2014 Q7 — School Magazine Article on a Stand-up Comedy Show [PERFECT 42/42]
Question prompt — Q7 Learning English through Popular Culture
You recently attended a stand-up comedy show and you were impressed by the performance. Write an article for your school magazine:
- describing the show;
- discussing the challenges such performers might face;
- how students at school can benefit from watching such a performance.
About 400 words. Booklet pages 6–8 + Supplementary Answer Sheet S1. The candidate’s show is fronted by a fictional comedian, Peter Smith, performing his first Hong Kong show at the Hong Kong Arena.
This is the first PERFECT 42/42 Part B piece in the corpus for 2014 — and only the second perfect Part B in the entire collection (joining 2018-005’s debate speech on class-position abolition, the 2018 Q5 piece). Both markers awarded ^21 (capped maxima on every band), meaning M1 and M2 read the same script and independently arrived at the language ceiling. The 2014 marking convention records the third-marker function as C2 (Check marker) where 2017-onwards records show D3 — same procedure, different label. On a perfect-pair script no third reading was needed; M1 = M2 = 21 each, no tie-break, no closest-pair adjustment.
Among the other perfect-marks pieces in the collection: 2017-004 Q9 (Part B), 2017-005 Part A, 2018-005 Q5 (Part B), 2017-011 Part A, and 2016-003 Part A. This piece (2014-001 Q7) is the chronologically earliest perfect Part B in the corpus, the first perfect-marks 2014 entry, and the first 5** Part B on the ‘Learning English through Popular Culture’ elective. The companion Part A in the same booklet earned 40 / 42 (5**), so the candidate produced a 5** piece on both halves of the paper — the only 2014 candidate in the corpus to do so.
Among the other perfect-marks pieces in the collection: 2017-004 Q9 (Part B), 2017-005 Part A, 2018-005 Q5 (Part B), 2017-011 Part A, and 2016-003 Part A. This piece (2014-001 Q7) is the chronologically earliest perfect Part B in the corpus, the first perfect-marks 2014 entry, and the first 5** Part B on the ‘Learning English through Popular Culture’ elective. The companion Part A in the same booklet earned 40 / 42 (5**), so the candidate produced a 5** piece on both halves of the paper — the only 2014 candidate in the corpus to do so.
The writing, with corrections marked inline
Legend:
red strikethrough = removed |
green highlight = added or replaced |
yellow highlight = handwriting unclear or wording reconstructed from context |
caret insertion = word(s) inserted above the line by the candidate (preserved with a leading caret marker).
The candidate uses caret insertions throughout (further in the ‘intonations and gestures’ sentence; contagious above scattergun; on above cowed; have above insights; an above exaggeration; people to push at the foot of the supplementary sheet); these are shown inline with the caret pill marker so the original insertion choreography stays visible. The article ends mid-sentence at the foot of the Supplementary Answer Sheet S1, in the closing self-referential line: ‘It is not an exaggeration for people to push about how marvellous Smith’s stand up…’
Booklet p.6 (lines 1–24)
1Smith’s Stand-up Comedy — A Hilarious Yet Impressive Lesson
2
3The renowned Peter Smith, a worldwide stand-up comedian,
4had kicked off his first stand-up comedy show in at Hong
5Kong Arena last week. The mesmerising performance of
6Smith won over a lot of audiences’ hearts, and the critics’
7reviews of Smith’s virgin show in Hong Kong exalted Smith
8to the sky. Here, let us delve deeper into Smith’s impressive
9performance and let it act as an exemplary example to offer
10us a fresh assessment on how these performances can benefit
11our students as well.
12
13In a stand-up comedy, it is an a unanimous claim that the
14comedian plays the most prominent role in executing the
15show. Stating Smith as ‘fantastic’ would be an understatement;
16he was phenomenal. In the show, there was no sumptuous
17stage set-up but a black curtain; there was no exaggerating
18styling but just a plain checked shirt on Smith. Forsoo,
19Smith had infected everyone with his contagious scattergun
20humour, causing audiences to burst in laughter until tears
21glided down their pathetic cheeks. His execution was nearly
22impeccable; he had fluent English although he was born a
23Spanish, and the intonations and gestures just added
24further magical touches to his show.
Booklet p.7 (lines 25–50)
25Nevertheless, the true element that impressed everyone
26was not due to his charismatic stage presence (merely),
27but the dark sense of humour he had demonstrated in his
28speech. No cheap clichés were mentioned at the comedy.
29Rather, Smith had poked fun at some sensitive yet prevalent
30phenomena lurking in our society. Through mimicking the
31impoverished farmers, he revealed the extreme inequality
32in food distribution; though mocking the arrogant white
33people, he unveiled the discrimination that is still rampant
34in our society; though acting as a grumpy old man, he
35showed us the blind eye that society turns to the elderly.
36Disguised in tear-jerking laughter, the amazing performance
37actually provoked our internal reflection to on the broad
38swathe of problems looming in our current society, awakening
39us from the ignorance of these conflicts existing all along. No
40wonder he earned a standing ovation with rounds and rounds
41of applause at the end of the show.
42
43With such a dazzling show Smith pulled off, some people
44may think it is an easy mission for Smith to fire his intrinsic
45scattergun humour at us. However, I can assure those people,
46it is definitely not the reality. Performers have to face many
47challenges as well. The largest enemy of a performer must be
48his nerve creeping him on him. As a past drama actor myself,
49I do understand that it is very hard to perform in front of
50such a crowd. Your thoughts will be in turmoil and you will be
Booklet p.7 continued (lines 51–72)
51sweating bullets. You realise that you are starting to shake
52violently and have an urge to wet your pants! It is indeed a
53challenge for performers to shake off this nervousness that
54is shrouding over them and pluck up that swirl of gallantry
55to face the audience, and I do admire those who overcome
56this challenge and just show off what they have to say
57without tying their tongues into knots.
