| Mark / 50 | Indicative grade |
|---|---|
| 40–50 | A* |
| 35–39 | A |
| 30–34 | B |
| 25–29 | C |
| 20–24 | D |
| 15–19 | E |
Every Saturday I am at Fenwick’s by six. I have learned to count change with a queue watching me, to talk to strangers who are in a hurry, and to be pleasant at an hour when nobody is pleasant. School has never once asked me to do any of those things.
The money matters, and I will not pretend otherwise — it is the first money anyone has ever handed me that I did not have to ask for. But the strange part is what happened to my schoolwork. When my week lost eight hours, I stopped drifting through the other hundred and sixty. I plan now, because I have to. My maths grade has gone up two levels since I started, and I do not think that is a coincidence.
Adults love to say that school is a preparation for the world of work. Perhaps. But a till on a busy morning prepares you faster, and it pays you while it does it.
Each year a handful of my students take weekend jobs, and each year I watch the same pattern repeat. The research is not ambiguous: students working more than ten hours a week drop, on average, half a grade across their subjects. The job does not take the hours from their leisure. It takes them from sleep, and from the slow, unglamorous revision that examinations reward.
Employers are not villains, but their busiest weeks — the festival rush, the summer sales — fall exactly where our examinations do, and it is the sixteen-year-old who is asked to work the extra shift. I notice, too, that it is rarely the comfortable families’ children behind the tills. The students who most need the money give up the most hours, and so the gap we work hardest to close is quietly widened by the weekend.
A few students thrive on it; I concede that freely. But childhood contains the only years in which a person is allowed to give their whole attention to learning. My job is to guard them.
Your school magazine is running a series called Both Sides. Write an article for the magazine giving your view on the question: should students your age take part-time jobs?
In your article you should: use and develop ideas from both texts; weigh the two viewpoints against each other rather than ignoring one; and write in a style that would make a student actually read to the end. Give your article a headline. Write 250 to 350 words (the headline is not counted).
| Band | Content and structure | Style and accuracy |
|---|---|---|
| 5 21–25 | Ideas from both texts are reworked, developed and weighed — the strongest opposing point is stated at full strength and answered. The article has an angle of its own, announced by the headline and paid off by the ending. Paragraphs are ordered so the argument moves. | A public but personal voice, sustained to the last line. Vocabulary precise rather than inflated; sentence lengths varied deliberately; devices used sparingly enough to go unnoticed. Errors rare and trivial. |
| 4 16–20 | Both texts used and mostly developed a step beyond the original; the opposing case acknowledged and answered, if briefly. A clear line of argument with purposeful paragraphs, though one section may coast. | Register right for a school magazine and mostly held. Generally wide vocabulary with occasional flat patches; some conscious sentence variety. Minor errors that never delay the reader. |
| 3 11–15 | Both texts used, but mainly by reporting what they say. The opposing view is mentioned then left alone. Structure is clear but mechanical — point, point, point, conclusion. | Recognisably an article, though the voice fades into essay after the opening. Plain, adequate vocabulary; limited sentence variety; noticeable but non-obscuring errors. |
| 2 6–10 | Material drawn mostly from one text, or lifted in phrases. The writer’s view is asserted, not built; no real engagement with the other side. | Thin sense of form — perhaps a headline and nothing article-like after it. Simple, repetitive vocabulary; uniform sentences; frequent errors, sometimes obscuring meaning. |
| 1 1–5 | Occasional relevance; copying; or a general opinion piece that could have been written without reading either text. | Little sense of form or audience; persistent errors that make the reader work. |
These band descriptors are a study aid written for this site, not Cambridge’s published wording.
Part-Time Jobs
In this article I am going to discuss whether students should take part-time jobs. There are many points on both sides of this argument which I will now explain.
Text A says that she has learned to count change with a queue watching her and to be pleasant at an hour when nobody is pleasant. This shows that jobs teach you skills. Also her maths grade has gone up two levels. However Text B says that students working more than ten hours a week drop half a grade and that the job takes hours from sleep.
In my opinion jobs are good because you get money and its your own money which is really good. But to much work is bad for your grades so you shouldnt do to much.
Thank you for reading my article.
Should Teenagers Work?
Lots of students wonder whether they should get a weekend job. Having read two very different views on the subject, I think the answer is: it depends how much you work.
On one hand, working teaches you things school cannot. Ananya Rao learned to handle customers and manage her time, and her grades actually improved because her week became more organised. Earning your own money also makes you more independent, which will help you later in life.
On the other hand, Dr Okafor points out that students who work long hours drop half a grade on average, because the job takes time from sleep and revision. She also says that the students who most need money work the longest hours, which makes school less fair.
In conclusion, I believe a part-time job can be a good thing as long as it is kept under control. Students should work a few hours only, and stop before exams. That way they get the benefits without the problems.
Paid in More Than Money
At six o’clock on a Saturday morning, while the rest of us are asleep, a seventeen-year-old is counting change with a queue watching her. Her head teacher would rather she were in bed. Interestingly, so would mine — and I think they are both half right.
Start with the strongest case against, because it deserves it. Dr Okafor is not guessing: ten hours a week costs half a grade, the shifts multiply exactly when the exams do, and it is the students who most need the money who lose the most sleep. That last point is the one that should trouble us. A weekend job is sold as independence; for some of my classmates it is quietly a tax on being poor.
