In this video I do a live marking of a real student's essay. Not only do I talk through its strengths and weaknesses, but I then improve it to increase the grade.

I often find that reading and improving model answers is one of the most effective activities student's can do when studying how to write essays, and I think this video will offer similar insights.

An important point to consider is the exam board that this student is writing for and the impact that it has on how directly useful this video is for you. Now, obviously, if you are with the same exam board - sorted! But, if you're not:

Why this is still helpful - the overwhelming majority of skills in an English literature exam are the same, regardless of exam board.

What you need to keep in mind - because of how assessment objectives and question structures can vary across exam boards, there may be somethings which are more/less important/relevant for you compared to the student in this video. For example, how important is context in your exam? Do you have to analyse an extract followed by the play as a whole? Are you required to analyse language, structure AND form? Make sure you understand the question and assessment objectives for your specific exam and keep that in mind as you watch.

This video is on my YouTube channel. However, there are a few benefits to watching it here instead:

You can register to keep a track of which videos you’ve watched
You can bookmark lessons for later
There may or may not be no ads, but I can neither confirm nor deny and I definitely didn't tell you if YouTube asked, OK?

There are also multiple resources to help you in the Study Materials section:

Unlocking Shakespeare Study Guide

This is the perfect accompaniment to my video on how to read Shakespeare's language. It goes back over the strategies with more examples and - most importantly - more opportunities for you to practice putting those strategies to use.

Macbeth Wide Margin Textbook

If you don't have a copy of the play to annotate, then this is a must, must, MUST have. If you do have a copy of the play, but it's one of those editions where they have filled every inch of the page with only slightly useful information and have left practically no space for your notes, then my version is also going to be ideal. The wide margins of this version mean that there is plenty of space for your notes. I have still provided translations for lots of the archaic language, and I've provided a list of characters at the start too. It is basically everything I always wished was in the copies of Macbeth I had to use to teach! If you are from a school and would like to order physical copies of the textbook, you can find it on Amazon too.

Macbeth Hexagons Game

If you are studying Macbeth for the purposes of an exam, then this is a fantastic, quick and easy revision game (dare I call it 'fun'?). The basic idea is that every hexagon has a character, theme or some sort of important technique on it. You have to join the hexagons up by connecting the things that link. It's a great way to practice making links and also revise what you know about every important aspect of this play.

If there are any videos or resources you'd like to help you with the study of this play, then please do leave a comment and let me know. I know that my videos only scratch the surface at the moment and you can rest assured that I fully intend to release videos on all the other characters, themes and key techniques. I'm also planning to release model essays so that you can spot the patterns of approach across top grade essays.

Lesson Transcript:

Hello everybody, it's Mrs. Wear of Stream English here, and today is an exciting day! Today I'm going to be giving feedback and helping one of you—my wonderful subscribers—with improving an essay that you submitted to me via my Stream English website. In this video, I'm going to be showing you the essay that a subscriber submitted, talking to you about its strengths, its ways to improve, and how it could have been taken to that next level to get the very highest grades in English. So let's do this!

Now, the question that this person had to answer is at the top of the slide there: "How is Macbeth and Lady Macbeth's relationship presented?" And that is a classic question for exam boards to ask. Now, this person was writing for the exam board Eduqas, but all of the feedback I'm going to be giving applies for basically every single exam board, because it's just about how to improve your essay writing skills, your analytical skills in general.

So we're going to start off by reading the opening to this person's essay. I've broken it up into just smaller chunks so I can spread it across multiple slides:

"In the Scottish play Macbeth, Shakespeare presents Macbeth and Lady Macbeth's relationship as self-destructive. Shakespeare shows this through using Lady Macbeth as a construct of how females of a patriarchal society could easy manipulate man by questioning their masculinity. And this relationship ends with them both dying that some of the audience could argue is because of the witch's supernatural presence. Also in the play, there seems to be a lack of love in the relationship as their ambition and greed for power is more important. Shakespeare presents Lady Macbeth's relationship with Macbeth as self-destructive in order to highlight how people like Macbeth were victims of a patriarchal society because of females like Lady Macbeth."

In so many ways, this is a really strong opening. First of all, it's got a really clear focus on the question right in that opening sentence. It clarifies how Shakespeare presents Macbeth and Lady Macbeth's relationship. It also comes back to that as well at the end of the opening paragraph by exploring why he did that—what is his goal? Great thing to do, too. I also love how it talks about the characters as tools: "using Lady Macbeth as a construct." That is a great thing to do, too, and you'll know this from looking at my video on how to write a Grade 9 Macbeth argument: you always want to talk about the characters as tools. So those are some really strong elements of that opening.

