Example Candidate Responses PDF

Cambridge IGCSE®
English as a Second Language
0510 (speaking endorsement)

0511 (count-in speaking)
In order to help us develop the highest quality Curriculum Support resources, we are
undertaking a continuous programme of review; not only to measure the success of our
resources but also to highlight areas for improvement and to identify new development needs.
We invite you to complete our survey by visiting the website below. Your comments on the
quality and relevance of Cambridge Curriculum Support resources are very important to us.
https://www.surveymonkey.co.uk/r/GL6ZNJB
Do you want to become a Cambridge consultant and help us develop support materials?
Please follow the link below to register your interest.
http://www.cie.org.uk/cambridge-for/teachers/teacherconsultants/
Cambridge International Examinations retains the copyright on all its publications. Registered Centres are
permitted to copy material from this booklet for their own internal use. However, we cannot give permission
to Centres to photocopy any material that is acknowledged to a third party even for internal use within a
Centre.
® IGCSE is the registered trademark of Cambridge International Examinations.

© Cambridge International Examinations 2016
Version 1
Contents
Introduction ........................................................................................................................ 2
Assessment at a glance .................................................................................................... 3
Paper 1 – Reading and writing (core) ............................................................................... 5
Paper 2 – Reading and writing (extended)..................................................................... 50

Introduction
Introduction
The main aim of this booklet is to exemplify standards for those teaching Cambridge IGCSE English as a
Second Language (0511), and to show how different levels of candidates’ performance (high, middle and
low) relate to the subject’s curriculum and assessment objectives.
In this booklet a range of candidate responses has been chosen as far as possible to exemplify middle and
low level responses for Paper 1 (core), and high, middle and low level responses for Paper 2 (extended).
Each response is accompanied by a brief commentary explaining the strengths and weaknesses of the
answers.
For ease of reference the following format for each component has been adopted:
Question
Mark scheme
Example candidate
response
Examiner comment
Each question is followed by an extract of the mark scheme used by examiners. This, in turn, is followed by
examples of marked candidate responses, each with an examiner comment on performance. Comments are
given to indicate where and why marks were awarded, and how additional marks could have been obtained.
In this way, it is possible to understand what candidates have done to gain their marks and what they still
have to do to improve their marks.
This document illustrates the standard of candidate work for those parts of the assessment which help
teachers assess what is required to achieve marks beyond what should be clear from the mark scheme.
Some question types where the answer is clear from the mark scheme, such as short answers and multiple
choice, have therefore been omitted.
Past papers, Examiner Reports and other teacher support materials are available on Teacher Support at
https://teachers.cie.org.uk
2 Cambridge IGCSE English as a Second Language (0511)

Assessment at a glance
Cambridge IGCSE English as a Second Language (0511) 3

Teachers are reminded that the latest syllabus is available on our public website at www.cie.org.uk and
Teacher Support at https://teachers.cie.org.uk

Paper 1 – Reading and writing (core)
Exercise 1

Exercise 1, continued

Mark scheme

Example candidate response – middle
Examiner comment – middle

This candidate has selected the correct details for each question in the exercise, with the exception of (d).
The answers show clear understanding of the text and a careful selection of the relevant details, with brief
answers. At times, a short sentence is required to fully answer the question. This occurs in (b), where it is
important to explain the connection between the rain and the state of the rivers, and also in (c), where the
landslides have the function of ‘creating’ new habitats. Although the candidate has understood question (d),
the answer provided is ambiguous and indicates that the hornbills include birds in their diet. A more precise
response is needed for the mark to be awarded here. In (f), the candidate has supplied four separate details,
but as all are correct, the mark could be awarded.
Mark awarded = 6 out of 7

Example candidate response – low
Examiner comment – low

This candidate has answered all the questions as briefly as possible and shows good examination
technique, highlighting brief key details in many answers. More careful reading of the question is needed
in (b), as the candidate has provided a description of the rivers, rather than a reason for the rivers being an
exciting feature. Similarly, in (c), the candidate cannot gain credit for an answer without explaining the
reason for the importance of landslides. Candidates should always identify the key question words in order to
select the relevant detail(s) from the text. In (f), the candidate has supplied too many details, and included
incorrect information, resulting in the loss of the mark.

Exercise 2


Mark scheme



The candidate has demonstrated a good understanding of the text and made a generally good response to
the questions in this exercise. The answers are written concisely and without extra unnecessary information.
In (e), the answer needs to be more precise and to include the detail ‘onto the moon’ to gain the mark. Two
pieces of information about what the astronauts did on the moon are required in (f) for one mark. This
candidate has supplied one correct detail and one detail which refers to the following question. Without the
information that they also ‘conducted experiments’, the mark could not be awarded. The final question in this
exercise, (k), was commonly misunderstood, and this candidate has overlooked the key elements of the
question, ‘last job ... connected to flying’, to find the correct detail, ‘teaching aviation’.
There is always one question in this exercise which tests the candidate’s ability to interpret the details in a
chart or diagram. This candidate has responded well and provided the correct information concisely.



