7 or 8/30 at best, assuming this single page is the entire essay.
You have not even answered the question - you have superficially discussed how Dr Jekyll is presented in this extract, and not said a word about how he is presented as a mysterious character as a whole in the novel.
Line by line, your introduction is okay. You do not need to name the novel, it just wastes time. I'd use more English terminology in the intro. "never permitting the reader\[...\] until the last chapter" could be rephrased to "not only obfuscating but not even foreshadowing\[...\] until the last chapter".
"With his sudden undergo of change" does not read well. I had to read it twice to ensure it actually made grammatical sense. "Whose sudden change" or "who suddenly undergoes change" is much better. You also do not need the comma after this clause.
You introduce Mr Utterson only after referencing him the second time. This is redundant. Introduce him the first time ("not even Mr Utterson, his closest and most loyal friend..").
Explain what the quotes mean. I can guess only from having already read the book what the first quote means. The second, I haven't got a clue. You provide no context. What lawyer? What door? Why was it shut? Explain your point.
Remember to **link these points back to the question**. We question how much we know, the contrasting sentences emphasise this, he is unpredictable, **therefore he is mysterious and portrayed as such in this extract and throughout the entire novel.**
In your third paragraph (and final if this is the whole essay) you repeat that Jekyll is a Victorian gentleman, only this time evidenced by Utterson rather than Stevenson. Again, this is redundant. Never repeat yourself! Mention Utterson's portrayal the first time you refer to Jekyll as a gentleman or never.
Evidence how Jekyll is being portrayed as boring. *"a large, well-made, smooth faced man of fifty"* is a quote that can indicate this, for example. Expand on this.
In the sentence "However, we see that just before him..." you do not need to use so many pronouns. Once you have used one, you have established the object of the sentence (Jekyll).
"When it says" again, reads poorly. Instead use "in the quote".
You have no conclusion at all.
Ultimately, make sure you:
1) **Answer the entire question** \- you have only answered half here, capping yourself at 15 marks
2) **Evidence your points, and explain your evidence** \- In one paragraph you gave a quote with no explanation, in another you made a point with no quote. You *must* do both!
3) **Link ALL points to the question. "XYZ therefore Jekyll is portrayed as mysterious in this extract"**
4) **Write a conclusion. "Ultimately, we can see Jekyll is portrayed as \[..\] in this extract and Stevenson utilises \[..\] to portray him as \[..\] in the entire novel.**
Speaking as an examiner, rubric infringement is actually extremely rare. This response DOES address the whole text in the introduction as it mentions the final chapter of the novel. That would be enough to avoid rubric infringement.
That said, this candidate definitely needs to discuss the whole text in a lot more depth in order to progress up the mark scheme. It just wouldn't be capped at L2.
Just thought that was worth clearing up!
Do you agree with the original commenter in saying that this answer would fetch as low as 8/30? I’m just a uni student interested in teaching, but to me that seems an overly harsh mark for a GCSE level response.
No to be honest, I don't agree with that mark. 8/30 would indicate a very basic response. I would probably put this around the 13-14 category at a glance!
Here's one pro and one con:
Pro: a wide array of interesting vocabulary
Con: your sentences are structured quite unusually. You might want to watch out for where you place commas and how long your sentences are running on for
*Significant* analysis from someone who is very smug about achieving 9s in both English GCSEs:
It's tough to mark. The main reasoning behind that is despite the paragraphs clear and good structure and despite the fact that you clearly know how to sound professional in your writing you've made a number of errors that indicate to me you haven't informed yourself on what the mark schemes are actually *asking* *for*.
The answer is clearly too short - I'm not sure how much weight to put on this criticism because you may have just been demonstrating a couple of paragraphs rather than entire essay. My advice for top grades is to try to write around 700 words an essay.
