Study type: Genre Study |
Status: Exemplar
Concepts
This study delivers 1 primary concept and 4 secondary concepts.
Primary concept: Planning writing from model texts (EN-Y4-C042)
Type: Skill |
Teaching weight: 3/6
Pupils plan their writing by discussing writing similar to what they plan to write in order to understand and learn from its structure, vocabulary and grammar, considering purpose and audience
Teaching guidance: Teach planning as a structured process using model texts as the basis for writing. Analyse the structure of high-quality model texts together, then use that structure as a planning framework. Teach different planning formats: boxing-up grids (dividing the text into sections with notes for each), flow charts for chronological texts, mind maps for non-chronological texts, and story mountains for narratives. In Year 4, plans should include notes on vocabulary, sentence structures and text features to use, not just content.
Key vocabulary: plan, model text, structure, boxing up, mind map, flow chart, audience, purpose, vocabulary, draft
Common misconceptions: Children may write plans that are too detailed, effectively writing a first draft in their plan. They may plan content but not consider structure, vocabulary or audience. Some children produce neat, elaborate plans but then deviate significantly from them during writing, suggesting that planning is not yet integrated into their writing process.
Differentiation
| Level | What success looks like | Example task | Common errors |
| Entry | Discussing features of a model text before attempting to write something similar. | Read this model newspaper report. List three features you notice about how it is organised. | Listing content rather than structural features; Noticing only one or two features |
| Developing | Using a model text to create a structured plan that identifies sections, key vocabulary and sentence types to use. | Use this model letter of complaint as a basis for planning your own. Identify the structure, useful vocabulary and sentence types. | Planning content only without noting structural or language features from the model; Copying the model's content rather than its pattern |
| Expected | Analysing how structure, vocabulary and grammar serve purpose and audience in a model text, then applying these features to own writing plan. | Study this persuasive speech. Identify how the writer uses structure, vocabulary and grammar to persuade. Then plan your own persuasive speech on a different topic using the same techniques. | Noting features superficially without understanding how they serve the purpose; Planning content without incorporating the techniques identified |
| Greater Depth | Evaluating multiple model texts for the same purpose, identifying which techniques are most effective, and combining the best features into a plan. | Read two different persuasive letters on the same topic. Which is more effective and why? Create a plan that combines the strongest features of both. | Choosing one model as 'better' without analysing specific features; Not combining features — just copying one model's approach |
Model response (Entry): 1. It has a headline that grabs attention. 2. The first paragraph answers who, what, where and when. 3. It includes quotes from witnesses.
Model response (Developing): Structure: 1) Formal greeting, 2) State the problem, 3) Explain what happened, 4) Say what you want done, 5) Formal sign-off. Vocabulary: disappointed, unacceptable, request, replacement, promptly. Sentence types: formal statements, polite requests ('I would be grateful if...').
Model response (Expected): The model uses: a rhetorical question opening to engage the audience, three main arguments each in their own paragraph, emotive vocabulary ('devastating', 'innocent'), and modal verbs to urge action ('we must', 'we should'). My plan: Open with 'How would you feel if...?', three paragraphs on my reasons, emotive vocabulary relevant to my topic, closing with 'we must act now'.
Model response (Greater Depth): Letter A has a stronger opening — it uses a statistic that shocks the reader. Letter B has better structure — each paragraph builds on the last. Letter A repeats the same point too much, while Letter B introduces new arguments each time. My plan combines Letter A's shocking opening statistic with Letter B's progressive argument structure, and I'll add my own concluding call to action.