This candidate shows understanding of the task and provides short answers in response to the questions. It
is clear that the level of vocabulary in the text is a barrier to success in a number of questions.
In (a), the ‘role’ of Neil Armstrong in the mission has not been understood and this simple description of what
he did on 21 July could not be awarded the mark. The key word ‘When’ was well identified in (b), but it is the
specific point in the mission that is required for the answer, not the point in historical time. Question (c)
requires the candidate to connect the ‘benefit of the bigger command module’ in the question with an
‘advantage’ in the text, and list the benefits to the astronauts, for example, the fact that ‘they could move
around easily’ or ‘none of them suffered injuries’. Only one of the two details needed for the mark in (f) was
found, with the second part of the answer providing another indication that comprehension is not secure. The
question about the graph (h) has been well understood and the answer clearly specified. In (k), this
candidate has found the key words ‘job ... flying’ and located the correct part of the text, but has overlooked
the important element in the question, his ‘last job’ Although the biographical details the candidate has
chosen are correct, they do not relate specifically to his ‘last job’ and so cannot be awarded the mark.

Exercise 3


Mark scheme



Sections A and B:
The key to success in this exercise is complete accuracy in all aspects of the task, whether it is in selecting
the correct detail, using the correct grammar and spelling, or following the instructions correctly. A further
requirement is for the candidate’s handwriting to be clear and legible.
In Section A all the responses are correct: this candidate has chosen to write the name and address in
capital letters, which has made them easy to read. It is not essential to write these details in this way, but if
lower case letters are used, the distinction between capitals and small letters must be clear. The elements of
the address have been written in the order that they occur in the text, and the date has been accurately
transcribed.
In Section B, the details of the visit have been well attempted. The candidate has recognised that the specific
detail of the time of the visit, ‘evening’, is a necessary part of this item, and has accurately chosen the
responses to circle and delete. This candidate has made one error by ticking ‘friends’ instead of ‘newspaper’,
but overall this is a creditable attempt at a clear and easy-to-read response.
Mark awarded for Sections A and B = 9 out of 10
Section C:
To be successful in this section of Exercise 3, candidates must write two sentences, one in response to each
question. Each sentence can be awarded a maximum of two marks, giving a possible total of four marks.
Marks are awarded for complete accuracy of sentence construction, grammar, spelling and punctuation. This
candidate has chosen to separate the two sentences by drawing a line between them.
First sentence: the candidate has chosen the right detail which answers the question and has written a
complete sentence, starting with a capital letter and ending with a full stop. There is one grammatical error in
the first verb in an otherwise correct sentence. The candidate was awarded one mark out of a possible two
marks for this sentence.
Second sentence: the candidate has also found the right detail from the text in answer to this question. It has
been written as a complete sentence, with a capital letter at the start and a full stop at the end. There are two
grammatical errors in this sentence: ‘it’s was’ and one incorrect preposition, ‘on’ instead of ‘in’. One mark
was awarded for this sentence.
Marks awarded for Section C = 2 out of 4
Total marks awarded = 11 out of 14


Sections A and B:
The key to success in this exercise is complete accuracy in all aspects of the task, whether it is in selecting
the correct detail, using the correct grammar and spelling, or following the instructions correctly. A further
requirement is for the candidate’s handwriting to be clear and legible.
In Section A, the candidate has written very clearly and legibly. The candidate has used capital letters for
proper nouns, and spelt the address and the date correctly. This candidate has made one error by including
the preposition ‘in’ as part of the address. Candidates should be aware that they must not include the
prepositions ‘in’ or ‘at’ when transcribing the address.
In Section B, this candidate has found providing details of the visit more challenging and has been awarded
two out of a possible six marks. The number in the group includes only Rebecca’s friends as the candidate
has omitted to include Rebecca herself. Without the specific detail ‘evening’, the mark could not be awarded
for this item. The detail of the waiter’s name has been correctly identified and the candidate has correctly
circled the words ‘Very good’ in response to the opinion item. Candidates should be aware that when asked
to enter a tick in a box, a cross is not a suitable alternative and the mark will not be awarded. Similarly, in the
last item in Section B, it is clear that the friends would like to visit the cafe again, but the instruction to delete
has not been followed, and the mark cannot be awarded.
Mark awarded for Sections A and B = 5 out of 10
Section C:
To be successful in this section of Exercise 3, candidates must write two sentences, one in response to each
question. Each sentence can be awarded a maximum of two marks, giving a possible total of four marks for
Section C. Marks are awarded for complete accuracy of sentence construction, grammar, spelling and
punctuation.
First sentence: the candidate has chosen the right detail which answers the question and has written a
complete sentence, starting with a capital letter and ending with a full stop. There is one grammatical error in
the failure to use the plural ‘cakes’ in an otherwise correct sentence. The candidate was awarded one mark
out of a possible two marks for this sentence.
Second sentence: the information required here is that the friends found the café noisy. The information
given by this candidate is not specific enough. Although the sentence is grammatically accurate no mark was
awarded.
Marks awarded for Section C = 1 out of 4