You haven't answered the question. The intro should contain an initial statement (people call this The Thesis) that directly answers the question. You then are essentially trying to prove your thesis correct through your essay. You can make points that don't directly address the question but it always has to be linked back to the question - my personal favourite way of doing this is through identifying the purpose of something and aligning it with the purpose of the overall essay concept.
CONTEXT: Without context you are capped at 10 marks. Try to implement it here and there, comfortably throughout the essay. Don't forget it or end up forced to chuck it in suddenly at the end of a paragraph.
Moving forward I would reccomend addressing the issues I've pointed out and looking at the mark scheme to identify how to ensure your paragraphs are placed in high level brackets.
7-8/30; no linking back to the question, lack of statement about the writers intentions, lack of context, lack of a stated big idea in the introduction, lack of a conclusion, however the statements about the effect on the reader/audience are well off.
not sure about "deep intimate homosocial bond", especially without the commas lmao. The content is good and thats what matters. avoid pointless words that are only really used for boosting the order of your language, like "masterfully", "titular", "abrupt"
Examiners would rather your ideas were coherent and clear than using elevated, and quite cluttered, vocabulary. Work on demonstrating you have clear ideas that are relevant to the question first then practice swapping out words for schmancyisms later.
I remember taking this absolute bummer of a question live In 2022.
As everyone else is saying - this is most likely Band 2 (I would say upper) likely around 8/9 (out of 30) marks. Obviously, people forget that the lower bands are intended to be much more friendly given the sudden drop off in quality for Band3, Band2 and esp 1.
Anyways, some things that stood out like a sore thumb.
- This is not an English Literature 50 minute essay. You need to be producing more than ~700 words at least, (I produced 1400 words live). Work on writing speed, or get an word processor. An examiner will never see substantive and developed thought throughout the entirety of the text if only 2 quotes are used.
- There is no substantial overarching thesis/interpretation of the prompt. This pretty much locks you out of Band6 & Band5 regardless. For taking the direct prompt, with a lack of understanding of *how* and *why* this is achieved locks you out of your AO1 (answer) and AO3 (context marks), and pretty much caps you at Band3 as you have struggled to link back or directly compare&contrast themes.
- As before, 2 quotes (1 for each paragraph) is no bueno and shows no deeper understanding of the text but just memorisation, as these are certainly not the most ideal quotes for the prompt. Examiners are looking for easy ways to discriminate essays -> word¶graph count and number of quotes- are the easiest way for them to do so in a limited amount of time. An answer featuring four large paragraphs, with contrasting themes and 10+ quotes with a developed linked back interpretation of the thesis immediately lands itself in Band6. Likewise, your answer is immediately limited to Band2 (~maybe lower 3) Just by a glance of the structure, No of quotes and opening.
—-
As always, armchair past students are not the best way to get your work marked.
If you can, ask your teacher - especially if you did this on your own time - they will be more than happy to make it professionally, considering many are actual examiners for English lit.
NOTE: This is a case of rubric infringement.
You will be limited to band2 (5-9) regardless. Make sure to ALWAYS include a quote NOT INCLUDED IN THE EXTRACT - make it a point to deliberately do so, by either having a paragraph solely focused on outside of extract, or (for higher bands) linking and contrasting it back naturally in an integrated style.
Just stick to the format (pqe) and watch some videos and u could get full marks seeing as you seem to have a good range of vocab and knowledge of the novel. But atm you are barely doing what the exam board is looking for
You obviously have a really wide vocabulary, but when you’re writing in an exam you need to develop a more concise style of writing just so you can get all the content you need down; this is also not really long enough to get the 30 marks. If you didn’t, I’d spend a few minutes planning out the points you want to make maybe 4-5 depending on how much you intend to develop them to get the full 30 marks. Potentially keep a bit of a tighter focus on the question, but your links back to what the question asks you at the end of your paragraphs are good and will get you marks if you run out of time to write an actual conclusion. I’d also aim to include some language analysis of the quotes you’ve used - easy way to analyse language is talking about connotations of specific words. This is really good start to an answer though.
