Writing - Composition

Read this extract from a novel you have studied in class. Identify three places where the author's sentence structure creates a specific effect. Then write your own paragraph on a different topic, using the same three structural techniques. Annotate your choices.

Model response: Author's techniques: (1) A sentence fragment — 'Nothing.' — after a long description to create a void. (2) A periodic sentence where the main clause is delayed until the end to build suspense: 'Through the smoke, past the broken walls, beyond the place where the road used to be, she saw it.' (3) A list of short clauses without conjunctions to create breathless pace: 'She ran. She climbed. She fell. She got up.' My paragraph (about a space launch): 'Through the static, past the crackling countdown, beyond the point where fear should have stopped her, Commander Osei pressed the button.' (periodic — delays the action). 'The engines fired. The ground shook. The tower fell away.' (short clauses — pace and power). 'Then — silence.' (fragment — contrast). I used the periodic sentence to build anticipation, the short clauses to convey overwhelming force, and the fragment to mark the sudden transition to weightlessness.

In a charity appeal letter, the writer begins formally: 'The Foundation has worked tirelessly for fifteen years to provide clean water to communities in need.' Then shifts: 'But here is what the numbers do not tell you. Last Tuesday, a seven-year-old girl called Amara drank clean water for the first time.' Analyse why the writer shifts register. Then write your own short text that uses a deliberate register shift for effect.

Model response: The formal opening establishes the charity's credibility and authority — the reader trusts the organisation. The shift to informal, personal language ('But here is what...') breaks through the formality to create an emotional, human connection. 'Last Tuesday' and 'a seven-year-old girl called Amara' move from statistics to a real person, making the appeal feel urgent and personal. The shift works because the contrast makes the informal section feel more authentic. My text (school fundraiser): 'The PTA has raised over three thousand pounds this academic year to support enrichment activities for all pupils. Fundraising events have included a sponsored walk, a cake sale and a quiz night.' [Shift] 'But none of that matters as much as what happened last Friday. A Year 2 boy opened his violin case for the first time — paid for by your donations — and his face lit up like it was Christmas morning.' I shifted from impersonal report to personal anecdote so the reader feels the real impact behind the numbers.

Read Source A (a newspaper editorial arguing for school uniform) and Source B (a blog post arguing against it). Write a balanced discussion of at least 200 words that uses evidence from both sources, evaluates the strength of each argument, and reaches a reasoned conclusion. You have 30 minutes.

Model response: The question of whether schools should require uniform divides opinion. Source A, from The Times, argues that uniform promotes equality and school identity. The editorial cites a 2019 study showing that 'schools with uniform policies report fewer incidents of bullying related to clothing.' This is a strong argument because it uses research evidence rather than opinion. However, Source A does not acknowledge that the study was commissioned by a uniform supplier, which may introduce bias. Source B, a parent's blog, argues that uniform restricts self-expression and is an unnecessary expense. The writer states that she spent over two hundred pounds on branded items in a single year. This is a persuasive personal example, but it represents one family's experience and cannot be generalised. Source B is weaker in its use of evidence — it relies on anecdote rather than data. Both sources raise valid points. On balance, I believe uniform is beneficial for the sense of belonging it creates, but schools should ensure costs are reasonable and second-hand options are available. The strongest argument is Source A's evidence on bullying, provided the study is independently verified.

You want to convince your head teacher to create a school garden. Choose the most effective form (letter, report, speech or article) and write it. In a separate paragraph, explain why you chose that form over the others and identify three specific techniques you used to make your writing persuasive.

Model response: [Formal letter to the head teacher, approximately 250 words, including: a clear statement of purpose, three organised arguments with supporting evidence (health benefits, curriculum links, community engagement), acknowledgement and rebuttal of a potential objection (cost), and a polite but assertive closing request.] Explanation: I chose a formal letter because it is a direct, personal appeal to one decision-maker, which is more appropriate than a general article or public speech. A report would present information neutrally, but I needed to persuade, not just inform. Three techniques: (1) I used the tricolon 'healthier, happier and more engaged' for rhetorical impact. (2) I anticipated the objection about cost and countered it with evidence that local businesses have offered donations, which shows I have considered practicalities. (3) I closed with 'I would welcome the opportunity to discuss this further,' which is firm but respectful — it assumes the conversation will continue rather than asking 'please can we?'

Write the opening of a story that uses a non-chronological structure (for example, starting at the end and then going back to explain how the character got there). Explain why this structure is more effective than starting at the beginning.

Model response: 'I never meant to open the letter. That is what I told myself afterwards, standing in the headteacher's office with the torn envelope in my hand and the words still burning behind my eyes. But that is not entirely true. The truth started three weeks earlier, on the morning Grandad's desk arrived.' This opening works better than chronological order because it creates a mystery — the reader knows something went wrong with a letter but does not know what the letter said or why it matters. The flash-forward to the headteacher's office tells the reader there will be consequences, which creates tension throughout the chronological section. Starting at Grandad's desk arriving would be a slower opening with no hook. The phrase 'that is not entirely true' hints that the narrator might not be fully honest, which adds complexity — the reader has to judge for themselves what really happened.