58
59Moreover, the pathway of becoming a stand-up comedian
60is not as easy as people imagine. There are a lot of stand-up
61comedians in this market, and it would be a great achievement
62to stand out from the crowd. Sometimes, it takes years and
63years of painful experiences and bitter failures before you are
64known to somebody. To grab the attention of audiences during
65the whole show, performers have to come up with all and
66sundry ideas and topics for him to extricate his humour. To
67grab the attention of audiences sustainably throughout his
68career, imagine how many good ideas and topics a performer
69has to come up with! Therefore, it will really be a tough
70challenge for a performer if he runs out of ideas. After all,
71all that glitters is not gold. To hTo have to survive through
72the journey to establish his own name, the performer has to
Booklet p.8 (lines 73–100)
73walk through a lot of ups and downs, as well as thrills and
74spills. It is tough for a performer to cling on his dream and
75not to give up when things hit the fans.
76
77I steadfastly believe that not only myself, but the whole
78school can benefit from this kind of outstanding shows. For
79instance, it provides us with a precious opportunity to let down
80our armour and relax. While our school years files fly in a
81flurry of examinations and assignments, seldom have we taken
82a break from the exhausting lifestyle that keeps us pushing us
83to work around the clock. After shaking off the cobwebs of
84sleep, it is another mechanical day for us to bury ourselves in
85books. This kind of performance gives us the exact chance to
86take a break from the hectic schedule and relax ourselves and
87extricate the immense stress that we are in. Studies have
88revealed that a good laughter is crucial for our well-being. I
89do believe that after watching such performance, students can
90have time to relax their brains. The brief rest may even motivate
91them to do better in their daily performances through the
92relaxation of their overworked brains.
93
94Secondly, this kind of performance can actually stimulate
95the critical thinking of a lot of students. Hong Kong students
96are often being censured for being too politically apathetic.
97Burying ourselves in books, we see nothing stirring up
98controversy in our society aside from the fine print. This kind
99of performances which hints at some sensitive yet prevalent
100phenomena in our society can stimulate our students to
Supplementary Answer Sheet S1 (lines 101–125)
101open a minded be open-minded to current affairs picking up
102steam in our society. Afterall, we do not need erudite
103bookworms in our schools; what we truly need are trailblazers
104who have insights on social responsibility and have a sense to
105contribute in our society. And this kind of performances is an
106elixir to open a window of current world affairs to our students
107in a funny and more lively way.
108
109Last but not least, this kind of performance can also enhance
110the presentation skills of our students. Nowadays, based on a
111product of circumstances, students are having difficulties in
112expressing or presenting themselves in public. Though watching
113this kind of shows, students can pick up brains from these
114outstanding performers and brush up their public-speaking
115skills. With the addition of more practices, they may also get
116a confidence boost when speaking in front of the public. This
117certainly makes students more comfortable in expressing
118themselves not only in presentations, but also in public
119examinations and admission interviews, so it is like killing
120two birds with a one stone.
121
122It is not an exaggeration for people to push about how
123marvellous Smith’s stand-up [piece ends mid-sentence at the
124foot of the Supplementary Answer Sheet S1 — the closing
125self-referential sentence runs out of paper]
Marks earned: ^M1 = 21 + ^M2 = 21 = 42 / 42 (PERFECT). Both markers awarded full marks on every band. No third-marker review (the 2014-era C2 Check-marker step) was triggered — the two markers agreed at the ceiling on the first read. This is the rarest possible outcome on Paper 2: most 5** scripts get 20+21 or 21+20 (one marker conceding a single point); this script got 21+21 from two independent reads.
Word count. Approximately 880 words across booklet pages 6–8 and the full Supplementary Answer Sheet S1 (against the 400-word brief) — more than double the budget. The candidate has used every available line of the Supplementary sheet. The closing sentence runs out of paper mid-clause — the piece ends without a sign-off, which is the one structural fact that a different marker might have penalised, but neither M1 nor M2 did. The reasoning is presumably that the body of the piece has earned every band, and the final sentence is decorative (a self-referential closing flourish) rather than load-bearing.
The structural plan tracks the three bullets exactly. Title + opening hook (the show) · describing-the-show paragraphs × 2 (performance description · dark-humour social-critique reading) · challenges paragraphs × 2 (the nerves challenge · the career-pathway challenge) · student-benefit paragraphs × 3 (relaxation · critical thinking · presentation skills) · aborted closing sentence. Three bullets → three substantive content blocks → three benefit paragraphs. The architecture is engineered to the brief: every bullet gets two or three paragraphs, none gets one. This kind of structural compliance is what markers look for when they award the top Organisation band.
The standout move (1): the dark-humour social-critique reading. “Through mimicking the impoverished farmers, he revealed the extreme inequality in food distribution; though mocking the arrogant white people, he unveiled the discrimination that is still rampant in our society; though acting as a grumpy old man, he showed us the blind eye that society turns to the elderly.” The candidate doesn’t just describe the show — the candidate reads the show. Three parallel through V-ing X, he Y-ed Z constructions, each pairing a comic register-target with a social-justice category. Food inequality · racial discrimination · ageism. This is graduate-essay-prize-level critical reading on a 16-year-old’s exam paper. No other 2014 Part B in the corpus reaches this analytical altitude.
