10Q/Ci1 Citizenship: 12 Mark Evaluation Feedback (prisoner treatment)

Marking Overview

Total Scripts:
32

Question:
Should prisons make prisoners work? (12 marks)

Marks:
12 marks

Average Grade:
?/12

Success Criteria for a 12-Mark Answer

This guide is based on an analysis of a real student script that scored 12/12. It shows what is needed to reach the top marks.

Length and Structure: Aim for a concise and focused answer of around **300-320 words**. The best answers follow a clear 3 or 4 paragraph structure: an introduction, one or two body paragraphs, and a conclusion.
Start with a Clear Judgement: Your first paragraph must directly answer the question ("Which view do you agree with more?"). State your final judgement clearly and briefly introduce the main reason why.
Evaluate, Don't Just Summarise: The main body of your answer should not just describe what each source says. You must actively **evaluate** by:
- Directly comparing the two arguments and explaining which is stronger or weaker.
- Critiquing the quality of the evidence used (e.g., is it based on **facts and statistics** or just **opinion**?).
- Considering the potential bias or limited perspective of the writers.
Use Your Own Knowledge: To reach the highest marks, you should bring in **one or two specific examples or pieces of factual knowledge** from outside the sources to support your evaluation and strengthen your argument.
Write a Powerful Conclusion: Your final paragraph should not simply repeat your introduction. It should summarise your key evaluative points and provide a final, reasoned justification for why one argument is fundamentally more persuasive than the other.

Source Texts for this Assignment

Sarah Shemkus says YES

UK prisons should copy the example of the US where 88% of inmates participate in productive prison work. Prisoners run laundry rooms and kitchens, transcribe textbooks into Braille and build desks. They can also be found moulding dentures, grinding lenses for glasses, upholstering chairs as well as more skilled and complex work such as computer coding. We need prisons to protect the public but they can do much more. Supporters say the training they offer is essential for preparing prisoners to succeed in life after release. Such training includes improving literacy skills. These programmes produce goods and services that are often sold to outside customers, such as government agencies and schools. Advocates of these programs believe working while in prison can teach inmates technical and also transferable skills. Work keeps prisoners busy and less likely to cause problems inside. Many offenders have never had a legal job. So they need to learn the basics such as showing up on time, listening to a supervisor and working as part of a team. The advantage of this is that prisoners pay back to society and to the individuals they harmed when they committed their crimes. In addition many US states note that prisoners who participate fully in work are less likely to reoffend following release. That is a core aim of prison, to reintegrate them into society.

Helen Brown Coverdale says NO

Making all prisoners work will not make prison work. US work programmes often verge on enslavement, with inmates paid little or no wages. Often the tasks they are given are unmatched to their skills, interests and ambitions. Prisoners at work are often denied the health and safety benefits and protections a civilian job would provide. It is not work in a real context. Work is not the answer to the crisis in the prison system in England and Wales. Work will not solve increases in unrest, riots and escapes. It will not put a stop to prisoner assaults on staff and prisoners, as well as prisoner self-harm and suicide. Almost 100 years ago, Prison Commissioner Alexander Paterson argued that people are sent to prison as punishment, not for punishment. The purpose of prison is to protect the public, reform and rehabilitate offenders. It also prepares prisoners for life outside prison and to maintain an environment that is safe and secure. We do need prisoners to play a full part in society but forcing them into hard work will not achieve this. We need a wider solution for them not to reoffend. We must not lose sight of prisoners as people, with pasts and presents. They also have families and futures. For them - just as much as victims and society - we must remember how to care.

Select Student to View Marked Work:

Model Answer - Grade: 12/12

Which writer do you agree with most? Explain your answer referring to arguments made in both parts of the source

Student Response:

I agree more with the view from Sarah Shemkus.A clear and decisive introduction that directly answers the question. Although Helen Brown Coverdale raises important ethical questions, Shemkus’s argument is more convincing because it is forward-looking and provides a practical solution to the problem of reoffending, which should be the primary aim of the prison system.

The key difference between the writers is their view on the purpose of prison.This sentence immediately starts evaluating by comparing the two core philosophies. Coverdale, citing Alexander Paterson, argues people are sent to prison "as punishment, not for punishment", suggesting that rehabilitation is the goal. However, her argument that work is like "enslavement" and fails to solve issues like unrest contradicts this, as she offers no alternative method for rehabilitation. Shemkus, on the other hand, sees rehabilitation as an active process. Her view that work teaches "technical and also transferable skills" is powerful because it addresses a key cause of reoffending. As many UK charities for ex-offenders note, a stable job is the single most important factor in preventing a return to crime.This is excellent use of own knowledge to support the source's argument and strengthen the evaluation.

Furthermore, Shemkus provides strong statistical evidence from the US that prisoners who work are "less likely to reoffend", whereas Coverdale’s argument is based more on philosophical principles without providing data.This is another high-level evaluation, critiquing the quality of the evidence presented by each writer, just as the exam exemplar did. While Coverdale’s point that work is not in a "real context" due to a lack of health and safety protections is valid, it is a weaker argument. This is a problem that could be fixed with better regulation, whereas the problem of reoffending, which Shemkus addresses, is far more fundamental. Coverdale's perspective is also limited; she focuses entirely on the prisoner, failing to address the need for prisoners to "pay back to society", as Shemkus notes.This critiques the bias or limited perspective of one of the writers, showing deep critical thinking.

In conclusion, I agree more with Sarah Shemkus. Her argument is more persuasive as it is supported by evidence and provides a practical solution to the most important issue, which is reducing reoffending to protect the public.The conclusion summarises the key evaluative points (evidence, practicality) and explains why one argument is ultimately stronger than the other. While Coverdale’s concerns for prisoner welfare are important, her argument is less complete and fails to address the wider societal need for rehabilitation.

Detailed Feedback

✅ Strengths of this Model Answer

**Concise & Focused:** It is approximately 310 words long, similar to a real exam answer.
**Evaluative Throughout:** It constantly compares the two sources and makes judgements.
**Uses Own Knowledge:** It brings in external facts to support its points.
**Critiques Evidence:** It assesses the *quality* of the arguments (statistics vs. opinion).

🔄 How this answer gets top marks

It moves beyond simple summary to build a coherent and critical argument.
The conclusion is a powerful summary of the evaluation, directly explaining why one source is more convincing than the other.
It demonstrates all the key skills of analysis, comparison, and evaluation required for a Level 4 (10-12 marks) response.

Next Steps: Aim to replicate this style in your own answers. Focus not just on what the sources say, but on which source makes a better, more convincing, or better-supported argument, and explain your reasoning clearly.

Grade: 12/12 marks - A concise, well-structured, and highly evaluative response that uses own knowledge.

4473 - Candidate: N/A - Projected Grade: 5/12

Which writer do you agree with most? Explain your answer referring to arguments made in both parts of the source

Student Response:

I agree with this statement because this could help them improve their skills, like cleaning, washing clothes. We also need prisons to protect the public. Another reason is that it will help them be successful after they get discharge. Another reason is that (SS) points that they need to learn the basics such as showing up on time.Good analysis of a key point from Shemkus. they fail to realise that not everyone shows up on time.This is your own opinion. Try to focus on explaining the arguments in the text. I agree with (SS) as they clearly point out it helps them improve their literacy skillsAnother good point of analysis. which means that they can have a better reading age and a positive mindset. I agree to an extent with (HBC) points as they cleary point out that they are given tasks unmatched to their skills.Excellent - you are now showing balance by bringing in the other source. I agree more with (HBC)This contradicts your earlier points where you agreed with Shemkus. You need to have one consistent argument. as they make clear arguements of why they shouldn't work in prison. they clearly point out the purpose of prison is to protect the public and they sent to prison for punishments and not for working, so in conclusion, (HBC) makes clear points and provides a better reason of why they shouldn't be working.