Exercise 4


Mark scheme


Overall this candidate shows a good understanding of the text. The responses are generally in note form and
the candidate has selected relevant details.
First heading: the candidate has followed the example given and the first answer is correct. The second
response needs to be more precise and include the detail of ‘Nicoya peninsula’.
Second heading: the candidate has been successful in all three answers. In each case the candidate has
written more than the required details; however all the information is correct and marks can be awarded. For
the third point in this section the candidate needs to remember that a full sentence is not needed and a brief
answer can achieve the mark.
Third heading: The candidate has supplied incorrect information for the first point as the response has no
connection with the heading ‘Ideas introduced’. For the second point, the candidate has attempted to include
three separate details. The first idea on the line, ‘public garden’ is correct and can be awarded the mark.
Candidates should be advised that in cases where several ideas are written on the same line, only the first
will receive attention. In the case of this candidate, if the answer had been written in a different order, for
example, ‘nature and trail around its lake and public garden’, no mark would have been awarded, as ‘nature
and trail’ are not accurate according to the mark scheme.


Although this candidate has not been very successful in this exercise, the responses given show
understanding of the requirements of the task and good examination technique. The candidate has
understood the general themes in the text, but comprehension of the section headings has not been entirely
secure.
First heading: the candidate has attempted to follow the example provided, but has supplied a particular
example of someone living in a ‘blue zone area’ rather than highlighting the key idea. No mark was awarded
in this first section.
Second heading: the candidate has managed to find two lifestyle characteristics in this section, but the mark
has not been awarded for the first point as this is a general introductory point rather than a specific common
characteristic.
Third heading: the candidate has correctly identified the two points which fit the heading. However, the mark
has not been awarded for the second detail as the incorrect spelling of the word ‘trail’ cannot be credited.

Exercise 5
Mark scheme


This candidate has responded well to the requirements of the task. The summary is within the maximum limit
of 80 words and has fully addressed the topic of ‘Blue Zones’. The summary starts with an introductory
sentence and the candidate uses ideas from the text in combination with some of the notes from Exercise 4
to produce an effective, well-rounded paragraph. There is a logical sequence to the points and the ideas are
connected using the linking words and phrases ‘also’ and ‘In addition’. The candidate generally shows good
control of language and has attempted to use their own words by reworking the language of the text. This
candidate has not included specific examples or direct quotes, but kept to the general themes, which is a key
aspect of summary writing.


This candidate has engaged with the task and written within the maximum limit of 80 words. There is clear
understanding of the central themes of the text and an attempt to include the key ideas. This summary,
however, relies entirely on reproducing the notes from Exercise 4 in the form of a list. To be more successful,
this candidate needs to start with a short introductory sentence and select from the notes in the previous
exercise to create a rounded cohesive paragraph. Writing about the main themes rather than specific
examples is preferable and ideas should be connected using linking words or phrases. Candidates should
always try to use their own words where possible and appropriate, by reworking the sentences and phrases
from the text and finding synonyms.

Exercise 6

Mark scheme

Mark scheme, continued



Example candidate response – middle, continued


Content: in this response the candidate has addressed all three required points. There is good development
of the second point, the central focus of the email, but considerably less detail provided for the first and third
points. The style of the email is very narrative, and there is little awareness of or interaction with the reader.
Although this piece fulfils the task for content, without some engagement with the reader it cannot be
awarded marks in the top band. Candidates should include a short sentence at the start, to involve the
reader and set the scene.
Language: the language is generally secure and the meaning is clear. There is a variety of linguistic
complexity and sentence length and there is a natural flow to the writing. The errors are infrequent and
communication is assured. Higher marks could have been awarded if the candidate had provided structure
to the writing through the use of paragraphs. Candidates are advised that in this exercise the use of
paragraphing creates an effective framework in which the main ideas can be developed.
Mark awarded for content = 5 out of 7

Mark awarded for language = 4 out of 6


Example candidate response – low, continued


Content: in this response the candidate has misunderstood the question. The focus of this response is on an
event which happens at school and not on a school trip, and for this reason the writing does not fulfil the
task. The second point has been well developed and the writer’s feelings are clear, but more careful reading
of the question to address all the main points is needed for higher marks to be awarded. The candidate has
provided an opening sentence which gives an indication of engagement with the reader and this leads on to
a natural informality of style and register which is appropriate for this question.
Language: the candidate has provided a clearly defined structure to the writing by using one paragraph for
each main point, and, in combination with an opening sentence and a closing paragraph, this gives a sense
of balance to the piece. There are frequent errors with tenses, prepositions and spelling, to the extent that at
times the meaning is unclear. With greater accuracy of language, this candidate could achieve higher marks.


