out food. I really want to join. These people have lost everything, and helping them matters more than anything I could learn in class. The organisers said they need more young people because the work is hard and there are not enough volunteers. I'd learn so much about real life there.Text 2: Message from Bilal's older sisterBilal's mock exams start in three weeks and he is already behind in chemistry. The volunteers' camp has poor sanitation, and he has no training. He could help just as much by collecting donations at home and volunteer properly in the summer holidays. Two volunteers became ill with stomach infections last month and had to come home early. The relief agencies also say they need trained people more than enthusiastic beginners.
- (a) Your friend Bilal is deciding whether to join a two-week flood-relief trip. Write an email to Bilal giving your views.In your email you should:• evaluate the ideas and opinions in both texts• give your own views, with reasons, about whether Bilal should join the flood-relief trip.Base your email on what you have read in both texts, but use your own words.Begin your email: 'Hi Bilal,'Write 250 to 350 words. [25]
Show answer
- (a) Ideas in the texts and how convincing they are:Text 1: helping people who lost everything – powerful moral reason.Text 1: 'matters more than class' – emotional, ignores long-term effect.Text 2: mock exams soon, behind in chemistry – practical worry.Text 2: poor sanitation, no training – real safety concern.Text 2: donations at home, volunteer later – sensible alternative, though less immediate.Content a strong answer could use:• Moral importance of helping flood victims• Untrained volunteers can sometimes add pressure on organisers• Health risks at the camp• Effect on mock exams and preparation• Alternatives: fund-raising, shorter trip, summer volunteering• Own view, honest but supportiveShort model opening: Hi Bilal, I can tell from your message how much you want to help, and honestly I admire you for it – but let me be the friend who asks the awkward questions.
Content (10 marks): 9–10 = ideas and opinions from BOTH texts are thoroughly evaluated (weighed, questioned, compared – e.g. pointing out what is unsupported, one-sided or realistic), and a clear, well-developed own view grows out of that evaluation; 7–8 = most main ideas from both texts evaluated with some development, and a clear own view; 5–6 = some evaluation, but uneven between the texts or stated rather than developed; own view given; 3–4 = mainly retells or lists ideas from the texts with little evaluation; own view thin or missing; 1–2 = a few relevant ideas, little grasp of the texts; 0 = nothing relevant.Credit any well-evaluated ideas such as those listed in the answer; an answer that uses only one text, or leaves out its own view, cannot go above 6.Quality of writing (15 marks): 13–15 = register exactly right for a close friend; an email layout (a short subject line, a greeting and sign-off that suit the reader, a register matched to the relationship, short focused paragraphs); logical paragraphs with linking; precise, varied vocabulary and sentence structures; accurate spelling, grammar and punctuation; 10–12 = mostly fluent and accurate, register and form conventions largely right, clear paragraphs, some range of vocabulary and sentence types; 7–9 = generally clear, with errors that do not obscure meaning, register not always consistent, simple linking; 4–6 = frequent errors, limited vocabulary, weak organisation or the wrong register; 1–3 = errors often obscure meaning; little sense of audience or form.Lifting long phrases from the texts, or writing well under or over the word range, keeps an answer out of the top band.
Read Text 1 and Text 2, then answer the question.Text 1: Message from your pen friend Wanjiru in NairobiThere's a stray puppy that sleeps outside our gate every night. I want to adopt it – it's so thin and frightened. A dog would also guard our house. My parents haven't said no yet, but they are not sure. I have always wanted a dog, and I promise I would feed it and walk it every day. It already follows me to school in the morning.Text 2: Advice from Wanjiru's motherA dog lives for twelve years or more. Wanjiru will go to university in two years – who will look after it then? Vet bills and food cost money, and stray dogs can carry diseases if they are not vaccinated. Perhaps she could feed it and call an animal shelter. Last year our neighbour adopted a puppy, became bored of it within months and left it tied up all day.