Detailed Feedback

✅ Strengths (What you have started well)

You have analysed arguments from both sources.
You have identified several key points from the text.

🔄 How to complete the answer for a top grade

Your argument is very contradictory. You state you agree with Shemkus, but then conclude by saying you agree with Coverdale. You must choose one and build a consistent case.
The structure is very disorganised, jumping between points without clear paragraphs.

Next Steps: Plan your argument before you write. Decide which writer you agree with most, and then structure your whole essay to support that one conclusion. A good structure would be: 1. Introduction (your judgement). 2. Paragraph analysing the writer you agree with. 3. Paragraph analysing the other writer. 4. Conclusion (confirming your judgement).

Projected Grade: 5/12 - A disorganised and contradictory answer that shows some understanding of the sources.

4406 - Candidate: N/A - Projected Grade: 3/12

Which writer do you agree with most? Explain your answer referring to arguments made in both parts of the source

Student Response:

I agree with Sarah Shemkus because she's right, the UK prisons should copy the example of the US where 88% of inmates participateA clear start that states your view and uses evidence from the text. in productive prison work. She's right because in the UK people of the prison don't make the prisonner busy that can make dangerous problem.This point is not from the source text and is difficult to understand. Try to focus on the arguments provided. However that why she said work keeps prisoners busy and less likely to cause problems inside.Good - you are now correctly identifying an argument from the source. Many offenders have never had a legal job. Also public need to be protect so that why Sarah interpect when she said we need prisons to protect the public.Your writing is very unclear here, making it hard to understand your point. Finally I'm disagree with Helen Brown Coverdale because he's not right.You need to explain *why* she is not right. Simply stating disagreement is not analysis. For Helen prisoners don't need to work but that bad why he's present making all prisoners...

Detailed Feedback

✅ Strengths (What you have started well)

You have a clear point of view.
You have tried to use evidence from the source text.

🔄 How to complete the answer for a top grade

The quality of your writing is very poor, which makes your answer confusing and difficult to understand.
Your answer is very one-sided. You have not explained any of Helen Brown Coverdale's arguments, you have only dismissed them.
You have made factual errors (referring to Coverdale as 'he').

Next Steps: You must focus on writing in clear, simple sentences. It is also essential that you fairly explain the arguments from *both* sources before you make a judgement. You cannot get high marks by only discussing one side of the argument.

Projected Grade: 3/12 - A very unclear, one-sided answer that is difficult to understand.

4528 - Candidate: N/A - Projected Grade: 8/12

Which writer do you agree with most? Explain your answer referring to arguments made in both parts of the source

Student Response:

I agree with Helen Brown (HB) to a certain extent.A good, nuanced start to your essay. This is because she mentions how 'People are set to prison as punishment not for punishment'Excellent analysis of the key philosophical argument from the source. meaning prisoners should have'nt to work hard labour in their prison sentence. HB also mentions how the US work programmes often verge on enslavement, with inmates paid little or no wages. The issue with that is it goes against the prisoners human right to be forced into work. However, I also agree with Sarah Shemku (SS)This phrasing makes your argument sound contradictory. You should frame this as a counter-argument that you find less convincing. as she mentions 88% of inmates participate in productive prison work, such as kitchens and laundery rooms. However she forgets to mention how prisoners can use their jobs to cause trouble. For example a prisoner can get hold of a knife or sharp object during their shift in the kitchen can cause harm to other inmates.This is a fantastic piece of evaluation. You are using your own knowledge and logical reasoning to identify a weakness in Shemkus's argument. Overall, I agree with HB as she states "prisoners are still people and deserves to play a part into society without being forced into work".A good conclusion that summarises your final judgement.

Detailed Feedback

✅ Strengths (What you have started well)

You have a clear structure with an introduction, analysis of both sides, and a conclusion.
You show excellent evaluation skills by using your own knowledge to challenge an argument from the source.
You explain the arguments clearly and show a good understanding.

🔄 How to complete the answer for a top grade

Your argument is slightly contradictory. Your introduction and conclusion state that you agree with Coverdale, but your analysis of Shemkus is presented as an agreement ("I also agree with..."). This is a little confusing.

Note: Your evaluation is excellent. To make your overall argument even stronger and more consistent, present the opposing view as a counter-argument.

Improved Structure:

"On the other hand, Sarah Shemkus makes a case for prison work, citing that 88% of US inmates participate. However, her argument is weakened by the fact that she fails to consider...This phrasing makes it clear that you are explaining Shemkus's point only to challenge it, which strengthens your overall argument for Coverdale."

Next Steps: You have excellent skills. Focus on making your overall argument as consistent and clear as possible by framing the points you disagree with as counter-arguments.

Projected Grade: 8/12 - A strong and evaluative answer, let down slightly by a contradictory tone.

4508 - Candidate: N/A - Projected Grade: 9/12

Which writer do you agree with most? Explain your answer referring to arguments made in both parts of the source

Student Response:

I agree with Sarah Shemkus (SS).A clear start stating your view. This is because SS accentuates the fact that prisoners should spend their time in prison serving a purpose rather than rotting away doing nothing. For example, SS says that prisoners should be trained so that they can be prepared to succeed in life after release.Good, clear analysis of the source's main idea. This could help them greatly improve their literacy skills, which would be a huge benefit to both the country and its economy. In addition SS states that work could be used as a preventative measure to reduce the crime rate.Good analysis of another key point from the source. For example, prisoners will be far too busy working to commit crimes. This would benefit both the country and the prisoners as the prisoners wouldn't serve further time in prison and things would run more smoothly. On the other hand, you could argue that Helen Brown Coverdale (HBC) has a good point.Perfect. You are now showing balance by fairly and accurately analysing the other source. This is because HBC expresses certain views that could solve even bigger issues in our country. For example, she states that work will not solve unrest, riots and escapes.

Detailed Feedback

✅ Strengths (What you have started well)

You have a clear, balanced structure and analyse arguments from both sources.
Your analysis is detailed and well-explained, linking the source's points to wider concepts like the economy.
Your writing is formal and analytical.

🔄 How to complete the answer for a top grade

You have done a fantastic job of analysing the sources. The only thing missing is a concluding paragraph.
Your conclusion needs to make a final judgement and explain *why* Shemkus's practical arguments about the economy and preventing crime are more persuasive to you than Coverdale's warnings about unrest.

Next Steps: You are on track for a top mark. Plan and write your conclusion. It should start with a sentence like: "In conclusion, I agree more with Sarah Shemkus. While Helen Brown Coverdale raises valid concerns about prison unrest, Shemkus's argument for using work as a tool to reduce reoffending is more compelling because it addresses the primary goal of the justice system: to make society safer."

Projected Grade: 9/12 - A well-structured and highly analytical answer that just needs a conclusion.

7201 - Candidate: N/A - Projected Grade: 6/12

Which writer do you agree with most? Explain your answer referring to arguments made in both parts of the source

Student Response:

Prisoner's should work while in prison as it prepares them for life outside prison. One reason why prisons should work while being locked up is because it prepares them for the gives them skills that could help them succeed later on in life.A clear analysis of a key point from Shemkus. For example many who have been arrested have dropped out of school and formal education to persue this big income so by having them work it gives them these qualifications that they may have not recived in their past to succeed. This means that it will be easier to gain jobs and a stable income that prevents them going to crime for support.Excellent analysis, where you explain the long-term benefit of the skills being taught. However making them work could be see as a fit form of enslavement as they may not have are not being paid for this work yet it's still being sold to make a proset.Good - you are now showing balance by bringing in the key counter-argument from Coverdale. As well as this putting prisoners to work isn't stopping the problem of overcroding and riots.

Detailed Feedback

✅ Strengths (What you have started well)

You have a clear structure and analyse arguments from both sides of the debate.
Your analysis is good, and you explain the logic behind the arguments in your own words.