The standout move (2): ‘sweating bullets… urge to wet your pants’ on the nerves paragraph. “Your thoughts will be in turmoil and you will be sweating bullets. You realise that you are starting to shake violently and have an urge to wet your pants!” A 16-year-old writing about stage-fright reaches for the most embarrassing physiological detail available and names it. Urge to wet your pants is a register-collapse moment that lesser candidates would either avoid (and the paragraph would lose its visceral truth) or get wrong (and the paragraph would lose its register). The candidate hits the right register — school-magazine playful, not vulgar — and the moment lands. The follow-up (shake off this nervousness… and pluck up that swirl of gallantry) escalates back up to the formal register, completing the rhetorical swing.
The standout move (3): the ‘past drama actor myself’ pivot. “The largest enemy of a performer must be his nerve creeping over him. As a past drama actor myself, I do understand that it is very hard to perform in front of such a crowd.” The candidate stops being a reviewer and becomes a witness. This converts the challenges paragraph from analytical observation to first-person testimony — the candidate has been on stage; the candidate knows what stage-fright feels like. The move is brief (one clause) but it changes the marker’s relationship with the rest of the paragraph: the physiological details now come from someone with credentials. This is the same self-evidence move that 2018-005’s perfect Part B makes with the NSS electives argument (I am a striking example of this).
The standout move (4): the lexical reach is sustained, not concentrated. The candidate doesn’t cluster high-register vocabulary at the opening (the way many strong candidates do); the high-register words are distributed across all eight paragraphs. Sumptuous, exaggerating, impeccable, scattergun, charismatic, demonstrated, lurking, mimicking, impoverished, unveiled, rampant, swathe, looming, ovation, intrinsic, turmoil, gallantry, sundry, extricate, glitters, steadfastly, flurry, hectic, immense, censured, apathetic, controversy, erudite, trailblazers, elixir, marvellous. That’s 30 high-register choices across ~880 words — one every 30 words, sustained without thinning. M2 was looking for any drop in lexical altitude and didn’t find one; that’s what 21+21 means.
Word count. Approximately 880 words across booklet pages 6–8 and the full Supplementary Answer Sheet S1 (against the 400-word brief) — more than double the budget. The candidate has used every available line of the Supplementary sheet. The closing sentence runs out of paper mid-clause — the piece ends without a sign-off, which is the one structural fact that a different marker might have penalised, but neither M1 nor M2 did. The reasoning is presumably that the body of the piece has earned every band, and the final sentence is decorative (a self-referential closing flourish) rather than load-bearing.
The structural plan tracks the three bullets exactly. Title + opening hook (the show) · describing-the-show paragraphs × 2 (performance description · dark-humour social-critique reading) · challenges paragraphs × 2 (the nerves challenge · the career-pathway challenge) · student-benefit paragraphs × 3 (relaxation · critical thinking · presentation skills) · aborted closing sentence. Three bullets → three substantive content blocks → three benefit paragraphs. The architecture is engineered to the brief: every bullet gets two or three paragraphs, none gets one. This kind of structural compliance is what markers look for when they award the top Organisation band.
The standout move (1): the dark-humour social-critique reading. “Through mimicking the impoverished farmers, he revealed the extreme inequality in food distribution; though mocking the arrogant white people, he unveiled the discrimination that is still rampant in our society; though acting as a grumpy old man, he showed us the blind eye that society turns to the elderly.” The candidate doesn’t just describe the show — the candidate reads the show. Three parallel through V-ing X, he Y-ed Z constructions, each pairing a comic register-target with a social-justice category. Food inequality · racial discrimination · ageism. This is graduate-essay-prize-level critical reading on a 16-year-old’s exam paper. No other 2014 Part B in the corpus reaches this analytical altitude.
The standout move (2): ‘sweating bullets… urge to wet your pants’ on the nerves paragraph. “Your thoughts will be in turmoil and you will be sweating bullets. You realise that you are starting to shake violently and have an urge to wet your pants!” A 16-year-old writing about stage-fright reaches for the most embarrassing physiological detail available and names it. Urge to wet your pants is a register-collapse moment that lesser candidates would either avoid (and the paragraph would lose its visceral truth) or get wrong (and the paragraph would lose its register). The candidate hits the right register — school-magazine playful, not vulgar — and the moment lands. The follow-up (shake off this nervousness… and pluck up that swirl of gallantry) escalates back up to the formal register, completing the rhetorical swing.
The standout move (3): the ‘past drama actor myself’ pivot. “The largest enemy of a performer must be his nerve creeping over him. As a past drama actor myself, I do understand that it is very hard to perform in front of such a crowd.” The candidate stops being a reviewer and becomes a witness. This converts the challenges paragraph from analytical observation to first-person testimony — the candidate has been on stage; the candidate knows what stage-fright feels like. The move is brief (one clause) but it changes the marker’s relationship with the rest of the paragraph: the physiological details now come from someone with credentials. This is the same self-evidence move that 2018-005’s perfect Part B makes with the NSS electives argument (I am a striking example of this).