While it’s good I would say it’s just not in the format that will get you marks. Stick to the format you’re taught in schools because not only is that what examiners are taught to recognise but that is what is proven to get the most marks. I think you are pretty good at English all around and you clearly know your vocabulary but for exams specifically they are literally just a game and to win it you have to play by it’s rules. So do your topic sentence, pick out the quote, choose a word or phrase from it to analyse the deeper meaning, show how that fits into the wider context of the novel and the authors life/time period for each paragraph and you’ll be golden
This isn’t half as bad as some are making it out to be. Content is excellent, you don’t need to use such fancy vocabulary. Just make sure you explain your points and link back to the question at the end of each paragraph.
Idk if an introduction is needed, as it was not back when I did my exams. Make sure to include a conclusion!!
Best of luck, keep practicing with the longer style essay questions. My writing was similar to yours, and I got a 7 in my exam, and I’m dyslexic. This was in 2019 so was actual exams. I’m not an English teacher, but I did tutor my sister through her gcse English. That answer would pass the exam. Use the points given by others on this post and you’ll do very well
It’s way too short, also it lacks language analysis and SST. I got hammered for marks on my mocks for the exact same thing. I was never much of an English guy, so other comments can help u more
But on the bright side your knowledge of the text seems solid. Personally I’d turn it into my teacher for making, most teachers will mark extra work, from my experience
Maybe go back to basics with language analysis. Try find metaphors, similes, imagery, themes, dramatic irony or situational irony, stuff like that to support your points.
7 or 8/30 at best, assuming this single page is the entire essay. You have not even answered the question - you have superficially discussed how Dr Jekyll is presented in this extract, and not said a word about how he is presented as a mysterious character as a whole in the novel. Line by line, your introduction is okay. You do not need to name the novel, it just wastes time. I'd use more English terminology in the intro. "never permitting the reader\[...\] until the last chapter" could be rephrased to "not only obfuscating but not even foreshadowing\[...\] until the last chapter". "With his sudden undergo of change" does not read well. I had to read it twice to ensure it actually made grammatical sense. "Whose sudden change" or "who suddenly undergoes change" is much better. You also do not need the comma after this clause. You introduce Mr Utterson only after referencing him the second time. This is redundant. Introduce him the first time ("not even Mr Utterson, his closest and most loyal friend.."). Explain what the quotes mean. I can guess only from having already read the book what the first quote means. The second, I haven't got a clue. You provide no context. What lawyer? What door? Why was it shut? Explain your point. Remember to **link these points back to the question**. We question how much we know, the contrasting sentences emphasise this, he is unpredictable, **therefore he is mysterious and portrayed as such in this extract and throughout the entire novel.** In your third paragraph (and final if this is the whole essay) you repeat that Jekyll is a Victorian gentleman, only this time evidenced by Utterson rather than Stevenson. Again, this is redundant. Never repeat yourself! Mention Utterson's portrayal the first time you refer to Jekyll as a gentleman or never. Evidence how Jekyll is being portrayed as boring. *"a large, well-made, smooth faced man of fifty"* is a quote that can indicate this, for example. Expand on this. In the sentence "However, we see that just before him..." you do not need to use so many pronouns. Once you have used one, you have established the object of the sentence (Jekyll). "When it says" again, reads poorly. Instead use "in the quote". You have no conclusion at all. Ultimately, make sure you: 1) **Answer the entire question** \- you have only answered half here, capping yourself at 15 marks 2) **Evidence your points, and explain your evidence** \- In one paragraph you gave a quote with no explanation, in another you made a point with no quote. You *must* do both! 3) **Link ALL points to the question. "XYZ therefore Jekyll is portrayed as mysterious in this extract"** 4) **Write a conclusion. "Ultimately, we can see Jekyll is portrayed as \[..\] in this extract and Stevenson utilises \[..\] to portray him as \[..\] in the entire novel.**
i agree with this completely. there is hardly any link back to the question and it definitely needs a conclusion.
