Eduqas A-Level English Language and Literature: Component 3 Non-Literary Texts overview quiz quiz

A single closed-book essay on one prescribed non-fiction text, worth the whole of the component on its own

An unseen poetry comparison in which two poems met cold are compared closely against the clock with no preparation

A 2 hour paper worth 20 percent, in two sections: a comparison of unseen spoken and non-literary texts and an analysis of a studied non-literary text

A creative non-fiction coursework folder marked entirely by the centre and then moderated by the awarding board each year rather than sat as a timed written exam

Because a transcript is always far shorter than a comparable passage of written prose

Because transcripts contain no punctuation marks at all and so cannot be read as prose

Because the talk recorded in a transcript is always informal, casual and unplanned speech

Its meaning is in the turns, overlaps, repairs and face-work, not only in the words

Real-time planning, hesitation, emphasis, turn-management or thought

Pure carelessness and error on the part of an inattentive speaker

A carefully scripted and rehearsed performance learned in advance

Nothing of any analytical value at all that is worth commenting on at all

The factual information it contains, summarised and paraphrased point by point

What it does to its reader: how its language positions the reader to feel or think

Its factual accuracy alone, checked carefully against the known facts of the matter

Its length and the number of words and paragraphs it happens to run to in total

Because all non-fiction is in truth simply fiction in disguise and contains no real facts at all to analyse

Because using lots of literary technical terms in an answer is the surest way to impress the examiner marking it

Much of it is literary non-fiction using focalisation, narrative method, voice and suspense to shape the reader

Because non-fiction contains no verifiable facts of any kind and so must be treated exactly as if it were fiction

By stating the whole argument openly and explicitly so the reader can weigh it up first

By using unusually long and elaborate sentences that the reader has to work hard to follow

By avoiding any direct address to the reader and never using the second person at all

By smuggling in an assumption the reader is led to accept before it is examined

Each point exists only as comparison; you could not split it into separate single-text halves

It names all of the texts together once in the introduction and then moves on without returning

It analyses each of the texts fully in its own entirely separate section, one after another in turn

It draws the texts together and compares them only in the very last paragraph at the end of the essay

Because all of the texts set in Section A always share one single mode, making mode the obvious likeness

The texts are often of different modes, so comparing how each exploits its mode gives a precise axis

Because the mode of a text is by far the easiest single feature to name quickly at the start of an answer

Because the mode of a text is never assessed at all in Section A, only its theme, audience and purpose

The writer's biography and personal life story, used to account for the text

The historical period and literary tradition the text belongs to and grows out of

Mode, audience and purpose: the kind of text, who it addresses, and what it seeks to do

The exam board's own published mark scheme and the exact wording of the assessment objectives

Stated generically in a single opening paragraph and then never referred to again in the rest of the answer

Ignored entirely in favour of simply summarising the content and all the information the text happens to contain instead

Listed briefly at the very end of the answer as a closing remark, once all the language analysis is finished

Every feature read as serving them: this feature does this because the text is this mode, for this audience, to this end

Summarising the content rather than analysing how the writing shapes the reader

Over-analysing the language in far too much fine detail at the expense of the argument

Quoting far too often and at far too great a length throughout the whole of the answer

Spending too long considering the genre and conventions of the text rather than its language

As a written page essay meant only to be read silently and never to be heard delivered aloud at all

As a scripted-spoken hybrid: rhetoric built for the ear, direct address and prosodic emphasis projected to a listening audience

As spontaneous, unplanned everyday conversation that is full of natural fillers, hesitations, false starts, repairs and overlapping turns

As a multimodal image text whose meaning rests on its layout, typography, colour and accompanying pictures