- (a) Your pen friend Wanjiru has asked what you think about adopting the stray puppy. Write an email to Wanjiru giving your views.In your email you should:• evaluate the ideas and opinions in both texts• give your own views, with reasons, about whether Wanjiru should adopt the stray puppy.Base your email on what you have read in both texts, but use your own words.Begin your email: 'Dear Wanjiru,'Write 250 to 350 words. [25]
Show answer
- (a) Ideas in the texts and how convincing they are:Text 1: puppy thin and frightened – emotional and caring.Text 1: dog as guard – practical benefit.Text 1: parents uncertain – shows a decision is needed.Text 2: long lifespan, university in two years – very practical.Text 2: costs of food and vet – realistic.Text 2: disease risk unless vaccinated – fair but solvable.Text 2: shelter option – responsible alternative.Content a strong answer could use:• Kindness and the puppy's welfare• Guarding the home• Long-term commitment and who cares for it later• Costs and vaccination• Shelter as an alternative• Own view, perhaps adopt only if the family agrees to take responsibilityShort model opening: Dear Wanjiru, I loved reading about your little visitor at the gate – I could almost picture him curled up there!
Content (10 marks): 9–10 = ideas and opinions from BOTH texts are thoroughly evaluated (weighed, questioned, compared – e.g. pointing out what is unsupported, one-sided or realistic), and a clear, well-developed own view grows out of that evaluation; 7–8 = most main ideas from both texts evaluated with some development, and a clear own view; 5–6 = some evaluation, but uneven between the texts or stated rather than developed; own view given; 3–4 = mainly retells or lists ideas from the texts with little evaluation; own view thin or missing; 1–2 = a few relevant ideas, little grasp of the texts; 0 = nothing relevant.Credit any well-evaluated ideas such as those listed in the answer; an answer that uses only one text, or leaves out its own view, cannot go above 6.Quality of writing (15 marks): 13–15 = register exactly right for a friend from another country; an email layout (a short subject line, a greeting and sign-off that suit the reader, a register matched to the relationship, short focused paragraphs); logical paragraphs with linking; precise, varied vocabulary and sentence structures; accurate spelling, grammar and punctuation; 10–12 = mostly fluent and accurate, register and form conventions largely right, clear paragraphs, some range of vocabulary and sentence types; 7–9 = generally clear, with errors that do not obscure meaning, register not always consistent, simple linking; 4–6 = frequent errors, limited vocabulary, weak organisation or the wrong register; 1–3 = errors often obscure meaning; little sense of audience or form.Lifting long phrases from the texts, or writing well under or over the word range, keeps an answer out of the top band.
Read Text 1 and Text 2, then answer the question.Text 1: Proposal from a student council memberWe should set up a recycling scheme: separate bins for paper, plastic and cans in every classroom, collected weekly by a recycling company that pays us for the material. The money could go towards a new water cooler. It would teach good habits that students take home. Recycling bins in classrooms would remind everyone, every day, that waste can be useful. Other schools in the city have already joined the scheme successfully.Text 2: Proposal from the gardening clubRecycling companies often send plastic abroad or burn it. A composting garden would turn food waste from the canteen into soil for vegetables, which students could grow and sell. It is cheaper, uses no lorries and lets students see the whole cycle with their own eyes. Our canteen throws away several sacks of food scraps every week. The garden would also give younger students a calm outdoor place to learn about science.
- (a) The student council can support only one of these projects this year. Write an email to the head of the student council giving your views.In your email you should:• evaluate the ideas and opinions in both texts• give your own views, with reasons, about which project the student council should support.Base your email on what you have read in both texts, but use your own words.Begin your email: 'Dear Head of the Student Council,'Write 250 to 350 words. [25]
Show answer
- (a) Ideas in the texts and how convincing they are:Text 1: separate bins, weekly collection – organised.Text 1: income for water cooler – attractive, but may be small.Text 1: habits taken home – plausible.Text 2: plastic sent abroad or burnt – a serious doubt about recycling, but general.Text 2: compost reduces food waste, grows vegetables – practical and visible.Text 2: cheaper, no lorries – environmental and financial.Text 2: only deals with food waste, not plastic – a limitation it doesn't mention.Content a strong answer could use:• Recycling tackles paper, plastic and cans; compost tackles food waste only• Doubts about where recycled plastic goes – check the company• Income from recycling may be small; vegetables could also be sold• Educational value: visible cycle in the garden• Space, smell, and who does the work• Own view; perhaps start one, plan the other next yearShort model opening: Dear Head of the Student Council, I am writing to share my views on the two environmental proposals, since I know the council must make a decision before the end of term.