Exercise 7

Mark scheme





This candidate has written at appropriate length and the writing fulfils the task. A balanced approach to the
topic has been taken and the statement is considered from both sides. There is a more formal tone to the
writing, as this exercise requires. The candidate has supplied their own opinion in the conclusion.
Content: the candidate has used the four written prompts to provide a platform for their argument, but has
not relied entirely on these ideas. For example, the candidate develops the idea of ‘having choices to do
what you want’ to include examples of these choices, such as ‘travel, buying clothes and accessories’. A
further development can be seen in the use of the candidate’s own ideas, for example, that you are
‘respected more if you have money’ and that you ‘make friends more easily’. On the other side of the
argument, the candidate has relied more closely on the prompts provided, but has also attempted to
introduce an original idea: ‘rich people’s friends are fake’.
Language: this is a well-structured piece of writing, with an introduction, a conclusion and two middle
paragraphs, one for each side of the topic. Each paragraph is clearly signposted with the writer’s intention,
‘Nowadays …’, ‘First of all …’, ‘On the other hand …’ and ‘All in all …’, which enables the reader to follow the
progress of the argument. The language is generally secure and the meaning is clear. Any errors do not
prevent communication of the message.
This is a satisfactory piece of writing. Marks in the higher band could have been awarded if the candidate
had focused more on their own ideas and developed these at greater length.




This candidate has written at appropriate length. The writing is on the topic throughout. A balanced approach
to the topic has been taken and the statement has been considered from both sides. There is a more formal
tone to the writing, as this exercise requires. The candidate has supplied their own opinion in the conclusion.
Content: this candidate has relied on the four prompts to supply the entire focus of their writing. The ideas in
the prompts have been copied and not extended or developed in any way, and there are no original thoughts
until the conclusion. If candidates need to rely on the prompts as the key element in their writing, they should
always try to rewrite them in their own words and provide examples to develop their ideas.
Language: there is a satisfactory paragraph structure to this writing; the candidate shows good writing skills
in the use of an introduction, a conclusion and two central paragraphs, one for each side of the argument.
The writer’s intention in each paragraph is clearly signposted: ‘In this day and age ...’, ‘On the one hand ...’,
‘On the other hand ...’ and ‘Finally ...’. However, the candidate has used idiomatic phrases, such as ‘you
cannot deny’, ‘there are two sides to every coin’, ‘shedding light on the above’, to such an extent that at
times the message is obscured and the meaning is unclear.
This is not an entirely satisfactory response to the exercise. Higher marks could have been awarded if the
good ideas presented in the conclusion, ‘it’s about being yourself’ and ‘You have to give and get love back’,
had appeared as a central part of this candidate’s argument.


Paper 2 – Reading and writing (extended)
Exercise 1


Mark scheme

Example candidate response – high
Examiner comment – high
The candidate attempted the whole exercise very well, selecting and copying correct details from the text.
The examination technique was very good; for example, the answers were concise, in particular the one or
two word responses to questions (d) and (f). The candidate used two lines, one for each answer, to separate
the two details required in questions (g) and (h). Spelling was very accurate and the error ‘Depatment’ in
question (i) was tolerated because the meaning was conveyed. There was one incorrect response; for
question (b) the candidate should have read the whole sentence in the text more carefully because the key
detail was in the subordinate clause in the second part of the sentence.

The candidate made a satisfactory attempt to select and copy correct details from the text. The examination
technique was very good; for example in questions (a) and (e) to (h), the answers were commendably brief
and included the correct key words. For questions (g) and (h), the candidate used two lines, one for each
answer, to separate the two details required. Spelling was very accurate but there were three incorrect
responses. For question (b), the candidate should have read the whole sentence in the text because the key
detail was in the subordinate clause in the second part of the sentence. For question (d), if the candidate had
checked their answer against the question, they might have realised that their incorrect wording conveyed
the idea that the diet of the hornbills was the ‘largest fruit-eating birds’. For both questions (d) and (i), the
candidate was not precise nor brief enough.

The candidate made an attempt to select and copy correct details from the text. The examination technique
in the five correct answers was very good, with brief responses that included the correct key words. For
questions (g) and (h), the candidate used two lines, one for each answer, to separate the two details
required. There were four incorrect responses. For questions (b) and (c), the candidate selected information
from the wrong parts of the text. For (e), the candidate overlooked the key word ‘where’ in the question. For
the final question, the candidate was not awarded the mark because their poorly-worded answer, ‘Permit has
to obtain the Forestry Department’, did not convey a meaning. The candidate’s reading of both the text and
certain questions was not precise enough.

