Loading…
Loading...
Loading...
Loading…
Loading…
KS3 · iLowerSecondary English · Reading skills · Comparison
Reading skill 1.5 - Comparing non-fiction texts. This is the one question on the paper that asks you to read two texts together and explain how they relate. Get the technique right and it is the biggest single block of reading marks you can win.
Skill 1.5 has two strands, and you need both to reach the top level:
The big comparison question - “Compare how two quotations reflect each writer’s purpose” - is worth 6 marks and is the only item on the paper marked against three reading objectives at once:
RAO2
Deduce, infer or interpret information, events or ideas from texts.
RAO4
Explore writers' use of grammatical and literary language at word and sentence level.
RAO5
Consider writers' purposes and viewpoints, and the overall effect of the text on the reader.
In plain English: read beyond the literal (RAO2), look closely at the writers' word choices (RAO4), and explain what each writer is trying to do to the reader (RAO5) - and do all of this across the two texts, not one then the other.
Before you write a word, find the point of contact between the two texts. They will be on the same theme, but they almost always have different purposes or viewpoints - one might inform calmly while the other argues passionately, or one might be enthusiastic while the other is critical. Ask:
A strong answer is built around the differences and similarities you find here - not a feature spotted in Text 1 and an unrelated feature spotted in Text 2.
The difference between a Level 1 and a Level 3 answer is often a single word. An implicit comment puts the two texts near each other and hopes the examiner sees the link. An explicit comparison uses a connective that makes the link impossible to miss. Keep these ready:
Showing a similarity
Showing a difference
Building the contrast
Sentence frame that always works: “The first writer … whereas the second writer …, which suggests …” - claim, connective, contrast, then the effect on the reader.
The 6-mark question is levelled out of 6. The journey through the grid is exactly the journey from an implicit comment (Level 1), to an explicit explanation (Level 2), to a clear, developed explanation of the contrast (Level 3). This is the grid examiners apply, word for word:
| Level | Marks | Descriptor |
|---|---|---|
| Level 1 | 1-2 | Response is a simple comment with implicit contrast, referring to either one or two of: deducing, inferring or interpreting information, events or ideas; the use of language at word level; writers’ purpose and viewpoint / overall effect on the reader. |
| Level 2 | 3-4 | Response is an explanation with explicit reference to the contrast, focused on two of: deducing, inferring or interpreting information, events or ideas; the use of language at word level; writers’ purpose and viewpoint / overall effect on the reader. |
| Level 3 | 5-6 | Response is a clear explanation of the contrast, focusing on: deducing, inferring or interpreting information, events or ideas; the use of language at word level; writers’ purpose and viewpoint / overall effect on the reader. |
Notice the ladder: Level 1 touches one or two of the three strands implicitly; Level 2 makes the contrast explicit and focuses on two strands; Level 3 explains the contrast clearly across all three - inference, language at word level, and purpose and effect on the reader.
Alongside the extended question there is a quicker closed comparison item - “Tick which text uses a feature”, worth 2 marks. You are given a list of language or punctuation features and you tick whether each appears in Text 1, Text 2, or both. Scan each text for the named features (e.g. question marks, apostrophes for possession, dashes, brackets). Partial credit is usually available for most rows correct.
Below is an original worked example (written by The English Hub, not from any past paper) using two short notices on the same theme:
| Feature | Text 1 | Text 2 |
|---|---|---|
| A direct question to the reader | ✓ | - |
| An exclamation mark for emphasis | - | ✓ |
| A statistic or number | ✓ | - |
| A first-person pronoun | - | ✓ |
| A list of three | ✓ | ✓ |
Scan each text once per row. Marks are usually awarded for most rows correct, so do not leave any blank - an even guess on a row you are unsure of risks nothing.
The two short non-fiction extracts below are completely original works written by The English Hub for this masterclass. They are on the same theme - keeping a city river clean - but they have deliberately contrasting purposes and viewpoints.
Text 1 - Council information leaflet
Purpose: to inform. Viewpoint: neutral and factual.
The River Calden runs for eleven kilometres through the centre of town. Each year, council teams remove around forty tonnes of litter from its banks. Most of this waste is plastic packaging that has been dropped on nearby streets and washed into the water by rain.
Recycling bins are now placed every two hundred metres along the riverside path. Residents can also report a blocked drain or a pollution spill using the form on the council website. Reports are usually checked within three working days.
Text 2 - Campaigner's blog post
Purpose: to argue and persuade. Viewpoint: angry and urgent.
Have you actually walked along the Calden lately? I have. Last Saturday I counted seven bottles, a tyre and a supermarket trolley in a single bend of the river. This is not somebody else's problem - it is ours, and it is getting worse every single month.
A few extra bins will not save this river. We need people on the banks, sleeves rolled up, refusing to look away. Come to the clean-up on Sunday. Bring gloves, bring friends, and bring the anger this beautiful, neglected river deserves.
Comparison question (6 marks)
“Text 1 ends with “Reports are usually checked within three working days.” Text 2 ends with “bring the anger this beautiful, neglected river deserves.” Compare how these two endings reflect each writer's purpose and the effect on the reader.”
Read these three responses to the question above. They climb the official grid one rung at a time - watch what changes.
Level 1 (1-2 marks) - a simple comment, implicit contrast
“Text 1 talks about reports being checked in three days. Text 2 talks about bringing anger to the river. They are both about the river but they end in different ways.”
The contrast is only implicit - the writer places the two endings side by side and says they are “different” without explaining how or why. It touches one strand (a vague sense of purpose) but offers no comment on word choice and no effect on the reader. Best-fit: Level 1.
Level 2 (3-4 marks) - explicit explanation of the contrast
“Text 1 ends with a calm, factual sentence about reports being ‘checked within three working days’, which shows the writer's purpose is to inform residents and reassure them. In contrast, Text 2 ends with the emotive word ‘anger’, because the writer's purpose is to persuade people to act, not just to give information.”
Now the contrast is explicit - “in contrast” signals it directly. Two strands are covered: a word-level comment (“factual” vs the emotive “anger”) and each writer's purpose. What is still thin is the effect on the reader. Best-fit: Level 2.
Level 3 (5-6 marks) - clear, developed explanation of the contrast
“The first writer closes on the measured phrase ‘checked within three working days’: the precise number and the bureaucratic tone imply a writer whose purpose is purely to inform, leaving the reader feeling calmly reassured that a system is in place. Whereas the second writer ends on ‘the anger this beautiful, neglected river deserves’ - the loaded noun ‘anger’ and the bitter contrast between ‘beautiful’ and ‘neglected’ reveal a purpose to provoke and persuade, deliberately leaving the reader unsettled and pushed towards action. However, although their tones pull sharply apart, both writers ultimately want the reader to care about the river - one through quiet trust, the other through stirred emotion.”
This is a clear, developed explanation of the contrast. All three strands are present and woven together: inference (“imply a writer whose purpose…”), language at word level (“loaded noun ‘anger’”, “bitter contrast”), and purpose with the effect on the reader (“calmly reassured” vs “unsettled and pushed towards action”). The final “however” even links them back together. Best-fit: Level 3.
The takeaway: the words on the page barely change between levels. What changes is whether the link is implied or stated, how closely the word choices are examined, and whether you finish on the effect on the reader. Aim to do all three in every comparison paragraph.