2022 May Cambridge Primary Checkpoint End of Series Report May 2022 - tcm142-655506

Cambridge Primary Checkpoint
Cambridge Primary Checkpoint End of Series Report
May 2022
Contents
1 Introduction page 3
2. Cambridge Primary Checkpoint – English as a Second Language 0837

2.1 Comments on specific questions – English as a Second Language component 01 page 4
2.2 Comments on specific questions – English as a Second Language component 02 page 11
2.3 Comments on specific questions – English as a Second Language component 03 page15
3 Cambridge Primary Checkpoint – Global Perspectives 0838

3.1 Comments on specific questions – Global Perspectives component 01 page 20
4 Cambridge Primary Checkpoint – English 0844

4.1 Comments on specific questions – English component 01 page 26
4.2 Comments on specific questions – English component 02 page 36
5 Cambridge Primary Checkpoint – Mathematics 0845

5.1 Comments on specific questions – Mathematics component 01 page 46
5.2 Comments on specific questions – Mathematics component 02 page 63
6 Cambridge Primary Checkpoint – Science 0846

6.1 Comments on specific questions – Science component 01 page 78
6.2 Comments on specific questions – Science component 02 page 85
1 Introduction
This document reports on candidate performance for this exam series. Performances for each syllabus are reported separately.
Overall and sub-group performances can change from series to series. You can use the report to compare sub-group performances for this
syllabus in this series. You should not use the information to compare performance changes over time.
For each syllabus the following information is provided:
• examiner comments on specific questions within each component of the test.
3
2. Cambridge Primary Checkpoint English as a Second Language 0837
2.1 Comments on specific questions – English as a Second Language component 01
General comments
The overall level of difficulty and learner performance appeared similar to that of equivalent papers, with Part 1 and Part 5 presenting the most difficulty for
learners; Parts 3 and 4 presenting least difficulty. This session there appeared to be far fewer problems than previously with unclear answers such as
erasures and overwriting, though Assistant Examiners needed to check with the Principal Examiner occasionally.
Part 1
(Questions 1–5)
A five-gap, multiple-choice sentence completion test, required learners to select an appropriate item to fill five gaps and to circle the word of their choice;
correct usage of lexical and function words was tested. Learners seemed to score less well on this part than in recent past sessions. The most correct
answers were for Questions 2 and 5, and the most incorrect answers were for Questions 1 and 4.
Part 2
(Questions 6–15)
For Questions 6–15, learners were required to put one word only into the gaps to complete a single email message to a friend. The words needed to fit
grammatically and to carry the intended meaning to complete the text.
As in previous sessions, a lot of the incorrect answers seemed to be produced because the words chosen often fitted the words either side of the blank in
terms of grammar or meaning but learners sometimes did not take into account the wider context of sentence/discourse level. Possibly more focus is needed
on this aspect when teaching reading skills to learners. This appears to be an important area for improvement as it is also noted in reports for previous
sessions and at secondary level.
4
Spelling needed to be accurate and the mark scheme allowed for alternative answers to Questions 11 and 13. The answers to Questions 10, 12, 14 and 15
were shown on the mark scheme with an initial capital letter but, in accordance with practice in previous sessions, examiners were directed to accept correct
answers with an initial lower case letter. This part proved to be a good discriminator, with strong learners very occasionally scoring full marks. The majority of
learners answered fairly well. Question 9 was especially difficult, with few learners finding the correct answer and other frequently incorrect answers were to
Questions 10 and 14.
Part 3
(Questions 16–20)
In this part, learners were required to complete a short conversation by selecting appropriate responses from those given. Most learners scored very well on
this task, with Question 17 being the most successfully answered and Question 16 the least. Errors are often made when learners find an item to match the
sentence before or after but not both.
In this part and Part 2 some learners changed their minds several times and, rather than crossing out their original mark, wrote over their first answer or
erased unclearly.
This occasionally resulted in an illegible response. It would be preferable for learners to completely cross out the rejected response and write the preferred
one next to it. There were also a few ambiguously formed letters and it was occasionally difficult to see if E or F was the intended final answer in cases where
there was overwriting and/or incomplete erasure. This, however, is an area which has shown considerable improvement in recent sessions.
Part 4
(Questions 21–25)
In this section, learners were required to select the correct meaning of the message shown in an image. Learners needed to circle one of the three choices
given. This part seemed to be slightly easier than in previous sessions. The task required careful reading and accurate matching of information to determine
the correct response. Learners needed to be good at making inferences and identifying different ways to convey a message; errors are often made when
learners focus on words shared by the text and the multiple-choice option and do not consider the wider context of the message. Questions 23 and 25 were
the most successfully answered and Questions 21 and 24 the least.
5
Part 5
(Questions 26–30)
This task comprised multiple-choice questions on a longer text with the title ‘Jordan Romero’. The need for learners to use a wide range of reading skills,
including inference and deduction, makes this a challenging part of the test. On the whole, learners answered less well than in other recent sessions and this
part seemed to be an effective discriminator. Questions 27 and 30 were the most successfully answered and Questions 26 and 29 the leas
Comments on specific questions
Part 1
Question 1
A very high proportion incorrect (correct: ‘off’); by far the most common incorrect answer: ‘up’. Possibly the context with ‘early’ suggested ‘get up’ to learners
(‘set up’ was the verb in the sentence and get/set may have been confused).
Question 2
Usually correct (‘took’); common incorrect answer: ‘left’.
Question 3
Often correct (‘keen’); incorrect answers divided between ‘amazing’ and ‘confident’.
Question 4
Often incorrect (correct: ‘preferred’); common incorrect answer: ‘wanted’ (seemingly a strong distractor).
Question 5
Often correct (‘certainly’); incorrect answers divided between ‘especially’ and ‘particularly’.
6
Part 2
Question 6
Usually correct (‘ago’); common incorrect answers: ‘and’, ‘before’, ‘earlier’.
Question 7
Often correct (‘than’); very common incorrect answer: ‘then’.
Question 8
Often correct (‘by’); common incorrect answers: ‘with’, ‘in’, ‘on’.
Question 9
An extremely high proportion incorrect and probably the most difficult question on the paper (correct: ‘too’); common incorrect answers: ‘very’, ‘so’, ‘really’, ‘to’
(misspelling) and ‘quite’. Most learners did not appear to know or to recognise the structure ‘too + adjective to + verb’ and chose an intensifier such as those
listed.
Question 10
Often incorrect (correct: ‘There’); common incorrect answer: ‘They’, and sometimes ‘Some’, ‘We’ and ‘You’.
Question 11
Often correct (‘them/those/these’ – almost always ‘them’ when correct); common incorrect answers : ‘they’, ‘it’, ‘activities’.
Question 12
Often correct (‘Do’); common incorrect answers: ‘What’, ‘Would’, ‘Did’.
7
Question 13
Often correct (‘like/love/need/have’); common incorrect answer: ‘want’.
Question 14
A very high proportion incorrect (correct: ‘If’); very common incorrect answer: ‘Can’, and other common incorrect answers were ‘Could’, ‘Will’ and ‘Would’.
Question 15
Often correct (‘If’); very common incorrect answer ‘If’.
Part 3
Question 16
Usually correct (C); common incorrect answer: B.
Question 17
A very high proportion correct (E); incorrect answers divided between B, C and D.
Question 18
A very high proportion correct (F); common incorrect answer: D, and sometimes A.
Question 19
Usually correct (A); incorrect answers divided between B, C, D and F.
Question 20
Usually correct (D); incorrect answers divided between A, B and G.
8
Part 4
Question 21
Often correct (C); incorrect answers divided between A and B.
Question 22
Often correct (B); common incorrect answer: A.
Question 23
Usually correct (A); incorrect answers divided between B and C.
Question 24
Often correct (A); incorrect answers divided between B and C.
Question 25
Often correct (C); common incorrect answer: B.
Part 5
Question 26
A very high proportion incorrect (correct: A); by far the most common incorrect answer: B, which was a strong distractor (the correct answer depended on
learners understanding the difference between ‘learning about’ climbing at school and seeing a picture/painting of a mountain at school.
Question 27
Often incorrect (correct: A); by far the most common incorrect answer was C.
9
Question 28
Very often incorrect (correct: B); by far the most common incorrect answer was C. To select the correct answer, learners needed to understand that ‘the
hardest part…’ in the question corresponded to ‘particularly difficult’ rather than ‘quite hard’.
Question 29
A high proportion incorrect (correct: B); most common incorrect answer: A.
Question 30
Often incorrect (correct: C) common incorrect answer: A
10
General comments
The paper seemed to work well and learners responded well to the tasks.
Questions 1–5 seemed very straightforward, and most learners managed this section very well, with only one of the questions proving difficult for them.
Examiners commented that letter formation in this section was much improved and they found it easy to mark this part of the test.
The majority of learners wrote responses of an appropriate length for Questions 6 and 7, which is an improvement on previous years. However, there were
some difficulties reading handwriting in quite a few instances, so care needs to be taken that learners can write extended texts, within a time limit, and form
their letters clearly. The majority of learners used a reasonable range of punctuation in their texts, but there were a few who relied on commas throughout
their longer piece of writing to separate their sentences.
Examiners also commented on the story task, Question 7, observing that many learners did not seem to use the information in the prompt as a basis for their
story and so it was sometimes difficult to award marks for Content, due to an apparently off-topic response.
On the whole, the learners seemed to cope well with the tasks and the majority produced English of the standard required.
Overall, this was a good paper and it seemed to discriminate well between weak and strong learners.
Question 1
This was probably the most straightforward item of this set and most learners were familiar with the answer ‘sunny’ and spelt it correctly. There were a few
alternative answers offered, e.g. ‘shiny’, ‘summer’, but these were not acceptable responses.
11
Question 2
This item was slightly problematic in terms of spelling ‘island’, with some learners omitting the ‘s’, or writing ‘iceland’, suggesting that they knew the word, but
were confused about how to write it.
Question 3
This was problematic for some learners in terms of letter formation. The correct response was ‘towel’, but sometimes it was not clear if the learners had
written an ‘o’ or and ‘a’ as the second letter. The final letter ‘l’ was also difficult to distinguish at times, due to incorrect letter formation, ‘t’ and ‘r’ were possible
substitutions. A few learners wrote responses which clearly did not fit the definition, such as ‘tiger’ and ‘torch’.
Question 4
Learners generally knew this response: ‘dolphin’ and could spell it correctly. However, there were a few alternative spellings, which we could not accept, e.g.
‘dollfin’, dolphine’, ‘dolfin’. There were also some inventive alternatives, such as ‘dragon’, ‘ducklin’, ‘dinosor’, ‘dryfish’, which we could not accept either, but a
few learners wrote ‘dogfish’, which was an acceptable alternative.
Question 5
This item was the most problematic for learners, possibly because they did not equate the response with the definition, not thinking that ‘sailing’ was a sport.
This generated a whole range of unacceptable alternative responses, e.g. ‘surfing’, ‘skating’, ‘saleing’, ‘swimming’, ‘surfboard’, ‘shiping’, ‘speedboat’, ‘skiing’,
‘skysurf’, ‘snorkle’ and ‘surfsky’. Often this was left blank rather than an answer being attempted.
Question 6
This task required the learners to respond to an email to a friend telling them about a recent trip to a science museum. They had to say who they went to the
museum with, what they saw there and how long they stayed there. This question worked quite well and the vast majority of learners were able to gain high
marks, with examiners frequently awarding four or five marks for content and four out of five marks for Communicative Achievement and Language. The
learners who did not achieve higher marks either failed to address one of the points in the task or wrote the email from the wrong perspective, asking for
information rather than giving it. Some learners also failed to give enough detail about all three points, or wrote about a trip to a different place, or a different
type of museum.
12
The first question was very simple (‘Who did you go to the museum with?’), and most learners dealt with this very well. They specified either a single person
or a group, and any person they mentioned was sufficient to address the point. This allowed them to use vocabulary relating to family or friends. Some
learners did not read the input material very well and wrote about how they got to the museum rather than saying who they went with. Careful reading of
question words would avoid this confusion.
The second question (‘What did you see there?’) worked quite well and examiners accepted a range of things which may be seen in a museum, but which
were not specifically related to science. For example, some learners said they saw some posters or pictures, and this was accepted, as most museums of
whatever kind will have pictures and posters on the walls. However, a few learners described something very specific, e.g. ‘I saw the Mona Lisa’, which
examiners felt did not have a direct or indirect bearing on the ‘science’ museum, and was too specific to be credible. A few were quite vague about what they
saw, e.g. ‘I saw many things there’, which really did not inform the reader about their trip.
The third question (‘How long did you stay there?’) did not require much information from the learners, and most of them mentioned a time frame, e.g. ‘I went
there from 8.30 to 5 pm’, or a number of hours, e.g. ‘I stayed there for 3 hours’, or a period in the day, e.g. ‘I went there for the morning’, and all of these were
acceptable. Some claimed they went there for ‘3 days’, but they explained that they were on holiday and visited lots of other museums as well, which was
fine.
In terms of Communicative Achievement and Language, most emails were written in an appropriate style and used the appropriate functional language to
describe, explain and inform a friend. Overall, the task worked well and allowed the learners to demonstrate their ability.
Question 7
This story task worked very well for the majority of learners. The prompt was understood and most learners followed on from it in a logical way. The elements
in the prompt, ‘Sam pushed open the door and walked slowly into the old house’, provided enough of a springboard for the learners to come up with some
imaginative scenarios and allowed them to demonstrate their language ability. The prompt clearly directed learners to move forward rather than focus on what
had happened up to this point, which made it easier for them to follow on in an appropriate way. Most learners scored 5 for Content as there were very few
scenarios which could not be linked in any way to the prompt sentence. The stronger learners managed to construct a clear narrative and demonstrated
awareness of narrative features, such as a range of tenses, suspense, effective linking and good use of adjectives. The weaker learners struggled with
controlling the narrative through the use of tenses and linking words, although they did manage to produce a simple story, but it was often a series of
unconnected sentences which repeated elements of the prompt without developing their ideas.
In terms of Content, most learners managed to score between 5 and 3 as they were able to use some or all of the prompt elements within their story and