Exercise 2

Mark scheme


The candidate attempted the exercise very well. The answers were short and generally contained the
important details required by the mark scheme. The examination technique was very good, conveying the
key points briefly and precisely. The candidate used two lines, one for each answer, to separate the
two details required in question (f). Spelling was accurate and all ideas were communicated clearly. For
question (b), the candidate was not precise enough with their selection of the key detail from the text, opting
for the first piece of information in the sentence rather than reading to the end. There was a similar error in
response to question (k), where the time expressions ‘then’ and ‘before’ were overlooked. In the final
question, the candidate’s response displayed good examination technique with numbers and short notes as
answers. The candidate understood the key word ‘character’ in the question but was not awarded a mark for
the detail ‘he was born in 1930’ because this was not a personal characteristic.



The candidate responded satisfactorily to the more straightforward questions. The answers were short and
generally contained the key details with no unnecessary wording. Spelling was accurate with the exception
of ‘scienced experiment’ in question (f), which was tolerated. There was no misunderstanding resulting from
poor grammar. The incorrect responses in questions (c) and (h) were the result of imprecise reading and
misunderstanding of the question wording. Question (h) clearly required an answer which conveyed the ‘age
group’ but the candidate wrote ‘age of 47’. For question (k), the time expressions ‘then’ and ‘before’, which
appeared later in the relevant text, were overlooked. In the final question (l), the candidate only supplied
three details when four were required.



The candidate gave brief answers which contained no irrelevant details and displayed a broad, general
understanding of the text and the questions rather than complete comprehension. There was a lack of
precision in the answers to questions (a), (e) and (i), which would have been improved through more careful
reading of the text. There were various other errors, for example, supplying one detail rather than the two
required for question (f) where two details were needed and only one was supplied. For question (g),
imprecise grammar in the answer ‘to circle the moon and command module’ changed the meaning and a
mark could not be awarded. In the final question, only two details out of four were supplied.

Exercise 3 – sections a, b and c

Mark scheme


The candidate completed the form-filling task very well. The handwriting was clear and the capital letters
were well formed. There were no spelling mistakes and the ticking and deleting tasks were done correctly.
Section A required the full names of any guests and the candidate only answered ‘Jacqueline and
Christopher’ without the family name ‘Davies’. In Section B, the first answer about the day and date was
incomplete without the month of ‘February’. There was only one task in Section C and this was completed
with total accuracy.


The candidate generally completed the form-filling task satisfactorily but with some imprecise detail due to
misunderstanding the text. The handwriting was clear enough to be able to distinguish individual parts of
words and to assess accurate spelling. The capital letters were not clearly formed in some instances and it
was hard to differentiate between upper and lower case in certain key areas such as proper nouns. In
Section A, the candidate omitted ‘The’ in front of ‘Beacon School’. In Section B, the first answer about the
day and date was incomplete without the month of ‘February’. Imprecise reading of the final sentence in the
text led to the incorrect answer ‘A Life in Films’ when giving the titles of presentations at the Careers Day. In
Section C, ‘career preferences’ was misunderstood.

The candidate attempted to add all the key details to the form and successfully completed the ticking and
deleting tasks. The handwriting was at times unclear and it was difficult to distinguish between lower and
upper case letters. There were various errors throughout the exercise. In Section A, only the first names of
the guests, ‘Jacqueline and Christopher’, were written, rather than the full names. There were two mistakes
in the address: the wrong order for the address and the lower case article in the name of the school. In
Section B, the day and date were incomplete, there was only one choice of presentations and there was a
reference to the third person ‘her’ instead of the first person. In Section C, misreading of the text meant that
only one answer ‘journalism’ was offered when ‘advertising’ also needed to be included.

Exercise 3 – section d
Mark scheme


The candidate completed the task correctly. The capital letter at the beginning of the sentence and the full
stop at the end were clearly formed. There were no spelling or grammar errors and the word length was
within the required limits. The inclusion of ‘19 words’ at the end of the sentence was not necessary because
Examiners will always count the number of words.

The candidate wrote a sentence which was precisely at the upper limit of the word length required and
conveyed maximum information. The capital letter at the beginning and the full stop at the end were clear.
The content conveyed the required information from the text. There were two grammar errors. The first was
the incorrect choice of the preposition ‘at’ instead of ‘in’ south London. The second was the verb ‘live’ instead
of ‘lives’.

The candidate wrote very clearly and the handwriting was easy to read. There was no difficulty in discerning
the capital letter at the beginning and the full stop at the end of the sentence. The use of ‘advices’ (‘advice’ is
an uncountable noun and does not take a plural form) which means credit could not be awarded. Similarly
the content of the final phrase is not relevant to the task, and could not be credited.