🔄 How to complete the answer for a top grade

You need to state your overall judgement clearly in the introduction. The question asks who you agree with most.
You have analysed the sources, but you have not yet evaluated them.
You are missing a conclusion where you weigh the two arguments and make a final judgement.

Next Steps: You have a great foundation of analysis. To improve, add an introduction that states your overall opinion, and a conclusion that explains it. In your conclusion, you need to decide which argument is more important: the practical benefit of skills (Shemkus) or the moral problem of enslavement (Coverdale).

Projected Grade: 6/12 - A well-analysed and balanced answer that is missing a clear judgement.

4504 - Candidate: N/A - Projected Grade: 7/12

Which writer do you agree with most? Explain your answer referring to arguments made in both parts of the source

Student Response:

I agree with Sarah Shemkus to an extent, this is because if prisoners work in prison this distracts them from committing more crimes in prison, such as, fighting, arguing etc.A good start stating your view and analysing a key point. This also helps them reflect on their behaviour. This is good so that when their time in prison ends they can succeed with a job. Working in prison can teach them various skills and teach them that offending and committing crimes isn't the best option.Good analysis of the rehabilitation argument. It's important that prisoners know how to work as a team so that they don't hurt eachother and cause more problems. This is good to reintegrate them to society. Wheras I partially agree with Helen Brown, this is because it is not fair that people commit crime and go to prison to work.Good - you are now moving to the other source to show balance. We could also argue that people are sent to prison as punishment and not as a chance to work.Excellent analysis of Coverdale's key philosophical point. Overall I agree with SS because people deserve second chances and a new restart.A clear conclusion that states your final judgement and gives a simple reason.

Detailed Feedback

✅ Strengths (What you have started well)

You have a clear structure with an introduction, balanced analysis, and a conclusion.
You analyse arguments from both sources clearly and explain them in your own words.
You understand the key points of the debate.

🔄 How to complete the answer for a top grade

You have done a good job of analysing the sources. The next step is to add more evaluation.
Your conclusion is a little simple. You need to explain *why* Shemkus's argument about 'second chances' is more convincing than Coverdale's argument about 'punishment'.

Next Steps: You have a great structure. To get into the top marks, your conclusion needs to be more developed. It should directly compare the two main arguments and explain why one is stronger. For example: "In conclusion, although Coverdale's point about punishment is valid, I agree more with Shemkus. Her view that work provides a 'new restart' is more important because the ultimate goal of prison should be rehabilitation, not just punishment, to prevent future crimes."

Projected Grade: 7/12 - A well-structured and well-analysed answer that needs more evaluation.

4253 - Candidate: N/A - Projected Grade: 6/12

Which writer do you agree with most? Explain your answer referring to arguments made in both parts of the source

Student Response:

I agree with Sarah Shemkus (SS), as when prisoners are released, they need to reintegrate into society.A clear start stating your view. Without this help, they will struggle to find places of work. This is an issue because this can cause even more crimes to occur, for example robberies.Good analysis where you explain the real-world consequence of not rehabilitating prisoners. Working in prison will help those in prison to keep their minds running and not let them fall behind. However, some people may agree with Helen brown (H.B), as she states that "Making all prisoners work will not make prison work".Good - you are now bringing in the other source to show balance. The statement is strong because the whole purpose of prison is for people to have a consequence.A clear explanation of Coverdale's argument. Working puts them in a position they were in before.

Detailed Feedback

✅ Strengths (What you have started well)

You have a clear, balanced structure and analyse arguments from both sources.
You explain the arguments in your own words and show you understand the debate.

🔄 How to complete the answer for a top grade

You have analysed the sources well. The next step is to add evaluation.
You are missing a conclusion. You need to weigh the two arguments against each other and explain which one you find more persuasive. Is the 'purpose' of prison to provide a consequence, or is it to help people reintegrate?

Next Steps: You have a good foundation. To get top marks, you need to add a conclusion that makes a clear judgement. For example: "In conclusion, I agree more with Shemkus. While Coverdale is right that prison is a consequence, Shemkus's argument is stronger because simply punishing someone without helping them to reintegrate into society makes it more likely they will reoffend, which helps no one."

Projected Grade: 6/12 - A well-structured answer with good analysis, but lacks evaluation and a conclusion.

0274 - Candidate: N/A - Projected Grade: 4/12

Which writer do you agree with most? Explain your answer referring to arguments made in both parts of the source

Student Response:

Initially in my opinion the person I think is right is Helen Brown Coverdale.A clear start stating your view. In this text she states how prisioners are sent to prison as punishment, not for punishment.Good - you have correctly identified a key argument. She also says how the purpose of a prision is to protect the citizens from the reoffenders and for them to not to reform and rehabilitate. This shows how prisons are sent to prison for a reason which is not to work.This is a simple summary of the point. Try to explain *why* it is a strong argument. Them working is putting them in a position they used to be in before they committed their crime and it doesn't feel like they are getting punished. Working doesn't just tire them out but it doesn't give them time to work on themselve.This is a good point, but it's your own opinion. Try to focus on analysing the text. On the other hand, the following arguement from Sarah Shemkus states how training prisoners offer essential preperations for them to succeed in life after they release.You have correctly identified a point from the other source, which is good for balance, but you haven't explained it.

Detailed Feedback

✅ Strengths (What you have started well)

You have a clear point of view and have attempted to look at both sources.
You have correctly identified the main philosophical argument from Helen Brown Coverdale.

🔄 How to complete the answer for a top grade

Your analysis is very simple and relies on your own opinions rather than explaining the points in the text.
Your analysis of Sarah Shemkus's argument is extremely brief and undeveloped.
You are missing a conclusion.

Next Steps: Focus on explaining the points from the text in more detail. For every point you identify, write a full sentence in your own words explaining what it means and why it is important to the writer's argument. Always provide a balanced view by giving equal detail to both writers.

Projected Grade: 4/12 - A simple answer with very limited analysis of the source material.

4545 - Candidate: N/A - Projected Grade: 7/12

Which writer do you agree with most? Explain your answer referring to arguments made in both parts of the source

Student Response:

I agree with Sarah Shemkus (SS) statement due to her highlighting the benefit of having prisioners work.A clear start, stating your position. For example she procures us knowledge on why it is good for prison to work like it is essential for prepering prisioners to succed in life after release, and it giving prisioners a chance to learn how to work and read and write.Good analysis of the skills argument. I agree with SS because priosners working rechue the chance of reoffending when relesed and working in prison can be seen as a type of rehabilitation. On the other hand some may argue that work can be seen as enslavement due to the harsh reality that they do all the work but are paid little or sometimes not wages at all.Excellent - you are now showing a balanced argument by clearly explaining the key point from the other source. You can also argue that there is no point of prisoners working in prison due to when released most job places wont accept them.This is a good evaluative point, using your own knowledge to challenge the argument.

Detailed Feedback

✅ Strengths (What you have started well)

You have a clear structure and analyse arguments from both sources.
You have started to evaluate the arguments by using your own knowledge to challenge them.
You show a good understanding of the key points in the debate.

🔄 How to complete the answer for a top grade

You need a concluding paragraph to weigh the two arguments against each other and make a final, reasoned judgement.
Your writing is a little unclear in places. Work on sentence structure to make your points more powerful.

Next Steps: You have a strong foundation. The final step is to add a conclusion that explains why Shemkus's argument about rehabilitation is more convincing to you than the concerns about low pay and job prospects.

Projected Grade: 7/12 - A good, balanced answer with some evaluation, but needs a conclusion.