construct a coherent, relevant account. Those learners who struggled generally scored between 1 and 3 for Content, and the learners who really struggled
and could not write anything of relevance to the prompt scored 0, although this was quite rare.
13
In terms of Communicative Achievement, most learners knew that they had to write a story and were able to construct a narrative using past tenses,
sequential development, direct or reported speech and interesting adjectives to make their stories more impactful. The weaker learners were able to construct
a very simple timeline of events and report very straightforward ideas, with little use of narrative features. There was a range of marks given for this aspect,
but very few top marks (5) or the lowest mark (0).
In terms of Organisation, at the level these learners are working, this aspect is quite closely linked to Communicative Achievement. The narrative depends
upon a clear timeline and clear links between the action and the people involved. Some learners tried to construct quite complex stories, but lacked the
linguistic ability to communicate their ideas clearly, or to connect their events in a logical way. There were very few top marks awarded for this aspect, but
most learners scored between 1 and 4 for Organisation. Learners need to use punctuation more effectively and this would help to improve their scores. Some
stories had no punctuation at all, and others had full stops after chunks of language, but they were in the wrong place and interrupted sentences rather than
marked them appropriately.
In terms of Language, the learners often had the vocabulary to express themselves but they struggled with correct verb tenses, grammatical structures and
accuracy in terms of spelling and word choices. Weaker learners often lacked the resources to use a range a vocabulary and structures and limited their
stories to the present tense and often repeated key lexis throughout the text.
14
General comments
The great majority of learners attempted all the questions.
On the whole, answers were clearly indicated and, although there were very occasional queries from Assistant Examiners regarding lack of clarity due to
multiple crossings out (especially in Part 4), overwriting and unclear erasures, there were noticeably far fewer than in some previous sessions; this is an area
in which there has been a noticeable and continuing improvement in recent sessions.
Part 1
(Questions 1–5)
Learners identify one of three pictures from short discrete dialogues. Most learners did well in this part, especially on Questions 1 and 4 and answers to
Questions 2 and 5 were the least successful.
Part 2
(Questions 6–10)
This involved multiple-choice questions based on a longer dialogue which was a girl called Nayla talking to her friend Robert about a new chess club. Many
learners had a high proportion of correct answers, with some answering all correctly. Questions 7 and 10 were the most successfully answered and
Questions 6 and 8 the least.
15
Part 3
(Questions 11–15)
This task comprised five questions based on a talk by a girl called Cassie about a long family walk in New Zealand. Incorrect responses were more common
in this part, due to the increased complexity of the language and greater skills demanded. The most successfully answered question was Question 15 and
the least successful were Questions 11 and 13.
Part 4
(Questions 16–20)
This task comprised five questions based on a radio announcement about a festival; incorrect answers tended to be other words in the recording or the result
of mishearing the correct answer. Answers to Questions16, 17 and 19 were all common words at Primary level so no misspelling was allowed and the
answer to Question 20 was part of an email address that was spelt aloud, to test learners’ recognition of the pronunciation of letters of the alphabet. For
Question 19 some tolerance was allowed for the misspelling of ‘candles’ as this was not considered a common word at Primary level. The most successfully
answered question was Question 20 and the least successful were Questions 18 and 19.
Part 1
Question 1
Usually correct (B); incorrect answers divided between A and C.
Question 2
16
Question 3
Question 4
A high proportion correct (B); incorrect answers divided between A and C.
Question 5
Often correct (A); most common incorrect answer: C.
Part 2
Question 6
Usually correct (A); incorrect answers divided between B and C.
Question 7
A very high proportion correct (C); incorrect answers divided between A and B.
Question 8
Usually correct (B); incorrect answers divided between A and C.
Question 9
Usually correct (B); most common incorrect answer: A.
Question 10
A very high proportion correct (A); incorrect answers divided between B and C.
17
Part 3
Question 11
Often incorrect (correct: C); most common incorrect answer: A.
Question 12
Often correct (A); by far the most common incorrect answer: B.
Question 13
Often incorrect (correct: C); by far the most common incorrect answer was A (possibly the most intuitive answer).
Question 14
Often correct (A); by far the most common incorrect answer was C.
Question 15
Often correct (B); incorrect answers divided between A and C.
Part 4
Question 16
Often correct (‘Sunset/sunset’, and ‘Sun set’ was allowed); by far the most common incorrect answer was ‘City/city’, and sometimes ‘Central/central’. There
were some misspellings that were not accepted, for example, ‘Sunsite’, ‘Sonset’ and ‘Somesaid’.
Question 17
Often correct (‘nature’); most common incorrect answer: ‘ocean’, and sometimes ‘light’. There were various misspellings that were not accepted, for example,
‘narture’, ‘nacher’, ‘naiter’ and ‘neture’.
18
Question 18
Often incorrect (correct: ‘candles’, and plausible phonetic misspellings were accepted, the most common of which was ‘candels’); common incorrect answer:
‘candle/candel’ (plural was required), ‘costumes’ and various misspellings of it (a distractor on the recording).
Question 19
Often incorrect (correct: ‘photographer’); most incorrect answers were misspellings, for example, ‘fotographer’, ‘photografer’, ‘photographor’ and also
‘photography’. Sometimes ‘manager’ was given (on the recording).
Question 20
Usually correct (‘rhughes’ ; a few learners added the end of the email address printed on the question paper and that was allowed); incorrect answers were
mishearings of letters spelt out in the recording, for example, ‘rhughis’,’ ahughes’, ‘rhujis’ and ‘arehughes’. Some learners had the fairly common confusion
between ‘e’ and ‘I’ and ‘g’ and ‘j’, which explained many of the incorrect answers.
19
3 Cambridge Primary Checkpoint Global Perspectives 0838
3.1 Comments on specific questions – Global Perspectives 0838 component 01
Key messages
Candidates and teams need clear guidance at the beginning of the Team Project on what content to include in each part of the Checkpoint. Content which is
misplaced (for example, when something that should be included in the Team Report appears instead in the Personal Reflection) means that candidates or
teams cannot gain the marks which would have been awarded had it been put in the correct place.
Teachers are encouraged to familiarise themselves thoroughly with the requirements of the Checkpoint, by referring to the Cambridge Primary Global
Perspectives Curriculum Framework document.
General comments
The entry for the May 2022 series of the Checkpoint revealed a rich variety of responses from centres in different parts of the world to the demands of the
Team Project. While many centres were participating for the first time, among those that had entered in previous series there has been an encouraging
increase in the accuracy of marking by internal examiners.
Some centres that submitted entries for the May 2022 series of the Checkpoint are still facing restrictions as a result of the pandemic, and this has to some
extent hampered their candidates’ ability to engage as fully with the Team Project as they might have liked. However, many of the entries showed great
resourcefulness in the face of such restrictions.
20
Assessment Objective 1 Research, analysis and evaluation
Achievement against this Assessment Objective is evidenced in the Team Report and the Evidence of Action. Both of these are team submissions.
(a) Team Report
Teams often struggled to maintain a balance between the four criteria against which the Team Report is marked: a justification of the issue chosen
by the team; research findings; a summary of the action undertaken by the team; an explanation of the strengths and limitations of the action. In
some instances, one or more of these elements was missing entirely. In other cases, there was evidence that teams or individual candidates had
focused on these elements in other parts of the Checkpoint. For example, a candidate’s Personal Reflection might include details of the team’s
activities that should have been included in the summary of action in the Team Report, where it could have been given credit. In other cases, the
team’s Evidence of Action might include details of research findings that should also have appeared in the Team Report, where additional credit
could have been given. Misplaced content is one of the major factors preventing teams from achieving higher marks for their Team Report.
Some Team Reports were significantly shorter than the word limit of 300–500 words. Guidance can be provided to teams so that they are fully
aware of what they need to include in their report. Such guidance is likely to be effective if it is provided at the outset of the Team Project, rather
than being given only after the fact. An initial understanding of what the Team Report should include may enable teams to plan their project more
effectively, and to record information to include in their Team Report as their project progresses.
As it is a team submission, all members of the team should collaborate in and contribute to the writing of the Team Report. The Team Report should
be written in English, but marking does not take into account language features such as grammatical or spelling errors. Where the team has
successfully communicated the appropriate content in their writing, this should be credited.
Some teams chose to present their Team Reports in the form of bullet-pointed lists under headings related to the four criteria. While this may be an
appropriate method in some cases for presenting research findings and/or giving a summary of the action taken, it is unlikely to prove effective as a
way of providing a thoughtful justification for the issue chosen, or of giving a ‘clear and balanced explanation’ of the strengths and limitations of the
action taken.
Specifically, the Team Report is assessed against the following criteria:
‘justify the issue chosen, goal set and local action taken, making reference to different local perspectives on the issue’
21
Thoughtful justifications often included references to a specifically local issue that could also be linked to a wider global issue. However, teams were
unable to access the highest marks for this criterion where they did not identify other local perspectives related to the issue they had chosen. Often
such perspectives are more easily accessed through primary research carried out by the teams themselves, rather than through secondary research
sources.
The Team Report should include a clear statement of the goal set by the team. More successful teams are able to set a goal that is achievable in
the context of their Team Project; less successful teams often choose goals that are either too ambitious, or not sufficiently focused on the issue
they have chosen. In some cases, teams were unable or unwilling to narrow down a range of different goals to a single goal on which they could
concentrate their efforts.
‘outline research findings on the issue’
Teams that carried out primary research into a local issue were often able to include more detail in their research findings. Where findings had been
taken exclusively from secondary research sources, they were sometimes not entirely appropriate to the issue chosen by the team or lacked
sufficient detail.
‘summarise the course of action taken by the team’
The most successful summaries of action were provided by teams who had carefully thought through and planned the different stages of their
action, with a clear focus on the goal they wished to achieve. In such cases, teams were able to show how each of the actions they had undertaken
contributed towards the achievement of their goal. Summaries sometimes took the form of tables or bullet-pointed lists, which can be an effective
way of presenting the sequence of steps undertaken by the team.
‘discuss the strengths and limitations of the action taken’
Teams that evaluate the action they have undertaken, for example in terms of how successful or otherwise it was in achieving the goal they set, are
more likely to access higher marks for this criterion. Many teams choose to focus their attention on external factors such as restrictions imposed by
the pandemic, or the lack of time to complete their project. Such factors need to be discussed in terms of the team’s planning in order to be
considered relevant. For example, instead of saying that they had not been given enough time to finish their course of action, the team could explain
that they had planned too many activities, and that in future they would need to think more carefully about what could be achieved in the time
available to them
22
(b) Evidence of Action
Where teams had not set a sufficiently clear or focused goal for their action, it was hard for them to access higher marks in their Evidence of Action
against AO1. Teams can be encouraged to set goals that are achievable within the constraints of their specific local situation. The goal is more likely
to be achievable where the issue the team has chosen to focus on is a local issue.
For further comments relevant to the assessment of the Evidence of Action, see the section on AO3 below.
Assessment Objective 2 Reflection
Achievement against this Assessment Objective is evidenced in the Personal Reflection, a piece of writing that is produced by each individual candidate.
Throughout the Personal Reflection, candidates are expected to evaluate their experiences during the Team Project through discussion and explanation, and
not just to provide a narrative account of what they did.
Some candidates’ Personal Reflections fell well short of the 350–450 word limit, suggesting that they were perhaps unaware of the full scope of what they
could write about in this document. Once again, teachers need to ensure that candidates are fully conscious of what they need to include in the Personal
Reflection from the very beginning of the Team Project. Candidates can be encouraged to keep records of anything relevant to the Personal Reflection (their
thoughts, behaviour, personal contributions and experiences of teamwork) throughout the project, which they can then draw on when the time comes to write
it.
Specifically, the Personal Reflection is assessed against the following criteria:
1 Reflection on thoughts and behaviour:
‘how thoughts on the issue have developed as a result of the research conducted and/or action taken’
‘how personal behaviour or the behaviour of others has changed as a result of the research conducted and/or action taken and/or working together as a
team’
Candidates often struggle to achieve a balance between reflecting on their thoughts and behaviour on the one hand, and reflecting on the process of
collaboration, on the other. The lack of balance is often evident within each of the criteria, too. For example, to access higher marks candidates need to
reflect not just on their thoughts or on their behaviour, but on both.
23
In order to reflect on how their thoughts have developed as a result of their engagement in the Team Project, candidates can be encouraged to consider
the difference between what they thought ‘before’ and what they think ‘after’ (for example, ‘I used to think X about this issue, but now I think Y’). To
enhance their ability to do this, candidates can be given opportunities to make their thoughts on the issue their team has chosen explicit at the beginning
of the project, perhaps through the use of graphic organisers such as KWL charts. Please note that the emphasis here is on how thinking has changed,
rather than on what facts have been learned during the course of the project.
The same ‘before’ and ‘after’ approach can be adopted when it comes to reflecting on behaviour. Again, if – at the beginning of the project – candidates
are asked to make a record of what they do (their behaviour) in terms of the issue their team has chosen, they may then find it easier to carry out such
reflection at the end of the project, instead of having to reconstruct patterns of behaviour from memory.
2 Reflection on the process of collaboration:
‘strengths and limitations of their contribution to the team’