Exercise 4


Mark scheme


The candidate observed very good examination technique, giving their answers in note form transcribing
information accurately from the text. There was only one answer on each line, as required by the mark
scheme, and the candidate was generally able to select individual details without repetition. On one
occasion, the candidate was less precise and included the same ideas, ‘preserve tradition’ and
‘modernisation is not so advanced’, on the same line. The single error in the exercise was due to a lack of
precision when copying key detail from the text. In the first section, the candidate overlooked the key word
‘peninsula’ when referring to Nicoya. The second and third sections were well answered and the candidate
was awarded maximum marks for these.


The candidate showed good examination technique in attempting to complete the template with answers in
note form and not changing the words in the text. The transcription was free from spelling errors. There was
some imprecision when copying key detail from the stimulus text. In the first section, the first answer required
a verb, for example ‘lives’, in order to convey the correct detail. The answer ‘average seven years longer
than America’ does not convey enough meaning. The candidate was careless in leaving one line blank and
not supplying an answer. Candidates should always attempt a response even if it is a guess. In the second
section, the candidate overlooked the fact that ‘preserve tradition’ and ‘modernisation is not so advanced’
were really the same idea and so could only be credited once. The final section was well answered and the
maximum three marks were awarded.


The candidate answered in note form and with one response on each line. With the exception of the
misspelling of ‘inhabitants’ in the first line, the meaning of the answers was clear. Overall, the candidate
showed a lack of understanding of the text. In the first section, two of the answers were poorly constructed
and key words were omitted. The answer ‘highest percentage of inhabitants’ needed the key detail ‘over 90’,
and the ‘population lives seven years longer’ was incomplete without the comparison with the USA. In the
second section, ‘long and healthy life’ was too general. In the final section, the candidate displayed no
recognition or understanding of the word ‘ideas’ in the heading and all three answers made no reference to
the new features introduced in Minnesota.

Exercise 5

Mark scheme


The candidate wrote a very good summary about the benefits for young people if they learn to cook. The
length of the piece (106 words) was comfortably within the prescribed number of words. From a content point
of view, there was a good, brief introductory sentence which identified the task and focused the reader’s
attention. The ideas were well sequenced, key details were spaced throughout the summary and there was
very little detail which did not address the task. The final sentence neatly concluded the whole piece. The
candidate identified and conveyed the maximum six points for content.
From a language point of view, the spelling and punctuation were very accurate. There was a good attempt
to change the expression used in the stimulus text and to use own words, such as ‘positive outcomes’,
‘upcoming years’ and ‘boosted’. The candidate used linking expressions such as ‘first of all’, ‘as a
consequence’ and ‘last but not least’ to give a stylistic flow and a sense of order to the piece. There was
occasional awkwardness in sentence construction, for example, ‘If not in teams but with family, spending
great time is guaranteed’.



The candidate wrote a satisfactory summary about the benefits for young people if they learn to cook. The
length of the piece (112 words) was within the permitted number of words and this allowed the candidate to
include the required number of content points. From a content point of view, the introductory sentence did
not announce the topic and was irrelevant to the task. After that, the ideas were sequenced and key details
were conveyed throughout the summary. There was some irrelevance but overall there was very little detail
which did not address the task. The final sentence showed an attempt to conclude the whole piece.
From a language point of view, there were basic errors, particularly with punctuation, notably a lack of capital
letters, and single word spelling mistakes. These included ‘thier’ for ‘their’, ‘the’ for ‘they’, ‘dicide’ and ‘carrer’
for ‘career’. There was a reliance on using words and expressions from the text and there was a lack of
linking words. There was some attempt to organise ideas and, despite the inaccuracies, the meaning was
understandable.



The candidate wrote a summary which displayed a lack of good examination technique in key areas. The
length of the piece (114 words) was within the permitted number of words and the candidate indicated this at
the end of the summary. Examiners will always count the number of words, but for candidates to monitor this
themselves, as in this example, is good practice. The introduction to the piece, ‘Cooking! Yes, … etc.’ was
the wrong register and style for a summary, where factual detail from the text needs to be conveyed rather
than personal opinions. The candidate did not pay enough attention to the requirements of the task because
there was nothing of relevance until around the 70 word mark. After that, two key details were recognised
and conveyed. The final sentence attempted a brief conclusion to the whole piece.
From a language point of view, there were single word and verb errors, which included ‘launch’ for ‘lunch’,
‘everday’ and ‘children doesn’t like …’ There was a reliance on expressions lifted from the text and there was
a lack of linking words. The use of ‘If …’ to introduce sentences on four occasions made the piece repetitious
to read. There was some attempt to organise ideas and, despite the inaccuracies, the meaning was
comprehensible.


