You are viewing a free preview of this lesson.
Subscribe to unlock all 12 lessons in this course and every other course on LearningBro.
Evaluation is one of the most challenging skills tested in the FSCE 11+ exam, but it is also one of the most rewarding. When you evaluate a text, you are making a judgement about it. You might be asked whether you agree with an argument, whether a description is effective, whether a character's actions are justified, or whether the author has achieved their purpose.
Evaluation questions require you to have your own opinion AND to support it with evidence from the text. This lesson will show you how to structure evaluation answers and provide model answers at different quality levels.
To evaluate means to make a judgement about the quality, effectiveness, or validity of something. In the FSCE exam, evaluation questions often use phrases like:
These questions do not have one right answer. What matters is the quality of your argument and how well you support it with evidence.
graph TD
A["Read the Evaluation Question"] --> B["Form Your Opinion"]
B --> C["Find Evidence to Support It"]
C --> D["Consider the Other Side"]
D --> E["Write a Balanced, Evidenced Answer"]
E --> F["Conclude with Your Overall Judgement"]
Use this 4-part structure:
Read the passage:
Mobile phones should be banned for all children under 14. Research from the University of Cambridge shows that children who use phones for more than two hours a day score 15% lower in reading tests. Phones also damage sleep: the blue light from screens tricks the brain into thinking it is daytime, making it harder to fall asleep. Furthermore, social media platforms expose children to cyberbullying, unrealistic body images, and harmful content. Parents managed perfectly well before mobile phones existed, and children were happier and healthier for it.
Question: How convincing do you find this argument? Explain your answer.
Weak answer: "I think this is quite convincing because phones are bad for children and the research proves it."
Good answer: "This argument is partly convincing because it uses research from the University of Cambridge to support its claim that phone use reduces reading scores, and the science about blue light and sleep is well-known. However, it would be more convincing with more evidence."
Excellent answer: "This argument makes several convincing points but also has some weaknesses. The strongest evidence is the Cambridge University research showing that children who use phones for more than two hours a day score 15% lower in reading tests. This is a specific, measurable statistic from a credible source, which makes it persuasive. The point about blue light and sleep is also convincing because it is based on established science.
However, the argument has some weaknesses. The claim that 'parents managed perfectly well before mobile phones existed' is an opinion, not a fact, and it ignores the reality that modern life is different -- many parents rely on phones to contact their children for safety reasons. The sweeping statement that 'children were happier and healthier' is also unsupported by evidence and is arguably an idealised view of the past.
Additionally, the argument only presents one side. It does not acknowledge any potential benefits of phones for children, such as educational apps, staying in touch with family, or accessing information. A more convincing argument would address these benefits and explain why the risks outweigh them.
Overall, I find the argument partially convincing. Its strongest points are supported by evidence, but its weaker claims rely on opinion and nostalgia rather than facts, and it fails to consider alternative viewpoints."
Why the excellent answer is better: It evaluates specific parts of the argument separately, identifies both strengths and weaknesses, uses evidence from the text, considers what is missing, and reaches a balanced conclusion. This is exactly what FSCE examiners are looking for.
The forest was alive. Trees pressed in on every side, their branches reaching down like the arms of giants trying to grab him. The path had disappeared beneath a carpet of dead leaves that whispered and crackled with every step. Somewhere above, a bird screamed -- a high, sharp sound that cut through the silence like a blade. Marcus walked faster, his breath coming in short gasps, his eyes darting from shadow to shadow.
Question: How effectively does the author create a sense of danger in this passage?
Excellent answer: "The author creates a highly effective sense of danger through a combination of personification, simile, and sensory details.
The personification of the trees 'reaching down like the arms of giants trying to grab him' is particularly effective because it transforms the forest from a passive setting into an active threat. The simile comparing the branches to giants suggests enormous power, and the word 'grab' implies hostile intent, making the reader feel that Marcus is surrounded by danger.
The sensory details add to the threat. The dead leaves that 'whispered and crackled' create auditory imagery that suggests secrecy and unease. The bird's scream is described as 'a high, sharp sound that cut through the silence like a blade' -- the simile comparing the sound to a blade is violent and sudden, making the reader jump. The contrast between 'silence' and 'screamed' heightens the shock.
Marcus's physical reactions -- 'short gasps,' 'eyes darting from shadow to shadow' -- confirm the danger by showing his fear. The phrase 'darting from shadow to shadow' suggests there could be threats hiding everywhere.
One small criticism might be that the phrase 'the forest was alive' at the start is a somewhat common expression that does not quite match the originality of the descriptions that follow. However, it does serve as an effective opening that sets the tone for the rest of the passage.
Overall, the description is very effective. The author uses multiple techniques working together -- personification, simile, sensory details, and the character's physical responses -- to create a powerful, sustained sense of danger."
Subscribe to continue reading
Get full access to this lesson and all 12 lessons in this course.