Content (10 marks): 9–10 = ideas and opinions from BOTH texts are thoroughly evaluated (weighed, questioned, compared – e.g. pointing out what is unsupported, one-sided or realistic), and a clear, well-developed own view grows out of that evaluation; 7–8 = most main ideas from both texts evaluated with some development, and a clear own view; 5–6 = some evaluation, but uneven between the texts or stated rather than developed; own view given; 3–4 = mainly retells or lists ideas from the texts with little evaluation; own view thin or missing; 1–2 = a few relevant ideas, little grasp of the texts; 0 = nothing relevant.Credit any well-evaluated ideas such as those listed in the answer; an answer that uses only one text, or leaves out its own view, cannot go above 6.Quality of writing (15 marks): 13–15 = register exactly right for the head of the student council (polite, semi-formal); an email layout (a short subject line, a greeting and sign-off that suit the reader, a register matched to the relationship, short focused paragraphs); logical paragraphs with linking; precise, varied vocabulary and sentence structures; accurate spelling, grammar and punctuation; 10–12 = mostly fluent and accurate, register and form conventions largely right, clear paragraphs, some range of vocabulary and sentence types; 7–9 = generally clear, with errors that do not obscure meaning, register not always consistent, simple linking; 4–6 = frequent errors, limited vocabulary, weak organisation or the wrong register; 1–3 = errors often obscure meaning; little sense of audience or form.Lifting long phrases from the texts, or writing well under or over the word range, keeps an answer out of the top band.
Read Text 1 and Text 2, then answer the question.Text 1: Message from your auntYour uncle has been offered a job in Karachi with double his salary. In the city the children could go to better schools and the hospitals are closer. But we would leave our house, our land and the village where our families have lived for a hundred years. Your uncle says this chance may not come again. The children are excited about living in a big city, though they would miss their friends.Text 2: Comment from your grandfatherCity life is expensive: rent, transport, everything. The air is dirty and the children would play inside flats instead of in fields. Here everyone knows everyone and helps each other. Money is not everything. Your uncle could start a business here instead. Many young men from our village went to the city and now live in two rooms, working long hours and sending little money home. Your cousins would lose the freedom they have here.
- (a) Your aunt has asked for your opinion on whether the family should move from the village to the city. Write an email to your aunt giving your views.In your email you should:• evaluate the ideas and opinions in both texts• give your own views, with reasons, about whether your aunt's family should move to the city.Base your email on what you have read in both texts, but use your own words.Begin your email: 'Dear Aunty,'Write 250 to 350 words. [25]
Show answer
- (a) Ideas in the texts and how convincing they are:Text 1: double salary – important, but costs are higher.Text 1: better schools and closer hospitals – strong reasons for the children.Text 1: leaving home and history – emotional cost.Text 2: city expensive – may cancel out part of the salary gain.Text 2: pollution, children indoors – real quality-of-life concern.Text 2: close community – valuable.Text 2: start a business in the village – risky, no detail.Content a strong answer could use:• Salary increase versus higher living costs• Education and health care for the children• Loss of land, home and community• Pollution and space• The village business idea is uncertain• Own view, e.g. uncle goes first for a year, family decides after; keep the landShort model opening: Dear Aunty, thank you for trusting me with such an important question; I have read your message several times and thought carefully about what you and Dada have said.
Content (10 marks): 9–10 = ideas and opinions from BOTH texts are thoroughly evaluated (weighed, questioned, compared – e.g. pointing out what is unsupported, one-sided or realistic), and a clear, well-developed own view grows out of that evaluation; 7–8 = most main ideas from both texts evaluated with some development, and a clear own view; 5–6 = some evaluation, but uneven between the texts or stated rather than developed; own view given; 3–4 = mainly retells or lists ideas from the texts with little evaluation; own view thin or missing; 1–2 = a few relevant ideas, little grasp of the texts; 0 = nothing relevant.Credit any well-evaluated ideas such as those listed in the answer; an answer that uses only one text, or leaves out its own view, cannot go above 6.Quality of writing (15 marks): 13–15 = register exactly right for an older relative (warm but respectful); an email layout (a short subject line, a greeting and sign-off that suit the reader, a register matched to the relationship, short focused paragraphs); logical paragraphs with linking; precise, varied vocabulary and sentence structures; accurate spelling, grammar and punctuation; 10–12 = mostly fluent and accurate, register and form conventions largely right, clear paragraphs, some range of vocabulary and sentence types; 7–9 = generally clear, with errors that do not obscure meaning, register not always consistent, simple linking; 4–6 = frequent errors, limited vocabulary, weak organisation or the wrong register; 1–3 = errors often obscure meaning; little sense of audience or form.Lifting long phrases from the texts, or writing well under or over the word range, keeps an answer out of the top band.
