ASSESSMENT AND SUPPORT

Analysing language, form and structure

Assessment Criteria and What A Good One Looks Like

Below you will find the Skill Check assessment criteria for this skill, and underneath you will find an example of what a good one looks like, with a brief explanation of how it fits the criteria.

Assessment Criteria for Analysing language, form and structure

minus
any of these things

Basic task instructions have not been followed

No method has been identified in the analysis

The effect of the method has not even been identified

The effect of the method is completely wrong — the student has misunderstood the text in a significant way

equals
all of these things

Identifies at least one method using roughly correct terminology

Identifies the effect of the method but doesn’t really explain it

Attempts to connect explanation to the paragraph point, though perhaps only implicitly

plus
all of these things

Identifies at least one method using correct terminology

Explains the effect of the method somewhat successfully

Attempts to show how the method creates its effect, though perhaps only implicitly

Explanation clearly connects to the point

star
all of these things

Identifies at least one method using correct terminology

Explains the effect of the method successfully and attempts to analyse it, perhaps by zooming in to its component parts or explaining it methodically

Clearly shows how the method creates its effect

Explanation clearly connects to the point

What a good one looks like

Example task

Read the following paragraph opening and complete the task underneath.

Golding reveals the boys’ destructive power very early in the novel. When they first decide to start a fire, they accidentally set fire to the forest, and though the fire is initially small, a “squirrel leap[ing]” between the branches of the trees, it grows and spreads, creeping through the trees “as a jaguar creeps” until it has destroyed a quarter mile of forest.

Write the analysis to follow on from this point and evidence, with clear discussion of the method(s) used, including the appropriate terminology. Make sure you link your analysis back to the point.

Example response

Here we see just the destructive power of the boys, and the fact they are capable of this much destruction — so much of forest destroyed! — without even meaning to do it really reveals this. Because of their technology and their carelessness, the boys can cause enormous harm to the natural world. To emphasise this, Golding uses figurative language to describe the fire. First, he uses the metaphor of a squirrel, which suggests the fire is initially small but agile and fast-moving, like a squirrel, darting playfully and harmlessly through the forest, reflecting how the boys initially see it. However, as the fire spreads Golding changes the imagery with the simile of a jaguar creeping. Suddenly, all sense of harmlessness has gone: the fire is a predator. It is larger and more deadly, moving slowly now, almost as if it is stalking its prey, like a jaguar. This shows just how destructive the fire has become — it’s killing everything in its path. This all adds to the destructiveness of the boys’ behaviour. They started the fire, and in their carelessness, they created a kind of monster, a predator that destroyed the island and even killed one of the other boys.

Notes on this response

  • It explains the evidence first before analysing the methods.

  • It identifies several methods through correct terminology (“figurative language”, “metaphor”, “simile”, “imagery”)

  • It explains the effect of the methods (i.e. what extra meaning they create) — how the fire seems harmless at first, but then predatory.

  • It clearly shows how the methods create the extra meaning by linking the fire to squirrels and jaguars, the key imagery in the figurative language.

  • It zooms in to two of the component parts of the evidence through two methods — the squirrel metaphor and the jaguar simile - and explains each of them methodically

  • The explanation explicitly connects to the point about the boys’ behaviour being destructive (“destructiveness of the boys behaviour”).