Exercise 6

Mark scheme





The candidate fully answered the question and addressed all aspects of the three bullet points. The
introductory and concluding paragraphs contained a personal element directly focusing on the reader of the
email. The register was consistently appropriate throughout and continued to address the reader with
informal expressions such as ‘you know what a crazy animal lover I am! ‘.The candidate selected a
straightforward story line but added independent and imaginative ideas, such as helping the ‘cute pandas’
and the ‘bleeding nose’ incident which developed the story and made the piece more convincing and
enjoyable to read. There was a touch of humour with the expression ‘except for my face, of course!’ The
interest of the reader was well sustained throughout.
The style was confident and the candidate was comfortable using complex, sophisticated expressions such
as ‘lost in my thoughts’ and ‘buzzing with excitement’. The candidate selected less common verbs, for
example ‘jerked forward’, with a wide range of tenses and contractions, such as ‘we’d be able to see there’
which reinforced the informal style and register. The whole piece was very accurate grammatically with just
occasional awkwardness of phrase. The paragraphs were well-constructed giving an excellent balance to the
whole piece.



The candidate addressed the requirements of the three bullet points, including the feelings of nervousness
caused by the situation. The introductory paragraph addressed the reader of the email directly in the first line
and concluded with ‘I’m dying for your letter’, which was good use of register through informal expression.
The register was generally satisfactory throughout. The candidate wrote a very straightforward story line
which lacked development or original ideas, and the whole piece fulfilled the task but with little ambition.
The style was simple and the candidate was content to use common words and expressions throughout, for
example, ‘I didn’t want to show something like that’. The meaning was clear throughout and there was brief
evidence of the ability to use more complex structures, such as, ‘I should have gone’. There were grammar
errors which showed that the candidate was not totally in control of verbs, in particular the simple past, which
is the main tense for narrative pieces. There was some mixing of tenses, for example, ‘happy to saw her
live’, ‘my classmates went and bring me …’, ‘she also turn and told my “Hello”’. Paragraphs were sparingly
used and the story would have benefited from being divided further.
Mark awarded for content = 6 out of10




The candidate only made very brief reference to the three bullet points. One requirement was to state why
the group had chosen a particular place to visit. A swimming trip is mentioned in passing rather than given
suitable prominence. For the third bullet point, the reaction to the incident was also covered simply by ‘we
were all shocked’. There was no development of these two aspects and the incident itself was dismissed
with little additional detail. There were no introductory or concluding paragraphs which addressed the friend
personally apart from ‘Today something happened and I want to tell you about’. Thereafter there was no
attempt to include the reader of the email. Generally, the storyline was not developed and there was
unnecessary detail about the place that the group was going to visit, for example, ‘There is slides and a
plenty of playgrounds that are a lot of fun’.
The vocabulary and structures were simple and the candidate used basic expressions throughout. The
meaning was clear and the use of past tense verbs was generally accurate. There were many basic
grammar errors, in particular the misspelling of single words, such as ‘the’ for ‘that’, ‘whe’ for ‘we’, ‘acciedent’
and ‘planed’ for ‘planned’. Punctuation was used sparingly with the result that the writing was at times one
long sentence. Paragraphs were non-existent and this made it difficult for the reader to separate different
ideas.


Exercise 7

Mark scheme





The candidate fully answered the question and precisely addressed the requirements of the wording in the
rubric. The introductory paragraph neatly summarised the argument as required and the concluding
paragraph made the writer’s opinion clear. The register was suitably formal and persuasive and the content
focused on the argument throughout. Each paragraph included a specific example to support the writer’s
viewpoint, whether it was the idea that money cannot buy happiness or immunity from disease, or that joy
can be found in small things and the ability to buy expensive items does not necessarily equate to a good
life. The ideas were mature and the interest of the reader was well sustained throughout.
The style was suitably formal and convincing and the candidate was comfortable with using an excellent
range of more sophisticated vocabulary, in particular adjectives such as ‘materialistic’, ‘pleasurable’,
‘exuberant’ and ‘extortionate’. The writer’s opinion was conveyed with emphasis by expressions like, ‘I
thoroughly agree with’ and ‘I firmly believe’. The paragraphs were well linked with ‘firstly’, ‘secondly’ and ‘in a
nutshell’ which gave a good balance to the whole piece. The writing throughout was very accurate
grammatically with just occasional awkwardness of phrase.