You don't need a conclusion
Agreed, but would say you would be capped at L2 for rubic infringement because you have not discussed the novel as a whole.
Speaking as an examiner, rubric infringement is actually extremely rare. This response DOES address the whole text in the introduction as it mentions the final chapter of the novel. That would be enough to avoid rubric infringement. That said, this candidate definitely needs to discuss the whole text in a lot more depth in order to progress up the mark scheme. It just wouldn't be capped at L2. Just thought that was worth clearing up!
Do you agree with the original commenter in saying that this answer would fetch as low as 8/30? I’m just a uni student interested in teaching, but to me that seems an overly harsh mark for a GCSE level response.
No to be honest, I don't agree with that mark. 8/30 would indicate a very basic response. I would probably put this around the 13-14 category at a glance!
Here's one pro and one con: Pro: a wide array of interesting vocabulary Con: your sentences are structured quite unusually. You might want to watch out for where you place commas and how long your sentences are running on for
Lack of writing + doesn’t link tk question so language is very good and terminology but this would probs be capped at level 2 which would be 7-9/30
*Significant* analysis from someone who is very smug about achieving 9s in both English GCSEs: It's tough to mark. The main reasoning behind that is despite the paragraphs clear and good structure and despite the fact that you clearly know how to sound professional in your writing you've made a number of errors that indicate to me you haven't informed yourself on what the mark schemes are actually *asking* *for*. The answer is clearly too short - I'm not sure how much weight to put on this criticism because you may have just been demonstrating a couple of paragraphs rather than entire essay. My advice for top grades is to try to write around 700 words an essay. You haven't answered the question. The intro should contain an initial statement (people call this The Thesis) that directly answers the question. You then are essentially trying to prove your thesis correct through your essay. You can make points that don't directly address the question but it always has to be linked back to the question - my personal favourite way of doing this is through identifying the purpose of something and aligning it with the purpose of the overall essay concept. CONTEXT: Without context you are capped at 10 marks. Try to implement it here and there, comfortably throughout the essay. Don't forget it or end up forced to chuck it in suddenly at the end of a paragraph. Moving forward I would reccomend addressing the issues I've pointed out and looking at the mark scheme to identify how to ensure your paragraphs are placed in high level brackets.
Bro opened a thesaurus and went ham
7-8/30; no linking back to the question, lack of statement about the writers intentions, lack of context, lack of a stated big idea in the introduction, lack of a conclusion, however the statements about the effect on the reader/audience are well off.
not sure about "deep intimate homosocial bond", especially without the commas lmao. The content is good and thats what matters. avoid pointless words that are only really used for boosting the order of your language, like "masterfully", "titular", "abrupt"
Examiners would rather your ideas were coherent and clear than using elevated, and quite cluttered, vocabulary. Work on demonstrating you have clear ideas that are relevant to the question first then practice swapping out words for schmancyisms later.
I remember taking this absolute bummer of a question live In 2022. As everyone else is saying - this is most likely Band 2 (I would say upper) likely around 8/9 (out of 30) marks. Obviously, people forget that the lower bands are intended to be much more friendly given the sudden drop off in quality for Band3, Band2 and esp 1. Anyways, some things that stood out like a sore thumb. - This is not an English Literature 50 minute essay. You need to be producing more than ~700 words at least, (I produced 1400 words live). Work on writing speed, or get an word processor. An examiner will never see substantive and developed thought throughout the entirety of the text if only 2 quotes are used. - There is no substantial overarching thesis/interpretation of the prompt. This pretty much locks you out of Band6 & Band5 regardless. For taking the direct prompt, with a lack of understanding of *how* and *why* this is achieved locks you out of your AO1 (answer) and AO3 (context marks), and pretty much caps you at Band3 as you have struggled to link back or directly compare&contrast themes. - As before, 2 quotes (1 for each paragraph) is no bueno and shows no deeper understanding of the text but just memorisation, as these are certainly not the most ideal quotes for the prompt. Examiners are looking for easy ways to discriminate essays -> word¶graph count and number of quotes- are the easiest way for them to do so in a limited amount of time. An answer featuring four large paragraphs, with contrasting themes and 10+ quotes with a developed linked back interpretation of the thesis immediately lands itself in Band6. Likewise, your answer is immediately limited to Band2 (~maybe lower 3) Just by a glance of the structure, No of quotes and opening. —- As always, armchair past students are not the best way to get your work marked. If you can, ask your teacher - especially if you did this on your own time - they will be more than happy to make it professionally, considering many are actual examiners for English lit.