Read Text 1 and Text 2, then answer the question.Text 1: Suggestion from a group of Grade 8 studentsThe empty plot behind the school could become a vegetable garden. Students would learn about plants, soil and healthy eating, and the canteen could use the vegetables. Working outdoors is relaxing and good for us. We have already asked a local farmer to give us seeds and advice. The garden could even win prizes at the district agricultural show.Text 2: Comment from the school caretakerGardens need watering every day, including in the long summer holidays when nobody is here. The plot floods in the monsoon. Tools and seeds cost money, and who will be responsible when the students lose interest after a few weeks? Last year a flower bed was planted near the gate, and within two months it was full of weeds because nobody looked after it.
- (a) Your principal has asked you to write a report on whether the empty plot behind the school should become a vegetable garden.In your report you should:• evaluate the ideas and opinions in both texts• give your own views, with reasons, about the proposed school garden.Base your report on what you have read in both texts, but use your own words.Begin your report: 'Report on the proposed school vegetable garden'Write 250 to 350 words. [25]
Show answer
- (a) Ideas in the texts and how convincing they are:Text 1: learning about plants and healthy eating – strong educational value.Text 1: canteen use – useful but depends on the harvest.Text 1: relaxing outdoor work – plausible.Text 2: daily watering, summer holidays – real practical problem.Text 2: monsoon flooding – important site issue.Text 2: costs – fair.Text 2: students lose interest – a reasonable doubt.Content a strong answer could use:• Educational and health benefits• Supply to canteen• Watering, especially in holidays – rota or drip irrigation• Flooding – raised beds or drainage• Costs – donations, selling produce• Responsibility – a gardening club with a teacher in charge• RecommendationShort model opening: Introduction: The purpose of this report is to consider whether the unused plot behind the school should be turned into a vegetable garden, taking into account the views of students and staff.
Content (10 marks): 9–10 = ideas and opinions from BOTH texts are thoroughly evaluated (weighed, questioned, compared – e.g. pointing out what is unsupported, one-sided or realistic), and a clear, well-developed own view grows out of that evaluation; 7–8 = most main ideas from both texts evaluated with some development, and a clear own view; 5–6 = some evaluation, but uneven between the texts or stated rather than developed; own view given; 3–4 = mainly retells or lists ideas from the texts with little evaluation; own view thin or missing; 1–2 = a few relevant ideas, little grasp of the texts; 0 = nothing relevant.Credit any well-evaluated ideas such as those listed in the answer; an answer that uses only one text, or leaves out its own view, cannot go above 6.Quality of writing (15 marks): 13–15 = register exactly right for a school principal; report conventions (a title, To / From / Date / Subject lines, an introduction stating the purpose, short headed sections, an impersonal and objective tone, numbered recommendations at the end); logical paragraphs with linking; precise, varied vocabulary and sentence structures; accurate spelling, grammar and punctuation; 10–12 = mostly fluent and accurate, register and form conventions largely right, clear paragraphs, some range of vocabulary and sentence types; 7–9 = generally clear, with errors that do not obscure meaning, register not always consistent, simple linking; 4–6 = frequent errors, limited vocabulary, weak organisation or the wrong register; 1–3 = errors often obscure meaning; little sense of audience or form.Lifting long phrases from the texts, or writing well under or over the word range, keeps an answer out of the top band.
Read Text 1 and Text 2, then answer the question.Text 1: Survey comment from a teenagerThere's nowhere for young people in our town to go in the evening except the market. A skate park and outdoor basketball court in the old bus depot would keep us active and off the streets. Other towns have them and they are always busy. A survey at our school found that most students would use a skate park at least once a week. Without one, some teenagers skate on busy roads instead.Text 2: Letter from a local councillorSkate parks attract noise late at night and can be dangerous – broken bones are common. The bus depot site could earn money as a market extension. A small number of teenagers would use it, while the whole town would benefit from more shops. The town has very little money, and the market extension would create jobs for local people. Residents near the depot have already complained about noise from the bus station.