Secondary concept: Paragraphing in composition (EN-Y4-C045)
Type: Skill |
Teaching weight: 3/6
Pupils organise writing into paragraphs around a theme, grouping related sentences together, building on the introduction to paragraphs in Year 3
Differentiation
| Level | What success looks like | Common errors |
| Entry | Understanding that a new paragraph signals a change and grouping related sentences together. | Starting a new paragraph after every sentence; Not recognising time, place or topic changes as paragraph triggers |
| Developing | Planning writing in paragraphs before drafting, with each paragraph focused on one main idea or event. | Planning one long paragraph rather than four focused ones; Paragraphs that overlap in content |
| Expected | Organising extended writing into well-structured paragraphs in both narrative and non-narrative texts, using paragraph breaks appropriately for changes in time, place, topic or speaker. | Uneven paragraphs — one very long, others very short; Breaking paragraphs in the middle of an idea |
| Greater Depth | Using paragraph length deliberately for effect, and linking paragraphs with cohesive devices. | Using one-sentence paragraphs so often they lose their impact; Not connecting the paragraph-length choice to the intended effect |
Secondary concept: Organisational devices in non-narrative writing (EN-Y4-C047)
Type: Skill |
Teaching weight: 2/6
Pupils structure non-fiction writing using simple organisational devices such as headings and sub-headings, understanding that these serve the reader
Differentiation
| Level | What success looks like | Common errors |
| Entry | Using headings and subheadings to organise a simple non-fiction text. | Forgetting to include subheadings; Subheadings that do not match the content beneath them |
| Developing | Choosing appropriate organisational devices for different non-fiction text types. | Using the same devices for all text types; Adding devices after writing rather than using them to organise from the start |
| Expected | Using a range of organisational devices purposefully to aid the reader's navigation and understanding. | Using devices decoratively rather than functionally; Not explaining why each device serves the reader |
| Greater Depth | Evaluating which organisational devices best serve a specific purpose and audience, adapting choices accordingly. | Changing content but not organisational devices; Not recognising that different audiences need different navigational support |
Secondary concept: Evaluating own and others' writing (EN-Y4-C048)
Type: Skill |
Teaching weight: 3/6
Pupils assess the effectiveness of their own and others' writing, identifying strengths and suggesting specific improvements, monitoring whether writing makes sense at different levels
Differentiation
| Level | What success looks like | Common errors |
| Entry | Identifying one strength and one area for improvement in a piece of writing. | Giving only positive feedback ('it's really good'); Identifying a weakness but not suggesting how to improve it |
| Developing | Assessing writing against specific success criteria, identifying strengths and suggesting improvements. | Ticking off criteria without genuinely evaluating quality; Focusing only on surface features (spelling, handwriting) rather than content and structure |
| Expected | Evaluating own and others' writing for effectiveness, identifying strengths in content, structure and language, and proposing specific improvements. | Evaluating own work as 'good' without critical analysis; Identifying problems without proposing specific solutions |
| Greater Depth | Evaluating how effectively writing achieves its purpose for its intended audience, considering the reader's experience. | Evaluating from the writer's perspective rather than the reader's; Not considering how the audience would receive the writing |
Secondary concept: Multi-clause sentences with conjunctions (EN-Y4-C052)
Type: Skill |
Teaching weight: 3/6
Pupils extend the range of sentences with more than one clause by using a wider range of conjunctions, including when, if, because, although, creating subordinate clauses for varied effect
Differentiation
| Level | What success looks like | Common errors |
| Entry | Writing compound sentences using coordinating conjunctions (and, but, or, so). | Using 'and' for every join rather than choosing the appropriate conjunction; Missing the comma before the conjunction |
| Developing | Writing complex sentences using common subordinating conjunctions (when, if, because, although). | Writing a fragment instead of a complete subordinate clause; Placing the subordinate clause in a way that creates an unclear sentence |
| Expected | Using a range of subordinating conjunctions to create multi-clause sentences with varied structure, placing subordinate clauses in different positions. | Using only 'when' and 'because' rather than varying conjunctions; Forgetting the comma when the subordinate clause comes first |
| Greater Depth | Varying sentence length and structure deliberately for effect, choosing between simple, compound and complex sentences purposefully. | Writing all sentences the same length; Varying sentence length randomly rather than for deliberate effect |
Thinking lens: Evidence and Argument (primary)
Key question: What is the evidence, how reliable is it, and what conclusions can it support?
Why this lens fits: Evaluating writing requires using the text itself as evidence — pupils assess whether the words on the page achieve the intended effect, then edit based on that judgement with criteria as the argumentative standard.
Question stems for KS2:
What evidence supports this claim?
Is this a fact or an opinion? How can you tell?
Is this strong evidence or weak evidence? Why?
Can you structure your argument: claim, evidence, reasoning?
Secondary lens: Structure and Function — Narrative elements (setting, character, plot) and non-fiction organisational devices are structural choices that serve specific communicative functions — pupils learn why stories need each element and why non-fiction texts use particular layouts.
Session structure: Writer's Workshop + Text Study
This study uses 2 vehicle templates:
Writer's Workshop (main structure)
A process-writing sequence that develops pupils as independent writers. Studies a mentor text to identify craft techniques, practises those techniques in isolation, plans an original piece, drafts with attention to audience and purpose, engages in peer review for feedback, revises and edits, and publishes the final piece.
mentor_text →
technique_identification →
planning →
drafting →
peer_review →
editing →
publication
Assessment: Final published piece demonstrating identified craft techniques, with writing portfolio showing development through the drafting and revision process.