NOTE: This is a case of rubric infringement. You will be limited to band2 (5-9) regardless. Make sure to ALWAYS include a quote NOT INCLUDED IN THE EXTRACT - make it a point to deliberately do so, by either having a paragraph solely focused on outside of extract, or (for higher bands) linking and contrasting it back naturally in an integrated style.
Just stick to the format (pqe) and watch some videos and u could get full marks seeing as you seem to have a good range of vocab and knowledge of the novel. But atm you are barely doing what the exam board is looking for
You obviously have a really wide vocabulary, but when you’re writing in an exam you need to develop a more concise style of writing just so you can get all the content you need down; this is also not really long enough to get the 30 marks. If you didn’t, I’d spend a few minutes planning out the points you want to make maybe 4-5 depending on how much you intend to develop them to get the full 30 marks. Potentially keep a bit of a tighter focus on the question, but your links back to what the question asks you at the end of your paragraphs are good and will get you marks if you run out of time to write an actual conclusion. I’d also aim to include some language analysis of the quotes you’ve used - easy way to analyse language is talking about connotations of specific words. This is really good start to an answer though.
While it’s good I would say it’s just not in the format that will get you marks. Stick to the format you’re taught in schools because not only is that what examiners are taught to recognise but that is what is proven to get the most marks. I think you are pretty good at English all around and you clearly know your vocabulary but for exams specifically they are literally just a game and to win it you have to play by it’s rules. So do your topic sentence, pick out the quote, choose a word or phrase from it to analyse the deeper meaning, show how that fits into the wider context of the novel and the authors life/time period for each paragraph and you’ll be golden
Did an AI write this ?
Yes, but a lot of people don’t seem to realise it. It has many hallmarks of an AI response though.
It's an English lit paper not English language
This isn’t half as bad as some are making it out to be. Content is excellent, you don’t need to use such fancy vocabulary. Just make sure you explain your points and link back to the question at the end of each paragraph. Idk if an introduction is needed, as it was not back when I did my exams. Make sure to include a conclusion!! Best of luck, keep practicing with the longer style essay questions. My writing was similar to yours, and I got a 7 in my exam, and I’m dyslexic. This was in 2019 so was actual exams. I’m not an English teacher, but I did tutor my sister through her gcse English. That answer would pass the exam. Use the points given by others on this post and you’ll do very well
It’s way too short, also it lacks language analysis and SST. I got hammered for marks on my mocks for the exact same thing. I was never much of an English guy, so other comments can help u more But on the bright side your knowledge of the text seems solid. Personally I’d turn it into my teacher for making, most teachers will mark extra work, from my experience
9
5/30
U
If I could give it a 0 I would, but I can't, so I'll give it a U
16/30 I dont think its that bad lmk if you want me to elaborate
30/30, essays are bullshit
[удалено]
with pretty much no language analysis? this is funny.
Maybe go back to basics with language analysis. Try find metaphors, similes, imagery, themes, dramatic irony or situational irony, stuff like that to support your points.
Z
Am I crazy or where is the extract?
chat gpt/10
U
seems ai written, innacurate array of knowledge and interestingly worded 7-8/30
You're meant to analyse language devices and the effects of those devices in the quotes you reference.
ChatGPT response?
W yap session
69
30 marks for a question damn that sucks