4552 - Candidate: N/A - Projected Grade: 5/12

Which writer do you agree with most? Explain your answer referring to arguments made in both parts of the source

Student Response:

I agree with Helen Brown because she says work will not make prison work.A clear start stating your view. She also says 'prisoners are often denied the health and safety benefits'.Good use of evidence from the text. This is why I would say prisoners should not work as it goes against simple human and worker rights. Also prisoners are paid little to no wages which goes against the minimum wage.Good analysis of the key arguments from Helen Brown's source. I also agree with Sarah Shemkus to some extent because as she states we face... Hi work done inside could prepar prisoners for the future.Good - you are now bringing in the other source to show balance. I could say some prisoners have a life in prison which could mean they were able to come out and will most likely die in prison.This is an interesting point about life sentences, but it's not clearly explained. Adding on some prisoners could put others in danger with working and use the equipment provided as a weapon.

Detailed Feedback

✅ Strengths (What you have started well)

You have a clear point of view and analyse arguments from both sources.
You explain the arguments from your preferred source well.

🔄 How to complete the answer for a top grade

Your analysis of Shemkus's argument is very brief and undeveloped.
Your evaluation is based on your own opinions (e.g., about weapons) rather than a direct comparison of the two writers' arguments.
You are missing a conclusion to summarise your judgement.

Next Steps: You have a good start. To improve, make sure you explain the arguments from both sources in equal detail. Then, write a conclusion that explains why you find Coverdale's moral arguments about rights and pay more convincing than Shemkus's practical arguments about skills.

Projected Grade: 5/12 - A reasonable start, but the analysis is unbalanced and lacks a conclusion.

4453 - Candidate: N/A - Projected Grade: 8/12

Which writer do you agree with most? Explain your answer referring to arguments made in both parts of the source

Student Response:

In Source D, there are two commentors that are expressing their different views on prisons making prisoners work. On one hand Sarah Shemkus (S.S.) states that the prisons making the prisoners work is a great thing as it can help them learn and get used to the outside world.Good analysis of Shemkus's main argument. On the other hand, Helen Brown Coverdale (H.B.C) states that the prisons would be enslaving the prisoners into working with little to no wages.Excellent - a clear and balanced structure, moving on to the second source. She also states that they are denied of health and safety benefits and protections. She shows us that a Prison Commissioner (Alexander Paterson) argued that people are sent to prison as punishment not for punishment.Good use of evidence from the text. Me personally, I agree more with S.S as prisons should prepare inmates for outside life and maintain an environment that is safe for them and others.A clear conclusion that states your final judgement and gives a reason.

Detailed Feedback

✅ Strengths (What you have started well)

You have a perfect structure: introduction, analysis of Source A, analysis of Source B, and a conclusion.
You explain the arguments from both sources clearly and accurately.
Your writing is clear and easy to follow.

🔄 How to complete the answer for a top grade

You have done an excellent job of analysing the sources. To get top marks, the next step is to add more evaluation.
In your conclusion, you need to explain *why* Shemkus's argument about preparing inmates for life is more convincing than Coverdale's argument about enslavement and punishment.

Next Steps: You have a brilliant structure. To turn this into a top-level answer, develop your conclusion. It should weigh the two arguments against each other. For example: "In conclusion, I agree more with S.S. Although Coverdale's point about punishment is valid, Shemkus's argument is stronger because preparing inmates for the outside world is the best way to prevent them from reoffending, which is the main purpose of prison."

Projected Grade: 8/12 - A perfectly structured answer with excellent analysis. Needs more evaluation to hit the top marks.

4376 - Candidate: N/A - Projected Grade: 10/12

Which writer do you agree with most? Explain your answer referring to arguments made in both parts of the source

Student Response:

I agree with Sarah Shemkus' (SS) judgement as she highlights the main benefits of prisoners working in prison.A clear start stating your view. Statistically in the US, 88% of inmates partake in prison work. They help to clean places and fix equipment. This can help them to learn useful skills that are useful for life considering that most prisoners have low literacy. It is also portrayed as a way of giving back to community as the goods produced can be used outside of prisons.Excellent analysis of multiple points from the source. This work helps them to be busy and cause less trouble which can result in an early release which is beneficial to them. However Helen Brown Coverdale (HBC) disagrees with this movement and actually sees this form of reintegration as enslavement.Perfect - you are now showing a balanced argument by clearly analysing the counter-viewpoint. She believes that this forced work is unmatched to what they really want however she fails to address the fact that these criminals are there for punishment. HBC states that these roles lack health and safety and protection however she fails to give solid proof of this.This is a great piece of evaluation, critiquing the quality of evidence provided by Coverdale. She continues to provide information like "It will not put a stop to prisoner assaults" but lacks evidence and clarity.Another excellent evaluative point. You are assessing the strength of her claims.

Detailed Feedback

✅ Strengths (What you have started well)

You have a clear, balanced structure and analyse arguments from both sources.
Your evaluation is excellent, particularly when you critique Coverdale's argument for lacking "solid proof" and "evidence".
You show a deep and detailed understanding of the source texts.

🔄 How to complete the answer for a top grade

This is an outstanding start. The only thing missing is a conclusion to summarise your excellent points.
Your conclusion should state your final judgement and explain why Shemkus's evidence-based arguments are more convincing than Coverdale's less-supported claims.

Next Steps: You are on track for a top mark. To finish, add a conclusion. For example: "In conclusion, I agree more with Shemkus. Although Coverdale raises some valid moral questions, her argument is significantly weaker as it lacks the evidence and clarity that Shemkus provides. Shemkus's focus on practical rehabilitation supported by statistics is far more persuasive."

Projected Grade: 10/12 - A highly analytical and evaluative answer that just needs a conclusion.

4393 - Candidate: N/A - Projected Grade: 7/12

Which writer do you agree with most? Explain your answer referring to arguments made in both parts of the source

Student Response:

I agree with Sarah Shemkus's view saying yes prisoners should work in prison.A clear start stating your view. One reason for this is that they should pay back to the community what they had taken from it.Good analysis of the 'restorative justice' argument. People in prison are there because of their own acting and crimes. They are there because they would endanger those who live in society. They build desks for schools and dentures for old people. They are returning what belongs to the community.Excellent analysis using specific examples from the text. Did you know over 50% of prisoners have never had a legal job...Good analysis, but this statistic is slightly inaccurate - the text says "many offenders", not "over 50%". Be precise with evidence. This is a good point because such programs are what help prisoners to reintegrate into society. On the other hand many may argue that prisoners doing work is borderline slavery as they are working for basically nothing.Perfect - you are now showing balance by analysing the counter-argument from the other source. People in prison are sent there as punishment not for punishment.

Detailed Feedback

✅ Strengths (What you have started well)

You have a clear structure and analyse arguments from both sources.
Your analysis is good and you use specific examples from the text.
You understand the key points of the debate.

🔄 How to complete the answer for a top grade

Be careful to be accurate when quoting statistics from the source.
You are missing a conclusion where you weigh the two arguments against each other and explain why Shemkus's view is more convincing.

Next Steps: You have a very solid foundation. The final step is to add a conclusion that explains your final judgement. Explain why the practical benefit of prisoners "paying back to society" is more important to you than the moral problem of "slavery".

Projected Grade: 7/12 - A good, well-structured answer that needs a conclusion and greater precision.

4391 - Candidate: N/A - Projected Grade: 9/12

Which writer do you agree with most? Explain your answer referring to arguments made in both parts of the source

Student Response:

I agree with Helen Brown Coverdale (HBC) that prisoners should not work.A clear start, stating your position. She made a point that states "people are sent to prison as punishment, not for punishment". This is a strong point, as it outlines how the court decided their punishment, so it is not up to the prison to punish them.Excellent analysis. You have explained the significance of this quote perfectly. HBC also mentions that US work programs often are on the verge of being slavery which is a strong point as it outlines the key legal issues surrounding work in prison. However, Sarah Shemkus (SS) also states some strong points for why prisoners should work.Good - you are now showing balance by moving on to the other source. She mentions how prisoners working sets them up for life out of prison, which is a strong point as it links to the main ideas of prison protection, reform and punishment.Another good point of analysis. However, her point can also be viewed as weak, as it contradicts HBC's point that prison is the punishment.This is a good piece of evaluation where you directly compare the two arguments. Overall, I think that HBC has made a strong argument against, as it covers the main disadvantages in work in prisons. It also covers SS's point, showing HBC's strength in this argument.A very strong and well-reasoned conclusion that summarises your evaluative points.