Read this published poem. Write a response poem — a poem inspired by or in conversation with it — that uses a contrasting form or perspective. Write a reflective commentary explaining how your poem relates to the original and what poetic choices you made deliberately.

Model response: [Original poem: a formal sonnet about the beauty of nature.] Response poem: a free verse poem in the voice of the nature being described, pushing back against being romanticised. 'You write me in soft focus — / meadows, birdsong, golden hour — / but you were not here / when the frost killed the early blossom / or the fox screamed at three in the morning / loud enough to wake the dead. / Nature is not your postcard. / I am mud and rot and thorn / and the thing that grows / back.' Commentary: I chose free verse to contrast with the original's formal structure — my poem rejects the neat frame the sonnet imposes. The short final line 'back' sits alone to show resilience and defiance. I used concrete, unglamorous images ('mud and rot and thorn') to challenge the original's idealism. The poem is in second person ('You write me') to create a direct confrontation with the original poet.

You want to raise awareness about plastic pollution in the ocean. You could write: a newspaper report, a persuasive speech, a poem, or a diary entry from a marine biologist. Choose the form you think would be most effective. Write it. Then write a paragraph explaining why your chosen form is stronger than at least one of the alternatives.

Model response: [Diary entry from a marine biologist, approximately 150 words, written in first person with a mix of scientific observation and personal emotion: factual details about plastic found during a dive, contrasted with the biologist's growing frustration and sadness.] Explanation: I chose the diary because it combines facts with personal emotion in a way that feels genuine rather than manipulative. A persuasive speech would be effective for a live audience but can feel formulaic on paper — 'I urge you to act' is easy to dismiss. The diary creates empathy because the reader experiences the biologist's journey: they start with professional observation and end with private despair, which is more powerful than being told to care. The diary form also allows me to include specific scientific evidence naturally ('Today we counted 47 pieces of microplastic in one square metre') without it feeling like a lecture.

Write the opening of a persuasive text aimed at convincing reluctant readers to try a book you love. Consider: what does this audience think about reading? What objections might they have? How can you hook someone who does not usually enjoy books?

Model response: 'I know what you are thinking. Another book recommendation from someone who reads all the time. You have heard it before: "You'll love it!" "You just haven't found the right book yet." And you have smiled and nodded and gone back to your phone. Fair enough. But this book is different — and I can prove it. It is 180 pages. You could finish it in a weekend. There are no long descriptions. The chapters are short. And the main character hates reading as much as you do.' I anticipated three audience characteristics: (1) They are sceptical of book recommendations, so I acknowledged that scepticism immediately rather than ignoring it. (2) They value their time, so I emphasised the book's brevity. (3) They feel alienated from 'reading culture,' so I chose a book with a relatable protagonist. Addressing their objections before they raise them builds trust.

Read this 250-word opinion article arguing that homework should be abolished. Write a precis of about 80 words that preserves the argument structure (claim, evidence, counter-argument, conclusion). Then explain one decision you made about what to keep and what to cut.

Model response: Precis: The author argues that homework should be abolished because research shows it has little academic benefit for primary-age children and reduces time for play, family life and independent interests. A 2015 study found no correlation between homework quantity and achievement at primary level. The author acknowledges that secondary homework may have value for developing study habits, but maintains that primary homework causes unnecessary stress. The conclusion urges schools to replace homework with voluntary reading. Decision: I cut the personal anecdote about the author's daughter crying over maths homework. Although it was emotionally powerful, it was illustrative rather than essential — the research evidence makes the same point more reliably, and in a precis the argument matters more than the anecdote.

Compare how two characters are presented in the text. Use quotations from different parts of the text to build your argument, and zoom into specific word choices within your quotations.

Model response: Marcus and Priya are presented as opposites whose differences drive the story's central conflict. Marcus is associated with stillness and control: he 'folded the map with a sharp snap' and 'did not look up.' The verb 'folded' and the adjective 'sharp' suggest precision and decisiveness — he has already made his decision before the conversation begins. Priya, by contrast, is associated with uncertainty and movement: she is 'pulling her coat tighter' and later 'stared at the dark shapes of the trees.' The progressive verbs 'pulling' and 'stared' show her attention is scattered — she is reacting to her environment rather than controlling it. The contrast between Marcus folding (an act of closure) and Priya pulling (an act of self-protection) encapsulates their different responses to danger: he moves towards it, she shields herself from it.

Summarise this persuasive article (about 400 words) AND this explanatory text (about 400 words), each in approximately 80 words. Then explain how your summarisation approach differed for each text type.

Model response: [Persuasive summary preserves the claim, key evidence, counter-argument and conclusion in logical order. Explanatory summary preserves the causal chain, with each stage connected to the next.] Explanation: For the persuasive text, I needed to keep the argument structure intact — the claim, the strongest piece of evidence for each side, and the conclusion — because a persuasive text only makes sense if the reader can follow the reasoning. I cut illustrative examples that supported points already made. For the explanation, I needed to preserve every stage of the causal process, because missing one stage breaks the chain. I cut descriptive detail but kept all the causal connectives ('because', 'this leads to', 'as a result'). The key difference is that persuasive summaries prioritise the logic of the argument, while explanatory summaries prioritise the completeness of the process.