And yet. Ananya Rao’s grades went up. Not because tills teach algebra, but because scarcity teaches planning — lose eight hours and you stop wasting the rest. Notice what her evidence actually proves, though: it proves that eight hours works. It says nothing about eighteen. Her bakery and Dr Okafor’s research are not in conflict; they are two ends of the same curve.
So no, we should not choose between the till and the textbook. Cap the hours — eight, not eighteen — guard the exam term, and the Saturday job becomes what it was for Ananya: the best classroom she ever sat in, and the only one that pays twice.
Survey returns: 240 of the school’s 620 students responded.
| Finding | Figure |
|---|---|
| Named the queue as the worst part of lunchtime | 68% |
| Average time spent queuing (of a 40-minute break) | 17 minutes |
| Skip the canteen at least once a week because of the queue | 54% |
| Dissatisfied with the food itself | 12% |
| Would pre-order from a phone or terminal if they could | 82% |
| Food thrown away per day (canteen’s own weighing) | 41 kg |
Observation notes: one serving counter open of the two installed; every student receives the same portion size, from the smallest Year 7 to the tallest Year 11; the queue forms ten minutes before the bell; students at the back of the queue eat in under eight minutes.
Written comments included: “I stopped going. I bring biscuits.” — “The queue is the whole lunchtime.” — “A Year 7 and a Year 11 get exactly the same plate.”
You are the secretary of the student council. The principal has asked the council to investigate lunchtime in the canteen and report back. Write the report, for the principal.
In your report you should: state its purpose and scope; present the findings, grouped and interpreted rather than listed; and end with numbered recommendations that follow from the evidence. Give the report a title. Write 250 to 350 words (the title is not counted).
| Band | Content and structure | Style and accuracy |
|---|---|---|
| 5 21–25 | The data is synthesised: figures are grouped by theme, patterns are named across findings (what the 12% means next to the 68%), and a limitation of the evidence is acknowledged. Findings come before recommendations, and every recommendation is traceable to a finding. | Impersonal, measured and consistent from title to final line. Sub-headings do real organising work; verbs are careful (“suggests”, “indicates”); the report sounds as if the evidence dragged it to its conclusions. |
| 4 16–20 | Findings mostly grouped and interpreted, with at least one genuine pattern drawn across the data. Recommendations follow from the evidence, though one may be under-supported. | Formal register held with only momentary wobbles; sub-headings present; mostly measured phrasing. Minor errors that never delay the reader. |
| 3 11–15 | The data is repeated rather than interpreted — accurate figures in survey order, little grouping, no pattern named. Recommendations present but loosely connected to the findings. | Recognisably a report, but the register drifts (“really annoying”) or the first person intrudes. Errors noticeable, meaning clear. |
| 2 6–10 | Some relevant material, but complaint rather than analysis; figures misquoted or ignored; recommendations mixed into the findings or missing. | Little of the form beyond, perhaps, a title. Emotional or chatty language; frequent errors. |
| 1 1–5 | A narrative or a rant about the canteen that barely touches the data provided. | No formal register attempted; persistent errors make the reader work. |
These band descriptors are a study aid written for this site, not Cambridge’s published wording.
On Monday I went to the canteen at lunchtime to see what it was like. The queue was already massive when I got there and I had to wait ages, it was honestly disgraceful.
Loads of people are unhappy with the canteen. One person said “I stopped going. I bring biscuits” and another said “The queue is the whole lunchtime” which I completely agree with. Also there is loads of food waste which is really bad for the environment.
I think the school should sort out the queues and also the food should be nicer because people deserve a good lunch after working hard all morning.
Report on the School Canteen
This report presents the results of the student council’s canteen survey and makes recommendations.
Findings. 240 students answered the survey. 68% said the queue was the worst part of lunchtime. The average time spent queuing was 17 minutes. 54% skip the canteen at least once a week. 12% were dissatisfied with the food. 82% would pre-order if they could. 41 kg of food is thrown away each day. Portions are the same for all year groups and only one counter was open.
Recommendations. 1. Open the second counter. 2. Reduce the queues. 3. Look into pre-ordering. 4. Try to reduce food waste.
Report on Lunchtime Congestion in the School Canteen
This report summarises the student council’s survey of 240 students (of 620) and three lunchtime observations, and recommends four actions. Because respondents chose to take part, the sample may over-represent the dissatisfied; the pattern below is nonetheless consistent.
Findings: time, not food. Only 12% of respondents are dissatisfied with the food itself, yet 68% name the queue as the worst part of lunchtime and 54% avoid the canteen at least weekly. The problem is therefore congestion, not catering: students give up 17 minutes of a 40-minute break to queuing, and those served last eat in under eight minutes.
Findings: capacity and waste. Only one of the two installed counters operates, and every student receives an identical portion. The 41 kg discarded daily is consistent with portions sized for the largest students being served to the smallest; waste and queuing appear to share a cause in how serving is organised.
Recommendations. 1. Open the second counter at the start of service (queuing: 17 minutes). 2. Pilot pre-ordering for one year group (82% support). 3. Introduce two portion sizes (waste: 41 kg daily). 4. Re-survey the whole school in a term to test whether these measures work.