Detailed Feedback

✅ Strengths (What you have started well)

You have an excellent, clear structure with an introduction, balanced analysis, and a conclusion.
Your analysis of both sources is strong and well-explained.
You show good evaluation skills by directly comparing the two arguments.
Your conclusion is well-developed and provides a clear final judgement.

🔄 How to complete the answer for a top grade

This is a very strong response. To get into the top marks, you could develop your evaluation even further. For example, which argument is more important - the practical need for reform, or the philosophical purpose of punishment?

Next Steps: This is an excellent essay. To elevate it even further, try to use your own knowledge to support your points. For example, could you think of a specific reason why prison work might fail to reform someone? This would make your evaluation even more sophisticated.

Projected Grade: 9/12 - A very strong, well-structured, and evaluative answer.

4450 - Candidate: N/A - Projected Grade: 10/12

Which writer do you agree with most? Explain your answer referring to arguments made in both parts of the source

Student Response:

Both Sarah Shemkus (SS) and Helen Brown (HB) make some valuable points.A good, academic start that acknowledges both sides. Firstly, I agree with Helen HB because she says "US work programs often verge enslavement". This is a good point as work that you're not getting paid for is essentially slavery, which is against the human rights act that the UK follows.Excellent evaluation. You are using your own knowledge (the Human Rights Act) to develop and strengthen the source's argument. Also, HB says "people are sent to prison as punishment, not for punishment." This is a strong point as working isn't really necessary when the prison environment is a punishment in itself. However, SS also makes some good points. She says "working while in prison can teach inmates transferable skills". This is a good point as although they may have worked before, working in prison can give inmates new experience to use in the future.Perfect - you are now showing a balanced view by clearly analysing the key arguments from the other source. HB also says "work will not solve increases in unrest, riots and escapes", I disagree with this point as having something to do can help avoid inmates causing more trouble. In essence, I disagree with the question. This is because making prisoners work for no payment in return is dehumanising and borderline slavery. If inmates are going to work, they should get something in return.A very strong and sophisticated conclusion. You are not just choosing one writer, but offering your own nuanced judgement based on your analysis.

Detailed Feedback

✅ Strengths (What you have started well)

You have a clear, balanced structure and analyse arguments from both sources.
You use your own knowledge (Human Rights Act) to support your analysis.
Your evaluation is excellent, particularly in your sophisticated and well-reasoned conclusion.

🔄 How to complete the answer for a top grade

This is a very high-level response. To improve even further, you could make your judgement clear in the introduction rather than waiting until the conclusion.
You identify as agreeing with HB, but your conclusion seems to be that you disagree with the question. Make your final position clear and consistent.

Next Steps: This is an excellent piece of work. To make it even more powerful, state your final, nuanced conclusion in your introduction. For example: "While both writers make valuable points, I ultimately disagree with forcing prisoners to work for no pay, as this is a form of exploitation." This makes your excellent argument even clearer to the examiner from the start.

Projected Grade: 10/12 - A sophisticated and highly evaluative answer with a strong conclusion.

4469 - Candidate: N/A - Projected Grade: 9/12

Which writer do you agree with most? Explain your answer referring to arguments made in both parts of the source

Student Response:

I agree more with Sarah Shemkus (SS) that prisons should make prisoners work.A clear start, stating your view. Firstly, SS says that "many offenders never had a legal job so they need to learn the basics such as showing up on time, listening to a supervisor and working as part of a team."Good use of a quote to support your point. SS has got a good point here because she lists several benefits of making prisoners work, all of which are valid because many offenders are generally uncooperative, and lack skills necessary to work. However, she fails to consider that many prisoners lack skills which are basic skills like reading and writing.This is a good evaluative point, but it's a slight misinterpretation. The source *does* say training includes "improving literacy skills". Helen Brown Coverdale (HBC) has a good point in saying that "Making all prisoners work will not make prison work. US work programmes often verge on enslavement, with inmates paid... no wages."Excellent - you are now showing balance by fairly analysing the other source. Many prisons in the US in fact overwork and underpay inmates, which is not great if youre teaching inmates how to work properly but they will revolt since you pay them almost nothing.Good analysis where you explain the real-world consequences of Coverdale's point.

Detailed Feedback

✅ Strengths (What you have started well)

You have a clear, balanced structure and analyse arguments from both sources.
You explain the arguments in your own words, showing good understanding.
Your analysis is detailed and well-supported by quotes.

🔄 How to complete the answer for a top grade

You have made a minor factual error in your evaluation of Shemkus. Always read the source text carefully.
You are missing a conclusion where you weigh the two arguments against each other and explain your final judgement.

Next Steps: You have a strong foundation. Double-check the text to ensure your evaluation is accurate. Then, add a concluding paragraph that explains why you find Shemkus's arguments about skills more persuasive than Coverdale's arguments about exploitation.

Projected Grade: 9/12 - A strong and well-analysed answer that just needs a conclusion and greater precision.

4470 - Candidate: N/A - Projected Grade: 11/12

Which writer do you agree with most? Explain your answer referring to arguments made in both parts of the source

Student Response:

I agree with Helen Brown Coverdale (HBC), as she highlights how prison work often verges on slavery as prisoners are paid little to no wages.A clear start, stating your view and using evidence from the source. This is against the Declaration of Human rights as US prisoners are often forced to work. Prisoners often lack basic workers rights such as insurance, this leads to saftey issues.Excellent evaluation. You are using your own knowledge (Declaration of Human Rights, insurance) to develop and strengthen the source's argument. HBC also states how prisoners often are assigned work that doesn't align with their interests. Sarah Shemkus (SS) has the opposite viewpoint, she believes that the UK should adopt the US's policy of inmates participating in prison work.Perfect - you are now showing a balanced argument by analysing the other source. However, SS doesn't take into account that many offenders never had a legal job, and therefore lack experience in many fields of work. SS fails to release that not all inmates have no experience in work. Some prisoners may've been doctors or lawyers before they were convicted, meaning they wouldn't need experience work experience in order to be sucessful after release.This is another outstanding piece of evaluation, identifying a key flaw in the logic of Shemkus's argument by providing a counter-example. Overall, I agree more with HBC, as they explain how prison labour is often akin to slavery, whereas SS disregards the abilities of many inmates, viewing them as a collective as inexperienced.A superb conclusion that summarises your key evaluative points and provides a clear, final judgement.

Detailed Feedback

✅ Strengths (What you have started well)

You have a perfect structure: introduction, balanced analysis, and a conclusion.
Your evaluation is outstanding. You use your own knowledge and logical counter-examples to challenge both sources.
Your analysis is detailed and shows a sophisticated understanding of the debate.

🔄 How to complete the answer for a top grade

This is an exemplary piece of writing that clearly demonstrates all the skills needed for the top marks.
To improve even further, you could consider the quality of the evidence (e.g., Shemkus's use of statistics vs. Coverdale's use of principles).

Next Steps: This is a model answer. Continue to apply this high level of critical thinking and balanced argumentation to all of your work.

Projected Grade: 11/12 - An outstanding, well-structured, and highly evaluative response.