‘benefits and challenges of working together as a team’
Candidates need to achieve a good balance in each of these criteria in order to gain higher marks.
When reflecting on their personal contribution, candidates should be encouraged to regard the ability to reflect on their limitations as something that can
be rewarded, rather than as something that is best avoided in the mistaken belief that it might be regarded as a sign of weakness. After all, it is the ability
to reflect which is being assessed here, not the intrinsic merits or otherwise of the contributions the candidate makes. ‘Insightful discussion’ might also
include writing about the impact that the candidate’s contributions had on the team’s ability to achieve their goal, as well as giving indications of how the
candidate thinks they might do things differently in future, in the light of their experiences during the Team Project.
When it comes to reflecting on teamwork, the more successful candidates are those who are able to draw general conclusions about its benefits and
challenges from the specific experiences they have had while working together as a team during the Team Project. Less successful candidates tend to
restrict themselves to descriptions of who did what in their team, without explaining the positive or negative impact of these actions on the team’s ability to
carry out its work effectively.
Some candidates included descriptions of the work carried out by the team during the project in their Personal Reflection. Unless the work described is
specifically linked to the discussion of their own personal contribution, or is being used to illustrate a point the candidate is explaining about teamwork,
such description is at best redundant (it should already have been included in the summary of action in the Team Report), or at worst it may mean that,
instead of appearing in the Team Report where it might have gained credit, it has been incorrectly presented as part of the Personal Reflection.
24
Assessment Objective 3 Communication and collaboration
Achievement against this Assessment Objective is evidenced in the Evidence of Action, and additionally in the Team Observation and Individual Observation.
The Evidence of Action is a team submission.
Evidence of Action
Many teams successfully used a variety of media (videos, PowerPoint presentations, photographs, etc.) to communicate what they had done during the Team
Project. In many of these cases, teams used these media to show how they had communicated their message to an audience, for example, by including in
their Evidence of Action a recording of a presentation given to a school assembly, or of a play performed in front of other students.
Generally, teams also succeeded in showing through their Evidence of Action how their research findings had informed their message or their course of
action. However, in some instances teams only included such research findings in their Evidence of Action, whereas it would have been appropriate to
include at least some of the findings in their Team Report in order to gain marks there, too.
Some teams submit photographs of things they have created during the project (for instance, a poster or a brochure), or of themselves engaged in activities
as part of their course of action. Where such images are presented as separate JPEG files, it is sometimes difficult to understand the purpose or context of
what can be seen in the images. It is therefore recommended that such images are inserted into a document such as a PowerPoint or PDF file, where
captions offering further information can be provided.
In some instances, teams created online resources such as websites or blogs as a means of achieving their goal. If teams wish to include such resources as
part of their Evidence of Action, they should do so by taking screenshots or videos of the resources and uploading these to Cambridge. Merely providing links
to such resources can prove unreliable or may require further permissions in order to gain access.
Team Observation/Individual Observation
Where a candidate is awarded 0 for their Individual Observation, this has implications for their marks in other parts of the Checkpoint. Teachers are reminded
to check on p.24 of the Cambridge Primary Global Perspectives Curriculum Framework, to see what the full implications are.
25
4 Cambridge Primary Checkpoint English 0844
4.1 Comments on specific questions – English 0844 component 01
General comments
This session the given texts were an information/non-chronological report text about being an astronaut and a biography of an astronaut, Alan Shepard. The
subject matter seemed to be particularly engaging, and both texts were accessible to candidates in terms of the reading level required, although Text A
clearly proved to be the more challenging as more candidates achieved marks for the questions based on Text B. The writing task set was a chronological
report requiring the candidates to write a recount of a recent exploration made by a group of young explorers to a remote area. In both sections, those
candidates who focussed on non-fiction, factual techniques and styles scored the highest marks. Unusually, there were a number of candidates who included,
either in their comprehension answers or in their writing, narrative elements, perhaps demonstrating a misunderstanding of the focus of this particular paper.
In Section A – Reading, there were a variety of questions (including tick-boxes, a table and questions which required both short and extended answers)
which gave candidates ample opportunity to demonstrate their understanding of both texts. Responses which required candidates to retrieve information
directly from the text were generally answered particularly well. More demanding questions, such as those that required candidates to explain the writer’s
intent (Question 10(b)) or those which focused on a subject’s character traits (Question 16) seemed to cause more difficulties. Those that required higher-
level comprehension skills highlighted that some students find it difficult to articulate their understanding, even if they possess the basic knowledge required.
Several of the questions asked candidates to give examples/phrases from the text and those candidates who took note of this and quoted carefully were able
to accurately answer the question without omitting key information or making too many basic copying errors. Whilst minor spelling errors were allowable,
changes to word order and the omission or addition of words meant that the answer had to be considered incorrect. For questions which require a specific
word or phrase, candidates who choose a longer quote were only able to score a mark if they clearly identify the key words using underlining, capital letters or
parenthesis – for example ‘zooming to work on a speeding rocket’ (Question 1). However, it is clear many candidates are paying greater attention to question
instructions, such as ‘Tick one box’, which allows them to gain marks they might otherwise have not achieved.
Section B – Writing. Whilst the task required a certain amount of creative thinking (as few students would ever have visited the places suggested, such as a
jungle), the higher scoring students were the ones who were able to write in an appropriate non-fiction style, and in particular who were able to use a factual
tone by including relevant, real-life possible events and technical language. This was especially true of those who were able to sustain this consistently
throughout the piece. Those whose writing veered too closely to narrative in terms of tone or fictional content were unable to progress to higher marks.
26
Fortunately, most students were able to include some recount features such as consistent use of the past tense, and many included some relevant material
about the exploration.
In terms of technical writing skills, more successful candidates demonstrated their understanding that accurate punctuation is key to ensuring clear meaning.
As they were writing recounts, candidates were also required to show their knowledge of the past tense forms of many verbs and most did so very well.
Candidates who attempted the use of complex sentences were often rewarded with higher marks, although it is important that they are able to ensure that the
meaning, focus and tense of these sentences is not lost. Some candidates also scored well on the spelling aspect of their writing, especially those who
attempted more ambitious words, even if the spelling was not entirely accurate but was phonetically plausible.
It is worth noting that, although handwriting is not assessed, those scripts where the handwriting was legible (i.e. well-formed, consistent and well-spaced)
were much easier to mark.
Scripts which included even the most basic plan were often more engaging, and generally had a better balance of content which focussed on all aspects on
the trip. They also had a more satisfactory structure with clearer paragraphing and (in the most well-written ones) a clear, succinct introduction which set the
scene and a conclusion which rounded off the recount satisfactorily. While using the Planning box takes better time management, the positive impact on
students’ writing tasks is noticeable. Additionally, time management this session, especially for the Writing element, seemed to be well handled with the vast
majority of candidates attempting the writing piece, and most completing it. Those candidates who attempted longer pieces, actively using a significant
amount of the second page available to them, also scored more highly as there was more evidence on which markers could base their assessments.
Please note – candidates need to be instructed not to begin their writing in the Planning Box as this is not routinely checked/marked by examiners, leading
some scripts to be given No Response for the Writing task. In addition, candidates should be reminded not to use either of the example texts given in the
Insert as the basis for their writing as these rarely meet the brief and it is often difficult to award marks due to the limited amount of original content, structure,
sentence formation or language.
Section A – Reading
Question 1
A large number of candidates attempted this question. It was clear that those candidates who had a good understanding of more challenging writing
techniques and terms were able to quickly find and supply the necessary word – zooming. Most of these gave the answer as a single word and a few also
gained marks for choosing to give it highlighted within a quoted sentence. Some candidates were able to identify the correct phrase, but missed out on the
mark because the key word was not clearly indicated. ‘Gazing’ was often inaccurately identified, and some candidates clearly confused onomatopoeia with
alliteration and supplied the phrase ‘who wouldn’t want…’
27
Question 2
This question was well answered by most candidates, with the phrase ‘It can be tough out there’ most often used. Other students chose the alternative,
question-based option – ‘Have you got what it takes to fly?’ – which gained them the mark as long as they remembered to include the essential question
mark. It was also imperative, as they were asked for a quotation, that these were accurately copied. A few candidates seemingly did not note the requirement
that the answer must come from the first paragraph and either chose a quote from elsewhere – ‘it’s pretty difficult to say’ – or gave answers from outside the
text in their own words, such as ‘Because it would be hard to breathe.’
Question 3
For the most part, candidates followed the requirement to only tick one box for this question, with very few ticking more than one option. A large proportion of
students were able to correctly identify that the sentence was an example of a conditional. The random spread in the choosing of the other available options,
by those candidates who demonstrated they did not understand this term, suggests that none of the other terms are well understood, and this may be an area
for further study.
Question 4
(a) The variety of uses for brackets and dashes is obviously well understood and was demonstrated by many candidates. However, this question
challenged candidates to identify a common use for both dashes and brackets, and this meant that only those answers which referred to the broad
use of providing additional information (in whatever way this was expressed) could be credited. Successful candidates also realised that the
question required them to give a generic use rather than a content-specific one which relied solely on information from the text.
(b) Many candidates showed they are aware of the diverse uses for dashes, with the successful ones being able to focus on the distinctive
highlighting/emphasising effect that dashes have in particular. Again, the requirement for a generalised effect meant that direct examples from the
text could not be awarded a mark, and some candidates repeated their answer from Question 4(a), clearly demonstrating that they knew that
dashes are used to add information but lacking the specificity required for this question. Some candidates chose to give effects that would be better
suited to a fictional piece of writing, such as ‘dramatic pauses’ and ‘creating suspense’ and so were unable to score.
28
Question 5
Almost all candidates were able to give a reason taken from the text, with very few giving ‘own word’ answers such as ‘they’re not brave enough’ or ‘There’s
no oxygen in space.’ Many candidates accurately identified the relevant sentence from the text, but the successful ones accurately included both halves of the
quote by fully copying it – ‘Not many people…transport there is’ – to gain the mark. Other successful answers phrased this in their own way and included an
essential qualifier to indicate just how expensive space travel is, e.g. ‘Spaceships are too expensive’ or ‘They don’t have enough money.’
Question 6
A large number of candidates were able to identify the correct part of the text, and many of these noted the requirement to provide ‘a phrase’ and only gave a
succinct quote – ‘They’re dirt cheap,’ so gaining the mark. Some candidates quoted the whole sentence but only the successful ones clearly indicated the key
words. By carefully reading the question, stronger candidates were also able to realise they needed to include the modifier ‘dirt’ to make their answer
synonymous with ‘very cheap’. Some candidates clearly understood the need to find a more unusual phrase, but incorrectly chose ‘eye-watering sums’.
Question 7
Many candidates chose an answer from the correct part of the text, but to gain the mark they were able to make the link between ‘most common’ in the
question and the first option given in the text – that ‘working for a government space agency’ was the best way to get into space. They may also have realised
there was a link with ‘number one employer.’ A few candidates took the question too literally and incorrectly suggested that ‘on a spaceship’ was the way to
get a ride.
Question 8
This question was generally well answered, with many candidates able to identify and accurately copy only the correct phrase, rather than the whole, overly
long sentence. Careful reading was demonstrated by these candidates, who were not distracted by other phrases that might have been incorrectly interpreted
as being synonymous, such as ‘it’s pretty difficult to say’ or ‘eventually.’
Question 9
This question was very well answered with most candidates demonstrating that they have a good understanding of opinions rather than facts, and also that
they are able to follow the instructions given in the question to only tick one box.
29
Question 10
(a) The most capable candidates were able to use the table format to show their knowledge of informal text features, successfully including the correct
type of information (either an example from the text or own words) in the appropriate boxes. In relation to parts (i) and (iii), those candidates who
carefully copied fuller quotes (as suggested by the first given answer) from the pertinent text – rather than from Text B or by generating their own
words – were able to clearly prove that they knew what ‘the second person’ and ‘questions’ look like when used in a sentence. This necessary
accuracy was further shown by those candidates who also included the essential punctuation used to demarcate questions. Higher scoring
candidates were able to extend their answers for the second part (ii) beyond simply identifying the apostrophes, to accurately state that all the
examples given were using apostrophes of contraction or omission. Other candidates gave the equally valid answer that all the words showed
shortened phrases.
Note: Examiners were more able to accurately mark those scripts where candidates had worked hard to keep their answers within the parameters
of the boxes, especially for the third part of the answer (iii).
(b) This question challenged candidates to consider the writer’s intentions and reasons for the choice of using the informal style. To answer this
question well, candidates demonstrated that they had considered who the intended audience of this text might be. Successful candidates were able
to relate the general impact of this style of writing (engaging, entertaining or fun to read, for example) to the specific needs of the probable audience
(most likely, children). While many candidates could give various features of informal writing (‘it can be persuasive’ or ‘it’s more interesting’), a few
students were able to give precise, full answers such as ‘To make it more engaging for younger readers’ or ‘Informal allows the writer to connect to
the reader to keep their attention.’
Question 11
As a tick box question, the vast majority of candidates attempted this, and almost all of those who did, followed the instruction to only tick one box. Whilst
most were able to correctly identify the text as being the type of report one would find in an information book, a few chose the biography option – possibly
getting confused between Text A and Text B.
Question 12
For this question, candidates needed to retrieve a piece of basic information from the given text and convert this knowledge to an applicable answer to the
question posed. Whilst many candidates were able to do this by responding that he was from America / the USA, some candidates missed out on the mark by
simply using the direct quote ‘Alan Shepard was…the first American’ which does not accurately answer where he was from.
30
Question 13
Successful candidates here were the ones who carefully read the question and realised that to identify the relevant piece of information they had to focus only
on his first space flight, as the other potential answers referred either to his training or to his second flight. Careful reading of the text was also essential as (in
the case of the third option) the information given on the test paper did indeed refer to his first space flight, but was incorrect.
Question 14
This question was attempted by almost all the candidates, and most were able to correctly identify the two spaceships by carefully reading the whole text to
find the pieces of information in separate paragraphs. Those candidates who accurately copied both the names and numbers of the crafts were rewarded by
gaining the mark. Some candidates seemed to have been distracted by the inclusion in the text of the two names of Alan’s fellow astronauts, suggesting that
they focussed their attention on one paragraph only and simply assumed the two pieces of information would be found together.
Question 15
This question was particularly well answered by almost all candidates, who were able to deduce that if ‘Shepard and Mitchell walked on the moon,’ it must
have been Roosa who did not. When longer quotes are asked for, it is allowable that there may be a minor copying error. As the information needed to
answer this question was very limited, it was required that candidates accurately copied the astronaut’s surname.
Question 16
This question seemed to be the one candidates found most challenging. The highest achieving students were able to focus solely on what the golfing event in
particular (as indicated by the question instructions) showed about Shepard’s character, rather than supplying very generic adjectives that described his
character (or indeed the character of any astronaut) in general, for example that he was brave or enjoyed exploration. Successful answers also focussed on
traits that the behaviour suggested – ‘he was playful’ or ‘he had a fun personality’ – instead of simply reporting what he did – ‘he surprised people’ or ‘he was
the first person to hit a golf ball on the Moon’. It would seem that the ability to infer or judge character from a person’s actions is an area that could benefit
from further study.
31
Question 17
The majority of candidates were able to correctly answer this question, often using the direct quote he ‘continued to be involved…astronauts.’ Many others
gained marks for paraphrasing this idea, which demonstrated the higher-level skill of being selective in retrieving and reporting information. This ability also
saved them time and space, rather than copying an overlong sentence when it was not really required. A few candidates showed that they held the
misconception that Alan trained the astronauts himself, which careful reading and deeper understanding of the text would have shown was incorrect (he had
already left NASA so was unlikely to be doing training by that point).
Question 18
Again, this tick box question was well attempted and often well answered. A minority of candidates seemed to have muddled this answer with the one for
Question 11, but most demonstrated that they knew the features of a biography and were able to recognise them in Text B.
Question 19
Candidates who succeeded with this question demonstrated the ability to be very selective about the information they chose to use. Rather than simply
copying a list of the things that Shepard did (for example, ‘he played golf on the moon’), they singled out those events that showed how ‘exceptional’ he was,
such as being ‘the first American in space’ or being chosen as commander on only his second space flight. They were also careful to give accurate
information – ‘he was the second person in space’ as opposed to ‘he was the second person to walk on the moon.’ If they used the quote ‘Alan Shepard was
the second person, and first American, in space’ only those answers which gave it in full could be credited. Incomplete examples did not make sense, for
example ‘he was the second person and first American’ does not tell us what he did. It was also essential that candidates gave facts from the given text rather
than impressions based on his actions, such as ‘he was good at science.’
Note: When given two lines for their answers, it is preferrable that candidates give only one answer per line. Writing two answers on one line means they
either leave the second line blank, or attempt to give another answer which is not always accurate.
Question 20
Candidates who focussed on the correct paragraph tended to be able to select the correct option. However, it was clear that many candidates were
concentrating on the wrong paragraph which led them to think that the title needed to be about his ‘last flight’. Those students who had carefully read and
understood the information in the final paragraph were also better able to find an appropriate title – ‘Life on Earth.’
32
Section B – Writing
Question 21
Many candidates responded appropriately to the task of writing a report about an exploration and there were far fewer examples of No Response than in
previous years. Most scripts contained some relevant material and many had generally chronological report elements written in a more impersonal tone. Most
pieces were ordered sequentially using some paragraphing. The inclusion of sub-headings in a number did help to organise the writing, as did the use of time
connectives. Basic sentences were usually grammatically accurate and punctuated with some basic demarcation, and there were attempts to build longer
sentences. Spelling was reasonably well achieved with the most successful candidates attempting to use more ambitious structures.
Wa – Content, purpose and audience
The majority of pieces were able to score some marks here by ensuring that, although the subject of an exploration and the locations suggested may have
been unfamiliar to students, they included vaguely factual events and descriptions based on what the writers did know (geographically, scientifically or
logically). There were some pieces that were too narrative (in tone or content) or which did not include any relevant material, perhaps demonstrating that a
few candidates are not aware that this is a non-fiction paper or that they need to read the given brief more carefully.
A large number of candidates were able to write appropriately in an impersonal style, i.e. about a separate team of people with limited first person references.
Most of these used elements relevant to a recount (rather than a biography or persuasive text, for example) such as mostly past tense. More newspaper style
reports often attempted to include interviews or comments from participants to add interest and variety, but were most successful when these were used
sparingly and added additional details rather than repeating information. Effective reports ‘set the scene’ by including a brief introduction which explained the
background to the exploration, and these included some relevant material which was well balanced, i.e. there was not too much focus on the journey and
much more focus on the details of the actual exploration. More engaging reports chose to write about scouting out more remote, dangerous environments,
rather than limiting themselves by writing about day trips to ‘safer’ locations such as museums and water parks. They also gave detailed information about the
activities undertaken, the incidents which happened to the explorers and the things they discovered, with limited description about the participants or the
places they visited.
The most successful candidates were able to write wholly impersonal reports in the third person with either a more formal style and a sustained, factual
viewpoint, or in a journalistic style with many of the appropriate elements and a more engaging tone. They included lots of interesting scientific or technical
information making them a true report about an exploration, rather than a description of a place they had visited. Their reports contained no fantastical
elements (for example treasure hunts or mythical creatures being discovered) and focussed instead on how the explorers survived in the hostile environment
and what they discovered about the location. These reports were very well balanced and concluded effectively by indicating what effect their experiences had
on the participants when they returned and the impact of their findings.
33
Wt – Text structure and organisation
More accomplished candidates used their time and the space available wisely to write longer pieces with a clear structure, often using the Planning Box very
successfully to note what material would go in different sections. Short pieces (those which only utilised the first lined page, or even were only a couple of
paragraphs long) gave limited opportunity for candidates to demonstrate their skills and equally limited evidence for markers to base their assessments upon.
Most candidates were able to arrange their writing so that related points were grouped together, and those who wrote in a recount style about an exploration
(as opposed to choosing the wrong text type or focus) were able to include some relevant ideas that were organised chronologically. This structure usually
included an introduction that stated the location and gave some information about the group, followed by a description of what happened when they were
there and, in many cases, some details of what happened when they returned.
More sophisticated structures built on and extended these ideas with longer middle sections which added greater detail to the events of the exploration. Many
made their structure clearer by starting each section with unambiguous time connectives. Higher marks could be gained by those candidates who separated
their writing into paragraphs, especially when those breaks were carefully chosen to reflect a different event or time period, with these candidates often using
sub-headings to begin some paragraphs. Higher scoring candidates demonstrated that they are aware that a paragraph is rarely just one sentence, but
usually needs to include follow up sentences to expand on the initial point.
The most successful candidates were able to link their paragraphs together, not only by using time connectives but other connective words such as ‘However’
or ‘Because of this…’ A few were also able to use these logical links within their paragraphs to tie related ideas together or to add more information. Their
reports were very well balanced, with adequate material in each section (introduction, main content and conclusion) and flowed smoothly with few gaps in the
sequence or logic of events.
34
Wp – Sentence structure and purpose
The vast majority of candidates were able to score for this element and some understanding/use of good English grammar was clearly demonstrated. It was
noted that the use of basic demarcation, i.e. full stops and (more especially) correctly included capital letters, needs more work. Many candidates were unable
to progress further than the lower marks because, despite exhibiting good sentence structure, they were unable to show a similar proficiency in their
punctuation.
Those candidates who also used full stops rather than commas to demarcate units of meaning were able to score more highly. To gain more marks,
candidates had to use full stops within their paragraphs to demarcate sentences, not just at the end to show a paragraph had finished. Students who also
remembered to capitalise letters after full stops demonstrated greater levels of understanding of basic punctuation. Due to the required text structure and its
reliance on the past tense, most candidates showed that they are aware of and can use the correct forms of past tense for many verbs, as well as present
tense ones.
The most successful candidates were able to extend their sentences beyond basic compounds to form complex sentences. While lots of candidates are to be
praised for their attempts at longer sentence forms, it is important that they maintain control over these so that the sense, grammar and focus are not lost. An
effective complex sentence is one which the reader clearly understands because the grammar and organisation is clear and accurate. The most impressive
scripts included complex sentences that arranged the information so that the emphasis was clear, demonstrating that they had thought carefully about the
organisation of the information within the sentence. These scripts were also accurately punctuated throughout, especially with the use of commas not just for
lists but also to break longer complex sentences. Those candidates who chose a more journalistic form for their writing were also able to demonstrate that
they can correctly punctuate basic speech, which allowed them access to higher marks.
Ws – Spelling
This continues to be an area of strength in candidates’ work. Correctly spelt high frequency words are a feature of most candidates’ writing. Many candidates
demonstrated good knowledge of common plurals and past tense endings as well as common polysyllabic and compound words. Higher attaining students
demonstrated strong spelling ability by using accurate spelling throughout their writing, but could have challenged themselves by using more ambitious
vocabulary. This would allow them to gain full marks for this element.
35
4 Cambridge Primary Checkpoint English 0844
4.2 Comments on specific questions – English 0844 component 02
General comments
Text: an extract from ‘Cowboy Showdown’ by Chris Blake
The extract appeared to have been well-received by candidates who, overall, showed a good understanding of the material. The general feeling of examiners was that
it was an accessible text for most candidates.
Key messages
Section A: Reading
Candidates were able to demonstrate their understanding of the story in their answers to a variety of questions. The formats of the questions varied, ranging from
multiple choice where a simple tick was required against the correct response to those where the answer required a single word, phrase or a simple sentence.
Key messages from the responses to this section are listed here:
• Reading questions carefully is one of the most significant issues where candidates may lose marks. It is vital that they understand what is required by a particular
question. There were some questions where marks were lost when the focus of a question was misunderstood or the instruction in a question was mis-read.
Important examples of the language used in a question include ‘which word / give one word’, and ‘give two ideas’. There are others which will be mentioned
below as part of another key message or in the question-by-question commentary.
• Where ‘one word’ or a ‘short phrase’ is the required answer, extra words are not allowed as the correct answer may not be clear. Candidates need to make their
intentions plain and unambiguous so that examiners are able to award marks as appropriate. An example on this paper is Question 12 where three words and
only three words were required. Phrases including the word were inadmissible – again because examiners need to know which word is meant by the candidate.
As before, the correct answer can be shown by using parentheses or underlining, e.g. a word that describes sound is ‘jangle’ OR the word that describes sound
is jangle. In these examples the ONLY extra words are taken from the question and not the text.
• When a question requires candidates to ‘explain’ or ‘give a reason’ it is usual that answers should be in a candidate’s ‘own words’. A direct quote does not
usually provide the correct response. Sometimes the phrase ‘in your own words’ may be used as part of the instruction in a question. An example on this paper is
Question 7 where candidates were required to express their own ideas giving the necessary detail in their answers.
36
• Following on from the above, candidates frequently give an explicit answer using words retrieved directly from the text where an implicit answer is required. Many
candidates struggle to use context clues to determine their answer. The development of these higher order skills is essential for these students to gain more
marks.
• On occasions, correct answers might not score where they are given alongside incorrect information. Examiners need to be clear about a candidate’s intention
when giving their answer.
• Where a direct quote from the text is required for a correct answer, as in Question 13, words need to copied exactly. In this examination the most common
errors were where a candidate added their own words or missed out some of the words. Candidates need to be reminded about recognising when a direct quote
is required and how to select the correct words, copying them carefully. Also, identifying the correct words / sentence is vital so that either ‘over-quoting’ or
‘under-quoting’ does not occur.
• Candidates must take note of the line references given on the question paper to locate the correct information for an answer. In Question 12, a clear signpost is
given to candidates so that the correct words are found.
Section B: Writing
Most candidates responded well to the stimulus for writing. Many narratives showed an enthusiastic approach to the task.
Key messages to the responses to this section are listed her:

• The ‘What happens next’ stimulus required careful reading of what was happening as the extract finished. Not every candidate picked up the idea of the cyclone
at the start. However, most had the idea of Tom and Zuma ‘landing’ somewhere else.
• Whilst some candidates attempted to create an interesting story using some imaginative detail, many stories were brief and lacking in descriptive detail. Events
were recounted with little or no use of a broad vocabulary intended to engage the reader. Was this a timing issue? Tricky to determine as most stories DID end
with very few just ‘stopping’.
• The previous point referred to the amount of detail in many stories. Figurative language was rarely used. Even where similes, for example, were used, they were
frequently not appropriate to the image being described. This will be referred to in greater detail later in this report.
• Examiners shared a concern, also noted in the previous session, as to whether candidates have been able to practise extended writing tasks and develop their
writing ability appropriately so that they are able to reach their potential. There were a significant number of stories that started well but then did not achieve a
good writing score. It was noted that, often, these stories were accompanied by a high score in Section A – higher attainers did not appear to match their high
marks in Section A with a high score in Section B.
37
• There was evidence across the range of attainment that there has been some good teaching of basic skills. Sentence structure and spelling were particularly
sound for many candidates. However, accurate punctuation was an issue this session. This has always been a strength in the past.
• Candidates need to be made aware that copying content from the given story gains no credit. Occasionally, introducing the narrative with a sentence at the end
of the extract can allow the story to continue as required but this should be very brief to ensure that ‘original’ work eligible for marks is clear.
Section A – Reading
Question 1
This was a straightforward question and most candidates gained the mark here. The multiple-choice format allowed candidates to make a good start to the
paper.
Question 2
Many candidates achieve d the mark for this question. Unsuccessful candidates mentioned the boxes without the idea that they were ‘unpacked’. Others
made a general statement about getting the display ready or said that Tom needed to help his father.
Question 3
This was well answered by many with some candidates copying the full line from the text whereas more confident candidates gave the required single word,
‘pyramid’. ‘Clay statues’ was a common error.
Question 4
Overall, this was well answered. Candidates needed to take care to avoid ambiguity here and ensure their responses referenced a telephone call either by
implication or literally. Imprecise answers included words like ‘a woman called him’.
38
Question 5
The general response to this question was a concern as so many candidates only gave one tick instead of two. It is an example of the importance of reading
the question carefully. Question 1, also a multiple-choice question, only required one tick. There were more choices in this question that offered two correct
answers, requiring two ticks. The majority of candidates scored one mark with one tick. Those who did give two ticks often selected both correct answers.
Question 6
There was a wide range of answers to this question. Successful candidates correctly included the idea of Tom wanting to hit / bang / play the drum although
there was some confusion about the word ‘mallet’ – meaning given in the glossary. Developing their responses to be eligible for two marks was a challenge.
Although implicit questions can present difficulties, many managed to describe how Tom did not want to be seen or did not want to get into trouble thus
gaining both marks. Incorrect or imprecise responses often included a direct quote from the text which did not describe why Tom wanted to be alone.
Question 7
Although this question was challenging, the majority of errors were a result of candidates giving a direct quote rather than an explanation ‘in your own words’.
Again, careful reading of the instructions within the question was essential here. ‘How the drum was hit’ and ‘the extent of the sound’ were important ideas to
explain Tom’s shock. The line references were clear here to offer candidates a signpost to the information that will help them construct their answer. Very few
correct responses were seen by examiners.
Question 8
This question saw many correct answers. The wording ‘before Tom sees her’ was essential to understanding what is required here. There was some
confusion between the words, ‘mallet’ and ‘drum’. The glossary needs to be studied as part of the extract. Incorrect responses showed some
misunderstanding of ‘prison’ where candidates thought of Zuma being in an actual prison and not ‘imprisoned’ or ‘trapped’ in the drum.
Question 9
A high percentage of candidates ticked the correct box.
39
Question 10
As with Question 9, a high number of candidates gained the mark here. Incorrect responses ticked ‘she was surprised by the arrival of a stranger’ but this
would not account for her being nervous as described in the question.
Question 11
This was well-answered by many candidates who linked Tlaloc with picking up the drum.
Imprecise answers were given where weaker candidates simply mentioned ‘holding’ or ‘picking’ the drum. Other unsuccessful candidates answered ‘who’ and
not ‘what’ brought the rain to an end, giving one word, ‘Tlaloc’.
Question 12
Overall, this question was well answered. Line references were given although some words were taken from elsewhere in the extract.
‘Three’ words were required. Answers needed to be clear and not masked by extra words.
Question 13
There were many correct quotes given here.
Incorrect responses often involved incomplete transcription of the words in the required sentence. Omissions also resulted in no credit being given. Some
weaker candidates copied the sentence given in the question from line 48 instead of locating another sentence. These candidates need to practise how to
give a quote in their responses so that full credit may be given.
Question 14
This question was a good discriminator. There was a pleasing number of candidates who gained all three marks. The line references should have helped to
guide candidates to the correct location of the word within the extract so that looking at the context of how each word is used could have been helpful. One of
the problems for examiners with this question was the way in which some candidates drew the lines – sometimes it was difficult to identify the start and end of
a line. Deletions made this difficult too. To be fair, some candidates who made an error, resorted to numbering the words on each side as a way of matching
them which allowed credit to be given.
40
Question 15
This question required a higher level of understanding than in previous ‘point of view’ questions. Higher attainers were able to give a concise answer
pinpointing the differences. However, there were only a few who gained the full two marks here. Incomplete explanations lost marks, e.g. ‘it would be first
person’, or ‘he would use first person’. To gain credit here it needed to be clear that ‘Tlaloc would use first person (I or me) to describe himself’. There were
many imprecise answers such as ‘the pronouns would be different’.
‘Thoughts and feelings’ on its own, was not creditworthy as such a general reference could be used to describe any of the characters. ‘We would know
Tlaloc’s/his thoughts and feelings’ adds the necessary detail.
Many candidates had the correct idea that the beginning of the story would be different but few suggested ‘how’ or ‘why’ this would be.
Question 16
There were some correct responses to this question where the genre (either ‘fantasy’ or ‘adventure’) was identified with a correct reason. However, many
candidates seemed to misunderstand the word ‘genre’. There were many answers of ‘fiction’. Also, where the correct genre was identified, few went on to add
a correct feature. Quoting from the text, ‘it’s going to be an adventure!’, as a feature to match to the ‘adventure’ genre was incorrect.
Matching features of different genres could be achieved by examining a range of different texts so that candidates are able to distinguish the relevant
characteristics when faced with a new, previously unseen text.
Section B – Writing
Question 17
Examiners reported how many stories were enjoyable to read and that there were far fewer irrelevant narratives than previously.
41
Wa – Content, purpose and audience
A few excellent stories were seen that were characterised by well-described settings, linked to a lively plot, usually with some dramatic detail and plenty of
action. These high scoring narratives included a precise vocabulary where the choice of a particular word, or words, contributed significantly to the creation of
image and mood. The best examples, referred to here, managed to create atmosphere and describe feelings, often using adverbs effectively to modify verbs.
Only these higher attainers managed to control the content so that the reader is fully engaged. This is difficult to achieve. The sense of character in these
narratives was clear with engaging action using appropriate linguistic skills together with perceptive choices of vocabulary.
For the majority of candidates, the extract and the instruction in the writing stimulus (Question 17) were sensibly used to create suitable content and
structure. They wrote about Tom and Zuma and their attempt to find six coins. These often began within the cyclone and ended with another confrontation
with Tlaloc, either with or without the coins. In between, different locations were described although the narratives often lapsed into a ‘list-like’ account of how
the coins were found. Consequently, plot and character development included very limited detail. It is difficult to establish a relationship between writer and
reader without providing some idea of individual character and this was true of many of the stories seen this session.
Sometimes, Tom and Zuma did not leave the museum. Whilst this was acceptable, examples again showed limited development.
It is worth noting that a significant finding in this section of the paper, already mentioned in key messages, was that many stories began well indicating a
candidate’s intention to create an interesting narrative. These pieces showed a potential to gain much higher marks but it would appear that these candidates
were unable to display their writing skills to the full. A focus for these more able candidates, in fact, all candidates, would be to explore ways of developing
vocabulary. Whilst reading a variety of texts, candidates could select vocabulary and evaluate the effect of an author’s choice of words. Writing short
passages using some of their findings will help all candidates to gain the confidence to use an adventurous and precise vocabulary. They will be able to
describe characters through their actions and reactions that includes engaging detail. Candidates will, and should, achieve increasing levels of success in
pieces of extended writing.
42
Wt – Text structure and organisation
Higher scoring candidates were able to develop the structure of their narratives by using paragraphs to organise and shape their stories in a way that helped
the plot to ‘flow’ logically.
Using paragraphs and learning about their purpose, all helps towards improving the structure of a piece of writing. Successful candidates were able to gain
higher marks where they showed a good understanding of how paragraphs can be linked together effectively, for example, through contrasts in mood, shifts
in time and changes in location.
Most candidates attempted to sequence their stories – which was even more effective where paragraph breaks were evident. However, some weaker
candidates understand the importance of ‘splitting’ their stories into sections but with limited success where paragraphing appeared to be a series of illogical
line breaks to divide the text. At the same time, examiners noted that lower scoring stories often lacked any paragraphs and structure.
Furthermore, although the content was generally clear in the majority of stories, the coherence both within and between paragraphs/sections, was often less
clear. There were jumps of logic and what appeared to be a ‘list-like’ series of divisions with no explanation. Examiners have suggested that these ‘leaps’
might have been due to time constraints where a candidate was eager to set out their ideas in the time available. This could also account for those narratives
that showed good paragraphing at the start which became a continuous piece of prose with no line breaks at all.
Again, identifying how paragraphs are used within a range of texts will support candidates in developing their work. It can be an interesting exercise where
candidates increase their ability to see how paragraphs can be used to signal a change – character, time, place or event. This session there were only a few
high scoring stories in this strand, largely due to a lack of cohesive devices especially where the use of connectives was limited. Examining a range of texts to
determine how authors manage to create and use paragraphs that show more complex links between sections and well-organised content within paragraphs,
will prove to be invaluable to these candidates.
43
Wp – Sentence structure and punctuation
Some higher attaining candidates were adventurous in their attempts to expand their writing with more complex and detailed sentences with grammatically
correct clauses. These candidates were able to demonstrate how they could use phrases and clauses to develop ideas. These candidates were usually able
to keep the story pace flowing and develop their ideas by using expanded phrases, particularly adjectival, adverbial and verbal, to develop ideas with a wider
variety of connectives.
This expansion of meaning and development of control by these candidates is to be commended.
The majority of candidates are able to construct basic simple and compound sentences but there was a surprising number who were not able to develop this
further and marks were restricted where this lack of ambition characterised the writing. Complex sentences were frequently missing in many pieces.
Developing these more detailed structures could be a target for these candidates.
Almost all candidates showed that they knew where speech punctuation was needed. However, a general area of concern noted by examiners this session,
was a marked decline in the use of punctuation. This has been a strength in the past but good English was often let down by comma splicing being used to
demarcate sentences. Whilst this showed an awareness of the need for a ‘break’, it did limit the marks available. There were a number of pieces where
demarcation of any kind was missing completely. This was noted across a wide range of attainment resulting in some candidates ‘under-achieving’ in this
strand.
As in previous sessions, weaker candidates’ scores were also limited by inconsistencies in tenses and agreement of verbs. Moving between past and present
was frequently seen in these pieces.
44
Ws – Spelling
This continues to be a strength is candidates’ work. Correctly spelt high-frequency words were a feature in nearly all candidates’ work meaning that zero
marks were very rarely given.
There is evidence of good teaching across all levels of ability so that candidates can use their blends, patterns and knowledge of polysyllabic words to good
effect. Phonetic attempts at spelling words, especially polysyllabic words, were generally good and candidates are to be praised for making an effort with
these.
However, whilst higher attaining candidates showed ambition in their word choices and demonstrated the accurate spelling of words with complex regular
patterns, there were many examples of narratives where the story did not include interesting polysyllabic words showing the ambition that would qualify for a
higher mark.
45
5 Cambridge Primary Checkpoint Mathematics 0845
5.1 Comments on specific questions – Mathematics 0845 component 01
General comments
Topics that were well covered: • knowing multiplication facts for 3×, 4× and 6× tables (Question 1)
• dividing a two-digit number by a single-digit number (Question 2)
1 2 3
• recognising the equivalence between , and (Question 3)
2 4 6
• subtracting a near multiple of 10 from a three-digit number (Question 4)
• understanding that multiplication and division are inverse functions of each other (Question 6)
• identifying multiples of three (Question 8)
• comparing and order numbers up to one million using the > and < signs (Question 11)
• rounding whole numbers to the nearest 1000 (Question 17)
Topics that proved to be more difficult: • using brackets to order operations (Question 13)
• doubling a two-digit number and halving a three-digit number (Question 15)
• interpreting data that is represented in a bar chart (Question 18(b))
• comparing fractions with related denominators (Question 22)
• reading and using a timetable (24-hour clock) (Question 27)
• adding and subtracting numbers with one-decimal place, which are near multiples of one (Question 28)
• calculating three numbers with a sum of 20 (Question 29)
46
Some general issues noted when marking Paper 1:
Overall, the question paper displayed a good coverage of the Cambridge Primary Mathematics Framework.
The formation of numerals continued to show improvement, however, it was still an issue on some papers. Numerals need to be unambiguous and, in a few
cases, it was impossible to distinguish which numbers were intended. Marks may have been lost because of this. Some examples were seen where learners
appeared to misread their own figures within a calculation.
A few learners used a point as an indicator between thousands and hundreds and as a decimal point. This was not accepted. If employed consistently, a
comma was accepted as a decimal point and a point as a comma. Using one symbol to fulfil both roles cause unacceptable ambiguity.
Learners would benefit from practicing calculations involving the use of brackets to order operations (Question 13)
Learners would benefit from exploring numerical strategies such as:

• being able to multiply by 19 or 21 by multiplying by 20 and adjusting (Question 14)
• being able to multiply two numbers by halving one and doubling the other one (Question 26)
• being able to add and subtract numbers with one decimal place which are near multiples of one (Question 28)
Learners should be shown and encouraged to use their mathematical knowledge to explain and convince others of a mathematical argument
(Question 18(b))
Where a question requires learners to draw a shape in a given position on a square grid the drawing must be carried out accurately. In Questions 12 and 23
the required shapes had to be drawn with enough accuracy to demonstrate an understanding of the respective transformations.
Learners should be familiar with different forms of presentation and be able to adapt their mathematical knowledge to cope with these. For example:
• use their knowledge of fractions with related denominators to compare the relative size of a set of fractions (Question 22)
• use their knowledge of time intervals using 24-hour clock notation to read and interpret a timetable (Question 27).
Mathematically specific vocabulary such as: addition, subtraction, difference, multiplication, multiples, division, equivalent, odd (number), even (number),
rounded, largest, smallest, less than, mixed numbers, decimals, Carroll diagram, trapezium, polygon, translated, reflection, mirror line, fair, certain, likely,
even (likelihood), unlikely, impossible, likelihood, all need to be used in context and understood.
47
Question 1
Objective: To know multiplication facts for 3×, 4× and 6× tables.
Common Errors: Most learners answered this question correctly.
A few learners repeated the calculations without giving the answers.
Where errors did occur, they tended to be with and
Question 2
Objective: To divide a two-digit number by a single-digit number.
Question 3
1 2 3
Objective: To recognise the equivalence between , and
2 4 6
1 5
A few learners gave fractions equivalent to that did not relate to either diagram, e.g.,
2 10
48
Question 4
Objective: To subtract a near multiple of 10 from a three-digit number.
A few learners made arithmetic errors, e.g., 565, 554
A few learners misunderstood the mathematical meaning of ‘difference’ and described different attributes of the numbers, e.g., 634 is
even, 79 is odd.
Question 5
Objective: To devise the directions required to follow a given path.
Common Errors: A few learners calculated the distance travelled in each direction by counting the number of different squares passed through
e.g.
A few learners used directions such as up and down rather than use points of the compass.
49
Question 6
Objective: To understand that multiplication and division are inverse functions of each other.
A few learners attempted to calculate 16 ÷ 3 and gave answers such as 5 or 5.3
Question 7
Objective: To know and use the relationship between grams and kilograms.
Common Errors: A few learners correctly calculated 9060 – 850 = 8210 but gave the answer without including any units.
A number of learners made an error converting the two masses to the same units leading to answers such as:
• 960 – 850 = 110 grams
• 9.6 – 0.85 = 8.75 kilograms
A few learners added the mass of the basket to the mass of the fruit to give: 9060 + 850 = 9910 grams.
50
Question 8
Objective: To identify multiples of three.
The two most common errors were:
putting only one number in each, e.g.

