Write a story in which two people unexpectedly agreed to help each other.

Mark scheme

Marking points from the official mark scheme (May/June 2018). The mark or mark type is shown in brackets.

1. [Instructions] The 'best fit' principle is applied. Primary emphasis is on the quality of Language; descriptors for appropriateness and content are then used to adjust the mark.
2. [Instructions] Candidates are advised to write between 350 and 500 words.
3. [27-30] (Composition Band 8) Highly accurate writing, apart from very occasional slips; highly appropriate to chosen task type.
4. [27-30] (Composition Band 8 Quality of Language) Sentence structures varied for particular effects. Verb forms largely correct and appropriate tenses consistently used. Vocabulary wide and precise. Punctuation accurate and helpful. Spelling accurate apart from very occasional slips. Paragraphs have unity, are linked, and show evidence of planning.
5. [27-30] (Composition Band 8 Appropriateness and Content) Consistently relevant. Interest aroused and sustained. Tone and register entirely appropriate. Descriptions have well-developed images helping to create complex atmospheres. Arguments are well developed, logical, even complex. Narratives are complex, sophisticated, possibly tense, and may contain devices such as flashbacks.
6. [23-26] (Composition Band 7) Accurate writing: occasional errors are either slips or caused by ambition; appropriate to chosen task type.
7. [23-26] (Composition Band 7 Quality of Language) Sentence structures show some variation to create some natural fluency. Occasional slips in verb forms or tense formation, but sequence consistent and clear throughout. Vocabulary precise enough to convey intended shades of meaning. Punctuation accurate and generally helpful. Spelling nearly always accurate. Paragraphs have unity, are usually linked, and show some evidence of planning.
8. [23-26] (Composition Band 7 Appropriateness and Content) Relevant. Interest aroused and mostly sustained. Tone and register appropriate. Descriptions have interesting images and a range of detail, helping to create effective atmospheres. Arguments have clearly defined, cohesive, logical stages in their development. Narratives have effective detail creating character or setting, and may contain some sense of climax.
9. [19-22] (Composition Band 6) Mostly accurate writing; errors from ambition do not mar clarity of communication; mostly appropriate to chosen task type.
10. [19-22] (Composition Band 6 Quality of Language) Some variety of sentence structures, but a tendency to repeat sentence types may produce a monotonous effect. Errors may occur in irregular verb forms, but control of tense sequence sufficient to sustain clear progression of events or ideas. Simple vocabulary mainly correct; errors may occur with more ambitious words. Punctuation generally accurate and sentence separation correctly marked, but errors may occur, e.g. with direct speech. Spelling of simple vocabulary accurate; some errors in more ambitious words. Paragraphs may show some unity, although links may be absent or inappropriate.
11. [19-22] (Composition Band 6 Appropriateness and Content) Relevant. Some interest aroused, although there may be some lack of originality and/or planning. Tone usually appropriate, although there may be slips of register. Descriptions have satisfactory images, ideas and details which help to create atmosphere. Arguments make a series of relevant points, with some being developed; linking of ideas may be insecure. Narratives are straightforward with proper sequencing of sentences.
12. [15-18] (Composition Band 5) Writing is sufficiently accurate to communicate meaning, with patches of clear, accurate language; sufficiently accurate for chosen task type.
13. [15-18] (Composition Band 5 Quality of Language) Some variety of sentence length and structure, not always for particular purpose. Errors in verb forms and tense consistency may cause uncertainty in sequence of events or disturb ease of communication. Vocabulary usually adequate to convey intended meaning; idiom may be uncertain. Punctuation used but not always helpful; occasional sentence separation errors. Spelling of simple vocabulary accurate; errors in more difficult words. Paragraphs used but may lack unity or coherence.
14. [15-18] (Composition Band 5 Appropriateness and Content) Attempt to address topic but there may be digressions or failures of logic. May lack liveliness and interest. Tone may be uneven. Descriptions have some detail but may rely too much on narrative. Arguments have mainly relevant points but may be only partially developed, with some repetition. Narratives are largely a series of events with only occasional details of character and setting.
15. [11-14] (Composition Band 4) Overall meaning never in doubt, but errors sufficiently frequent and serious to hamper precision and distract reader from content.
16. [11-14] (Composition Band 4 Quality of Language) Some simple sentence structures accurate but unlikely to sustain accuracy for long. Errors in verb forms and tenses will sometimes confuse sequence of events. Vocabulary limited, either too simple or imperfectly understood; some idiomatic errors likely. Simple punctuation usually accurate, but there may be frequent sentence separation errors. Spelling of simple vocabulary accurate, frequent errors in more difficult words. Paragraphs used haphazardly.
17. [11-14] (Composition Band 4 Appropriateness and Content) Some relevance. Some interest. Tone may be inconsistent. Descriptions are relevant but lack scope or variety. Arguments make a few points but development is simple and not always logical; some obvious repetition of ideas. Narratives are simple, everyday or immature.
18. [7-10] (Composition Band 3) The writing has many serious errors of various kinds of 'single-word' type (i.e. they could be corrected without re-writing the sentence); communication established, although weight of error may cause some 'blurring'.
19. [7-10] (Composition Band 3 Quality of Language) Sentences probably simple and repetitive in structure. Frequent errors in verb forms and haphazard changes of tense confuse meaning. Vocabulary conveys meaning but likely to be simple and imprecise; significant idiomatic errors. Spelling may be inconsistent. Punctuation and paragraphing may be haphazard or non-existent.
20. [7-10] (Composition Band 3 Appropriateness and Content) A little relevance. A little interest. Some recognition of appropriate tone. In Descriptions the overall picture is unclear. In Arguments only a few points are discernible and the argument progresses only here and there. Narratives are very simple and may narrate events indiscriminately.
21. [3-6] (Composition Band 2) Sense usually decipherable but some errors will be multiple (i.e. requiring the reader to re-read and re-organise); meaning may be partly hidden by density of linguistic error.
22. [3-6] (Composition Band 2 Quality of Language) Unlikely to be more than a few accurate sentences, however simple, in the whole essay.
23. [3-6] (Composition Band 2 Appropriateness and Content) Little relevance or interest. Tone may be inappropriate. In Descriptions the overall picture is very unclear. In Arguments only a very few points are discernible and the argument barely progresses. Narratives are extremely simple and may narrate events indiscriminately.
24. [1-2] (Composition Band 1) Scripts almost entirely or entirely impossible to recognise as pieces of English writing; whole sections make no sense at all.
25. [1-2] (Composition Band 1 Quality of Language) Where occasional patches of relative clarity are evident, 2 or 1 mark(s) should be given.
26. [1-2] (Composition Band 1 Appropriateness and Content) Arguments are rarely relevant and may well be disordered, as are Descriptions and Narratives.
27. [0] (Composition Band 0) Insufficient to meet the criteria for Band 1.