4280 - Candidate: N/A - Projected Grade: 10/12

Which writer do you agree with most? Explain your answer referring to arguments made in both parts of the source

Student Response:

On the one hand Sarah Shemkus (S.S) says that inmates need to participate in productive prison work and improving literacy skills. This is credible as around 60% of inmates are illiterate which is one of the main reasons people offend.Excellent evaluation. You are using your own knowledge (a statistic) to support and strengthen the argument made in the source. If they were to learn to read and write it could stop prisoners from reoffending as this could help them find proper jobs. She also says 'prisoners pay back to the community' this adds weight to her argument as this could be seen as restorative justice.Another good piece of analysis, linking the source's point to a key concept. Contrastingly, Helen Brown (H.B.C) says that prisons shouldn't allow prisoners to work as they 'gain little or no wages and are on the verge of enslavement.'Perfect - you are now showing a balanced argument by analysing the other source. However what H.B has forgotten to mention is that even getting paid when working in prison is a privillege and it is teaching them important skills.This is a good evaluative point where you directly challenge the logic of Coverdale's argument. In conclusion I agree more with S.S as trying a different approach and teaching prisoners important things can help stop people reoffending.A clear conclusion that summarises your final judgement and provides a reason.

Detailed Feedback

✅ Strengths (What you have started well)

You have a clear, balanced structure with an introduction, analysis of both sides, and a conclusion.
Your evaluation is excellent, using both your own knowledge and logical challenges to assess the sources.
You explain the arguments clearly and show a sophisticated understanding of the debate.

🔄 How to complete the answer for a top grade

This is a very high-level response. To improve even further, you could make your judgement clear in the introduction rather than waiting until the conclusion.

Next Steps: This is an excellent piece of work. To make it even more powerful, state your final judgement at the very beginning. For example: "While both writers make strong points, I ultimately agree more with Sarah Shemkus because her practical approach to rehabilitation is more convincing." This makes your argument even clearer to the examiner from the start.

Projected Grade: 10/12 - A well-structured, highly analytical, and evaluative response.

4434 - Candidate: N/A - Projected Grade: 7/12

Which writer do you agree with most? Explain your answer referring to arguments made in both parts of the source

Student Response:

I agree with Sarah Shemkus (SS) point that says prisoners should work in prison.A clear start stating your view. This is because prisons making prisoners work could benefit them in many different ways. For example, it could prepare them for the real world. After release, prisoners may forget how life is outside, and working them in prison could help them.Good analysis of the rehabilitation argument. Also, making prisoners work could keep them busy and distract them from causing problems inside. However, I also agree with Helen Brown (HB) this is because this could lead to an increase in riots and escapes.You are now bringing in the other source, which is good for balance. HB has a strong point where she says making the inmates work is like enslavement as they are paid little to no wages.You are analysing both sides, but you are agreeing with both, which makes your argument contradictory. SS has a weak point where she says "they need to learn the basics" as they could be put onto jobs/tasks that do not fit their skills/interests.This is a good point of evaluation, but it is confusing as it weakens the argument you claim to support.

Detailed Feedback

✅ Strengths (What you have started well)

You have tried to analyse arguments from both sources.
You have started to evaluate the arguments.

🔄 How to complete the answer for a top grade

Your argument is contradictory. You cannot agree with both writers. You must make a clear judgement about who you agree with *most* and build your entire essay to support that view.
You are missing a conclusion.

Next Steps: Plan your argument before you write. Decide which writer you agree with most, and then structure all of your points to support that decision. You can explain the other writer's points, but you should frame them as a counter-argument that you find less convincing.

Projected Grade: 7/12 - A balanced answer with some good evaluation, but the argument is contradictory.

4413 - Candidate: N/A - Projected Grade: 6/12

Which writer do you agree with most? Explain your answer referring to arguments made in both parts of the source

Student Response:

I agree with Sarah Shemkus (SS) because letting them work in one prison helps them not only in the prison but outside as when they leave the prison it can help.A clear start, stating your view. Being on like a builder or plumber, also if they work in prison it can benfis the prison itself and as they can help fix the prison and improve the prison.Good analysis where you use your own examples to explain the skills argument. Also if the prison work will keep them busy and it will be less likely for them to cause problems. Another thing when the prisoners work it gives them a chance to give back to society and repay where mistake.Good analysis of the 'paying back' argument. However some people might disagree because they think prisoners work is a slave.You are now bringing in the counter-argument from the other source, which is good. they get while working as a prisoner is wrong as they get no pay. We do need prisoners to play a full part in society but forcing them into hard work will not...You are doing a good job of explaining the other side, but you haven't finished your thoughts.

Detailed Feedback

✅ Strengths (What you have started well)

You have a clear point of view and a balanced structure.
You analyse arguments from both sources, using your own examples to explain them.

🔄 How to complete the answer for a top grade

You have analysed the sources, but you have not yet evaluated them.
You need to add a conclusion where you weigh the two arguments and explain why you find Shemkus's arguments more persuasive.

Next Steps: You have a good foundation. The key to getting top marks is the conclusion. Make sure your final paragraph directly compares the two arguments and makes a clear, reasoned judgement. For example, explain why the benefit of rehabilitation is more important than the problem of low pay.

Projected Grade: 6/12 - A good, balanced analysis that needs an evaluative conclusion.

4353 - Candidate: N/A - Projected Grade: 7/12

Which writer do you agree with most? Explain your answer referring to arguments made in both parts of the source

Student Response:

I agree more with Helen Brown. This is because she states that the purpose of a prison is to protect the public, reform and rehabilitate offenders.A clear start, stating your view and using evidence from the source. If you send out offenders to work then they could harm someone else which means that the environment is not safe. However, I also think that Sarah Shemkus (SS) made a strong point saying that training can improve literary skills.Good - you are now showing balance by bringing in the other source's argument. What she did not mention is that prison is meant to teach people a valid lesson for why you should not have done what you did and so that you can learn from your mistakes.This is a good point, but it's more of your own opinion. Try to frame it as a critique of the source. Another reason why I agree with Helen Brown (HB) is because she states that often the tasks they are given are unmatched to their skills, interests and ambitions.Good analysis of another key point from Coverdale. If you force prisoners to work then you are stripping them of their right to a free choice which means that you are breaking the laws.

Detailed Feedback

✅ Strengths (What you have started well)

You have a clear point of view and a balanced structure.
You analyse arguments from both sources and use quotes as evidence.
You have started to evaluate the arguments by challenging them.

🔄 How to complete the answer for a top grade

Your evaluation is a little confused. You say you agree with Coverdale, but then you critique Shemkus for not mentioning punishment, which is actually Coverdale's main point. Be careful to keep the arguments distinct.
You need a conclusion to summarise your argument.

Next Steps: Your analysis is good. To improve your evaluation, make sure your criticism is clearly directed at the right source. For example, a better critique of Shemkus would be to say "She focuses on skills, but fails to address the moral argument that prison itself is the punishment."

Projected Grade: 7/12 - A good, balanced answer with some evaluation, but the argument is slightly confused.

4581 - Candidate: N/A - Projected Grade: 6/12

Which writer do you agree with most? Explain your answer referring to arguments made in both parts of the source

Student Response:

I agree with Helen Browns (HB) statement. This is because she states that a prison commissioner said people are sent to prison as punishment and not for punishment.A clear start, stating your view and using evidence from the source. For example a person couldve robbed a store and they would be sent to prison as punishment not to work a job in prison. I agree with this as if they wanted prisoners to work as punishment they could just make them work as a normal person instead of keeping them isolated to think about their actions.Good analysis where you explain the logic of the source's argument. Sarah Shemkaus however says that she should make prisoners work. She explains that work in prison helps them to give back to the community that they herval.Good - you are now analysing the counter-argument from the other source. The reason why I dissagree with her is how forcing someone to work isn't right even if its for a community.This is a simple evaluation, stating your disagreement. They get little to no pay which shows they are close to being slaves.

Detailed Feedback

✅ Strengths (What you have started well)

You have a clear point of view and a balanced structure.
You analyse arguments from both sources and explain them in your own words.

🔄 How to complete the answer for a top grade

Your evaluation is very simple ("I disagree..."). You need to develop this into a more detailed point. Explain *why* Coverdale's moral argument about slavery is more important than Shemkus's practical argument about paying back the community.
You are missing a conclusion to summarise your final judgement.

