Worked example · RE · Year 8
DCF: Interacting and collaborating → Collaboration
A secure Year 8 response, annotated to show which success criterion each part meets. It is also your answer key. Show it after pupils have finished their own work. The key ideas: comment A is the only helpful comment; comment B is rude and comment C is vague; suggestion D must be rejected because the Sikh scripture is always called the Guru Granth Sahib. Cerys deleted Maya’s paragraph without asking, so it should be restored. The draft has exactly 12 errors: 4 spelling, 3 punctuation, 2 grammar, 1 wrong fact (langar food is always vegetarian), 1 disrespectful phrase and 1 repetition. The best paragraph order is 1, 4, 3, 2, 5.
Accept other wording, roles and rules if they do the same job. “Last Thursday, Class 8C” is not one of the 12 errors (comment A deals with it), but give credit if a pupil fixes it as an extra improvement.
| Item | Kind? | Specific? | Useful? | What should the group do with it? Why? |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| A (Maya) | Yes | Yes | Yes | Make the change, reply to say it is done, then resolve it. Maya points to the exact words, explains why website readers will be confused, and gives a better version. |
| B (Rhodri) | No | No | No | Delete it and replace it with a helpful comment. It attacks the writer (“who wrote this??”, “rubbish”), not the writing, and does not say which words are wrong or how to fix them. |
| C (Osian) | Partly | Partly | No | Replace it with a helpful comment. It is attached to the right sentence, but “this is bad” does not say what is wrong or how to improve it, so the writer cannot act on it. |
| D (Osian’s suggestion) | Yes | Yes | No | Reject because the Bible is the Christian holy book. Sikhs always call their scripture the Guru Granth Sahib, as the fact check box says, so the change is wrong and disrespectful. A better idea is to keep the name and explain it: “the Guru Granth Sahib, the Sikh holy book”. Osian was right to use Suggesting mode, though, so the writer could say no. |
(a) Comment B rewritten: “This paragraph explains the rules for visitors clearly. The words ‘weird bandanas which looked well funny’ could upset Sikh readers and do not say why we covered our heads. Could we write ‘we covered our heads as a sign of respect, using scarves the gurdwara lent us’? Also, ‘seperate’ should be ‘separate’ and ‘there heads’ should be ‘their heads’.”
(b) Comment C rewritten: “This sentence uses ‘really interesting’ 3 times, and readers still do not find out what was interesting. Could we use one detail instead? For example: ‘The visit was fascinating: we learned how Sikhs welcome everyone, and we shared a meal in the langar.’”
Each judgement uses all 3 tests (kind, specific, useful) and gives a reason. Suggestion D is judged on accuracy and respect, not just on whether it sounds easier. Both rewritten comments start with something that works, quote the exact words, and offer a better version. Evidences criterion 1, and criterion 4 for the reason D is rejected.
(a) At 21:47 on Wednesday 11 March, Cerys deleted 52 words: paragraph 5, “What we learned” (the heading and 49 words of text). It was Maya’s work, and Cerys left no comment or message.
(b) First, Maya did not know her work had gone, which is unfair and could make her feel her ideas do not count, so the group would trust each other less. Second, the report lost its only paragraph that explains what the visit taught them: that the langar shows Sikhs believe everyone is equal. Cerys should have left a comment on paragraph 5, or used Suggesting mode to suggest the deletion and explain why, then let Maya and the group decide.
(c) “FINAL final!!” does not say what is in the version or what changed, and it is not even final, because the draft still has errors and open comments. The older versions only have dates and times, so the group would have to open each one to find, for example, the version that still has paragraph 5.
| Pupil | Role | What they may change directly, and what they should only suggest |
|---|---|---|
| Cerys | Proofreader | May correct spelling, punctuation and grammar directly. Must use Suggesting mode for anything that changes meaning, and must never delete a sentence or paragraph. |
| Maya | Lead editor | May move paragraphs and accept or reject suggestions once the writer has replied. Suggests, but does not make, changes to other people’s wording. |
| Osian | Fact checker | Only suggests changes to facts, with a comment saying which line of the fact check box proves it. |
| Rhodri | Comment manager | Changes no text directly. Replies to every comment, checks that each one is kind, specific and useful, and resolves it once the change is made. |
| Topic | Our rule |
|---|---|
| 1. Suggesting or editing | Use Editing mode only in your own paragraph or for the job your role allows. Use Suggesting mode for every change to someone else’s paragraph. |
| 2. Comments | Quote the exact words, say how to improve them, and comment on the writing, not the person. Only resolve a comment when the change is made and the writer has replied. |
| 3. Naming versions | Name each version with the day and what changed, for example “Wed 11 March: Maya added paragraph 5”. Do not use the word “final” until Mrs Pryce has approved it. |
| 4. Other people’s work | Never delete or move someone else’s work. Leave a comment or a suggestion and wait until the writer or the lead editor agrees. |
The pupil reads the version history accurately (time, person, what was deleted, whose work it was), gives 2 different reasons (fairness to Maya and the quality of the report) and a better action. Every pupil has a different role, and the second column separates direct changes from suggestions. Each ground rule says exactly what to do, and rules 1, 3 and 4 would have prevented the problems in the stimulus. Evidences criterion 2.
