Beruflich Dokumente
Kultur Dokumente
We invite you to complete our survey by visiting the website below. Your comments on the
quality and relevance of Cambridge Curriculum Support resources are very important to us.
https://www.surveymonkey.co.uk/r/GL6ZNJB
Do you want to become a Cambridge consultant and help us develop support materials?
http://www.cie.org.uk/cambridge-for/teachers/teacherconsultants/
Cambridge International Examinations retains the copyright on all its publications. Registered Centres are
permitted to copy material from this booklet for their own internal use. However, we cannot give permission
to Centres to photocopy any material that is acknowledged to a third party even for internal use within a
Centre.
Introduction ........................................................................................................................ 2
Introduction
The main aim of this booklet is to exemplify standards for those teaching Cambridge IGCSE English as a
Second Language (0511), and to show how different levels of candidates’ performance (high, middle and
low) relate to the subject’s curriculum and assessment objectives.
In this booklet a range of candidate responses has been chosen as far as possible to exemplify middle and
low level responses for Paper 1 (core), and high, middle and low level responses for Paper 2 (extended).
Each response is accompanied by a brief commentary explaining the strengths and weaknesses of the
answers.
For ease of reference the following format for each component has been adopted:
Question
Mark scheme
Example candidate
response
Examiner comment
Each question is followed by an extract of the mark scheme used by examiners. This, in turn, is followed by
examples of marked candidate responses, each with an examiner comment on performance. Comments are
given to indicate where and why marks were awarded, and how additional marks could have been obtained.
In this way, it is possible to understand what candidates have done to gain their marks and what they still
have to do to improve their marks.
This document illustrates the standard of candidate work for those parts of the assessment which help
teachers assess what is required to achieve marks beyond what should be clear from the mark scheme.
Some question types where the answer is clear from the mark scheme, such as short answers and multiple
choice, have therefore been omitted.
Past papers, Examiner Reports and other teacher support materials are available on Teacher Support at
https://teachers.cie.org.uk
Assessment at a glance
Teachers are reminded that the latest syllabus is available on our public website at www.cie.org.uk and
Teacher Support at https://teachers.cie.org.uk
Exercise 1
Exercise 1, continued
Mark scheme
Exercise 2
Exercise 2, continued
Mark scheme
There is always one question in this exercise which tests the candidate’s ability to interpret the details in a
chart or diagram. This candidate has responded well and provided the correct information concisely.
In (a), the ‘role’ of Neil Armstrong in the mission has not been understood and this simple description of what
he did on 21 July could not be awarded the mark. The key word ‘When’ was well identified in (b), but it is the
specific point in the mission that is required for the answer, not the point in historical time. Question (c)
requires the candidate to connect the ‘benefit of the bigger command module’ in the question with an
‘advantage’ in the text, and list the benefits to the astronauts, for example, the fact that ‘they could move
around easily’ or ‘none of them suffered injuries’. Only one of the two details needed for the mark in (f) was
found, with the second part of the answer providing another indication that comprehension is not secure. The
question about the graph (h) has been well understood and the answer clearly specified. In (k), this
candidate has found the key words ‘job ... flying’ and located the correct part of the text, but has overlooked
the important element in the question, his ‘last job’ Although the biographical details the candidate has
chosen are correct, they do not relate specifically to his ‘last job’ and so cannot be awarded the mark.
Exercise 3
Exercise 3, continued
Mark scheme
In Section A all the responses are correct: this candidate has chosen to write the name and address in
capital letters, which has made them easy to read. It is not essential to write these details in this way, but if
lower case letters are used, the distinction between capitals and small letters must be clear. The elements of
the address have been written in the order that they occur in the text, and the date has been accurately
transcribed.
In Section B, the details of the visit have been well attempted. The candidate has recognised that the specific
detail of the time of the visit, ‘evening’, is a necessary part of this item, and has accurately chosen the
responses to circle and delete. This candidate has made one error by ticking ‘friends’ instead of ‘newspaper’,
but overall this is a creditable attempt at a clear and easy-to-read response.
Section C:
To be successful in this section of Exercise 3, candidates must write two sentences, one in response to each
question. Each sentence can be awarded a maximum of two marks, giving a possible total of four marks.
Marks are awarded for complete accuracy of sentence construction, grammar, spelling and punctuation. This
candidate has chosen to separate the two sentences by drawing a line between them.
First sentence: the candidate has chosen the right detail which answers the question and has written a
complete sentence, starting with a capital letter and ending with a full stop. There is one grammatical error in
the first verb in an otherwise correct sentence. The candidate was awarded one mark out of a possible two
marks for this sentence.
Second sentence: the candidate has also found the right detail from the text in answer to this question. It has
been written as a complete sentence, with a capital letter at the start and a full stop at the end. There are two
grammatical errors in this sentence: ‘it’s was’ and one incorrect preposition, ‘on’ instead of ‘in’. One mark
was awarded for this sentence.