The standout move (4): the lexical reach is sustained, not concentrated. The candidate doesn’t cluster high-register vocabulary at the opening (the way many strong candidates do); the high-register words are distributed across all eight paragraphs. Sumptuous, exaggerating, impeccable, scattergun, charismatic, demonstrated, lurking, mimicking, impoverished, unveiled, rampant, swathe, looming, ovation, intrinsic, turmoil, gallantry, sundry, extricate, glitters, steadfastly, flurry, hectic, immense, censured, apathetic, controversy, erudite, trailblazers, elixir, marvellous. That’s 30 high-register choices across ~880 words — one every 30 words, sustained without thinning. M2 was looking for any drop in lexical altitude and didn’t find one; that’s what 21+21 means.
Strengths to praise
1. The architecture maps the three bullets one-to-three
Q7 has three bullets (describe the show / discuss challenges / discuss student benefits). The candidate gives each bullet at least two paragraphs — show description gets two (the performance, the social-critique reading); challenges gets two (nerves, career pathway); student benefits gets three (relaxation, critical thinking, presentation skills). Every bullet is over-served; none is short-changed. This is the structural compliance that earns the Organisation band ceiling on both markers’ reads.
2. The dark-humour social-critique reading is graduate-essay-prize level
“Through mimicking the impoverished farmers, he revealed the extreme inequality in food distribution; though mocking the arrogant white people, he unveiled the discrimination that is still rampant in our society; though acting as a grumpy old man, he showed us the blind eye that society turns to the elderly.” Three parallel through V-ing X, he Y-ed Z constructions, each pairing a comic register-target (impoverished farmers / arrogant white people / grumpy old man) with a social-justice category (food inequality / racial discrimination / ageism). The candidate is reading the comedy as social critique — treating Peter Smith as a Hong Kong-version of Dave Chappelle or Hannah Gadsby — and the parallel-syntax delivery makes the reading land. This is one of the strongest pieces of critical reading in the entire corpus.
3. The ‘past drama actor’ testimony pivot converts the challenges paragraph
“The largest enemy of a performer must be his nerve creeping over him. As a past drama actor myself, I do understand that it is very hard to perform in front of such a crowd. Your thoughts will be in turmoil and you will be sweating bullets.” The candidate names their own credentials (a past drama actor) and immediately drops into the physiological present-tense (your thoughts will be… you will be sweating bullets). The marker now reads the rest of the paragraph as testimony, not theory. This is the same self-evidence move 2018-005 uses on the NSS-electives argument (I am a striking example of this); naming yourself as the witness raises the credibility of the paragraph that follows.
4. ‘Sweating bullets… urge to wet your pants’ lands the right register
“You realise that you are starting to shake violently and have an urge to wet your pants! It is indeed a challenge for performers to shake off this nervousness that is shrouding over them and pluck up that swirl of gallantry to face the audience.” The candidate names the most embarrassing physiological detail of stage-fright (the urge to wet your pants) and then immediately escalates back to the formal register (shake off this nervousness… pluck up that swirl of gallantry). The swing — from playful-vulgar to formal-essayistic in two sentences — is a school-magazine register move. A lesser candidate either stays at one register (and loses the visceral truth) or fails the swing (and the piece reads as awkward); the candidate executes it cleanly.
5. The four-image ‘no cheap clichés’ setup
“In the show, there was no sumptuous stage set-up but a black curtain; there was no exaggerating styling but just a plain checked shirt on Smith. […] No cheap clichés were mentioned at the comedy.” The candidate uses three no X but Y constructions across paragraph 2 and the bridge into paragraph 3 (no sumptuous set / no exaggerating styling / no cheap clichés), each negating a Hollywood stand-up convention. The cumulative effect is to define Smith’s comedy by what it is not — which is the rhetorical move serious critics use to set up the positive claim that follows (the true element… was… the dark sense of humour he had demonstrated). The negation pattern is a school-magazine-register elevation.
6. The three student-benefit paragraphs map to school life precisely
(i) Relaxation: “let down our armour and relax… while our school years fly in a flurry of examinations and assignments… shaking off the cobwebs of sleep, it is another mechanical day for us to bury ourselves in books”. (ii) Critical thinking: “Hong Kong students are often being censured for being too politically apathetic… we do not need erudite bookworms… what we truly need are trailblazers who have insights on social responsibility”. (iii) Presentation skills: “students can pick up brains from these outstanding performers and brush up their public-speaking skills… not only in presentations, but also in public examinations and admission interviews, so it is like killing two birds with one stone”. Three distinct benefits, each grounded in a recognisable HK student experience (the exhausting schedule / the apathy critique / the DSE-and-interviews pressure). The candidate has thought about which benefits actually matter to the marker’s school audience.
7. The lexical reach is sustained across all eight paragraphs
Sumptuous, exaggerating, impeccable, scattergun, charismatic, lurking, mimicking, impoverished, unveiled, rampant, swathe, looming, ovation, intrinsic, turmoil, gallantry, sundry, extricate, steadfastly, flurry, hectic, censured, apathetic, controversy, erudite, trailblazers, elixir, marvellous. Thirty high-register choices distributed evenly across the piece. M2 reads the entire script looking for any drop in lexical altitude that would justify a 20 (rather than a 21) — and doesn’t find one. That is what makes 21+21 mathematically possible: a piece without any visible thinning of vocabulary.