- (a) The town council's youth committee has asked you to write a report on whether the old bus depot should become a skate park and basketball court.In your report you should:• evaluate the ideas and opinions in both texts• give your own views, with reasons, about the future of the old bus depot.Base your report on what you have read in both texts, but use your own words.Begin your report: 'Report on the proposed use of the old bus depot'Write 250 to 350 words. [25]
Show answer
- (a) Ideas in the texts and how convincing they are:Text 1: nowhere for young people – genuine need.Text 1: keeps teens active and safe – likely.Text 1: 'always busy' elsewhere – no evidence.Text 2: noise at night – fair, solvable with opening hours.Text 2: injuries – real but could be reduced with safety rules.Text 2: market brings money – practical.Text 2: 'small number' of users – assumption without evidence.Content a strong answer could use:• Need for safe leisure spaces for young people• Health and social benefits• Noise and opening hours• Injury risk and safety measures• Income from a market extension• Claims on both sides need evidence – survey of usage• RecommendationShort model opening: Introduction: This report, prepared for the youth committee, considers two competing proposals for the old bus depot and makes a recommendation.
Content (10 marks): 9–10 = ideas and opinions from BOTH texts are thoroughly evaluated (weighed, questioned, compared – e.g. pointing out what is unsupported, one-sided or realistic), and a clear, well-developed own view grows out of that evaluation; 7–8 = most main ideas from both texts evaluated with some development, and a clear own view; 5–6 = some evaluation, but uneven between the texts or stated rather than developed; own view given; 3–4 = mainly retells or lists ideas from the texts with little evaluation; own view thin or missing; 1–2 = a few relevant ideas, little grasp of the texts; 0 = nothing relevant.Credit any well-evaluated ideas such as those listed in the answer; an answer that uses only one text, or leaves out its own view, cannot go above 6.Quality of writing (15 marks): 13–15 = register exactly right for a council youth committee; report conventions (a title, To / From / Date / Subject lines, an introduction stating the purpose, short headed sections, an impersonal and objective tone, numbered recommendations at the end); logical paragraphs with linking; precise, varied vocabulary and sentence structures; accurate spelling, grammar and punctuation; 10–12 = mostly fluent and accurate, register and form conventions largely right, clear paragraphs, some range of vocabulary and sentence types; 7–9 = generally clear, with errors that do not obscure meaning, register not always consistent, simple linking; 4–6 = frequent errors, limited vocabulary, weak organisation or the wrong register; 1–3 = errors often obscure meaning; little sense of audience or form.Lifting long phrases from the texts, or writing well under or over the word range, keeps an answer out of the top band.
Read Text 1 and Text 2, then answer the question.Text 1: Feedback from a student who went on the tripThe visit to the solar power plant was the best trip I have been on. The engineers explained how sunlight becomes electricity, and seeing the huge panels made physics feel real. Several of us now want to study engineering. I had never seen anything like it. It was the first time I understood what our textbook means by renewable energy.Text 2: Feedback from a teacher who supervisedThe bus journey took four hours each way, leaving only ninety minutes at the plant. Many students were tired and hot, and the engineers spoke in technical language that younger students could not follow. The cost per student was high. A virtual tour and a visiting speaker might achieve much of the same at a fraction of the cost. In my opinion the visit could still be worthwhile, but only if it is planned very differently.
- (a) The head of science has asked you to write a report on whether the trip to the solar power plant should be repeated next year.In your report you should:• evaluate the ideas and opinions in both texts• give your own views, with reasons, about whether the trip should be repeated.Base your report on what you have read in both texts, but use your own words.Begin your report: 'Report on the visit to the solar power plant'Write 250 to 350 words. [25]
Show answer
- (a) Ideas in the texts and how convincing they are:Text 1: engineers' explanations, physics made real – strong learning value.Text 1: students now want engineering careers – inspiring but a small group.Text 2: eight hours of travel for ninety minutes' visit – striking imbalance.Text 2: heat and tiredness – reduces learning.Text 2: technical language too hard for younger students – suggests targeting older students.Text 2: high cost; virtual tour cheaper – sensible, but less memorable.Content a strong answer could use:• Learning value and inspiration• Travel time versus time at plant• Comfort and timing (season, start time)• Suitability for age group• Cost and possible alternatives• Recommendation, e.g. repeat for older students only, cooler month, briefed engineers; virtual tour for youngerShort model opening: Introduction: This report evaluates the recent visit to the solar power plant, drawing on feedback from students and staff, and recommends whether it should be repeated.
