This week you'll write a comparative analysis of Tom and Clara, who prepare for the same big assessment in very different ways. Read the sample below, then answer the questions. Notice how the student looks not just at what each person does, but why their strategies lead to different results.
Structure & Cohesion
A clear frame — point by point, or one approach then the other.
Signposts like 'in contrast', 'similarly', 'however' linking ideas.
Ideas that connect on the page, so the reader follows the comparison.
A path from describing each approach to drawing the wider point.
-
Movement: between ideas with clear connections that guide the reader.
Language Choices
Precise wording — 'Tom studies longer but with less focus' beats 'Tom works harder'.
Comparison words like 'whereas', 'in contrast', 'on the other hand'.
No emotional language that tilts the analysis.
Clear naming of actions and the relationships between them.
-
Precision: in describing actions and relationships, not in emotional language.
Task in one sentence
Compare Tom's and Clara's preparation strategies in 288-352 words, examining what each gets right, what each gets wrong, and what it reveals about anxiety and performance.
Ideas & Content
Strong writing this week compares Tom's high-effort approach with Clara's focused one, then digs into why the outcomes don't match the effort. The sample student suggests Tom mixes up worrying with preparing — anxiety done as study. That insight is the heart of the analysis.
What markers scan for
- A clear comparison of both approaches.
- Analysis of why the outcomes differ.
- Thinking about how anxiety and real preparation link.
- Insight that goes beyond the surface of the stimulus.
Score Bands
-
Basic
Describes what Tom and Clara do, but the analysis stays on the surface or is missing.
-
Strong
Compares approaches clearly; links each to outcomes; suggests why anxiety and preparation might differ.
-
Excellent
Fair, detailed comparison; ties actions to results; clear insight into the anxiety-preparation link.
Structure & Cohesion
Strong writing this week organises the comparison point by point, then draws larger conclusions about anxiety and performance. Words like 'whereas', 'in contrast', and 'however' guide the reader through. The piece builds from describing strategies to analysing their effects.
What markers scan for
- Clear organisation comparing both approaches.
- Strong transitions that show relationships between ideas.
- Logical flow from description to analysis to conclusion.
- A reader who can see exactly how ideas connect.
Score Bands
-
Basic
Both approaches appear but aren't clearly linked; transitions are weak; the comparison is hard to follow.
-
Strong
Approaches are compared clearly with good transitions; organisation is logical; reader can follow without effort.
-
Excellent
Comparison flows seamlessly; structure supports the analysis; reader sees exactly how each idea connects.
Student sample for assessment
Written by a Year 7 student in Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.
Tom and Clara take opposite approaches to preparing for a major assessment. Tom increases his study time dramatically, reviews everything multiple times, and cannot stop thinking about the assessment. He sleeps less and becomes exhausted. Clara keeps almost everything the same, studies once, identifies weak areas, and worries very little. Their different strategies lead to very different outcomes, but the difference is surprising. Tom's approach seems logical at first. More study should mean better performance. However, his outcomes do not match his effort. He performs below what his preparation should suggest. Why? The problem might be that Tom is confusing worrying about an assessment with preparing for one. He studies frantically, but his mind is partly on anxiety. His exhaustion on the day of the assessment works against him. His body and brain are tired. More study hours do not help if you cannot actually use what you have learned because you are exhausted. Clara does the opposite. She keeps her routine normal and her anxiety low. She studies deliberately — not less, just more focused. She identifies exactly where she is weakest and targets that area. Her preparation is actually preparation, not a symptom of anxiety. Her consistent routine and good sleep mean she arrives at the assessment rested. Her results match what her actual preparation should predict. The comparison suggests something important: preparing for an assessment and worrying about one are not the same thing. Tom mistakes anxiety for diligence. He believes that more study time equals better results. But he sacrifices sleep and focus in the process. Clara understands that effective preparation is calm and targeted. The relationship between anxiety and performance is inverse. The more anxious you are, the less effectively you can perform — even if you have studied. Tom's outcomes show this clearly. He studied more but performed worse. He did not fail because he did not prepare. He underperformed because his preparation was contaminated by anxiety.
