60 marks · an original Intuition practice paper realising the consensus predictions — every question links to the evidence behind it. Prefer the PDF?
Built from the consensus of the six-model AI panel for English Standard (deepseek, fable, gemini-3.1-pro, gpt-5.6-sol, grok, opus), whose 61 Paper 2 question-level predictions were clustered in synthesis/english_std-consensus-questions.yaml. Each question is tagged with the cluster it realises and the consensus probability that a question of that kind appears in 2026. The Paper 1 companion (common to Standard and Advanced) is samples/english_paper1-2026-predicted-paper.md. The stimulus quotation in Section III is an original line composed for this paper — it is not attributed to, or imitative of, any real author. No question is copied from a past paper. Questions address whichever prescribed texts you studied — no question below depends on any single prescription.
General instructions
20 marks — Attempt Question 1 — Allow about 40 minutes for this section
Your answer will be assessed on how well you demonstrate understanding of how language shapes and reflects identity and culture, analyse how meaning is shaped in texts, and organise, develop and express ideas using language appropriate to audience, purpose and form.
How does your prescribed text show that language can both affirm an individual's cultural identity and challenge assumptions about individuals and cultural groups?
In your response, make close reference to your prescribed text. (20)
(One common question — answer for whichever prescribed text you studied.)
20 marks — Attempt Question 2 — Allow about 40 minutes for this section
Your answer will be assessed on how well you demonstrate an informed personal understanding of the ideas expressed in the text, analyse the text's language, content and construction, and organise, develop and express ideas using language appropriate to audience, purpose and form.
How do the distinctive qualities of your prescribed text's form shape your informed personal understanding of its meaning and significance?
In your response, make close reference to your prescribed text as a whole. (20)
(One common question, no extract — answer for whichever prescribed text you studied.)
20 marks — Attempt Question 3 — Allow about 40 minutes for this section
Your answers will be assessed on how well you craft language to address the demands of the question, and use language appropriate to audience, purpose and context to deliberately shape meaning.
(a) (15 marks)
Use the following statement as the central idea of your writing.
'Every doorway is two rooms at once: the one you are leaving and the one you have not yet entered.'
Craft a piece of imaginative OR discursive writing that explores the experience of standing at a threshold. The idea of the stimulus must be woven through your piece, not simply quoted in it. (15)
(Original stimulus line composed for this paper.)
(b) (5 marks)
Explain how ONE stylistic feature of your writing in part (a) was influenced by ONE prescribed text you studied in Module C.
In your response, make close reference to your writing in part (a) and to your chosen prescribed text. (5)
| Band | Descriptor |
|---|---|
| 17–20 | Skilfully addresses BOTH demands — how language affirms cultural identity AND how it challenges assumptions — with perceptive analysis of language forms and features and well-selected evidence |
| 13–16 | Effectively addresses both demands with sound analysis and appropriate evidence |
| 9–12 | Addresses the question with uneven coverage of the two demands; explains rather than analyses |
| 5–8 | Describes ideas about identity or culture with limited textual reference |
| 1–4 | Attempts to describe the text |
Marker priorities from the clusters: (1) both halves of the paired demand — the exact failure NESA reported on 2025's 'benefits and challenges', where scripts answered one side only; plan a paragraph for each; (2) the assumption must be named — 'the text challenges stereotypes' scores little; say whose assumption, about whom, and which language choices unsettle it (2020, 2022 feedback); (3) analysis of language, not a cultural summary: dialogue, dialect and code-switching, naming, imagery, form-specific features; (4) the individual should be linked to the community (2021 feedback rewarded exactly this move).
| Band | Descriptor |
|---|---|
| 17–20 | Skilfully analyses how the form's distinctive qualities shape meaning and significance; a clearly voiced, informed personal understanding; evidence drawn from across the whole text |
| 13–16 | Effectively analyses the text's distinctive qualities with sound evidence and a personal response |
| 9–12 | Explains features of the text with some personal response; evidence narrow |
| 5–8 | Describes the text with limited reference to its form |
| 1–4 | Attempts to describe the text |
Marker priorities: (1) form-specific metalanguage — the gap markers have named in six of seven years: verse craft for poetry, staging and dramatic structure for drama, camera and editing for film, narrative voice and structure for prose; a themes-and-characters essay caps in the middle bands; (2) whole-text evidence — not two rehearsed scenes or poems (2019, 2020, 2023, 2024 feedback); for a suite of poems, range across the suite; (3) the personal understanding must be voiced — first-person judgement about the text's significance, sustained through the essay, not asserted in the conclusion (2023–2024 feedback rewarded 'a clear, strong personal voice').
| Band | Descriptor |
|---|---|
| 13–15 | Skilfully crafted writing in the selected form; the threshold idea functions conceptually (motif, structure, controlling image); sustained, authentic voice; deliberate structural choices |
| 10–12 | Effectively crafted writing in the selected form; the stimulus is meaningfully integrated; controlled voice |
| 7–9 | Sound writing; stimulus referenced but not developed; uneven control |
| 4–6 | Limited control of the form; literal or token use of the stimulus |
| 1–3 | Attempts to compose |
Marker priorities from seven consecutive years of feedback: (1) treat the stimulus conceptually and metaphorically — the doorway need not be a door; bolted-on final-line quotation of the stimulus is the single most flagged weakness; (2) respond to ALL aspects of the stimulus (leaving AND not-yet-entering — the two rooms), as 2025's guideline separated bands on complete stimulus coverage; (3) form discipline: discursive means an idea explored from several angles with anecdote and an open ending — a short story or a persuasive essay in discursive clothing is penalised; (4) avoid the clichéd school-set narrative; a small, specific, sensory moment outperforms melodrama.
| Criteria | Marks |
|---|---|
| Explains effectively how one stylistic feature of part (a) was influenced by one Module C prescribed text, with close reference (including quotation) to BOTH the student's own writing and the prescribed text | 5 |
| Explains the influence with reference to both texts | 4 |
| Explains a stylistic feature with reference to one text | 3 |
| Describes a feature of part (a) or of a prescribed text | 2 |
| Attempts to describe | 1 |
Marker priorities (2019, 2021, 2024 feedback): quote your own part (a); name the prescribed composer's specific technique and show the craft link, not a vague 'inspired me'; no plot summary of the prescribed text; no long introduction; no negative self-critique — reflection is analysis of craft, not confession.
| Paper item | Prediction | Agreement |
|---|---|---|
|
Q1 ↑ Q1 |
ES-P2-a1-affirm-challenge-dual-demand | 0.55 · 6 (all) |
|
Q2 ↑ Q2 |
ES-P2-b1-distinctive-qualities-personal-interpretation | 0.57 · 6 (all) |
|
Q3(a) ↑ Q3(a) |
ES-P2-c1-imaginative-or-discursive-choice | 0.59 · 6 (all; gemini-3.1-pro alone predicts an image stimulus rather than a quote) |
|
Q3(b) ↑ Q3(b) |
ES-P2-c2-reflection-returns | 0.54 · 6 (all) |
|
Q3 shape (15 + 5, the 2024 model) ↑ Q3 |
topic-level consensus | — · grok and opus name the 15+5 split; fable and gpt-5.6-sol carry 12–15 + 5–8 |
Intu AI
Intu AI builds unlimited practice questions for English Standard in these styles, marks your working, and explains what you missed — aligned to your syllabus.
Published Aug 2026, before the exams. In November 2026 we score these predictions publicly against the real paper — per-model calibration and question-level hit rates, the same harness as the 2025 backtest. How we did it.