Grammar — small corrections (for completeness on a 42/42 piece)
| Line(s) | Original | Suggested | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| 3–5 | had kicked off his first stand-up comedy show in Hong Kong Arena last week | kicked off his first stand-up comedy show at Hong Kong Arena last week | Two small fixes. (i) Tense: simple past kicked off rather than past perfect had kicked off, because last week is a definite past time. (ii) Preposition: at (event venue) rather than in (containers) for a named arena. |
| 6–8 | the critics’ reviews of Smith’s virgin show in Hong Kong exalted Smith to the sky | the critics’ reviews of Smith’s debut show in Hong Kong praised Smith to the skies | Three small fixes. (i) Virgin show reads slightly off-register; the standard performance-industry term is debut. (ii) Exalted means raised in rank or honoured solemnly (often religious); the candidate means praised. (iii) Idiom: praise to the skies (plural skies) is the fixed form. |
| 8–10 | let it act as an exemplary example to offer us a fresh assessment | let it serve as a model for a fresh assessment | Two small fixes. (i) Exemplary example is tautological (exemplary already means serving as a model); pick one. (ii) Offer… an assessment reads slightly bureaucratic; let it serve as a model for an assessment is the cleaner academic native. |
| 13 | it is an unanimous claim that the comedian plays the most prominent role | it is a unanimous claim that the comedian plays the most prominent role | Article: a (not an) before unanimous, because unanimous starts with the consonant sound /j/ (‘you’), not a vowel. |
| 15 | Stating Smith as ‘fantastic’ would be an understatement | To call Smith ‘fantastic’ would be an understatement | State X as Y is non-idiomatic; the standard verb-pattern for naming-or-calling is call X Y (no ‘as’) or describe X as Y. |
| 17 | there was no exaggerating styling | there was no exaggerated styling | Adjective form: exaggerated (past-participle adjective: describing something that has been over-done) rather than exaggerating (present-participle: describing something that is doing the exaggerating). Styling doesn’t exaggerate; it is exaggerated. |
| 18–19 | Forsoo, Smith had infected everyone with his contagious scattergun humour | Indeed, Smith infected everyone with his contagious scattergun humour | Two small fixes. (i) Forsoo isn’t a word (the candidate may be reaching for the archaic Forsooth, which is a Shakespearean register-marker too high even for this article; Indeed is the modern equivalent). (ii) Tense: simple past infected rather than past perfect had infected, for narrative flow. |
| 20–21 | tears glided down their pathetic cheeks | tears rolled down their reddened cheeks | Two small fixes. (i) Glided implies a smooth horizontal motion (a swan glides); tears roll or stream down a face. (ii) Pathetic means pitiful (a pathetic excuse, a pathetic state); the candidate means the audience’s cheeks were flushed or wet, not pitiable. Reddened, flushed, wet is the cleaner native. |
| 22–23 | he was born a Spanish | he was born Spanish / he was born a Spaniard | Two small fixes. (i) Spanish is the adjective (the people’s nationality); the noun for an individual is Spaniard. (ii) Article: born Spanish (adjective complement, no article) or born a Spaniard (noun complement, with article); not born a Spanish. |
| 37–38 | provoked our internal reflection to the broad swathe of problems | provoked our internal reflection on the broad swathe of problems | Preposition: reflection on (the fixed collocation), not reflection to. Swathe as a metaphor for a wide range of issues is a strong lexical choice; the only friction is the preposition. |
| 47–48 | The largest enemy of a performer must be his nerve creeping him | The biggest enemy of a performer is his nerves creeping over him | Three small fixes. (i) Largest for an abstract enemy reads physical; biggest or greatest is the more standard collocation. (ii) Nerve singular usually means courage (he had the nerve to ask); the candidate means nerves plural (anxiety). (iii) The caret-insert on is in the right slot but the standard collocation is creep over. Must be can become the simpler is. |
| 53–55 | shake off this nervousness that is shrouding over them and pluck up that swirl of gallantry | shake off the nervousness that shrouds them and summon the courage to face the audience | Two small fixes. (i) Preposition: shroud takes a direct object, not over (the verb already carries the over-cover sense). (ii) Pluck up that swirl of gallantry mixes two idioms (pluck up courage + swirl of); the cleaner is pluck up the courage or summon the courage. The phrase is doing real work; the mixed-idiom is the only friction. |
| 57 | without tying their tongues into knots | without tying themselves in knots / without tripping over their words | Idiom variant: the standard form is tied themselves in knots (of mental confusion) or tongue-tied (of stage fright); tying their tongues into knots is a defensible coinage that combines both but isn’t the standard form. Tripping over their words is the cleaner public-speaking idiom. |
| 65–66 | performers have to come up with all and sundry ideas and topics for him to extricate his humour | performers have to come up with all sorts of ideas and topics from which to draw their humour | Three small fixes. (i) All and sundry is an idiom that means everyone (he told all and sundry the news); the candidate means all sorts of. (ii) Number agreement: performers… for him (plural-then-singular pronoun); their is the parallel. (iii) Extricate humour is the wrong half of the collocation; extricate means free from a difficult position. The candidate means draw, source, derive the humour from the topics. |
| 74–75 | it is tough for a performer to cling on his dream and not to give up when things hit the fans | it is tough for a performer to cling to his dream and not give up when things hit the fan | Three small fixes. (i) Preposition: cling to (the fixed verb-particle), not cling on (which is cling on to). (ii) Verb-form: not give up (parallel with cling to), not not to give up. (iii) Idiom: when the shit hits the fan (singular fan) is the standard idiom; fans plural is non-standard. The piece is a school-magazine article, so the cleaner is when things go wrong. |