| No. | Para. | Wrong words, copied exactly | Code | Correction |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 1 | our first time inside a gurdwarra | Sp | gurdwara |
| 2 | 1 | Guru Nanaks teachings | P | Guru Nanak’s teachings (missing apostrophe for possession) |
| 3 | 1 | The visit was really interesting, the food was really interesting and the people were really interesting. | Rep | Use “really interesting” once, or replace the sentence with a specific detail (see Step 1 (b)). |
| 4 | 2 | the langar, wich is a free kitchen | Sp | which |
| 5 | 2 | The langar serves meat dishes like chicken curry | F | Langar food is always vegetarian (see Step 4 (a)). |
| 6 | 2 | a volunteer gives us | G | a volunteer gave us (past tense) |
| 7 | 3 | The hall was quiet, we sat on the floor | P | The hall was quiet. We sat on the floor (2 sentences joined with only a comma) |
| 8 | 3 | we was given Karah Prasad | G | we were given |
| 9 | 3 | it was soft and warm. | P | It was soft and warm. (capital letter to start the sentence) |
| 10 | 4 | a seperate room for shoes | Sp | separate |
| 11 | 4 | cover there heads | Sp | cover their heads |
| 12 | 4 | weird bandanas which looked well funny | R | head coverings, worn as a sign of respect (see Step 4 (b)) |
Count by code: Sp 4 · P 3 · G 2 · F 1 · R 1 · Rep 1. Total 12.
All 12 errors are found, in order, copied exactly and named with the right code. On the stimulus sheet the pupil used the key: red circles for the 4 spellings, a caret for the apostrophe, a / through the comma in paragraph 3, 3 short lines under the “i” of “it”, green crossings-out for “gives” and “was”, wavy orange lines for the fact and the disrespectful phrase, and brackets round the repeated words. Suggestion D is left out, as the worksheet says. Evidences criterion 3.
(a) The langar serves only vegetarian food, such as dal, rice and chapatis, so that anyone can eat it, whatever their religion or diet.
(b) Everyone covers their head in the prayer hall as a sign of respect, so we put on scarves that the gurdwara lent us.
(c) Best order: 1, 4, 3, 2, 5. Yes, paragraph 5 should be restored. The report should follow the visit in time order: the introduction, then arriving (paragraph 4), then the prayer hall (paragraph 3), then the langar, which happened “at the end of the visit” (paragraph 2). Paragraph 5 makes a good ending because it explains what the langar taught us about equality and seva, and it was Maya’s work that was deleted without the group agreeing.
The wrong fact is replaced with the fact from the fact check box and the reason for it (so anyone can eat). The disrespectful phrase is replaced with neutral words and the reason visitors cover their heads, and “there” is corrected to “their” on the way. The order is justified with evidence from the draft (“at the end of the visit”). Evidences criteria 4 and 5.
The langar
At the end of the visit, we went to the langar, the free kitchen that every gurdwara has. Anyone is welcome to eat there, and nobody pays. We sat together on the floor in rows, because in the langar everyone is equal, rich or poor, and everyone eats the same food. A volunteer gave us dal, rice and chapatis. Langar food is always vegetarian, so that anyone can eat it, whatever their religion or diet. All the food was cooked and served by volunteers. Sikhs call this seva, which means selfless service to others, done without expecting anything back.
Word count: 99. All 5 boxes in the proofreading checklist ticked.
Every error from paragraph 2 is corrected (“wich”, the meat dishes, “gives”). Langar and seva are explained for readers who have never visited a gurdwara. Verbs about the visit are in the past tense (went, sat, gave, was cooked); facts that are always true stay in the present (“Langar food is always vegetarian”), which is correct. No sentences are joined with only a comma, every fact matches the fact check box, and the length is inside 80 to 120 words. Evidences criteria 4 and 5.