section and not placing either 6 or 12
and
giving 23 as a multiple of 3 and 27 as, i.e.

not a multiple of 3
51
Question 9
Objective: To express diagrams of unit shapes and fractions of unit shapes as mixed numbers.
1 3 3 13
Common Errors: A number of learners correctly wrote 3 and 2 , but made an error with 1 writing a number such as 1
2 4 10 20
A number of misunderstandings of mixed numbers were seen
e.g.
3
In this example the whole number appears to represent the sections in the complete squares and the the sections in the
4
incomplete square.
Question 10
Objective: To compare and order masses where some are expressed in kilograms and some in grams.
Common Errors: 3600 g 900 g 1.2 kg 0.6 kg possible ordering by number and not considering the units
1.2 k 0.6 kg 3600 g 900 g possibly ordering kilograms first and then grams, without
considering the relationship between them.
52
Question 11
Objective: To compare and order numbers up to one million using the > and < signs.
A few learners gave 645 123 > 645 213
A few learners gave 645 123 = 645 213
A few learners reversed the signs and wrote:
53
Question 12
Objective: To identify where a polygon will be after a given translation.
Common Errors: A variety of incorrect answers were given including:
an incorrect translation, e.g. a rotation, e.g.
a reflection, e.g. a non-congruent shape, e.g.
A few learners drew shapes that were not accurate enough for the intention to be clear.
Question 13
Objective: To use brackets to order operations.
Common Errors: 80 calculating (5 + 5) × (5 + 3)
54
Question 14
Objective: To multiply by 19 and 21 by multiplying by 20 and adjusting.
Common Errors: The majority of learners answered this by working out each of the calculations separately.
Only a few used the relationship between multiplication by 19 and 21 and multiplication by 20 with an appropriate adjustment.
Question 15
Objective: To double a two-digit number and halve a three-digit number.
Common Errors: 152 doubling 76
38 halving 76
Question 16
Objective: To describe the occurrence of familiar events using the language of likelihood.
Common Errors: A number of learners said that a number 4 being rolled was likely. Possibly they did not appreciate that the dice was only rolled once.
A number of learners said that a number less than 20 being rolled was impossible. Possibly distracted because 20 was not on the
dice.
Most learners recognise that rolling an odd number had an even likelihood.
A number of learners did not appreciate that rolling a multiple of 10 was impossible. Possibly confusing multiple with factor.
55
Question 17
Objective: To round whole numbers to the nearest 1000
Common Errors: The two most common errors seen were:
and
Possibly some learners were unaware that an answer on the right could have more than one number matched to it.
56
Question 18
(a) Objective: To solve a problem by extracting data that is represented in a bar chart.
Common Errors: 16 the number of students that scored from 8 to 11 marks in the test, not including the students that scored 13 to 15 marks.
(b) Objective: To interpret data that is represented in a bar chart.
Common Errors: A variety of incorrect answers were given including:
Stating that the graph showed that nobody scored 10 in the test.
Confusing the scores with the number of students, e.g. stating that 8 to 11 students scored 16 on the test.
Incorrectly stating that the graph showed that 4 students scored from 4 to 7 marks on the test.
Interpreting 8 – 11 as 11 – 8 = 3.
Question 19
(a) Objective: To multiply a two-digit number by nine by multiplying the number by 10 and adjusting.
Common Errors: Giving the answer 387 but not showing the working involving addition or subtraction that led to this.
Calculating 43 × 9 and writing 387 on the answer line. The required answer was a calculation only involving addition and or
subtraction, e.g. 430 – 30
A few learners calculated 43 × 9 = 387 and then gave an addition or subtraction that equalled 387,
e.g. 43 × 9 = 387 so 397 – 10 = 387
This was not sufficient as it did not show how to calculate 43 × 9 using only addition or subtraction, starting from the fact that
43 × 10 = 430
57
(b) Objective: To use two number facts to generate a new multiplication fact.
Common Errors: Selecting 43 × 99 possibly calculating (43 × 11) + (43 × 9) as 43 × 11 × 9
Selecting 86 × 20 possibly calculating (43 × 11) + (43 × 9) as (43 +43) × (11 + 9)
Question 20
Objective: To give the answers to division calculations as both mixed numbers and decimals.
Common Errors: The most commonly seen errors were:
and
58
Question 21
Objective: To understand whether a 2D shape is a polygon or not.
Common Errors: A variety of incorrect answers were given with both and labelled as polygons
and and labelled as not polygons
by some learners.
Question 22
Objective: To compare fractions with related denominators.
Common Errors: A variety of incorrect answers were given, the most common being:
Possibly learners were ordering by the size of the numerator and or the denominator, without considering the relationship between
the two.
59
Question 23
Objective: To predict where a polygon will be after one reflection, where the sides of the polygon are not parallel to the mirror-line.
Common Errors: A wide variety of incorrect answers were seen including:
e.g. e.g. e.g. e.g.
translations reflections in a different mirror line rotations non-congruent shapes
Question 24
Objective: To make general statements about the sums, differences and products of odd and even numbers.
Common Errors: A variety of incorrect answers were seen. The errors appeared to be made equally across all five statements.
The most successful answers appeared to test each statement using small odd or even numbers.
Question 25
Objective: To convert a vulgar fraction to a decimal fraction using division.
Common Errors: 0.600 0.65 0.633
A number of learners did not attempt this question.
60
Question 26
Objective: To multiply by halving one number and doubling the other one.
Common Errors: 90 possible by calculating 45 × 18 = 810 and thinking that 90 × 90 = 180
810 calculating 45 × 18
Most learners did the complete calculation rather than utilise the strategy of halving one number and doubling the other one.
Question 27
Objective: To read and use a timetable using the 24-hour clock.
Common Errors: A wide variety of incorrect answers were given for the trains taking less than 3 hours to travel from Newcastle to London.
Several errors were made in calculating the time interval for train D to travel from Newcastle to London.
Some learners successfully calculated the time interval from 12:25 to 15:44 to be 3 hours 19 minutes but did not convert this to
minutes.
Some learners calculated 3 hours 19 mins but miscalculated the conversion to minutes and gave answers such as 189 minutes.
Question 28
Objective: To add and subtract numbers with one decimal place, which are near multiples of one.
Common Errors: A wide variety of incorrect answers were given.
Most learners appeared to attempt to work out each calculation rather than evaluate the strategies.
61
Question 29
Objective: To calculate three numbers with a sum of 20
Common Errors: A number of learners found one or two correct answers but not all three.
A number of learners used numbers that did not appear on the spinners or left a blank space in their answer,
e.g.
A number of learners gave examples that did not add up to 20
62
5 Cambridge Primary Checkpoint Mathematics 0845
5.2 Comments on specific questions – Mathematics 0845 component 02
General comments
Topics that were well covered: • recognising multiples of 5, 10 and 100 (Question 1)
• reading numbers up to 10 000 expressed in figures and in words (Question 2)
• understanding that area is measured in square units (Question 3)
• comparing amounts of money by converting them all to either cents or dollars (Question 8)
• calculating angles in a straight line (Question 9)
• plotting a coordinate in the first quadrant (Question 14(a))
• estimating the position of a four-digit number on an empty 0 to 10 000 number line (Question 17)
• dividing a three-digit number by a two-digit number (no remainder) (Question 18)
• drawing a straight line of a given length, accurate to the nearest millimetre (Question 26)
Topics that proved to be more difficult: • expressing times of the day using 12-hour digital clock notation (Question 4)
• estimating where a three-digit number would lie on an empty 0 to 10 000 number line (Question 6)
• deciding whether to round up or down after division depending on the context (Question 12)
• solving a number puzzle involving a knowledge of square numbers up to 10 × 10 (Question 13)
• solve a number puzzle that involves knowing what each digit represents in a three or four-digit number
(Question 15)
• finding the difference between a positive and negative integer in the context of temperature (Question 23)
• dividing a two-digit number by a single-digit number where the answer contains a remainder (Question 24)
• solving a number puzzle that involves multiplying and adding multiples of 10 (Question 27)
63
Some general issues noted when marking Paper 2:
Overall, the question paper displayed a good coverage of the Cambridge Primary Mathematics Framework.
Learners should have access to a calculator to complete this paper. They should be familiar with its functions and able to use it appropriately. As in previous
papers, there was evidence that this was not always the case and this resulted in avoidable arithmetic errors and a possible loss of time.
All comments from Paper 1 regarding presentation and working out apply to Paper 2.
Learners would benefit from considering the positioning of a number-on-number lines with different scales (Question 6).
Learners should be shown and encouraged to use their mathematical knowledge to support or counter mathematical statements (Question 15).
Where a question requires a shape to be plotted on a coordinate grid, it is important that this is done with enough accuracy for the intention to be clear
(Question 14(a)).
Learners should be familiar with different forms of presentation and be able to adapt their mathematical knowledge to cope with these, for example:
• use their ability to find the area of a rectangle to solve a spatial problem involving the comparison of the areas of two rectangles (Question 25).
Mathematically, specific vocabulary such as: hundred(s), thousand(s), whole number, decimal, divide, remainder, squares (of numbers), prime numbers,
order, estimate, nearest (whole number, etc.) number line, rectangle, pentagon, equilateral, isosceles, scalene, area, 3D shapes, cuboid, 12-hour digital
clock, Venn diagram, line graph, range and mode all need to be used in context and understood.
64
Question 1
Objective: To recognise multiples of 5, 10 and 100
The most common error for a number divisible by 100, 10 and 5 was 550
The most common error for a number divisible by 10 and 5 but not 100 was 55
A few learners wrote several numbers on each line, possibly selecting numbers that were separately divisible by 10, etc.
Question 2
Objective: To read numbers up to 10 000 expressed in figures and in words.
Question 3
Objective: To understand that area is measured in square units.
A few learners selected more than one shape.
The most frequently selected incorrect shape was:
Possibly, without counting squares, this was the most visually similar shape to
65
Question 4
Objective: To express times of the day using 12-hour digital clock notation
Common Errors: Most errors were made in writing ‘quarter past three in the morning’, e.g., 3:25 am and 3:45 am
and ‘quarter to nine at night’, e.g., 9:45 pm and 8:15 pm
Most learners gave ‘half past six in the evening’ correctly as 6:30 pm
Several learners did not include am or pm.
A number of learners mixed 12-hour and 24-hour notation.
Question 5
Objective: To use a Venn diagram to sort data.
Common Errors: Several learners accounted for the intersection of ‘boys’ and ‘likes tennis’ twice, writing:
or sometimes:
Several learners placed 4, 11 and 9 correctly but missed out 3
A number of learners place two numbers correctly (often 4 and 11) but missed out all the others.
66
Question 6
Objective: To estimate where a three-digit number would lie on an empty 0 to 10 000 number line.
Common Errors: Several learners circled C appearing not to notice that the two scales were different.
The next most common error was to circle B.
Question 7
Objective: To Visualise a 3D shape from a 2D net.
Common Errors: A few learners gave the name of a 2D shape, e.g., rectangle, hexagon.
A few learners said that the net would make a cube.
A few learners said that the net would make a 3D rectangle.
Question 8
Objective: To compare amounts of money by converting them all to either cents or dollars.
The most common error was to select 350 cents.
67
Question 9
Objective: To calculate angles in a straight line.
117° (or close) possibly measuring angle ‘a’ on their question paper.
295° calculating 360° – 65°
Question 10
Objective: To use fractions to describe a simple proportion.
Common Errors: A variety of incorrect answers were given.
1 1
The most common error was to say that the statement: of the animals were sheep was true, possibly confusing with 10
10 10
sheep.
A few learners did not put either a tick or a cross in each box.
Question 11
Objective: To classify triangles as isosceles, scalene or equilateral.
Common Errors: Labelling triangle ‘A’ as isosceles.
Labelling triangle ‘C’ as equilateral or scalene.
A few learners labelled ‘A’, ‘B’ and ‘C’ as triangles without being specific.
A few learners used inappropriate words, e.g., acute, obtuse and reflex.
68
Question 12
Objective: To decide whether to round up or down after division depending on the context.
Common Errors: 23 calculating 960 ÷ 42 and rounding the answer up.
23.86 or similar calculating 960 ÷ 42 but not interpreting what was required to give the number of whole rows.
918 calculating 960 – 42
1002 calculating 960 + 42
Question 13
Objective: To solve a number puzzle involving knowledge of square numbers up to 10 × 10
Common Errors 16 and 9 the squares of the required numbers.
A number of learners found two numbers that added to 25, e.g., 12.5 and 12.5
Question 14
(a) Objective: To plot a coordinate in the first quadrant.
A few learners joined (1,3) to (5,1), i.e.
69
(b) Objective: To solve a spatial problem involving reading and writing the coordinates of a point in the first quadrant.
Common Errors: (3 , 3) not appreciating that this formed a rectangle.
(5 , 3) possibly plotting a correct point but reversing the coordinates when writing them down.
Question 15
Objective: To solve a number puzzle that involves knowing what each digit represents in a three or four-digit number.
Common Errors: A number of learners gave an argument to support Oliver’s statement, e.g., 800 is bigger than 300 so Oliver must be correct.
A number of learners changed Oliver’s original statement, e.g., Chen might have had 300 000 not 300
A number of learners stated that 300 was greater than 800
3 8
A number of learners confused hundreds with hundredths and then incorrectly stated that was bigger than
100 100
70
Question 16
Objective: To derive pairs of one-place decimals that total 10
Common Errors: A few learners mistook the structure of the diagram and completed the numbers
on each card, so they added to 10, i.e.
These two numbers were