Sections A and B:
The key to success in this exercise is complete accuracy in all aspects of the task, whether it is in selecting
the correct detail, using the correct grammar and spelling, or following the instructions correctly. A further
requirement is for the candidate’s handwriting to be clear and legible.
In Section A, the candidate has written very clearly and legibly. The candidate has used capital letters for
proper nouns, and spelt the address and the date correctly. This candidate has made one error by including
the preposition ‘in’ as part of the address. Candidates should be aware that they must not include the
prepositions ‘in’ or ‘at’ when transcribing the address.
In Section B, this candidate has found providing details of the visit more challenging and has been awarded
two out of a possible six marks. The number in the group includes only Rebecca’s friends as the candidate
has omitted to include Rebecca herself. Without the specific detail ‘evening’, the mark could not be awarded
for this item. The detail of the waiter’s name has been correctly identified and the candidate has correctly
circled the words ‘Very good’ in response to the opinion item. Candidates should be aware that when asked
to enter a tick in a box, a cross is not a suitable alternative and the mark will not be awarded. Similarly, in the
last item in Section B, it is clear that the friends would like to visit the cafe again, but the instruction to delete
has not been followed, and the mark cannot be awarded.
Section C:
To be successful in this section of Exercise 3, candidates must write two sentences, one in response to each
question. Each sentence can be awarded a maximum of two marks, giving a possible total of four marks for
Section C. Marks are awarded for complete accuracy of sentence construction, grammar, spelling and
punctuation.
First sentence: the candidate has chosen the right detail which answers the question and has written a
complete sentence, starting with a capital letter and ending with a full stop. There is one grammatical error in
the failure to use the plural ‘cakes’ in an otherwise correct sentence. The candidate was awarded one mark
out of a possible two marks for this sentence.
Second sentence: the information required here is that the friends found the café noisy. The information
given by this candidate is not specific enough. Although the sentence is grammatically accurate no mark was
awarded.
Exercise 4
Exercise 4, continued
Mark scheme
First heading: the candidate has followed the example given and the first answer is correct. The second
response needs to be more precise and include the detail of ‘Nicoya peninsula’.
Second heading: the candidate has been successful in all three answers. In each case the candidate has
written more than the required details; however all the information is correct and marks can be awarded. For
the third point in this section the candidate needs to remember that a full sentence is not needed and a brief
answer can achieve the mark.
Third heading: The candidate has supplied incorrect information for the first point as the response has no
connection with the heading ‘Ideas introduced’. For the second point, the candidate has attempted to include
three separate details. The first idea on the line, ‘public garden’ is correct and can be awarded the mark.
Candidates should be advised that in cases where several ideas are written on the same line, only the first
will receive attention. In the case of this candidate, if the answer had been written in a different order, for
example, ‘nature and trail around its lake and public garden’, no mark would have been awarded, as ‘nature
and trail’ are not accurate according to the mark scheme.
First heading: the candidate has attempted to follow the example provided, but has supplied a particular
example of someone living in a ‘blue zone area’ rather than highlighting the key idea. No mark was awarded
in this first section.
Second heading: the candidate has managed to find two lifestyle characteristics in this section, but the mark
has not been awarded for the first point as this is a general introductory point rather than a specific common
characteristic.
Third heading: the candidate has correctly identified the two points which fit the heading. However, the mark
has not been awarded for the second detail as the incorrect spelling of the word ‘trail’ cannot be credited.
Exercise 5
Mark scheme
Exercise 6
Mark scheme
Language: the language is generally secure and the meaning is clear. There is a variety of linguistic
complexity and sentence length and there is a natural flow to the writing. The errors are infrequent and
communication is assured. Higher marks could have been awarded if the candidate had provided structure
to the writing through the use of paragraphs. Candidates are advised that in this exercise the use of
paragraphing creates an effective framework in which the main ideas can be developed.
Language: the candidate has provided a clearly defined structure to the writing by using one paragraph for
each main point, and, in combination with an opening sentence and a closing paragraph, this gives a sense
of balance to the piece. There are frequent errors with tenses, prepositions and spelling, to the extent that at
times the meaning is unclear. With greater accuracy of language, this candidate could achieve higher marks.
Exercise 7
Mark scheme
Content: the candidate has used the four written prompts to provide a platform for their argument, but has
not relied entirely on these ideas. For example, the candidate develops the idea of ‘having choices to do
what you want’ to include examples of these choices, such as ‘travel, buying clothes and accessories’. A
further development can be seen in the use of the candidate’s own ideas, for example, that you are
‘respected more if you have money’ and that you ‘make friends more easily’. On the other side of the
argument, the candidate has relied more closely on the prompts provided, but has also attempted to
introduce an original idea: ‘rich people’s friends are fake’.