That being said, there are also ways that we can improve this further. First of all, we need to consider the actual argument being presented here: that Macbeth and Lady Macbeth's relationship is "self-destructive." Now, self-destructive behavior, as you can see defined there, is harmful to the person who behaves in that way. So, what you can see is we've got a little bit of an issue in that the word "self-destructive" can't really be applied to a relationship—a relationship isn't a behavior. And this is a really common mistake that students make, and a really easy one to make, where basically the adjective that you have used to express your idea isn't quite the right word. Perhaps the meaning of that word isn't quite suitable for the idea you're actually trying to express, or it doesn't quite work with the grammar. So, for example, as in this case, a relationship can't be self-destructive because that's more of a behavior.

The second area that I would improve in this opening is linked to trying to improve that accuracy in some of the ideas being expressed. So, for example, we're told that Lady Macbeth is a construct of "how females of a patriarchal society could easily manipulate man." Now, a patriarchal society is one in which men have all or most of the power and importance. It sounds like they're saying something contradictory: how on earth could it possibly be that a woman can easily manipulate a man in a patriarchal society? Men are the ones who have all the power and importance. And again, that idea is technically true, but the way that it is phrased, it sounds like a contradiction of itself. So that wording needs to be edited so that it's clearer how on earth it can be true simultaneously that Lady Macbeth is living in a patriarchal society where men have all the importance and power, but she also seems to have a lot of power over men.

We also have in this paragraph some bits that start to go off-focus of the question. So we have this bit where we're told, "could argue it's because of the witch's supernatural presence"—that is no longer about Lady Macbeth and Macbeth's relationship. It again is arguably an accurate point, but part of what the exam board is testing you on, especially at the very highest levels, is your ability to focus in your response and your ability to only talk about the things that are directly relevant, pertinent, discriminating. They word it in slightly different ways per exam board, but the most suitable things to talk about for your question. And by bringing in the witches, we've diluted the focus. The witches shouldn't really be appearing here. The only characters who should be talked about in this essay because of the question are Macbeth and Lady Macbeth.

With all of that in mind, here's how I rewrote the opening paragraph:

"In the Scottish play Macbeth, Shakespeare presents Macbeth and Lady Macbeth's relationship as unhealthy in a number of ways. First is the unnatural gender and power dynamics of their relationship, as Lady Macbeth manipulates Macbeth into going against God's will and breaking the Divine Right of Kings. Secondly, their ambition and greed for power seems to be more important than their love for one another. In presenting their relationship this way, Shakespeare is able to heighten the audience's disapproval of Macbeth's regicide and explore the corrupting power of ambition."

So, in rewriting this opening, essentially what I've done is just heightened the level of relevance to the question and accuracy. So, I swapped out "self-destructive" for "unhealthy in a number of ways"—just, again, something a little bit more accurate because you can have an unhealthy relationship. I then clarified that seeming contradiction between Lady Macbeth being manipulative in a patriarchal society by instead calling it "the unnatural gender and power dynamics as Lady Macbeth manipulates Macbeth." I then also cut out any bits that weren't completely relevant, so I removed the reference to the witches. So this is now a really concise, clear opening that is answering the question, has Shakespeare's intentions, and is a really strong beginning.

On now to the first paragraph of their answer. Now, obviously in the introduction you don't want to have any analysis, as that example didn't, whereas in the main body we're now shifting to look at how you can actually prove your argument via analysis. So that's where that particular skill really comes into play. So let's have a read and see what our person has written:

"In Act 1, Scene 5, we see Lady Macbeth's strong will as she realizes in order to be powerful, she needs to get rid of her femininity when she says, 'Unsex me here,' highlighting her commitment. The imperative verb 'unsex' suggests she wants herself to become a man due to her desperation of wanting power instead of loving Macbeth. The Jacobean audience could argue Lady Macbeth is the reason for their inevitable fate, as Lady Macbeth saying things like 'look like the innocent flower but be the serpent under it' changed Macbeth's mind into only wanting more power, which is shown when he kills King Duncan, Banquo, and Macduff's family. It also results in him left in guilt: 'what has been done is done' before his monologue is cut off as a consequence, which a religious audience would see as a consequence from God. However, in the play, Shakespeare uses the supernatural theme of the witches to not only control Macbeth's mind, but Lady Macbeth's mind also. Perhaps he was subtly suggesting it was an illusion created that led to his own downfall."