often completed correctly
A number of arithmetic errors were made.
Some learners did not fill in all the empty boxes.
Question 17
Objective: To estimate the position of a four-digit number on an empty 0 to 10 000 number line.
3500 possibly miscounting or counting three interval lines from zero.
2050
possibly misinterpreting the ‘halfway’ division on the scale.
2005
71
Question 18
Objective: To divide a three-digit number by a two-digit number (no remainder).
The most common errors seen were:
864 calculating 888 – 24
912 calculating 888 + 24
21 312 calculating 888 × 24
Question 19
Objective: To know what each digit represents in a two-place decimal.
37
Common Errors: Most learners were able to write as a decimal.
100
3
More errors were made in converting 6 + to a decimal. The most common errors seen were:
100
6.3 making an error with place value.
6
0.09 misinterpreting the 6 to be
100
72
Question 20
Objective: To solve a number problem that involves finding the range and mode of a set of data.
Common Errors: A variety of errors were made including:
correct mode and total but incorrect range.
A number of learners gave answers that did not contain five positive whole numbers, e.g.,
73
Question 21
Objective: To round a number with one or two decimal places to the nearest whole number.
Common Errors: Most errors appeared to be made in rounding to the nearest whole number rather than with calculating.
Some learners did no rounding, i.e.,
Some learners made an error with the rounding, e.g.,
Another common error when rounding 471.9 × 8.9 was to make an error with place value and write 420
74
Question 22
Objective: To recognise prime numbers.
Common Errors: and
A number of learners did not follow the direction given in the question and only selected one of the prime numbers.
Question 23
Objective: To find the difference between a positive and negative integer in the context of temperature.
Common Errors: A number of learners appeared to misread the scales.
A number of learners appeared to miscalculate the difference between 12(°C) and – 14(°C), e.g., –26(°C), 2(°C)
Question 24
Objective: To divide a two-digit number by a single-digit number where the answer contains a remainder.
Common Errors: A wide variety of incorrect answers were seen.
A number of learners found three correct numbers but missed the fourth (often 80).
A number of learners appeared to misunderstand what was required: e.g., circled all multiples of 3
75
Question 25
Objective: To solve a spatial problem that involves calculating the areas of rectilinear shapes.
Common Errors: A number of learners took the two rectangles to have the same perimeter and calculated 36 + 18 – 24 = 30 (cm)
2 ( 36 + 18 ) − 48
or = 30 ( cm )
2
A number of learners took the right-hand shape to be a square and gave the missing length as 24 (cm).
A number of learners did the correct calculation: (18 × 36) ÷ 24 but made an arithmetic error.
Question 26
Objective: To draw a straight line of a given length, accurate to the nearest millimetre.
Common Errors: Most learners answered this question correctly although a significant number did not attempt it.
Question 27
Objective: To solve a number puzzle that involves multiplying and adding multiples of 10
Common Errors: A number of students gave an answer that fitted the first equation but not the second, e.g.,
A number of students gave an answer that fitted the second equation but not the first, e.g.,
76
Question 28
Objective: To find a simple percentage of a shape.
Common Errors: A number of answers were given suggesting that the calculation of 35% of 20 (triangles) was not understood, e.g., 4 triangles shaded.
On some papers the shading was unclear making it difficult to see the number of triangles selected.
Question 29
Objective: To match different distance/time line graphs to the descriptions of different journeys.
Common Errors: A wide variety of incorrect answers were given.
The most common were:
Matching Jamila’s statement: ‘I walked to my friend’s house with

then walked on to school.’
Matching Naomi’s statement: ‘I was late so dad took with

