The following extract is from The Art of Travel by Alain de Botton.

Mark scheme

Marking points from the official mark scheme (Oct/Nov 2016). The mark or mark type is shown in brackets.

1. [13-15] Perceptive appreciation of content and ideas. Fluidly relates content to structure, 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.
2. [10-12] Shows consistent appreciation of content and ideas. Able to relate content to structure, 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.
3. [8-9] Shows steady engagement with content/ideas of piece. Shows general understanding of structure, 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.
4. [6-7] Shows some engagement with content/ideas of piece. Shows general, overall understanding of structure, 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.
5. [3-5] Makes some relevant points about content. Shows some understanding of some aspects of the structure, audience, purpose, genre, style of passage; 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.
6. [0-2] Comments on content of passage; may be confused. One or two points made about language of passage. May be unclear. Expression breaks down at times. Very short work. Unstructured.
7. [8-10] A perceptive recognition of context, audience 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.
8. [6-7] A clear and informed sense of purpose, context and relevance supported by a reasonable attempt to use language appropriate for the task.
9. [4-5] An adequate attempt but marked by an inconsistent and uneven sense of purpose, context and style. Generally sound expression and accuracy.
10. [2-3] The beginnings of an answer, but limited by an inappropriate sense of style, purpose and language. Expression and accuracy may be limited.
11. [0-1] Confused and unfocused sense of purpose, context and audience. Wholly inappropriate language and style. Work may be brief or fragmented and expression very limited.