Content (10 marks): 9–10 = ideas and opinions from BOTH texts are thoroughly evaluated (weighed, questioned, compared – e.g. pointing out what is unsupported, one-sided or realistic), and a clear, well-developed own view grows out of that evaluation; 7–8 = most main ideas from both texts evaluated with some development, and a clear own view; 5–6 = some evaluation, but uneven between the texts or stated rather than developed; own view given; 3–4 = mainly retells or lists ideas from the texts with little evaluation; own view thin or missing; 1–2 = a few relevant ideas, little grasp of the texts; 0 = nothing relevant.Credit any well-evaluated ideas such as those listed in the answer; an answer that uses only one text, or leaves out its own view, cannot go above 6.Quality of writing (15 marks): 13–15 = register exactly right for a head of department; report conventions (a title, To / From / Date / Subject lines, an introduction stating the purpose, short headed sections, an impersonal and objective tone, numbered recommendations at the end); logical paragraphs with linking; precise, varied vocabulary and sentence structures; accurate spelling, grammar and punctuation; 10–12 = mostly fluent and accurate, register and form conventions largely right, clear paragraphs, some range of vocabulary and sentence types; 7–9 = generally clear, with errors that do not obscure meaning, register not always consistent, simple linking; 4–6 = frequent errors, limited vocabulary, weak organisation or the wrong register; 1–3 = errors often obscure meaning; little sense of audience or form.Lifting long phrases from the texts, or writing well under or over the word range, keeps an answer out of the top band.
Read Text 1 and Text 2, then answer the question.Text 1: Leaflet from the residents' water committeeOur neighbourhood's water supply runs dry most afternoons in summer. If every household fitted low-flow taps, fixed leaks and reused washing water on plants, we could save a third of our water. A small fine for washing cars with a hosepipe would make people take it seriously. Saving water is everybody's responsibility, and small changes add up when hundreds of homes take part.Text 2: Letter from a residentOrdinary families are already careful. The real waste comes from leaking municipal pipes and from a few large houses that fill swimming pools. Fines would only anger people. The committee should press the water board to repair the mains and install meters, so that big users pay more. The broken pipe on Canal Road has been leaking for three months, and nobody from the water board has come to repair it.
- (a) The residents' committee has asked you to write a report on how the neighbourhood should deal with its water shortage.In your report you should:• evaluate the ideas and opinions in both texts• give your own views, with reasons, about how the neighbourhood should deal with its water shortage.Base your report on what you have read in both texts, but use your own words.Begin your report: 'Report on water saving in the neighbourhood'Write 250 to 350 words. [25]
Show answer
- (a) Ideas in the texts and how convincing they are:Text 1: low-flow taps, fixing leaks, reusing water – practical household actions.Text 1: 'save a third' – a figure without a source.Text 1: fines for hosepipes – may work but unpopular.Text 2: families already careful – generalisation.Text 2: leaking mains and swimming pools – shifts blame, may be true.Text 2: fines anger people – plausible.Text 2: repair mains, install meters – fairer, but slower and outside residents' control.Content a strong answer could use:• Household savings are quick and cheap• Claimed savings need evidence• Fines may be unpopular; education campaign first• Mains leaks and large users may be the bigger problem• Meters make big users pay; depends on the water board• Recommendations combining short-term household action and long-term pressure on the water boardShort model opening: Introduction: The purpose of this report is to consider proposals for reducing the summer water shortage in our neighbourhood and to recommend a course of action.
Content (10 marks): 9–10 = ideas and opinions from BOTH texts are thoroughly evaluated (weighed, questioned, compared – e.g. pointing out what is unsupported, one-sided or realistic), and a clear, well-developed own view grows out of that evaluation; 7–8 = most main ideas from both texts evaluated with some development, and a clear own view; 5–6 = some evaluation, but uneven between the texts or stated rather than developed; own view given; 3–4 = mainly retells or lists ideas from the texts with little evaluation; own view thin or missing; 1–2 = a few relevant ideas, little grasp of the texts; 0 = nothing relevant.Credit any well-evaluated ideas such as those listed in the answer; an answer that uses only one text, or leaves out its own view, cannot go above 6.Quality of writing (15 marks): 13–15 = register exactly right for a residents' committee; report conventions (a title, To / From / Date / Subject lines, an introduction stating the purpose, short headed sections, an impersonal and objective tone, numbered recommendations at the end); logical paragraphs with linking; precise, varied vocabulary and sentence structures; accurate spelling, grammar and punctuation; 10–12 = mostly fluent and accurate, register and form conventions largely right, clear paragraphs, some range of vocabulary and sentence types; 7–9 = generally clear, with errors that do not obscure meaning, register not always consistent, simple linking; 4–6 = frequent errors, limited vocabulary, weak organisation or the wrong register; 1–3 = errors often obscure meaning; little sense of audience or form.Lifting long phrases from the texts, or writing well under or over the word range, keeps an answer out of the top band.