| 80 | our school years files in a flurry of examinations and assignments | our school years fly in a flurry of examinations and assignments | Spelling / verb form. The candidate writes files where the verb is fly (plural subject years, plural verb fly); files is a non-standard slip. The image (school years flying past in a flurry) works once the verb is corrected. |
| 82–83 | keeps us pushing us to work around the clock | keeps pushing us to work around the clock | Repetition: the candidate writes us twice; the first instance is redundant. The construction is keeps + V-ing + object. |
| 88 | a good laughter is crucial for our well-being | a good laugh is crucial for our well-being | Noun choice: laughter is uncountable (the activity / sound); a laugh is the countable instance. The candidate’s collocation is the latter (a good laugh, idiomatic). |
| 113–114 | students can pick up brains from these outstanding performers | students can pick up tips from these outstanding performers | Collocation: pick someone’s brain means to consult them; pick up brains from is non-idiomatic. The candidate means pick up tips / skills / techniques from. |
| 110–111 | Nowadays, based on a product of circumstances, students are having difficulties | Nowadays, as a product of the circumstances we live in, students have difficulty | Two small fixes. (i) Based on a product of circumstances is a dangling participial slip (the subject of based on needs to be the candidate’s sentence-subject; it isn’t). (ii) Number: have difficulty rather than are having difficulties for the general claim. |
| 119–120 | killing two birds with a stone | killing two birds with one stone | Idiom: the fixed phrase is with one stone (numeric, not indefinite article). |
Style suggestions — what a 42/42 piece could borrow from itself
Categories:
Fluency = smoother sentence rhythm |
Authenticity = how a native speaker would actually write it |
Text-type fit = right for the genre (a school-magazine article that reviews a comedy show and argues for its educational value)
What a perfect-marks piece doesn’t need is a wholesale rewrite. What it can use is acknowledgement of where the piece could have closed cleanly (the trailing self-referential sentence), where one or two collocations cluster as near-misses (the ‘pluck up that swirl of gallantry’, ‘all and sundry’, ‘Forsoo’, ‘tears glided down their pathetic cheeks’ cluster), and where the architecture is doing the heavy lifting that earned both 21s.
What a perfect-marks piece doesn’t need is a wholesale rewrite. What it can use is acknowledgement of where the piece could have closed cleanly (the trailing self-referential sentence), where one or two collocations cluster as near-misses (the ‘pluck up that swirl of gallantry’, ‘all and sundry’, ‘Forsoo’, ‘tears glided down their pathetic cheeks’ cluster), and where the architecture is doing the heavy lifting that earned both 21s.
Suggestion 1 · the piece could have closed cleanly inside the budget the candidate already had
Text-type fitlines 122–125Original: the piece ends mid-sentence on S1: “It is not an exaggeration for people to push about how marvellous Smith’s stand up…”
Try (one short closing sentence using the remaining line and a half on S1): “In short, Peter Smith’s comedy was not just a night out — it was a hilarious yet impressive lesson that I would urge every schoolmate to seek out the next time he visits.”
The candidate has used every line of the booklet and the Supplementary sheet but ran out of paper inside the closing self-referential sentence. The structural cost is small (both markers awarded 21 anyway) but the piece would have closed at the article’s opening callback (A Hilarious Yet Impressive Lesson) if the closing line had been shorter. A school-magazine article ends with a one-sentence recommendation; the candidate’s aborted line is doing exactly that, just with too many words.
Suggestion 2 · the ‘Forsoo’ / ‘tears glided down their pathetic cheeks’ cluster is the one register-jangle
Authenticitylines 18–21Original: “Forsoo, Smith had infected everyone with his contagious scattergun humour, causing audiences to burst in laughter until tears glided down their pathetic cheeks.”
Try: “Indeed, Smith infected everyone with his contagious, scattergun humour — audiences burst into laughter until tears rolled down their flushed cheeks.”
Three frictions cluster in one sentence: Forsoo (coined non-word, perhaps reaching for the Shakespearean Forsooth), burst in laughter (the idiom is burst into laughter / burst out laughing), tears glided down their pathetic cheeks (tears roll / stream; the cheeks are flushed / reddened, not pathetic). The sentence is doing strong work otherwise (the ‘contagious scattergun humour’ collocation is excellent); only the cluster needs tidying.
Suggestion 3 · the ‘swirl of gallantry’ / ‘all and sundry’ mixed-idiom pair
Authenticitylines 53–55, 65–66Original: “pluck up that swirl of gallantry to face the audience… performers have to come up with all and sundry ideas and topics…”
Try: “pluck up the courage to face the audience… performers have to come up with all sorts of ideas and topics…”
Two idiom-misalignment slips. (i) Pluck up the courage is the standard form; the candidate’s pluck up that swirl of gallantry mixes pluck up courage with the genuinely-coined swirl of gallantry (which on its own is striking but in the construction reads as over-decoration). (ii) All and sundry means everybody (he told all and sundry the news), not all sorts of; the candidate has reached for the standalone-noun idiom and used it as a modifier. Both fixes are one-word swaps; the candidate’s ambition outpaces the standard collocation by a fraction.
Suggestion 4 · ‘born a Spanish’ could be the only marker that catches an L1-Cantonese-EFL reader’s eye
Authenticitylines 22–23Original: “he had fluent English although he was born a Spanish”
Try: “he had fluent English even though he was born Spanish” or “even though Spanish is his mother tongue”
The nationality-noun / -adjective distinction is one of the small things L2-English markers often catch. Spanish is the adjective (a Spanish family, a Spanish accent) and the language; the noun for an individual is a Spaniard. The candidate writes a Spanish, which conflates the two. The cleaner native is either the adjective complement (born Spanish) or the noun complement with the right noun (born a Spaniard) — or recast around the language (Spanish is his mother tongue). A small fix, but a visible one.
