This question is worth 25% of paper 1! It really is worth practising this one. Questions 2 and 3 combined are only worth 20%. Combined…
The Mr Salles Method for Question 4
State whether or not you agree with the statement. (It is easiest to mostly agree)*.
Give 20 explanations which show how the examples make us think or feel or predict that the statement is mostly correct.
Give up to 20 examples. (Often you will be able to give more than one explanation from one quotation, so you can get away with far fewer examples).
Write each example and explanation in one sentence, not a PEE paragraph. PEE paragraphs stop you giving enough explanations and getting enough points. They take too long.
Just say what the writer is doing. Only name a technique if you know it. “Imagery” or “emphasises” or "contrasts” scores just as highly as “imperative verb” or “asyndetic list”. You don’t need to be fancy, just make sense. You don’t need to go looking for techniques, as everything will be “imagery” or used to “emphasise”. And the same, bog standard techniques will always come up, “simile, metaphor, personification, alliteration and sibilance”.
Use words like perhaps, might, could, may, however to show that you are evaluating.
*Later on you will see that only partially agreeing makes it easy to get extra marks, even if you don’t have enough points.
We can summarise the method in one sentence:
Write 20 points, including words like perhaps, might, could, may, however to explain what each one makes us think, feel or predict.
(You will notice others in bold italic which also evaluate, but these are the main ones).
Here is an answer worth 13 marks.
13 is the top of a grade 6.
14 is grade 7
15 is grade 8
16-20 is a grade 9.
What does that tell you? Getting a grade 9 is tough. Why? Because students don’t write enough.
Whey don’t they write enough? Because they are told to write something like 4 chunky paragraphs about X number of quotes. Teachers don’t know how many words, how many quotes or, more importantly, how many explanations.
Where does my method come from?
I’ve read hundreds of answers marked by senior examiners. I’ve written hundreds of answers. I’ve put them in guides. And now, I’m putting together a course on the language papers. I’ll let you all know when they are good to go.
So, my method works backwards from seeing what works at every grade. That takes out the guesswork.
The following answers come from my Guide to Question 4.
This What a 13 Mark Answer Looks Like
I partly agree with the statement as the dog is described as an imaginary character. It “had a bizarre coat: a skin dappled in grey and blue, and splotches of white, like a child’s painting”. We can infer from this that, like a painting, the dog could be a figure from make believe. The “bizarre” description of the dog’s colours also suggests that the dog could be magical, like a Disney cartoon come to life.
The dog is compared to a grandfather, “like an old man or a grandfather on a rocking chair, a calm, constant presence that fills a child with confidence.” This seems very unlikely. It also suggests that Robert is over imaginative. We can also see that his imagination is too powerful when “Robert had seen wisdom in the hound’s anxious glance” which seems too human to be a description of a real dog.
We can also imagine that the dog is supernatural because his children don’t seem to notice the huge dog. Or this could mean that the dog is just a part of Robert’s imagination. “The hound stole a glance at the house, a sudden, secretive check, as though scared of seeing someone in the upstairs windows watching”, which suggests that the dog is too human to be a real dog. Also the “wisdom in the hound’s anxious glance” is too intelligent for a dog, which makes us think that the dog is not really there. Robert notices that the dog is chewing a rag doll that “looked very much like Lara”. This suggests that the dog is just a projection of Robert’s fears for his daughter.
The sudden disappearance of the dog, “the giant hound was nowhere to be seen” also suggests that the dog was never there. Robert tried to move quickly to put on his shoes but the dog still vanished in that time. This makes Robert wonder if the dog was ever even there.
323 words
8 quotes
(The bold words which aren’t quotes are the ones which show the examiner you are evaluating).
How Do You Mark It?
The mark scheme says:
Perceptive, detailed evaluation 16-20 marks
Clear, relevant evaluation 11-15 marks
Some evaluation 6-10 marks
Some limited comment 1-5 marks
Personally, I found some parts of it pretty perceptive. The first paragraph, for example, I found very convincing.
The idea that a character would psychologically project their fears is also pretty sophisticated, “Robert notices that the dog is chewing a rag doll that “looked very much like Lara”. This suggests that the dog is just a projection of Robert’s fears for his daughter.”
But the senior examiner says, “tough, it is only an average ‘clear and relevant’ evaluation.”
Now, when you are in the exam, how do you know when you have written enough for 14 marks, for a grade 7? Impossible I’d say.
But what if I set those paragraphs out as separate explanations, and numbered them so I could tell when I had reached 14?
The Mr Salles Method in Action
(Each explanation is in italics)
I partly agree with the statement as the dog is described as an imaginary character. It “had a bizarre coat: a skin dappled in grey and blue, and splotches of white, like a child’s painting”.