Take a piece of writing you completed last week. Conduct three editing passes: Pass 1 — content and argument (Is everything relevant? Is anything missing?). Pass 2 — structure and cohesion (Does it flow logically?). Pass 3 — style and precision (Is every word earning its place?). For each pass, make at least two changes and explain the effect.

Model response: Pass 1 (content): (1) Cut paragraph 4 entirely — it repeated the point from paragraph 2 without adding new evidence. The text is now tighter. (2) Added a counter-argument to paragraph 3 — the original was one-sided, which weakened the discussion's credibility. Pass 2 (structure): (1) Moved paragraph 5 to before paragraph 3 — the chronological evidence needed to come before the thematic analysis so the reader has the facts before the interpretation. (2) Added 'Despite this evidence' at the start of paragraph 4 to signal the shift from arguments for to arguments against, improving cohesion. Pass 3 (style): (1) Changed 'The results were really very significant' to 'The results were striking' — removed hedging that weakened the claim. (2) Broke the final sentence into two: 'The debate continues.' was more powerful alone as a short, definitive closing than buried in a longer sentence.

Plan a narrative that uses a non-linear structure (flashback, dual timeline, or in medias res). Explain why this structure serves your story better than a straightforward chronological approach.

Model response: Story: A girl discovers her grandmother's wartime diary. Structure: Dual timeline — alternating chapters between the girl reading the diary (present) and the grandmother's experiences (past). Opening: In medias res — the girl finds the diary hidden in a wall cavity during a house renovation. She opens it and reads the first entry, which takes us back to 1940. Plan: Chapter 1 (present): Discovery of the diary. Hook: the grandmother never talked about the war. Chapter 2 (past): First diary entry — grandmother arrives as an evacuee. Chapter 3 (present): The girl finds a photograph tucked between pages — she recognises the house. Chapter 4 (past): The grandmother makes a difficult choice. Final chapter (present): The girl understands something about her grandmother she never knew. Why this structure works better than chronological: Starting with the discovery creates an immediate mystery — why was the diary hidden? The alternating timeline lets the reader piece together the story alongside the girl, which creates dramatic irony when the reader knows things from the past that the girl does not yet understand. A chronological structure would tell the grandmother's story directly, losing the emotional frame of a granddaughter learning who her grandmother really was.

Re-read your own discussion text as if you were an examiner marking it. Identify the strongest and weakest sections. For the weakest section, write two alternative versions and evaluate which is more effective.

Model response: Strongest section: Paragraph 2 — the argument for is well-evidenced with a statistic and a real-world example, and the final sentence explicitly connects the evidence to the claim. An examiner would see clear PEE structure used fluently, not mechanically. Weakest section: The conclusion. Original: 'In conclusion, there are arguments on both sides and it is hard to decide.' This is weak because it does not weigh the arguments — it avoids taking a position. Version A: 'In conclusion, while both sides present valid points, the weight of scientific evidence supports the argument for renewable energy investment. The economic concerns raised by opponents are legitimate but short-term, whereas the environmental benefits are long-term and irreversible.' Version B: 'Ultimately, this is not a question of economics versus environment — it is a question of what kind of future we are willing to accept. The evidence presented in this discussion suggests that inaction carries a far greater cost than investment.' Version A is more effective for a formal discussion text because it directly references the arguments presented and reaches a reasoned judgement. Version B is more rhetorical and would suit a speech better. For this text type, I would use Version A.

Choose a topic you have studied this year. Write about it in three completely different forms for three different audiences. Then write a reflective commentary explaining what each form allowed you to do that the others could not.

Model response: Topic: The Industrial Revolution. Form 1 — Diary entry of a child factory worker (audience: classmates for a display): 'Monday 14th March 1833. My hands are raw from the spinning frames again. Mr Arkwright says I am too slow but the thread cuts my fingers...' Form 2 — Information report for a class textbook (audience: Year 5 pupils): 'The Industrial Revolution began in Britain in the late 18th century. Factories replaced cottage industries, and millions of people moved from the countryside to rapidly growing towns...' Form 3 — Speech for a school debate: 'The Industrial Revolution is celebrated as the birth of modern Britain. But at what cost? Today I want to tell you about the children — some as young as five — who paid for our progress with their health, their childhood, and sometimes their lives.' Commentary: The diary let me explore the emotional, human experience — I could use first person and sensory detail to make the reader empathise. The information report let me present facts objectively — I could cover the broad picture without personal bias. The speech let me combine facts with persuasion — I could use rhetorical techniques to make the audience care about historical injustice. Each form reveals a different truth about the same topic. Writing in all three made me realise that form is not just packaging — it changes what the writing can say and how the reader receives it.