Suggestion 5 · the ‘sweating bullets / urge to wet your pants’ pair could be matched by one more physiological specific
Text-type fitlines 50–52Original: “Your thoughts will be in turmoil and you will be sweating bullets. You realise that you are starting to shake violently and have an urge to wet your pants!”
Try: “Your thoughts will be in turmoil — mind blank, heart hammering, palms slick. You realise that you are starting to shake violently and have an urge to wet your pants.”
The candidate has named two physiological details (sweating bullets, urge to wet your pants); a school-magazine-register stage-fright paragraph at the top band would name three or four (the racing pulse, the blank mind, the slick palms, the dry mouth). These are the small specifics that put the marker inside the performer’s body. The paragraph is already at the language ceiling; what the suggestion offers is just an inventory of what could go in the same slot.
Suggestion 6 · the ‘past drama actor myself’ pivot could land harder with one named role or year
Text-type fitlines 48–49Original: “As a past drama actor myself, I do understand that it is very hard to perform in front of such a crowd.”
Try: “As someone who performed at three school drama festivals in Form 3, I do understand that performing in front of such a crowd is hard.”
The candidate’s credentials-claim (past drama actor) is brief and abstract; one specific (the number of festivals, the year, the play, the role) would convert it from a testimonial to a vivid one. The marker doesn’t need to verify the specific — the texture is what carries the credibility. This is the ‘NSS-electives I ranked 22nd in a class of 32’ move that 2018-005’s perfect Part B uses. The candidate has the move; it just lands one stage short of fully landed.
Suggestion 7 · the second-benefit critical-thinking paragraph is sharper than it lets on
Text-type fitlines 95–105Original: “Hong Kong students are often being censured for being too politically apathetic. Burying ourselves in books, we see nothing stirring up controversy in our society aside from the fine print. […] We do not need erudite bookworms in our schools; what we truly need are trailblazers who have insights on social responsibility.”
Try: name the source of the ‘censured for being politically apathetic’ observation. “Hong Kong students are routinely censured — in op-eds in the SCMP, in panel discussions on RTHK — for being too politically apathetic.”
The candidate’s claim (HK students are censured for political apathy) is well-founded but unsourced. One specific (the venue of the censure: newspaper editorial, public radio panel, a named professor) would convert the claim from anecdote to citation. The candidate’s 2018 perfect-marks counterpart (2018-005) does this with the HKU Faculty of Social Science survey; this candidate gestures at the same move (often being censured) without the citation. A school-magazine article in the upper-5* band routinely cites its sources.
Suggestion 8 · the three-benefit close could number the benefits explicitly
Text-type fitlines 78, 94, 109Original: the three benefits are introduced as “For instance” (benefit 1) · “Secondly” (benefit 2) · “Last but not least” (benefit 3).
Try: explicit parallelism. “Firstly, … Secondly, … Thirdly, …” or “The first benefit is … The second is … The third is …”
The candidate’s three-benefit close uses three different transition phrases (For instance / Secondly / Last but not least) — which is varied but breaks the parallel structure that the brief invites (a three-bullet brief rewards a three-numbered close). The fix is cosmetic; both markers awarded 21 with the current transitions. But the explicit numbering would have made the architecture even more visible to the marker, which is the operative aesthetic of the school-magazine article genre.
Professional rewrite — the closing sentence that ran out of paper
Professional rewrite — how a working magazine editor would have closed the piece on the line and a half the candidate had left
For comparison only, not a correction. The piece is at the language ceiling on every band — rewriting the body would be an exercise in changing register, not improving language. The one place a 42/42 piece could still be tightened is the closing sentence, which runs out of paper mid-clause (“It is not an exaggeration for people to push about how marvellous Smith’s stand-up…”) at the foot of the Supplementary Answer Sheet S1. The candidate is reaching for the school-magazine genre’s standard close (a one-sentence recommendation that picks up the title callback), but the sentence as drafted needs 25–30 words; the candidate had paper for about 18. The rewrite shows what an editor would put in the same physical space.
The candidate’s aborted closing sentence
It is not an exaggeration for people to push about how marvellous Smith’s stand-up… [paper runs out at the foot of S1]
Rewritten by a working magazine editor
Smith’s show was not just a night out — it was, as the title promised, a hilarious yet impressive lesson. Catch him next time he visits.
What the rewrite is doing differently:
- It picks up the title as the closing payoff. The article’s title is “Smith’s Stand-up Comedy — A Hilarious Yet Impressive Lesson”. A school-magazine article closes by ringing the title bell — as the title promised, a hilarious yet impressive lesson. The candidate’s aborted line was trying to do this; it just took too many words to get there.
- It ends on a four-word imperative. “Catch him next time he visits.” School-magazine reviews of live events almost always end with a recommendation to the reader; the imperative-form recommendation is the genre’s standard exit. Four words, declarative, no decoration.
- It avoids the ‘people to push’ construction. The candidate’s caret-inserted phrase people to push is the friction point in the aborted sentence (push about how marvellous… is non-idiomatic; the candidate may be reaching for rave about or gush about). The rewrite sidesteps that by collapsing the praise into the title callback.
- It uses an em-dash, not a relative clause. The em-dash setup (not just a night out — it was, as the title promised, a hilarious yet impressive lesson) keeps the rhythm short. The candidate’s aborted sentence was building a longer subordinated structure that the paper-budget would not have supported.
- It would have fitted on the remaining line and a half. The rewrite runs to 23 words across two short sentences; on the candidate’s handwriting size it fits in the space the Supplementary sheet had left. The point of the exercise isn’t that the candidate’s draft was wrong — it’s that an editor with one more pass would have noticed the paper budget and adjusted the sentence to fit it.