Language: this is a well-structured piece of writing, with an introduction, a conclusion and two middle
paragraphs, one for each side of the topic. Each paragraph is clearly signposted with the writer’s intention,
‘Nowadays …’, ‘First of all …’, ‘On the other hand …’ and ‘All in all …’, which enables the reader to follow the
progress of the argument. The language is generally secure and the meaning is clear. Any errors do not
prevent communication of the message.
This is a satisfactory piece of writing. Marks in the higher band could have been awarded if the candidate
had focused more on their own ideas and developed these at greater length.
Content: this candidate has relied on the four prompts to supply the entire focus of their writing. The ideas in
the prompts have been copied and not extended or developed in any way, and there are no original thoughts
until the conclusion. If candidates need to rely on the prompts as the key element in their writing, they should
always try to rewrite them in their own words and provide examples to develop their ideas.
Language: there is a satisfactory paragraph structure to this writing; the candidate shows good writing skills
in the use of an introduction, a conclusion and two central paragraphs, one for each side of the argument.
The writer’s intention in each paragraph is clearly signposted: ‘In this day and age ...’, ‘On the one hand ...’,
‘On the other hand ...’ and ‘Finally ...’. However, the candidate has used idiomatic phrases, such as ‘you
cannot deny’, ‘there are two sides to every coin’, ‘shedding light on the above’, to such an extent that at
times the message is obscured and the meaning is unclear.
This is not an entirely satisfactory response to the exercise. Higher marks could have been awarded if the
good ideas presented in the conclusion, ‘it’s about being yourself’ and ‘You have to give and get love back’,
had appeared as a central part of this candidate’s argument.
Exercise 1
Exercise 1, continued
Mark scheme
The candidate attempted the whole exercise very well, selecting and copying correct details from the text.
The examination technique was very good; for example, the answers were concise, in particular the one or
two word responses to questions (d) and (f). The candidate used two lines, one for each answer, to separate
the two details required in questions (g) and (h). Spelling was very accurate and the error ‘Depatment’ in
question (i) was tolerated because the meaning was conveyed. There was one incorrect response; for
question (b) the candidate should have read the whole sentence in the text more carefully because the key
detail was in the subordinate clause in the second part of the sentence.
The candidate made a satisfactory attempt to select and copy correct details from the text. The examination
technique was very good; for example in questions (a) and (e) to (h), the answers were commendably brief
and included the correct key words. For questions (g) and (h), the candidate used two lines, one for each
answer, to separate the two details required. Spelling was very accurate but there were three incorrect
responses. For question (b), the candidate should have read the whole sentence in the text because the key
detail was in the subordinate clause in the second part of the sentence. For question (d), if the candidate had
checked their answer against the question, they might have realised that their incorrect wording conveyed
the idea that the diet of the hornbills was the ‘largest fruit-eating birds’. For both questions (d) and (i), the
candidate was not precise nor brief enough.
The candidate made an attempt to select and copy correct details from the text. The examination technique
in the five correct answers was very good, with brief responses that included the correct key words. For
questions (g) and (h), the candidate used two lines, one for each answer, to separate the two details
required. There were four incorrect responses. For questions (b) and (c), the candidate selected information
from the wrong parts of the text. For (e), the candidate overlooked the key word ‘where’ in the question. For
the final question, the candidate was not awarded the mark because their poorly-worded answer, ‘Permit has
to obtain the Forestry Department’, did not convey a meaning. The candidate’s reading of both the text and
certain questions was not precise enough.
Exercise 2
Mark scheme
The candidate attempted the exercise very well. The answers were short and generally contained the
important details required by the mark scheme. The examination technique was very good, conveying the
key points briefly and precisely. The candidate used two lines, one for each answer, to separate the
two details required in question (f). Spelling was accurate and all ideas were communicated clearly. For
question (b), the candidate was not precise enough with their selection of the key detail from the text, opting
for the first piece of information in the sentence rather than reading to the end. There was a similar error in
response to question (k), where the time expressions ‘then’ and ‘before’ were overlooked. In the final
question, the candidate’s response displayed good examination technique with numbers and short notes as
answers. The candidate understood the key word ‘character’ in the question but was not awarded a mark for
the detail ‘he was born in 1930’ because this was not a personal characteristic.
Mark scheme
The candidate attempted to add all the key details to the form and successfully completed the ticking and
deleting tasks. The handwriting was at times unclear and it was difficult to distinguish between lower and
upper case letters. There were various errors throughout the exercise. In Section A, only the first names of
the guests, ‘Jacqueline and Christopher’, were written, rather than the full names. There were two mistakes
in the address: the wrong order for the address and the lower case article in the name of the school. In
Section B, the day and date were incomplete, there was only one choice of presentations and there was a
reference to the third person ‘her’ instead of the first person. In Section C, misreading of the text meant that
only one answer ‘journalism’ was offered when ‘advertising’ also needed to be included.
