AQA English Language Paper 2: Non-fiction
How to answer Q2 – comparing the sources
For this question you have to compare something in the two sources (e.g. the schools, the surfboards, the campsites, etc). It’s the first of two comparison questions. You need to remember to make inferences about whatever you compare. Good inferences are key to getting good marks.
This guide is part of the English Language Paper 2 series:
Paper 2 Question 2 - comparing the sources
Contents of this guide
Overall structure and example for this question
Steps for tackling this question
Highlight relevant evidence – planning step
Make some inferences – planning step
Explain your inference from Source A – writing step
Compare the two sources – writing step
Example response
Overall structure and example for this question
You should write 1 or 2 comparative paragraphs, each with the following approximate structure:
A. Information from Source A, including contextualised quotations
B. Inference from Source A
C. Related information from Source B, including contextualised quotations
D. Comparative inference from Source B
Example paragraph
[A] In Source A, the Hawaiian islanders’ surfboards are “hand-carved” and “well-oiled and cared for.” [B] This implies that the surfboards mean an awful lot to each of the surfers; it would take days to carve a surfboard by hand, especially with the kind of tools these islanders would have had available to them, and further time to oil and care for the board on a regular basis. Anybody who invests that much time in a single item would really value that item: they would be devastated if they lost it. [C] In Source B, however, there are many different types of boards like “hollow paddle-boards”, “solid redwood slabs” and “kook box” boards for lifeguarding. [D] These boards would need to be commercially manufactured so we can infer that they wouldn’t have had the same personal significance to each of the surfers as the boards in Source A; it’s not that they wouldn’t care about their boards, but they won’t have invested the same amount of time or effort into their creation, and so the boards themselves wouldn’t be as important to them as the boards in Source A.
Steps for tackling this question
1. Highlight relevant evidence – planning step
The first thing you need to do is highlight the sections of the two texts which are relevant to the topic stated in the question. This might be all the sections which describe the surfboards, or all the sections which describe the children playing, or all the sections which describe the boats – whatever it is that you’re being asked to compare in the question. You should do this while you read the texts in the first 15 minutes.
For example
In Source A you might highlight “hand-carved”, “well-oiled and cared for”, “made from the native breadfruit tree” and “blessed in a simple ritual” because they all describe the surfboards
In Source B you might highlight “hollow paddle-boards”, “solid redwood slabs” and “kook box” boards “for lifeguarding” because those things describe the surfboards in that source
2. Make some inferences – planning step
This is the key step in your planning: more than anything else, the quality of your inferences will determine what mark you receive. One way to think about inference is as a kind of deduction, like a detective. You need to take one or two pieces of evidence from the text and deduce something from them by applying your knowledge of the real world to the information in the texts. There is no magic formula for this – every inference is different – but applying real-world knowledge is the key.
Let’s look at some examples of how inferences combine information from a text with real world knowledge.
Information in the text
There are lots of famous bands playing at a festival.
+
Real-world knowledge
Famous bands are in high demand and have large teams behind them.
=
Inference
The festival would have required a lot of advanced planning and organisation, using skilled professionals in the planning process.
It is even better if you can use two pieces of information from the text to make your inference (this is called synthesis). For example:
Information in the text
A storm killed lots of people climbing a mountain.
+
Information in the text
Some of those people were on a commercial climbing holiday.
+
Real-world knowledge
Commercial climbing holidays are highly planned for safety and insurance.
=
Inference
The storm’s severity must have been very unexpected indeed.
While planning, during the 15 minutes reading time, you should decide what inferences you are going to use in your answer.
For example
From the evidence for Source A (see previous example box), you could make the following inferences by applying real world knowledge, included in [square brackets] below:
“hand-carved” + “well-oiled and cared for” + [people care about things they invest time in] = the surfboards must mean a lot to the individual surfers
“hand-carved” + “made from the native breadfruit tree” + [carving is a difficult skill to acquire and learn] = the surfboards are a traditional item for the surfers, part of their culture; the skill to carve them will have been handed down through the generations
made from the “native breadfruit tree” + “blessed in a simple ritual” + [people don’t bless any old item] + [the land is very important to primitive cultures] = the surfboards have a spiritual significance for the surfers
3. Explain your inference from Source A – writing step
Now you are ready to write your response. Start with Source A and state the information that your inference is based on, using embedded quotations from the text.
For example
In Source A, the Hawaiian islanders’ surfboards are “hand-carved” and “well-oiled and cared for.”
Next, you then need to explain what you have inferred from the evidence, and, crucially, why you have inferred it. In other words, you need to explain what the exam board call “the correlation” between the information and the inference. This is where the real-world knowledge from Step 2 comes in – this is the correlation that you need to explain.
For example, if you have inferred that bigger boats are safer than smaller boats, you will need to explain why their size makes them safer (e.g. because they are less likely to capsize in high winds due to their low centre of gravity).
If you don’t clearly explain the correlation between the information in the text and the inferences you have made, you won’t get beyond Level 2 (4 marks out of 8). If you explain this correlation in detail, however, it might push you up from Level 3 (5-6 marks) to Level 4 (7-8 marks), according to the examiner’s report.
This is what makes it so important.
Useful phrases: Signpost your inferences with phrases like ‘which implies/suggests’ or ‘from this we can infer.’
For example
This implies that the surfboards mean an awful lot to each of the surfers; it would take days to carve a surfboard by hand, especially with the kind of tools these islanders would have had available to them, and further time to oil and care for the board on a regular basis. Anybody who invests that much time in a single item would really value that item: they would be devastated if they lost it.
4. Compare the two sources – writing step
Now repeat Step 3 for Source B. You need to use related evidence from that source (e.g. evidence which is similar to or contrasts with the evidence from Source A), and in your explanation of the inference, you need to make links back to what you wrote about Source A using comparative connectives like ‘unlike in Source A’. Otherwise, just follow the same rules as you did in Step 3 to complete the paragraph.
Useful words and phrases: Use comparative connectives like ‘unlike in Source A’, ‘similarly’, ‘however’, etc.
For example
In Source B, however, there are many different types of boards like “hollow paddle-boards”, “solid redwood slabs” and “kook box” boards, for lifeguarding. These boards would need to be commercially manufactured so we can infer that they wouldn’t have had the same personal significance to each of the surfers as the boards in Source A; it’s not that they wouldn’t care about their boards, but they won’t have invested the same amount of time or effort into their creation, and so the boards themselves wouldn’t be as important to them as the boards in Source A.
This creates the following full paragraph, which we saw at the start of this guide
In Source A, the Hawaiian islanders’ surfboards are “hand-carved” and “well-oiled and cared for.” This implies that the surfboards mean an awful lot to each of the surfers; it would take days to carve a surfboard by hand, especially with the kind of tools these islanders would have had available to them, and further time to oil and care for the board on a regular basis. Anybody who invests that much time in a single item would really value that item: they would be devastated if they lost it. In Source B, however, there are many different types of boards like “hollow paddle-boards”, “solid redwood slabs” and “kook box” boards for lifeguarding. These boards would need to be commercially manufactured so we can infer that they wouldn’t have had the same personal significance to each of the surfers as the boards in Source A; it’s not that they wouldn’t care about their boards, but they won’t have invested the same amount of time or effort into their creation, and so the boards themselves wouldn’t be as important to them as the boards in Source A.