We can infer from this that, like a painting, the dog could be a figure from make believe.
The “bizarre” description of the dog’s colours also suggests that the dog could be magical, like a Disney cartoon come to life.
The dog is compared to a grandfather, “like an old man or a grandfather on a rocking chair, a calm, constant presence that fills a child with confidence.” This seems very unlikely.
It also suggests that Robert is over imaginative.
We can also see that his imagination is too powerful when “Robert had seen wisdom in the hound’s anxious glance” which seems too human to be a description of a real dog.
We can also imagine that the dog is supernatural because his children don’t seem to notice the huge dog.
Or this could mean that the dog is just a part of Robert’s imagination.
“The hound stole a glance at the house, a sudden, secretive check, as though scared of seeing someone in the upstairs windows watching”, which suggests that the dog is too human to be a real dog.
Also the “wisdom in the hound’s anxious glance” is too intelligent for a dog, which makes us think that the dog is not really there.
Robert notices that the dog is chewing a rag doll that “looked very much like Lara”. This suggests that the dog is just a projection of Robert’s fears for his daughter.
The sudden disappearance of the dog, “the giant hound was nowhere to be seen” also suggests that the dog was never there.
Robert tried to move quickly to put on his shoes but the dog still vanished in that time. This makes Robert wonder if the dog was ever even there.
13 marks
My Commentary
There are 13 explanations and so there are 13 marks!
Clear, relevant evaluation 11-15 marks
Now I know I can’t get a grade 7. There are only 13 explanations. However, the examiner also knows that they have to give 13 marks.
They knew that anyway, though, didn’t they?
Grading is a Con
No. AQA allows a ‘tolerance’ of 10%. What that means is this:
Senior examiner gives it 13. But 10% of 20 marks is 2 marks.
So another examiner can come along and give the same answer 11, or 12, or 13 - the correct score - or 14, or 15. And AQA will accept all those scores. For real.
You can ask for a remark, and AQA will say, “sorry, Ofqual will back us up, we won’t change your mark.”
“There is often no single, correct mark for a question. In long, extended or essay-type questions it is possible for two examiners to give different but appropriate marks to the same answer. There is nothing wrong or unusual about that. Original marks that are appropriate for an individual answer will stand – they should not be changed.”
Like I said, a con!
So, the only way I can see to force the examiner to give you the right grade is the method I’ve shown you.
Paid subscribers can see my full mark answer, 20 out of 20.
Here’s the question of you want to try it yourself first:
Adapted From Language Paper 1 November 2020
Question 4
Focus this part of your answer on the second part of the source, from line 23 to the end.
A student said, “the disappearance of the giant hound was not a surprise. The writer made it obvious that Robert had imagined the dog, so it was never there.”
To what extent do you agree?
In your response, you could:
- consider the disappearance of the giant hound
- evaluate how the writer presents the giant hound
- support your response with references to the text.
[20 marks]
Here’s the Extract from my Guide
Source A
21st Century prose-fiction
Based on a novel: The Silk Factory by Judith Allnatt
This extract is from the beginning of a novel. It is set in a house next to an old cotton mill, built in in 1800s. Robert, his daughter Lara and his son Dan, have just moved in.
On his first morning in his new home Robert saw the eerie hound. In the kitchen, mechanically washing up, Robert was dispirited by the list of chores still waiting to be done. Exhausted after last night’s hours in the car from Manchester, he glanced absently at the enclosed wild field which Dan and Lara were enjoying. He noticed them playing.
The kitchen window was stained glass in parts, so their figures, the lines of the wall and the trees were slightly blurred. Dan was absorbed by a hole that Robert had dug for him, exploring for ants and beetles and worms he would pick out with grubby fingers, and Lara was toddling between bushes trying to find butterflies with an old, delicate net.
Beyond the stained window, Robert observed his children shimmer, as though he was seeing them underwater. He relaxed, grateful for this chance to recover from the anxieties of the last week. He shut his eyes, and sank his hands into the soothing dough he was making. But when he looked up, a giant hound sat in the field.
Robert had carried out a brief assessment of the strange field, then allowed the kids to enter it. The far end of the field was an unkempt jungle, a jumble of bushes and forest. A majestic oak dominated this patch. Its ancient, twisting branches bent to the grass, like a monstrous arthritic fist knuckling the ground. The watery sunlight lay on the horizon and the malformed oak sent twisting shadows over the struggling plants it caged. The body of the oak was choked with strangling ivies twisting around the shattered brickwork and cracked masonry, smothering it. A track leading to the wall at the end of the field, which separated it from the countryside, was smothered by a profusion of weeds and blackthorn until it met a chained gate.