Next Steps: You have a good foundation. To improve your evaluation, make your final paragraph a full conclusion where you weigh the two arguments against each other. For example: "In conclusion, I agree more with Helen Brown. While Sarah Shemkus's idea of paying back the community is appealing, it is a weaker argument than Brown's because forcing people to work for no pay is a form of exploitation that violates their human rights, and this moral issue is more important."

Projected Grade: 6/12 - A well-structured answer with good analysis, but needs more developed evaluation.

4365 - Candidate: N/A - Projected Grade: 5/12

Which writer do you agree with most? Explain your answer referring to arguments made in both parts of the source

Student Response:

I agree with Sarah Shemkus (SS) because since in prison the UK has 88% of prisoners participate in productive work.A clear start stating your view, although your use of the statistic is slightly inaccurate - the 88% figure is for the US. For example they run cuadry rooms and kitchens, and can also be found moulding dentures.Good use of examples from the text. I disagree with Helen brown (HB) she's talking about how she thinks prisoners working could be seen as enslavement and she thinks that prisoners have the slavery act some of the English laws.This analysis is very confused. You have not clearly explained her argument about slavery or low wages. SS has more clear points on why inmates should be able to work for example they can learn amazing skills and expressing is every good.This is a simple but clear evaluative point comparing the clarity of the two arguments.

Detailed Feedback

✅ Strengths (What you have started well)

You have a clear point of view and have attempted to analyse both sources.
You have started to evaluate the arguments by judging which is "clearer".

🔄 How to complete the answer for a top grade

Your analysis of Helen Brown's argument is very confused and inaccurate. You must read the source text carefully to understand her points.
Your writing is unclear in places, which makes it hard to follow your reasoning.
You are missing a conclusion.

Next Steps: You must focus on reading the sources carefully to make sure you understand them before you start writing. Your analysis of Source B is not accurate. Try to write in clearer, shorter sentences to make your points easier to understand.

Projected Grade: 5/12 - A simple answer that misunderstands parts of the source text.

4511 - Candidate: N/A - Projected Grade: 10/12

Which writer do you agree with most? Explain your answer referring to arguments made in both parts of the source

Student Response:

In Source D Sarah Shemkus says that UK prisons should copy the example of the US where a staggering 88% of the inmates participate in productive prison work.A good start, immediately using evidence from the source. However Helen Brown Coverdale says that making prisoners work will not make prison work and I partially agree with SS due to the fact that putting prisoners to work would allow them to experience what its like to be in the workforce.Clear analysis of Shemkus's argument, stating your own position. On the other hand I also agree with HBC because it seems that programares in the US often ber on enslavement since inmates work long hours and are paid little to no wages.You are now showing a balanced view by analysing the other source. HBC also says that the job prisoners are forced to work that often doesnt match their ambitions or interests or skill sets suggesting if we are losing sight of the prisoners as people.Excellent, detailed analysis of Coverdale's argument. Overall, I agree with HBC more as she shows winning HBC.A good, clear conclusion that states your final judgement.

Detailed Feedback

✅ Strengths (What you have started well)

You have a good, balanced structure and analyse both sources in detail.
You show a sophisticated understanding of the arguments.
You have a clear conclusion.

🔄 How to complete the answer for a top grade

You have done an excellent job of analysing the sources. To get top marks, you need to add more of your own evaluation.
In your conclusion, you need to explain *why* you agree with HBC more. Which of her arguments is more persuasive than SS's, and why?

Next Steps: You have a great foundation. The key to getting into the top band is to make your conclusion more evaluative. For example: "Overall, I agree more with HBC. While SS makes a good case for the practical benefits of work, HBC's moral argument that forced, mismatched labour is a form of enslavement is more powerful because it concerns the fundamental human rights of prisoners."

Projected Grade: 10/12 - An excellent and well-balanced analysis that just needs a more evaluative conclusion.

4512 - Candidate: N/A - Projected Grade: 6/12

Which writer do you agree with most? Explain your answer referring to arguments made in both parts of the source

Student Response:

I agree more with Sarah Shemkus that prisoner should work in prisons.A clear start stating your view. I agree with Sarah Shemkus because prisoners going to prison and learn nothing by doing nothing does not benefit them. In prison it is said that the training they offer is needed for preparing prisoners to succed after their release.Good analysis of a key argument from the source. Prisoner who came into prison not knowing how to read and write can possibly leave prison knowing how to. Sarah also said that these programs can teach inmates technical and also transferable skills, this also keeps inmates busy and less likely to cause promblems inside.Good, detailed analysis of Shemkus's points. I disagree with Helen Brown that prisoner should not work in prison.Good, you are now bringing in the other source to show balance. Helen says that work will not solve riots and escapes but it can help prevent the things prisoners do.

Detailed Feedback

✅ Strengths (What you have started well)

You have a clear point of view and a balanced structure.
Your analysis of Sarah Shemkus's argument is detailed and well-explained.
You understand the key points of the debate.

🔄 How to complete the answer for a top grade

Your analysis of Helen Brown's argument is very brief and underdeveloped. You need to explain her points about "enslavement" and the purpose of punishment.
You are missing a conclusion where you weigh the two arguments and make a final judgement.

Next Steps: You have a good foundation. To improve, make sure you give equal detail to your analysis of both sources. Then, add a conclusion that explains why Shemkus's practical arguments are more persuasive to you than Coverdale's moral objections.

Projected Grade: 6/12 - A good analysis of one source, but the answer is unbalanced and lacks a conclusion.

4540 - Candidate: N/A - Projected Grade: 7/12

Which writer do you agree with most? Explain your answer referring to arguments made in both parts of the source

Student Response:

I agree with Sarah Shemkus (SS) because her points are more valid and reasonable.A clear start, stating your view. For example she said "88% of inmates participate in prison work, to succeed in life after release". This shows that people are dedicated to change.Good use of evidence from the text and a simple explanation. not just because they are imprisoned because they are willing to do better in life. Once you in prison your dignity is once over and you have no proper future, which is what SS docent agree with.This is a good point, but it's your own opinion. Try to link it more closely to the source. While Helen Brown talks about the negative impacts such as "this will not solve increases in unrest riots and escapes". Her point is saying that work something doesn't effect how a person acts while in prison or not.Excellent - you are now showing a balanced view by clearly analysing the other source. I agree with this statement because them on their enjoyment is already over once they enter jail.This is a good point, but you seem to be agreeing with Coverdale, which contradicts your introduction.

Detailed Feedback

✅ Strengths (What you have started well)

You have analysed arguments from both sources.
You use quotes from the text as evidence.

🔄 How to complete the answer for a top grade

Your argument is contradictory. You start by agreeing with Shemkus, but then you agree with Coverdale's points. You need to pick one side and build a consistent argument.
You are missing a conclusion.

Next Steps: Plan your argument before you write. Decide which writer you agree with most, and then structure your whole essay to support that one conclusion. You can explain the other writer's points, but you should frame them as a counter-argument that you find less convincing.

Projected Grade: 7/12 - A reasonable analysis of both sources, but the argument is contradictory.

4404 - Candidate: N/A - Projected Grade: 6/12

Which writer do you agree with most? Explain your answer referring to arguments made in both parts of the source

Student Response:

I really agree with HBC's view because she is protecting the prisoner's rights by interpreting that their intention of being in prison is to deter from crime and change their old personality and ways.A good start, stating your view and showing a strong understanding of Coverdale's argument. Their purpose is to be punished for what they did and not be forced to work in prison.Good analysis of the philosophical point. I partially agree with SS because making them work can impact them, sometimes making them want to help out more which can essentially decrease their chances of serving more time in jail.Excellent - you are now showing balance by bringing in the other source's argument. This routine of continuous prison work can help prisoners stay away from crime as soon as they're released from prison. But for prisoners who continuously break the law even when they are given harsh punishments, they deserve prison work also to protect civilians.This is a good point, but it's your own opinion. Try to focus on analysing the arguments in the text.