Exercise 3 – section d
Mark scheme
Exercise 4
Exercise 4, continued
Mark scheme
Exercise 5
Mark scheme
From a language point of view, the spelling and punctuation were very accurate. There was a good attempt
to change the expression used in the stimulus text and to use own words, such as ‘positive outcomes’,
‘upcoming years’ and ‘boosted’. The candidate used linking expressions such as ‘first of all’, ‘as a
consequence’ and ‘last but not least’ to give a stylistic flow and a sense of order to the piece. There was
occasional awkwardness in sentence construction, for example, ‘If not in teams but with family, spending
great time is guaranteed’.
From a language point of view, there were basic errors, particularly with punctuation, notably a lack of capital
letters, and single word spelling mistakes. These included ‘thier’ for ‘their’, ‘the’ for ‘they’, ‘dicide’ and ‘carrer’
for ‘career’. There was a reliance on using words and expressions from the text and there was a lack of
linking words. There was some attempt to organise ideas and, despite the inaccuracies, the meaning was
understandable.
From a language point of view, there were single word and verb errors, which included ‘launch’ for ‘lunch’,
‘everday’ and ‘children doesn’t like …’ There was a reliance on expressions lifted from the text and there was
a lack of linking words. The use of ‘If …’ to introduce sentences on four occasions made the piece repetitious
to read. There was some attempt to organise ideas and, despite the inaccuracies, the meaning was
comprehensible.
Exercise 6
Mark scheme
The style was confident and the candidate was comfortable using complex, sophisticated expressions such
as ‘lost in my thoughts’ and ‘buzzing with excitement’. The candidate selected less common verbs, for
example ‘jerked forward’, with a wide range of tenses and contractions, such as ‘we’d be able to see there’
which reinforced the informal style and register. The whole piece was very accurate grammatically with just
occasional awkwardness of phrase. The paragraphs were well-constructed giving an excellent balance to the
whole piece.
The style was simple and the candidate was content to use common words and expressions throughout, for
example, ‘I didn’t want to show something like that’. The meaning was clear throughout and there was brief
evidence of the ability to use more complex structures, such as, ‘I should have gone’. There were grammar
errors which showed that the candidate was not totally in control of verbs, in particular the simple past, which
is the main tense for narrative pieces. There was some mixing of tenses, for example, ‘happy to saw her
live’, ‘my classmates went and bring me …’, ‘she also turn and told my “Hello”’. Paragraphs were sparingly
used and the story would have benefited from being divided further.
The vocabulary and structures were simple and the candidate used basic expressions throughout. The
meaning was clear and the use of past tense verbs was generally accurate. There were many basic
grammar errors, in particular the misspelling of single words, such as ‘the’ for ‘that’, ‘whe’ for ‘we’, ‘acciedent’
and ‘planed’ for ‘planned’. Punctuation was used sparingly with the result that the writing was at times one
long sentence. Paragraphs were non-existent and this made it difficult for the reader to separate different
ideas.
Exercise 7
Mark scheme
The style was suitably formal and convincing and the candidate was comfortable with using an excellent
range of more sophisticated vocabulary, in particular adjectives such as ‘materialistic’, ‘pleasurable’,
‘exuberant’ and ‘extortionate’. The writer’s opinion was conveyed with emphasis by expressions like, ‘I
thoroughly agree with’ and ‘I firmly believe’. The paragraphs were well linked with ‘firstly’, ‘secondly’ and ‘in a
nutshell’ which gave a good balance to the whole piece. The writing throughout was very accurate
grammatically with just occasional awkwardness of phrase.
The candidate showed some range of expression suitable for a more formal register with expressions such
as ‘On the one hand’, On the other hand’, and ‘to sum up’, together with the more sophisticated rhetorical
question, ‘What about our friends and our relationships?’ Generally, the style was simple and the candidate
was content to use less ambitious vocabulary throughout. There were basic spelling errors, for example
‘thing’ for ‘think’ and ‘as’ for ‘us’ as well as verb errors, in particular, the lack of subject - verb agreement in
‘money don’t’. Paragraphs were used successfully to separate the candidate’s introduction, conclusion and
the different sides of the argument.
The candidate used very basic expressions throughout and lacked the vocabulary to be able to convey ideas
and opinions persuasively. The structures were simple, for example, the first sentence: ‘Life can be good and
beautiful wether (sic) you have a lot of money or you don’t it’s just about how you live your life if your (sic)
enjoying it or not’. There was a lack of punctuation but the meaning was clear and the spelling of basic words
was generally accurate. Paragraphs were non-existent, with no introduction or conclusion or division of
ideas, and this made it difficult for the reader to be persuaded by the writer’s opinion.