(The bold text is the part you are allowed to quote from in your answer)
Now a black beast, a mastiff, squatted by a blackberry bush against the wall. Its back was turned to Robert and it bent over something that might be a rag doll. Lara appeared to ignore this hound and carried on searching for butterflies. Robert shifted to see through a clearer pane. From its size, the dog might be a mature male, but he also looked hunched, and this made it appear ready to strike. It wore a red, studded collar and had a bizarre coat: a skin dappled in grey and blue, and splotches of white, like a child’s painting.
However had it got into the field? Perhaps from next door? But how had it climbed the wall? It was high, much too high even for this beast to jump, surely.
The hound stole a glance at the house, a sudden, secretive check, as though scared of seeing someone in the upstairs windows watching. Robert noticed the dog’s anxious expression before it bent down and picked up the rag doll with glistening fangs. He noticed that the doll looked very much like Lara. There was something unlikely about the way it moved: slow, like an old man or a grandfather on a rocking chair, a calm, constant presence that fills a child with confidence.
Something was definitely odd about it. Robert had seen wisdom in the hound’s anxious glance. Quickly, Robert grabbed his shoes with nervous hands and put them on. He breathed, wanting to approach slowly, so as not to frighten the beast. He would smile and try to reach for the collar. Perhaps he could lead the dog to the gate before it noticed his children.
But when he reached the field, the giant hound was nowhere to be seen.
Give it a go!
Grade 9 Full Mark Answer
I mostly agree with the student’s statement.
Describing the dog as “a black beast” rather than a dog suggests that it is an imaginary character.
Although the dog feels real to Robert, he feels it is chewing something which “might be a rag doll”. This implies that even he is not sure if he should trust his vision.
Next Lara “appeared to ignore this hound” even though Robert sees it as a “beast”. This implies that it is very unlikely that the dog is actually there, as Lara couldn’t be expected to ignore it if it were real.
The physical description of the dog also makes it appear unrealistic, like a cartoon, or a “child’s painting”.
This appears to be a strong hint that the dog is a figment of his imagination.
Robert also can’t be sure that the dog is real, because he is looking through a stained glass window and therefore looks for a “clearer pane”.
We can infer that the dog is produced by Robert’s fear and earlier “anxieties” because he immediately imagines that it is “ready to strike”.
Another clue that this is probably his imagination is what happens in reality. The dog doesn’t actually strike and his children are unharmed.
His own thoughts also imply that it might be impossible for such a huge dog to climb the fence into the field, “It was high, much too high even for this beast to jump, surely.”
The dog also seems to reflect Robert’s own feelings of anxiety, so he noticed “the dog’s anxious expression”.
This implies it is probably a projection of his own fears for his children.
The dog is also playing with “a rag doll”, which is also unlikely and therefore probably imaginary.
The description that the doll looks “very much like Lara” also implies that this is a projection of Robert’s fears, rather than a real dog chewing on a real doll.
The dog also appears to leave the doll intact, even though Robert sees that it has “glistening fangs”, whereas such a dog, if real, would probably destroy it.
The writer points out that instead of terrifying a child through its giant appearance, it has a “presence that fills a child with confidence”. This appears unlikely.
This continues with the unlikely idea that the dog has “wisdom”. These descriptions are much more like a human than a real dog.
This does open up an alternative idea, that the dog may be supernatural. This would explain its strange intelligence, and its ability to suddenly appear.
The convention that not all the characters can see a ghost is also well known in literature, at least since the ghosts in A Christmas Carol.
The dog vanishes in the short time between Robert seeing it and going outside. The speed of this suggests that it was never actually there.
However, this fact backs up both interpretations, meaning that the dog may be an imaginary embodiment of his fears, or may be a supernatural presence.
My Commentary
Point 1 states a partial agreement, but scores no marks on its own.
Points 2-21 all include an explanation, and all score 1 mark each.
Exam boards are supposed to ensure that each question has the same level of difficulty each year. Yet I could not easily find more points to add to this answer. It suggests that this is a harder question to get full marks in than other papers.
That’s why, for every paper I’ve looked at, I’ve only found one 20/20 mark answer published by the exam board.
Hi Claudia,
That is confusing, I agree. Examples are 'convention, character, interpretation, description' ... terminology simply means the language you need to use tow write about a text.
This is the problem with jargon filled criteria - it is difficult to apply. But, when you see grade 9 answers, that's what you find.
This is really useful, as always, but what about techniques? One of the success criteria for AO2: Explain, comment on and analyse how writers use language and structure to achieve effects and influence readers, using relevant subject terminology to support their views.
Where is the subject terminology related to language and structure in the Grade 9 example?