Choosing a Value-Based Question That Cannot Be Answered by Plot Recall
A supplementary-reader question-setting panel is replacing a recalled item in the 5-mark value-based section. The text involves a narrator who keeps a friend's secret about a debt, and a third person who loses money as a result. The brief says the question must (a) require a value judgement, (b) allow two defensible positions, (c) be answerable in 80-100 words with one textual consequence, and (d) not reward plot summary. Draft 1: 'What happened when the narrator went to the station?' Draft 2: 'The narrator says, "I kept the secret because I promised." Using one consequence for the third person, argue whether keeping the promise was the right action. Support your view with one detail.' Draft 3: 'Was the narrator selfish? Justify your answer.' The panel has time to revise only one draft.
1. Which draft best meets the brief, and which is least suitable? Justify with reference to each criterion.
Read the worked answer
Draft 2 best meets the brief. It requires a judgement ('was keeping the promise right?'), allows at least two defensible positions (loyalty to a promise versus harm to a third person), demands one consequence as evidence, and cannot be answered by retelling the station trip. Draft 1 fails (d): it is pure recall. Draft 3 is weaker than 2 because 'Was the narrator selfish?' invites a character verdict rather than a judgement about an action; a student can answer 'yes' or 'no' with assertion and no consequence. It also tends to collapse into name-calling. Draft 2 is therefore the only draft that satisfies all four criteria.
2. Revise Draft 3 into a question that meets criteria (b) and (c).
Read the worked answer
Rewrite: 'The narrator kept a promise, and a third person lost money as a result. Do you think loyalty to the promise was more important than the harm done, or was the harm a reason to break it? Take one position and support it with one consequence from the text.' This meets (b) by making both sides arguable and (c) by requiring a consequence, not a summary. It avoids the yes/no moral label of Draft 3.
3. What would a plot-summary answer look like, and what instruction would you add to prevent it?
Read the worked answer
A plot-summary answer would say what happened - the narrator went here, met this person, kept the secret - without weighing the decision. To prevent it, add: 'Do not retell the events. Use one consequence only as evidence for your judgement.' Marking should cap such answers at 2/5, because they show knowledge but not evaluation. The instruction shifts the task from memory to judgement.