Teacher note: Use the WRITER'S WORKSHOP template: share a mentor text and guide pupils to identify specific techniques the writer uses. Model how to plan writing that uses those techniques purposefully. Give pupils time to draft their own piece, then facilitate peer review focused on the targeted technique. Guide editing with attention to grammar, punctuation, and the effect of their choices on the reader.
KS2 question stems:
What techniques does the mentor text use, and what effect do they create?
How have you planned to use this technique in your own writing?
What feedback did your partner give, and how will you respond to it?
What edits will improve the clarity and impact of your writing?
Text Study
A reading-to-writing cycle for primary and KS3 English. Begins with shared or guided reading of a high-quality text, moves through analysis of language features and authorial choices, builds vocabulary, then scaffolds the writing process from planning through drafting to editing and publication.
shared_reading →
analysis →
vocabulary →
planning →
drafting →
editing
Assessment: Final written outcome in the genre studied, demonstrating understanding of text features, appropriate vocabulary use, and effective application of the writing process.
Teacher note: Use the TEXT STUDY template: share a quality text and guide pupils to analyse the author's choices — vocabulary, sentence structure, and literary techniques. Build subject-specific vocabulary through discussion. Support pupils in planning and drafting their own writing, applying techniques they have identified. Include time for editing and improving their work.
KS2 question stems:
What effect does the author create with this word or phrase?
Why did the author structure the text this way?
What technique could you borrow for your own writing?
How could you improve this section of your draft?
Text type and features
Text type: Non Fiction
Features to teach: formal tone, rhetorical questions, emotive language, logical argument structure, counter-argument
Writing outcome: Write a persuasive letter (300-500 words) using formal structure, rhetorical devices, and paragraphed arguments
Grammar focus: multi-clause sentences with conjunctions, fronted adverbials, paragraphs to organise ideas around a theme
(from Y4 Appendix 2)
Literary terms: rhetorical question, emotive language, counter-argument, register, tone
Suggested texts
Model persuasive letters (teacher-curated) by Various — Teacher models with clear persuasive features annotated
Newspaper opinion columns (adapted) by Various — Age-appropriate editorials for analysing persuasive technique
Genre
Persuasion: Texts that argue a single point of view using rhetorical and emotional techniques to convince the reader. Distinct from discussion (which is balanced): persuasion is deliberately one-sided. Teaches pupils to identify and deploy techniques including rhetorical questions, emotive language, repetition, and direct address.
Why this study matters
Persuasive writing develops pupils' ability to organise ideas logically, consider audience, and use language for deliberate effect. The 'Save Our Park' scenario provides a purposeful, real-world context that motivates genuine persuasion rather than formulaic letter-writing. It also bridges reading (identifying persuasive techniques in model texts) with writing (deploying those techniques independently).
Sequencing
Leads to: Discussion and Debate: Should Animals Be Kept in Zoos?
Pitfalls to avoid
Pupils list opinions without supporting them with evidence or reasoning
Rhetorical questions used excessively rather than strategically for effect
Formal register lapses into informal language without the pupil noticing the shift
Cross-curricular opportunities
| Link | Subject | Connection | Strength |
| UK Regional Study | Geography | Local area study and land use | Strong |
Reading and writing skills (KS2)
These disciplinary skills should be woven through teaching, not taught in isolation:
Language choices and their effects — Identify and explain how the author's choice of specific words and phrases enhances or shapes meaning, considering the connotations, imagery and deliberate effects created by those linguistic choices.
Information retrieval from simple texts — Find and report specific information or key facts from a short piece of fiction or non-fiction, identifying the part of the text where the answer is located.
Prediction from text clues — Predict what is likely to happen next in a story or sequence of events, drawing on what has already been read and on prior knowledge of similar texts and situations.
Comparing and contrasting across texts — Compare and contrast the content, style, purpose and viewpoint of two or more texts on related themes, synthesising evidence from multiple sources to construct an evaluative response that goes beyond listing similarities and differences.
Prediction from stated and implied details — Predict what might happen next or later in a text on the basis of information both explicitly stated and strongly implied, drawing on the internal logic of the narrative or argument.
Making comparisons within a text — Make comparisons between different characters, events, viewpoints or sections within a single text, identifying similarities and differences and explaining what these comparisons reveal about meaning or theme.