- Why no body rewrite. The eight body paragraphs are at the language ceiling on every band M1 and M2 read. Rewriting them would be an aesthetic preference (a different sentence rhythm, a different vocabulary palette) rather than a language improvement — which is exactly the kind of move a 21+21 piece is too good to need. The closing sentence is the only place a structural improvement is still on the table.
Vocabulary the piece showcases (or could borrow)
| Word / phrase | Used? | Definition | Usage notes |
|---|---|---|---|
| sumptuous | used | (adj.) splendid and expensive-looking. | Pairs with feast, banquet, set, stage, decor: there was no sumptuous stage set-up. Higher register than fancy / elaborate; the candidate’s use to set up the ‘no X but Y’ contrast is precise. |
| scattergun (humour) | used | (adj., metaphorical) covering a wide range without focus, like a scattergun. | Pairs with approach, criticism, humour, comments: his contagious scattergun humour. Sophisticated compound modifier; the candidate uses it twice in the piece (paragraphs 2 and 4) with the right metaphorical sense. |
| charismatic (stage presence) | used | (adj.) exercising a compelling charm that inspires devotion. | Pairs with leader, performer, presence, personality: his charismatic stage presence. Performance-review register; the candidate’s deployment is the standard collocation. |
| lurking (in our society) | used | (v.) waiting in a concealed or unobtrusive way. | Pairs with danger, threat, problem, phenomenon: sensitive yet prevalent phenomena lurking in our society. Social-critique register; the candidate’s deployment converts the dark-humour reading into a problem-identification claim. |
| rampant | used | (adj.) (especially of something unwelcome) flourishing or spreading unchecked. | Pairs with discrimination, corruption, disease, inflation, crime: the discrimination that is still rampant in our society. Social-critique register; pairs naturally with discrimination. |
| swathe (of problems) | used | (n.) a broad strip or area of something. | Pairs with broad, wide, sweep, of land, of issues: the broad swathe of problems looming in our current society. Geographic-metaphor noun; lifts the ‘range of issues’ claim above the conversational. |
| turmoil (of thoughts) | used | (n.) a state of great disturbance or uncertainty. | Pairs with emotional, political, mental, inner, in turmoil: your thoughts will be in turmoil. Standard psychological-register noun. |
| gallantry | used | (n.) courageous behaviour, especially in battle. | Pairs with act, display, medal, of: pluck up that swirl of gallantry. Higher-register / archaic-leaning noun for courage; the candidate’s deployment is striking but slightly mixed-idiom (pluck up courage is the fixed form). |
| extricate | used | (v.) to free or release from a constraint or difficulty. | Pairs with oneself, from a situation, the stress, the immense pressure: extricate the immense stress that we are in. The candidate uses it twice (paragraphs 5 and 6); paragraph 6 is the cleaner use. |
| all that glitters is not gold | used | (proverb) outward appearance can be deceiving; not everything that looks valuable is. | Standard register for a school-magazine article; the candidate’s deployment in the career-pathway paragraph (the comedy life looks easy from outside) is precise. |
| steadfastly | used | (adv.) in a resolute or unwavering way. | Pairs with believe, refuse, maintain, deny: I steadfastly believe that…. Higher-register adverb opening the benefit-section paragraph 6. |
| a flurry of (examinations) | used | (n. phrase) a sudden burst of activity. | Pairs with activity, snow, excitement, examinations, deadlines: a flurry of examinations and assignments. Slightly literary register; the candidate’s deployment is precise. |
| censured (for being politically apathetic) | used | (v., formal) expressed severe disapproval of someone, typically in an official capacity. | Pairs with for, by, publicly, officially: Hong Kong students are often being censured for being too politically apathetic. Higher-formal register than criticised; the candidate’s deployment fits the social-commentary frame of the critical-thinking paragraph. |
| apathetic | used | (adj.) showing or feeling no interest or concern. | Pairs with politically, socially, response, attitude: too politically apathetic. Sociological register; standard collocation in HK education writing about civic engagement. |
| erudite (bookworms) | used | (adj.) having or showing great knowledge or learning. | Pairs with scholar, study, work, lecture, audience: we do not need erudite bookworms. Higher-register / mildly archaic; the candidate’s deployment in the rejection-of-rote-learning move is clever (using a high-register adjective to dismiss high-register learning). |
| trailblazers | used | (n.) pioneers; people who lead the way in something. | Pairs with industry, social, technological, generation: what we truly need are trailblazers who have insights on social responsibility. The candidate’s pairing of erudite bookworms (what we don’t need) with trailblazers (what we do) is rhetorically sharp. |
| elixir | used | (n.) a magical or medicinal potion; a preparation supposed to prolong life. | Pairs with of life, of youth, magical: an elixir to open a window of current world affairs. Literary-register metaphor; the candidate’s deployment is one of the most ambitious lexical reaches in the piece. |
| marvellous | used | (adj.) extremely good or pleasing; wonderful. | Pairs with opportunity, performance, day, time, story: how marvellous Smith’s stand-up…. Standard British-English register; the article’s closing self-referential sentence reaches for it before the paper runs out. |
| killing two birds with one stone | used | (idiom) to achieve two ends with a single action. | Pairs with so it is like, this is: so it is like killing two birds with one stone. The candidate writes a stone (indefinite article); the standard idiom is one stone. The deployment, with the small article fix, is well-placed. |
Leave a Reply