me to school by car.’
More learners appeared to match Lily and Hassan’s statements to the correct graphs
than Jamila and Naomi’s.
77
6 Cambridge Primary Checkpoint Science 0846
6.1 Comments on specific questions – Science 0846 component 01
General comments
Simple recall questions were generally answered well, as were many of the questions which required analysis and interpretation of the information provided
within the stem of the question. In some cases, answers to questions requiring longer explanations and interpretation of facts required more detail, with some
learners only providing simple one-word answers which needed to be expanded.
Questions on scientific enquiry were answered well by many learners who appeared to be familiar with practical investigations, demonstrating that first-hand
experience is invaluable. The idea of fair testing, reliability and accuracy continues to be an area where there could be more focus, coupled with how to
describe the pattern of the results provided.
The learners demonstrated good knowledge of the following areas of the framework: food chains, separation techniques, transparent and opaque materials
and electrical circuits. Areas where there could be greater focus are the differences between pitch and volume and the drawing of line graphs.
Question 1
Some of the leaners were able to correctly interpret the life cycle of the apple tree and express themselves fully in the open response question to provide a
detailed account of the process of pollination.
(a) Many of the learners correctly identified the arrow showing when germination was occurring within the apple tree life cycle. Some of the learners
identified it as occurring once the seedling had already sprouted a shoot and roots, or had it occurring between the tree and the production of
flowers. These were the most common incorrect answers.
78
(b) Some of the learners provided good detail in their responses explaining the complete process of the pollen being carried by an insect or pollinator
from the anther to the stigma, or to another flower. Some of the learners provided partial explanations of the process. Some of the learners
described the process of seed dispersal rather than pollination. A few of the learners described the movement of the wind carrying the pollen, which
were accepted.
Question 2
Many of the learners correctly identified which statements about sound were true and which ones were false. The most common incorrect answer was
selecting that it was true for pitch being the same as volume.
Question 3
Some of the learners showed a good understanding of this area of the framework and they could correctly identify the food chain provided and the associated
terminology.
(a) Some of the learners correctly identified that there were four consumers in the food chain provided. However, there were a variety of different
responses to this question.
(b) The most common incorrect answers to this question were either to include the aphid as a predator as well as the bird, ladybird and hawk or to only
include the bird and hawk and omit the ladybird. The aphid is not a predator as a predator is defined as an animal that hunts and kills its prey. The
aphid is an herbivore which grazes on the bush but does not hunt and kill it.
Question 4
Many of the learners showed good knowledge of the separating techniques required to separate the different mixtures. Some of the learners selected more
than one process for some of the mixtures when there was only one correct process for each mixture.
79
Question 5
Many of the learners showed a very good understanding of the materials which do and do not allow light to pass through them.
(a) Many of the learners answered this question correctly.
(b) Some of the learners drew very good ray diagrams to show the passage of the light ray from the candle through the periscope to the person’s eye.
Some of the learners did draw the passage but they did not draw straight lines for their light rays, or they forgot to draw an arrow on the light ray to
show its direction moving from the candle to the person’s eye. Some of the learners drew an arrow to show the light ray moving in the incorrect
direction, from the person’s eye to the candle.
Question 6
Some of the learners correctly recalled the different life processes that living things possess and many of the learners successfully identified the living thing
from the list provided.
(a) Most of the learners answered this question correctly.
(b) Some of the learners provided the processes listed on the framework. Some of the learners provided answers stating three living things rather than
the living processes or the processes they listed were ones which are not shown by all living organisms, such as eating and drinking instead of
nutrition.
Question 7
This is an area of the framework where the leaners demonstrated very good understanding.
(a) Most of the learners correctly identified the different components in the electrical circuit. The most common incorrect answer was for wire where
some of the learners labelled it as circuit, even though the question did specify for them to identify the different parts of the circuit.
(b) Most of the learners correctly matched the correct electrical circuit diagram to the electrical circuit shown.
80
Question 8
Some of the learners showed an understanding of the process of melting and the properties of water in this question.
(a) There were a variety of responses to this question but some of the learners interpreted that, if the room temperature was lower than substance ‘E’s’
melting point, it would be a solid.
(b) Some of the learners correctly stated that ‘D’ was water as its melting point is 0°C or that it has the same melting point as water. The most common
incorrect answer for this question was where some of the learners stated that either water or ‘D’ did not have a melting point. They were
misinterpreting a melting point of 0°C as the substance not being able to melt.
(c) The learners that provided good answers to this question stated that they would either need to find the boiling point or the freezing point of water.
Some of the learners did not realise they needed to provide more information. Instead, they answered the question using information from the table
by stating it showed the melting point of water or that water did not have a melting point.
Question 9
This was another area of the framework where the learners demonstrated a very good understanding.
(a) This question was answered correctly by most of the learners.
(b) Many of the learners provided answers describing good reasons for the prevention of the pollution of rivers. Some of the answers were too general
or described methods by which humans pollute the rivers.
Question 10
Many of the learners showed a good understanding of the role of the organ labelled as the lung within the human body.
(b) Learners who provided good answers to this question identified the role of the lungs as breathing to get oxygen into the body and to release carbon
dioxide. Some of the learners only discussed breathing or breathing and the taking in of oxygen. They did not write about carbon dioxide.
81
Question 11
Some of the learners showed that they were able to interpret the information provided within the table and they understand what a pattern is.
(a) Most of the learners correctly interpreted the information within the table and answered this question correctly. The most common incorrect answer
was Saturn, which was the next furthest planet from the Sun in the table.
(b) Many of the learners used the information in the table correctly to answer this question. The most common incorrect answer was four planets, which
was the number of other planets listed in the table apart from Jupiter.
(c) The learners who provided good answers to this question clearly stated the pattern, suggesting that they had correctly ordered the planets from the
Sun, and then identified that the number of Earth years to orbit the Sun increases. Some of the learners only stated the Earth years from the Sun
and did not state the number of earth years as increasing; thus, not completing the pattern. Some of the learners identified the pattern as increasing
and decreasing showing that they had not used the information in the table to firstly place the planets in the correct order.
Question 12
Some of the learners showed the ability to analyse the information provided within the table and to interpret it to inform their answers.
(a) Many of the learners correctly ordered the metals provided within the table from strongest to weakest. The most common incorrect answers were to
either list the metals from weakest to strongest, despite the guides on the paper, or to list the numbers rather than the names of the metals.
(b) Good answers to this question showed an understanding that by adding the carbon to the iron it would make the steel stronger. Some of the
learners repeated the information in the stem of the question by answering that it would make steel. A few of the learners thought that adding
carbon to the iron would make it weaker.
82
Question 13
This question showed that scientific enquiry skills are an area of the framework where there could be more focus.
(a) Some of the learners demonstrated that they had good skills when drawing line graphs. The most common incorrect answer was where learners did
not read the instructions carefully and drew a bar chart rather than a line graph. Some of the learners, who did draw a line graph, correctly plotted
the points but did not draw a line.
(b) Many of the learners interpreted the information in the table correctly to answer this question. Some of the learners put the time taken for the candle
to burn rather than the length of the candle which took the shortest time to burn.
(c) Some of the learners correctly predicted the time that the 3 cm candle would take to burn. There was an allowance for those candidates who had
not drawn their line correctly to use their line to answer this question. The learners who drew a bar chart were still able to answer this question using
the information within the table.
(d) Many of the learners answered this question incorrectly, focussing on the 3 cm candle being absent from the table as the reason why the
experiment was not a fair test or that the candles were different lengths, when this was the independent variable being investigated. Others
commented on the candles not burning for the same amount of time; this was the dependent variable which was being measured.
Question 14
Many of the learners showed good understanding of this area of the framework.
(a) Many of the learners answered this question correctly with the most common incorrect answer being Newtons, which is the unit of force rather than
the equipment used to measure force.
(b) Most of the learners interpreted the force diagram and answered this question correctly.
(c) Many of the learners answered this question correctly. The most common incorrect answer was selecting the arrow pointing forwards, suggesting
they had misunderstood what the question was asking; probably to show which arrow was showing the boat was moving which they were told in the
stem of the question.
(d) Some of the learners correctly interpreted the information shown in the force diagram to circle that the speed of the car would increase. Some of the
learners thought that the car would either decrease in speed or increase and then decrease.
83
Question 15
Learners showed good knowledge of the parts of the skeleton and the ability to interpret the information in the graph.
(b) Some of the learners correctly interpreted the information provided to describe the changes to the mass of the human brain at the stages required.
Some of the learners thought they had to calculate the change in the mass rather than describe what was happening to the mass.
(c) Many of the learners answered this question correctly.
(d) Some of the learners correctly interpreted the information in the bar chart to determine when the skeleton was growing at the fastest rate; this is
where there is the steepest increase in the size of the bars in the bar chart.
84
6 Cambridge Primary Checkpoint Science 0846
6.2 Comments on specific questions – Science 0846 component 02
General comments
Simple recall questions were generally answered well, as were many of the questions which required analysis and interpretation of the information provided
within the stem of the question. In some cases, answers to questions requiring longer explanations and interpretation of facts required more detail, with some
learners only providing simple one-word answers which needed to be expanded.
Questions on scientific enquiry were answered well by many learners who appeared to be familiar with practical investigations, demonstrating that first-hand
experience is invaluable. The idea of planning investigations incorporating making predictions, fair testing, reliability and accuracy continues to be an area
where there could be more focus.
The learners demonstrated good knowledge of the following areas of the framework: organs in the human body, dissolving and its associated terminology and
electrical circuits. Areas where there could be greater focus are fertilisation in plants, the difference between mass and weight and their units, and the
difference between pitch and volume.
Question 1
Some of the learners showed a good understanding of this area of the framework and were able to interpret the information in the diagram to determine the
processes which are involved in the change of state of water.
(a) Some of the learners correctly interpreted the diagram showing the three states of water and correctly named substances A and B as ice and steam.
Many of the learners just stated what state the water would be, rather than naming substances A and B, which is not what the question asked.
(b) Some of the learners correctly interpreted the diagram to identify that the water was changing from a solid to a liquid, so the process was melting.
Some of the learners stated that the water was heating which was insufficient for the mark.
(c) Some of the learners correctly interpreted the diagram to identify that the water was changing from a liquid to a solid, so the process was freezing or
solidification.
85
(d) Many of the learners correctly interpreted the diagram to identify that the water was changing from a gas to a liquid, so the process was condensing.
Some of the learners stated that the water was cooling which was insufficient for the mark.
Question 2
Some of the learners identified the correct force slowing the speed of the parachutist and recalled the units for weight and mass.
(a) Some of the learners identified the force which would slow down the speed of the parachutist. The most common incorrect answer was gravity,
showing that the learners had misinterpreted what the question was asking as this would be the force pulling the parachutist towards the Earth.
(b) Some of the learners showed good knowledge of the units of weight and mass. The most common incorrect answers were putting kilograms or
grams as the unit for weight and newtons as the unit for mass.
Question 3
Some of the learners were able to interpret the investigation which was set in a more unfamiliar context. This question highlighted that an area where there
can be more focus is the planning of science investigations.
(a) Some of the learners showed an understanding of the investigation about sinking and correctly interpreted the method provided within the flow chart
to provide a missing question for box A. Some of the learners asked the question ‘Does it float?’ which was not accepted as they had not fully
understood that the investigation was looking at putting pins into a rubber ball until it sank. The question ‘Does it float?’ would not work with the rest
of the information provided within the flow chart as ‘Yes, it did float’ would then lead to recording how many pins were in the rubber ball for it to float,
rather than to sink.
(b) Some of the learners provided good answers to complete the method. Some of the learners thought that you would need to remove the pins from
the rubber ball rather than add another pin to see if the rubber ball would then sink when that pin was added.
86
Question 4
This question showed that, although the learners are familiar with certain parts of the life cycle of plants, there needs to be more focus on specific areas such
as fertilisation.
(a) Some of the learners correctly identified the next stage in the part of the life cycle shown for a plant. The most common incorrect answer was
pollination, which would have occurred at the beginning of the life cycle prior to fertilisation.
(b) Learners who provided good answers to this question discussed the need for the seeds to be dispersed to prevent overcrowding or to reduce
competition for nutrients and space between the new seedlings and the parent plant.
(c) Some of the learners answered this question correctly, although some of the learners provided more general answers such as ‘in the life cycle of the
plant’.
(d) This is an area of the framework where there can be more focus as only a few of the learners answered this question correctly.
Question 5
This question highlighted that hands-on experience using scientific equipment to carry out scientific investigations in invaluable to a learner’s experience and
understanding.
(a) Many of the learners answered this question correctly showing a familiarity with this piece of scientific equipment.
(b) Many of the learners correctly measured the volume of water to achieve the second mark. However, some of the learners showed that they were
unfamiliar with what a measuring cylinder looks like; the most common incorrect answer being beaker.
Question 6
Many of the learners correctly matched the words about dissolving to their correct meaning showing a good knowledge of the terminology associated with this
area of the framework.
87
Question 7
This question required the learners to use the information provided by the pictures, which many of the learners did. Some of the learners appeared to use
their own knowledge of the animals to provide correct answers without using the pictures.
(a) Many of the learners used the information provided in the pictures to identify the eagle as an animal that grips and tears the flesh of its prey as the
eagle has a sharp beak. Some of the learners discussed eagles as having sharp claws and, although this could not be seen from the pictures, it was
accepted. Also, some of the learners thought it would be the fox as they have sharp teeth which was accepted. Some of the learners did not state
which animal but provided a more generic answer of a predator; if they coupled this with an acceptable reason, it was accepted for one mark.
(b) Most of the learners used the pictures to identify the animal that hears its prey from a long distance away as the fox because it has the large ears
shown on the picture.
Question 8
This is an area of the framework where there could be more focus, particularly the difference between pitch and volume.
(a) Some of the learners used the correct terminology to describe the air as vibrating.
(b) Some of the learners answered this question correctly. The most common incorrect answer was volume.
(c) Some of the learners showed an understanding that if the guitar string was plucked with more force, then the sound will be louder. The answer
needed to be comparative so answers that just stated loud were not enough for the mark.
Question 9
Some of the learners showed a good understanding of this area of the framework and they were familiar with changing the size of the shadow.
(a) Some of the learners drew diagrams clearly showing the opaque butterfly shape creating a shadow and the light being able to pass through the
transparent material. However, some of the learner’s diagrams did not differentiate between the shadow and the holes, or the holes were not
included on the diagram at all as though the whole shape would create a shadow.
(b) Some of the learners answered this question correctly, although many of the learners thought that the size of the shadow would get bigger.
88
Question 10
Many of the learners answered this question well and achieved many of the marks. The most common incorrect answer was that steel was a silver liquid
rather than being attracted towards a magnet. Although steel is silver, it is a solid. Some of the learners thought that salt was soft rather than a white solid.
Question 11
Many of the learners showed a good understanding of this area of the framework.
(a) Many of the learners discussed that lamp B would not work as the switch was open or because there was a gap in the circuit. Some of the learners
discussed lamp B not working as lamp A did not work because they were in a series circuit but they did not identify that this was because the switch
was open. Some of the learners incorrectly selected ‘yes’ for lamp B working, even though their answers then implied that they did not think lamp B
would work.
(b) Many of the learners provided answers about needing to turn the switch on or close the switch. A few described opening the switch instead. Some
of the learners thought that another cell needed be added to make the lamps light.
(c) Many of the learners provided correct answers to this question. A common incorrect response was ‘electrical’ which was provided in the stem of the
question and not sufficient for the mark.
Question 12
The area of scientific enquiry is one where there could be more focus, especially the interpretation of investigations set in more unfamiliar contexts.
(a) This question was answered correctly by many of the learners. The most common incorrect answer was for circling ‘only count the first ten insects’.
This would not make their investigation a fair test as that was the dependent variable of the investigation.
(b) Some of the learners provided good answers to this question, identifying that the insects would be safer as they would be more hidden from
predators or the conditions under the logs would be darker and moister. Some of the learners repeated the information provided within the question
that it would be cooler or they did the converse of this and said it would be warmer, contradicting the information provided.
(c) This question was answered correctly by many of the learners showing good knowledge of this piece of scientific equipment.
89
Question 13
This question assessed different areas of the framework with the learners showing good knowledge of the boiling point of water and separation techniques.
(a) Many of the learners showed good knowledge of the boiling point of water, although some of the learners forgot to include the units or the units
were incorrect.
(b) Many of the learners realised that you would need to separate an insoluble solid, the rice, from a liquid, the water, and used appropriate methods
such as filtering or using a sieve.
(c) Many of the learners ticked that cooking was an irreversible change, although there were some who thought it was a reversible change. Some of the
learners were able to discuss why cooking the rice was an irreversible change. More generic answers, that just recalled what an irreversible change
is, were not enough as the learner needed to relate it specifically to cooking rice.
Question 14
Some of the learners showed good knowledge and understanding of this area of the framework.
(a) Many of the learners answered this question correctly. The most common incorrect answer was axis.
(b) This question was answered well by many of the learners. A few of the learners selected more than two sentences and must read the instructions in
the question carefully.
Question 15
Knowledge of the human organs was an area of the framework where many of the learners showed a good understanding.
(b) Many of the learners correctly selected the area of the body for the location of the liver. The most common incorrect answer was area C.
(c) Many of the learners correctly selected the role of the liver.
90
Question 16
Many of the learners utilised the information provided within the table to select material C as being water as it is not attracted to a magnet, it has a melting
point lower than 20°C and it is transparent. The most common incorrect answer for this question was material A; however material A cannot be water as it is
said to have a melting point higher than 20°C.
91

2022 May Cambridge Primary Checkpoint End of Series Report May 2022 - tcm142-655506

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

2022 May Cambridge Primary Checkpoint End of Series Report May 2022 - tcm142-655506

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Cambridge Primary Checkpoint

Cambridge Primary Checkpoint End of Series Report

2. Cambridge Primary Checkpoint – English as a Second Language 0837

3 Cambridge Primary Checkpoint – Global Perspectives 0838

4 Cambridge Primary Checkpoint – English 0844

5 Cambridge Primary Checkpoint – Mathematics 0845

6 Cambridge Primary Checkpoint – Science 0846

For each syllabus the following information is provided:

• examiner comments on specific questions within each component of the test.

2. Cambridge Primary Checkpoint English as a Second Language 0837

2.1 Comments on specific questions – English as a Second Language component 01

Comments on specific questions

Usually correct (‘took’); common incorrect answer: ‘left’.

Usually correct (‘ago’); common incorrect answers: ‘and’, ‘before’, ‘earlier’.

Often correct (‘than’); very common incorrect answer: ‘then’.

Often correct (‘by’); common incorrect answers: ‘with’, ‘in’, ‘on’.

Often correct (‘Do’); common incorrect answers: ‘What’, ‘Would’, ‘Did’.

Often correct (‘like/love/need/have’); common incorrect answer: ‘want’.

Often correct (‘If’); very common incorrect answer ‘If’.

Usually correct (C); common incorrect answer: B.

Usually correct (A); incorrect answers divided between B, C, D and F.

Usually correct (D); incorrect answers divided between A, B and G.

Often correct (C); incorrect answers divided between A and B.

Often correct (B); common incorrect answer: A.

Usually correct (A); incorrect answers divided between B and C.

Often correct (A); incorrect answers divided between B and C.

Often correct (C); common incorrect answer: B.

A high proportion incorrect (correct: B); most common incorrect answer: A.

Often incorrect (correct: C) common incorrect answer: A

2. Cambridge Primary Checkpoint English as a Second Language 0837

2.2 Comments on specific questions – English as a Second Language component 02

Comments on specific questions

2. Cambridge Primary Checkpoint English as a Second Language 0837

2.3 Comments on specific questions – English as a Second Language component 03

The great majority of learners attempted all the questions.

Comments on specific questions

Usually correct (B); incorrect answers divided between A and C.

Often correct (C); incorrect answers divided between A and B.

Often correct (C); incorrect answers divided between A and B.

A high proportion correct (B); incorrect answers divided between A and C.

Often correct (A); most common incorrect answer: C.

Usually correct (A); incorrect answers divided between B and C.

Usually correct (B); incorrect answers divided between A and C.

Usually correct (B); most common incorrect answer: A.

Often incorrect (correct: C); most common incorrect answer: A.

Often correct (A); by far the most common incorrect answer: B.

Often correct (B); incorrect answers divided between A and C.

3 Cambridge Primary Checkpoint Global Perspectives 0838

3.1 Comments on specific questions – Global Perspectives 0838 component 01

Assessment Objective 1 Research, analysis and evaluation

(a) Team Report

Specifically, the Team Report is assessed against the following criteria:

‘outline research findings on the issue’

‘summarise the course of action taken by the team’

‘discuss the strengths and limitations of the action taken’

(b) Evidence of Action

Assessment Objective 2 Reflection

Specifically, the Personal Reflection is assessed against the following criteria:

1 Reflection on thoughts and behaviour:

2 Reflection on the process of collaboration:

‘strengths and limitations of their contribution to the team’

Assessment Objective 3 Communication and collaboration

Team Observation/Individual Observation