Vocabulary word mat
| adverbial | A word, phrase, or clause that works like an adverb, telling when, where, how, or why something happened. |
| although | A subordinating conjunction introducing a contrasting idea (despite the fact that). |
| audience |
| boxing up |
| bullet point | A dot or symbol (•) used to introduce items in a list, making information clear and easy to scan. |
| caption | A short piece of text beneath an image or photograph that explains what it shows. |
| clause |
| co-ordinate | To link clauses of equal importance using coordinating conjunctions (and, but, or, so, yet). |
| cohesion | The way ideas in a text are linked together using connectives, pronouns, and repeated words. |
| conjunction |
| diagram | A labelled drawing or visual representation used to explain information in non-fiction texts. |
| draft | An early version of a piece of writing that will be revised and improved. |
| effective | Successfully achieving the intended purpose or impact. |
| evaluate |
| feedback | Comments given about work that help identify strengths and areas for improvement. |
| flow chart | A diagram using shapes and arrows to show a process or sequence of decisions. |
| heading |
| improve |
| layout |
| link |
| main idea |
| mind map |
| model text |
| multi-clause |
| navigation |
| organise |
| paragraph |
| place |
| plan |
| purpose |
| sentence |
| since | A conjunction meaning 'because' or 'from that time onwards'. |
| speaker |
| specific |
| strength |
| structure |
| subheading |
| subordinate | A clause that depends on the main clause and cannot stand alone as a sentence. |
| success criteria |
| table | A way of organising information in rows and columns for easy reference. |
| target |
| text box |
| time |
| topic |
| topic sentence |
| until | A conjunction or preposition indicating the end point of a period of time. |
| vary | To change or make different; to use a range of techniques rather than repeating the same one. |
| vocabulary |
| while |
| persuasion |
| rhetorical question |
| emotive language |
| formal |
| argument |
| counter-argument |
Prior knowledge (retrieval plan)
Pupils should already know the following from earlier units:
| Prior knowledge needed | For concept | Description |
| Planning writing from model texts | Planning writing from model texts | Pupils discuss writing similar to what they plan to write in order to understand and learn from i... |
| Paragraphing in composition | Paragraphing in composition | Pupils organise writing into paragraphs around a theme, grouping related sentences together |
| Organisational devices in non-narrative writing | Organisational devices in non-narrative writing | Pupils structure non-fiction writing using simple organisational devices such as headings and sub... |
| Evaluating own and others' writing | Evaluating own and others' writing | Pupils assess the effectiveness of writing, identifying strengths and suggesting specific improve... |
| Multi-clause sentences with conjunctions | Multi-clause sentences with conjunctions | Pupils extend sentences with more than one clause using a wider range of conjunctions including w... |
Scaffolding and inclusion (Y4)
| Reading level | Fluent Reader (Emerging) (Lexile 300–500) |
| Text-to-speech | Available |
| Max sentence length | 18 words |
| Vocabulary | Curriculum vocabulary expected to be known (with in-context reminder). Some academic vocabulary (e.g., 'evidence', 'conclusion') acceptable. Technical terms in context. |
| Scaffolding level | Moderate |
| Hint tiers | 3 tiers |
| Session length | 15–25 minutes |
| Worked examples | Required — Text-based with inline questions. Not fully narrated — child reads the example. |
| Feedback tone | Respectful And Precise |
| Normalize struggle | Yes |
| Example correct feedback | Your inference was correct — the text never said the character was nervous, but you worked it out from the clues: the short sentences and the word 'paced'. That is sophisticated reading. |
| Example error feedback | This is a common misconception: plants do not get their food from the soil — they make it from sunlight, water, and carbon dioxide. The soil provides minerals, but food is made in the leaves. |
Knowledge organiser
Key terms:
persuasion
rhetorical question
emotive language
formal
argument
counter-argument
audience
purpose
Core facts (expected standard):
Planning writing from model texts: Analysing how structure, vocabulary and grammar serve purpose and audience in a model text, then applying these features to own writing plan.
Graph context
Node type: EnglishUnit |
Study ID: EU-EN-Y4-003
Concept IDs:
EN-Y4-C042: Planning writing from model texts (primary)
EN-Y4-C045: Paragraphing in composition
EN-Y4-C047: Organisational devices in non-narrative writing
EN-Y4-C048: Evaluating own and others' writing
EN-Y4-C052: Multi-clause sentences with conjunctions
Cypher query:
``cypher
MATCH (ts:EnglishUnit {unit_id: 'EU-EN-Y4-003'})
-[:DELIVERS_VIA]->(c:Concept)
-[:HAS_DIFFICULTY_LEVEL]->(dl)
RETURN c.name, dl.label, dl.description
``
Generated from the UK Curriculum Knowledge Graph — zero LLM generation.