The candidate satisfactorily addressed the topic statement. The first paragraph introduced the idea that there
are both advantages and disadvantages to money and that the writer intended to convey a balanced
argument. The concluding paragraph summed up the writer’s position on the subject emphatically. The
register was appropriate, although there was some digression in the middle of the piece when the candidate
wrote about ‘cooking machines’. This was too specific and did not progress the general idea of the topic. The
arguments were straightforward and fulfilled the basic purpose of the task but did not contain much depth or
sophistication.
The candidate showed some range of expression suitable for a more formal register with expressions such
as ‘On the one hand’, On the other hand’, and ‘to sum up’, together with the more sophisticated rhetorical
question, ‘What about our friends and our relationships?’ Generally, the style was simple and the candidate
was content to use less ambitious vocabulary throughout. There were basic spelling errors, for example
‘thing’ for ‘think’ and ‘as’ for ‘us’ as well as verb errors, in particular, the lack of subject - verb agreement in
‘money don’t’. Paragraphs were used successfully to separate the candidate’s introduction, conclusion and
the different sides of the argument.



The candidate made reference to the topic throughout, but used examples rather than ideas to convey an
opinion. The argument that you do not need money to have a good life was supported by excessive
superficial detail about family, work and activities such as skydiving and scuba diving. These were
digressions and the writer’s opinion was not persuasively expressed, being implied rather than explicitly
stated. The final line very briefly summarised the message that the candidate wished to convey. The whole
piece lacked any depth and did not totally fulfil the task.
The candidate used very basic expressions throughout and lacked the vocabulary to be able to convey ideas
and opinions persuasively. The structures were simple, for example, the first sentence: ‘Life can be good and
beautiful wether (sic) you have a lot of money or you don’t it’s just about how you live your life if your (sic)
enjoying it or not’. There was a lack of punctuation but the meaning was clear and the spelling of basic words
was generally accurate. Paragraphs were non-existent, with no introduction or conclusion or division of
ideas, and this made it difficult for the reader to be persuaded by the writer’s opinion.


Back cover
Cambridge International Examinations

1 Hills Road, Cambridge, CB1 2EU, United Kingdom
tel: +44 1223 553554 fax: +44 1223 553558
email: info@cie.org.uk www.cie.org.uk

Example Candidate Responses PDF

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Example Candidate Responses PDF

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Cambridge IGCSE®

English as a Second Language

0510 (speaking endorsement)

Please follow the link below to register your interest.

® IGCSE is the registered trademark of Cambridge International Examinations.

Assessment at a glance .................................................................................................... 3

Paper 1 – Reading and writing (core) ............................................................................... 5

Paper 2 – Reading and writing (extended)..................................................................... 50

2 Cambridge IGCSE English as a Second Language (0511)

Cambridge IGCSE English as a Second Language (0511) 3

4 Cambridge IGCSE English as a Second Language (0511)

Paper 1 – Reading and writing (core)

Cambridge IGCSE English as a Second Language (0511) 5

6 Cambridge IGCSE English as a Second Language (0511)

Cambridge IGCSE English as a Second Language (0511) 7

Example candidate response – middle

Examiner comment – middle

Mark awarded = 6 out of 7

8 Cambridge IGCSE English as a Second Language (0511)

Example candidate response – low

Examiner comment – low

Mark awarded = 4 out of 7

Cambridge IGCSE English as a Second Language (0511) 9

10 Cambridge IGCSE English as a Second Language (0511)

Cambridge IGCSE English as a Second Language (0511) 11

12 Cambridge IGCSE English as a Second Language (0511)

Example candidate response – middle

Cambridge IGCSE English as a Second Language (0511) 13

Examiner comment – middle

Mark awarded = 8 out of 11

14 Cambridge IGCSE English as a Second Language (0511)

Example candidate response – low

Cambridge IGCSE English as a Second Language (0511) 15

Examiner comment – low

Mark awarded = 6 out of 11

16 Cambridge IGCSE English as a Second Language (0511)

Cambridge IGCSE English as a Second Language (0511) 17

18 Cambridge IGCSE English as a Second Language (0511)

Cambridge IGCSE English as a Second Language (0511) 19

Example candidate response – middle

20 Cambridge IGCSE English as a Second Language (0511)

Examiner comment – middle

Mark awarded for Sections A and B = 9 out of 10

Marks awarded for Section C = 2 out of 4

Total marks awarded = 11 out of 14

Cambridge IGCSE English as a Second Language (0511) 21

Example candidate response – low

22 Cambridge IGCSE English as a Second Language (0511)

Examiner comment – low

Mark awarded for Sections A and B = 5 out of 10

Marks awarded for Section C = 1 out of 4

Total marks awarded = 6 out of 14

Cambridge IGCSE English as a Second Language (0511) 23

24 Cambridge IGCSE English as a Second Language (0511)

Cambridge IGCSE English as a Second Language (0511) 25

26 Cambridge IGCSE English as a Second Language (0511)

Example candidate response – middle

Examiner comment – middle

Mark awarded = 5 out of 7

Cambridge IGCSE English as a Second Language (0511) 27

Example candidate response – low

Examiner comment – low

Mark awarded = 3 out of 7