We've again got a lot of potential in this opening paragraph. I really like the focus on analysis with talking about the imperative verb of "unsex." I really like the really quite complex and high-level ideas of Lady Macbeth being the reason for their fate. Also linking back with that context to how the audience would respond to their actions—that is all really good. And again, it comes back to Shakespeare's intentions—again, all really good. So the key strength here is the way that it is structured, with a clear opening topic sentence, a shift to analysis, a shift to how the audience would react with some context, and then a shift to Shakespeare's intentions. That is all great.

The main area of how this needs to improve is in its focus on the question. Let us not forget the question was: "How is Lady Macbeth's and Macbeth's relationship presented?" So that opening topic sentence of "Lady Macbeth's strong will as she realizes she needs to be more powerful, she needs to get rid of her femininity"—all true, all not relevant to the question. Similarly, when we are told that Lady Macbeth is the reason for their inevitable fate—arguably true, but also arguably not clearly relevant to the question. Similarly, when we're told that his monologue is cut off and the religious audience would see that as a consequence from God—great idea, not clearly relevant to the question. Then, of course, we have Shakespeare's intentions of him using the supernatural theme of the witches—not relevant enough to the question.

So, what this student needed to do was essentially be hyper-focused on the question and have all of this structure, but always centered around looking at their relationship. That's the biggest area of how this could be improved. And I know from my time as an examiner, this is another really common thing that students do and all of you out there need to be paying close attention to in your work, because the exam board knows that you've got a huge amount of knowledge on this text. So they're really testing how well you can take all of that information and only pull out the really important bits that are the most directly relevant to the question that you've got, and also, of course, directly relevant to the introduction you set up in the beginning as well.

The next big area of how I think this could be improved is with its analysis. We have a nice little touch with the imperative, but otherwise there isn't really any language or structural analysis in this paragraph. And for most exam boards, analysis—the reason I place so much emphasis on it—is because that is what is required at the highest level. I'll be honest: you don't have to analyze to get a Grade 5 or a Grade 6, even a little bit of a Grade 7. But for the Grade 8 and the Grade 9, oh yes, you need to analyze. It has to be analysis. And if you're not sure what I mean by "what is analysis," make sure you have a look at my video on that.

So, with all of that in mind, with the need to improve the focus and improve the analysis, let me show you how I rewrote this paragraph:

"In Act 1, Scene 7, we see the unnatural gender and power dynamics of their relationship, as Lady Macbeth seeks to convince Macbeth to kill King Duncan by talking about what she would do for him: while a baby was 'smiling in my face,' she would have 'plucked my nipple from his boneless gums and dashed the brains out.' This imagery would be horrific to the Jacobean audience. Firstly, because of the gruesome juxtaposition between the symbolism of innocence and vulnerability in the image of a smiling baby against the graphic violence of the murder. The dynamic verbs 'dashed' and 'plucked' connote great force and energy, thereby suggesting an eager willingness to murder the baby and highlighting how far she would go for their relationship. Secondly, Lady Macbeth being willing to do this subverts gender expectations of the time. The primary role of women in society was as wives and mothers; therefore, her willingness to kill a baby would be viewed by the audience as an unnatural subversion of her gender. When this combines with her intention to convince Macbeth to commit regicide, Shakespeare shapes Macbeth's relationship with Lady Macbeth into an evil and corrupting influence on him."

So, you can see it is all focused on answering the question: that is what I said in my introduction I was going to talk about. I then provide a quote. I talk about the imagery, I talk about the juxtaposition, the symbolism, the graphic violence, the dynamic verbs—so there is a lot of analysis going on. I also link that back to some context and bring that all back together to what it's saying about Macbeth's relationship with Lady Macbeth. So it is all brought to being focused on answering the question, and there is analysis in there.

That's the key difference between this version and the version that the student originally wrote. Everything in this paragraph is really focused on answering the question with some clear analysis to prove the idea that I've come up with.

Now, in this version, I picked new quotes—I chose a different quote to what our student had originally. However, I've also written a version where I kept the "look like the innocent flower, but be the serpent under 't," so I can also show you how we could have kept those quotes and still made it work as being more relevant. So, here's the second version of the first paragraph:

"Lady Macbeth repeatedly manipulates Macbeth. For example, when she tells him to 'look like the innocent flower, but be the serpent under ’t.' