In the extract which follows, taken from a collection of scientific essays, the writer describes a discovery made during an archaeological dig. 'Let's go back this way and survey the bottom of that gully over there.' The gully in question was just over the crest of the rise where we had been working all morning. It had been thoroughly checked out at least twice before by other workers, who had found nothing interesting. Nevertheless, conscious of the 'lucky' feeling that had been with me since I woke, I decided to make that small final detour. There was virtually no bone in the gully. But as we turned to leave, I noticed something lying on the ground partway up the slope. ‘That's a bit of a hominid¹ arm,' I said. 'Can't be. It's too small. Has to be a monkey of some kind.' We knelt to examine it. 'Much too small,' said Gray again. I shook my head. 'Hominid.' 'What makes you so sure?' he said. 'That piece right next to your hand. That's hominid too.' 'Good grief!' said Gray. He picked it up. It was the back of a small skull. A few feet away was part of a femur: a thighbone. We stood up, and began to see other bits of bone on the slope: a couple of vertebrae, part of a pelvis-all of them hominid. An unbelievable, impermissible thought flickered through my mind. Suppose all these fitted together? Could they be parts of a single, extremely primitive skeleton? No such skeleton had ever been found-anywhere. 'Look at that', said Gray. 'Ribs.' A single individual. 'I can't believe it,' I said. 'I just can't believe it.' 'You'd better believe it!' shouted Gray. ‘Here it is, Right here!' His voice went up into a howl. I joined him. In that 110-degree heat we began jumping up and down. With nobody to share our feelings, we hugged each other, sweaty and smelly, howling and hugging in the heat-shimmering gravel, the small brown remains of what now seemed almost certain to be parts of a single hominid skeleton lying all around us. 'We've got to stop jumping around,' I finally said. 'We may step on something. Also, we've got to make sure.' 'Aren't you sure, for heaven's sake?' 'I mean, suppose we find two left legs. There may be several individuals here, all mixed up. Let's play it cool until we can come back and make absolutely sure that it all fits together.' We collected a couple of pieces of jaw, marked the spot exactly and got into the blistering Land-Rover for the run back to camp. On the way we picked up two expedition geologists who were loaded down with rock samples they had been gathering. 'Something big,' Gray kept saying to them. ‘Something big. Something big.' That afternoon everyone in camp was at the gully, sectioning off the site and preparing for a massive collecting job that ultimately took three weeks. When it was done, we had recovered several hundred pieces of bone (many of them fragments) representing about forty percent of the skeleton of a single individual. Tom's and my original hunch had been right. There was no bone duplication. But a single individual of what? On preliminary examination it was very hard to say, for nothing quite like it had ever been discovered. The camp was rocking with excitement. That first night we never went to bed at all. ¹hominid: the group consisting of all Modern and Great Apes, including humans

Mark scheme

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

1. Marking for part (a) is based on the Generic Marking Principles for Commentary (maximum 15 marks):
2. [13-15] Band 1: Shows perceptive appreciation of content and ideas. Fluidly relates content to structure, form, audience, purpose, genre, style. Shows keen awareness of intentions of passage. Analyses text with sensitive and discriminating awareness of how language creates effects. Moves with ease between part and whole in discussing specific examples of language use and the effect of the whole passage. Strong structure; may be concise; quotation is used fluently, 'embedded' in the argument.
3. [10-12] Band 2: Shows consistent appreciation of content and ideas. Able to relate content to structure, form, audience, purpose, genre, style, main aims of passage. Analyses text, with awareness of the effects created. Able to relate part to whole in discussing specific examples of language use and the effect of the whole passage. Strong structure used to convey clear argument.
4. [8-9] Band 3: Shows steady engagement with content/ideas of piece. Shows general understanding of structure, form, audience, purpose, genre, style of passage. Thorough analysis of passage is made, correctly identifying a range of features of language, giving examples, and showing ability to explain how they create effects with some relation of part to whole. Clear structure, sustained focus.
5. [6-7] Band 4: Shows some engagement with content/ideas of piece. Shows general, overall understanding of structure, form, audience, purpose, genre, style of passage. Appropriate points are made, correctly identifying some features of language use, giving examples, and showing some ability to explain how they create effects. May be a fragmented approach. Clear structure; may be 'line-by-line'; essay may drift in and out of focus.
6. [3-5] Band 5: Makes some relevant points about content. Shows some understanding of some aspects of structure, audience, form, purpose, genre, style of passage, but with some failures to identify key features and or misunderstanding. Some relevant points made, identifying a restricted range of examples of language use. Some examples are not related to the effects created. Some examples may be listed without development. Much generalisation. Little structure. Points may be rather disconnected.
7. [0-2] Band 6: Comments on content of passage. May be confused. Very few, if any, points made about language of passage. May be unclear. Expression breaks down at times. Very short work. Unstructured.
8. Marking for part (b) is based on the Generic Marking Principles for Directed Writing (maximum 10 marks):
9. [8-10] A perceptive recognition of context, audience, form, and purpose supported by a good range of appropriate vocabulary and expression suitable for the task. Responses at the top of this band will be persuasive and confident, supported by a consistent, and at best personal, engagement with context and purpose, using fluent and accurate expression accompanied by a strong sense of audience.
10. [6-7] A clear and informed sense of purpose, context, form and relevance supported by a reasonable attempt to use language appropriate for the task.
11. [4-5] An adequate attempt, but marked by an inconsistent and uneven sense of purpose, form, context and style. Generally sound expression and accuracy.
12. [2-3] The beginnings of an answer, but limited by an inappropriate sense of style, form, purpose and language. Expression and accuracy may be limited.
13. [0-1] Confused and unfocused sense of purpose, form, context and audience. Wholly inappropriate language and style. Work may be brief or fragmented and expression very limited.