Detailed Feedback

✅ Strengths (What you have started well)

You have a clear point of view and a balanced structure.
You analyse arguments from both sources well.
You show a good understanding of the key issues.

🔄 How to complete the answer for a top grade

The answer relies a little too much on your own opinions rather than analysing the text.
You need to add a conclusion that weighs the two arguments against each other and explains your final judgement.

Next Steps: You have a strong foundation. For every point you make, try to support it with a specific idea or quote from the text. Finish your essay with a conclusion that summarises why you find Coverdale's argument more persuasive.

Projected Grade: 6/12 - A good, balanced analysis that needs to be more focused on the text and include a conclusion.

4485 - Candidate: N/A - Projected Grade: 10/12

Which writer do you agree with most? Explain your answer referring to arguments made in both parts of the source

Student Response:

Firstly, Sarah Shemkus (SS) has a strong point in saying that "the training offered is essential for preparing prisoners to succeed in life after release".A good start, immediately analysing a key point from the source. giving evidence for this claim such as improving literacy skills and teaching technical and transferable skills. I think this is a strong, valid point as it highlights the benefits of work in prison and shows how work can help them reintegrate into society after release.Excellent analysis, explaining the significance of the point. However, a criticism of this claim is that it would already be extremely difficult to secure a job with a criminal record, making work in prison pointless.This is an outstanding piece of evaluation, using your own knowledge to identify a major flaw in Shemkus's argument. Secondly, Helen Brown (HB) has a strong point in saying that "US work programmes verge on enslavement, with inmates being paid little to no wages".Perfect - you are now moving on to the other source to provide a balanced argument. This is a strong point as it highlights the futility of prison work, showing how prisoners it borderline violates the Human Rights Act. Overall I agree most with SS as work can...A clear statement of your final judgement.

Detailed Feedback

✅ Strengths (What you have started well)

You have a clear, balanced structure and analyse arguments from both sources.
Your evaluation is outstanding, using your own knowledge to challenge the arguments of both writers.
You show a sophisticated understanding of the key issues.

🔄 How to complete the answer for a top grade

This is a very high-level response. Your introduction and conclusion seem to disagree (your analysis suggests you favour HB, but your conclusion says SS). Make your final judgement consistent with your excellent evaluation.
Develop your conclusion into a full paragraph.

Next Steps: Your critical thinking is superb. Based on your evaluation, a conclusion agreeing with Coverdale would be more logical. For example: "Overall, I agree more with Coverdale. Although Shemkus's ideas for training are good in theory, they are made pointless by the reality that ex-offenders cannot get jobs, making Coverdale's focus on protecting their rights in prison the more convincing argument."

Projected Grade: 10/12 - A highly evaluative and well-analysed response.

4587 - Candidate: N/A - Projected Grade: 5/12

Which writer do you agree with most? Explain your answer referring to arguments made in both parts of the source

Student Response:

I agree with Helen Brown and she says no.A clear start, stating your view. The reason why work in prison won't work out is because prison is supposed to be like a restorative to teach the prisoner what they did was wrong.Good analysis of the 'purpose of prison' argument. Adding work/labour to prison will affect prisoners because they already get less freedom in jail and most likely live in poor conditions. Helen Brown mentions inmates get paid little or get no wages. She also shows the fact prisoners are unmatched to their skills, interests and ambitions.Good analysis of several key points from the source. The point is prison is already as bad as it is and will harm prisoners.This is your own opinion. Try to focus on explaining the arguments in the text. Labour in prison can also make opinions comes out such as you can't force prisoners to work or they are there to stay away from the public not to work and do duties. As much as they are hated or just disliked they are still humans who have rights to not be forced to work.

Detailed Feedback

✅ Strengths (What you have started well)

You have a clear point of view and have analysed your preferred source in detail.
You understand the key arguments made by Helen Brown Coverdale.

🔄 How to complete the answer for a top grade

Your answer is completely one-sided. For a 12-mark question, you MUST analyse the arguments from the other source (Sarah Shemkus) as well.
The answer relies too much on your own opinions. You need to focus more on explaining what the sources say.

Next Steps: To get a higher mark, you must provide a balanced argument. Read the question carefully - it says "referring to arguments made in **both parts** of the source". You need to add a paragraph where you fairly explain the arguments made by Sarah Shemkus (e.g., about skills and reducing reoffending), even if you don't agree with them.

Projected Grade: 5/12 - A detailed but one-sided answer that fails to engage with the second source.

1234 - Candidate: N/A - Projected Grade: 4/12

Which writer do you agree with most? Explain your answer referring to arguments made in both parts of the source

Student Response:

I agree with Helen Brown Coverdale when she says that prisons should not make prisoners work, this is because althouhg US work programes do verge on enslave they have to take part.A clear start, stating your view. Many priosners may not know what they are doing when forced into work, prisoners after this lose normal people and may use this to their advantage.This is your own opinion, not an analysis of the source text. This could include them working finding objects or weapons that could help them escape or hurt other inmates and workers. This is rather benefiting them more especially if your making them do something they dont want to do which results in riots and big slepts in the prison.Your writing is very unclear here, making it hard to follow your point. Instead of putting prisons into random places of work people worthy in police papers could get in the effort to check prisons criminal record and past jobs. This can be unfair as there are also prisoners falsely get put into jail for crimes they did not commit.This is an interesting point, but it is not mentioned in the source text and is therefore irrelevant to this question.

Detailed Feedback

✅ Strengths (What you have started well)

You have a clear point of view.
You have identified one or two key ideas from the source.

🔄 How to complete the answer for a top grade

The answer is almost entirely based on your own opinions and ideas, rather than an analysis of the text.
You have not discussed the arguments made by Sarah Shemkus at all, making the answer very one-sided.
The writing is unclear and difficult to understand in places.

Next Steps: You must focus on explaining the arguments that are in the text provided. Use quotes from both writers. A good answer needs to be balanced, so you must add a paragraph explaining Sarah Shemkus's views before you give your final judgement.

Projected Grade: 4/12 - A one-sided and opinion-based answer that does not analyse the sources properly.

4571 - Candidate: N/A - Projected Grade: 7/12

Which writer do you agree with most? Explain your answer referring to arguments made in both parts of the source

Student Response:

I mostly agree with Helen Brown (HB). This is because I don't think prisoners should work in prison because if they are working with things like kives in the kitchen they have the capacity to commit suicide or harm others.A good start stating your view, supported by your own logical reasoning. I also think that them being forced to work in prison with no pay is unfair and unacceptable. Another point that I really agree with from HB is "work will not solve increaces in unrest, riots and escapes". I agree with that point because it will not change the prisoners attitude as they can work outside prision.Good analysis of a key point from the source. On the other hand I partially agree with Sarah Shemkus (SS). This is because if prisoners work they can help and provide services for the public which benefits the public.Excellent - you are now showing balance by fairly analysing the other point of view. A point that I also agree with from SS is "improving literacy skills". If working in prison benefits them in some way then it is not a waste of time.

Detailed Feedback

✅ Strengths (What you have started well)

You have a clear, balanced structure and analyse arguments from both sources.
You use your own reasoning to support the points you are making.
You use quotes from the text effectively.

🔄 How to complete the answer for a top grade

You have analysed the sources well. The next step is to add evaluation.
You are missing a conclusion where you weigh the two arguments against each other and explain why you find Coverdale's arguments more persuasive. For example, is the risk of harm from kitchen knives more significant than the benefit of learning skills?

Next Steps: You have a strong analytical foundation. To get top marks, you must add a conclusion that makes a clear judgement. Explain why the moral and safety risks identified by Coverdale are more important than the practical benefits of skills and rehabilitation identified by Shemkus.

Projected Grade: 7/12 - A well-structured and well-analysed answer that needs an evaluative conclusion.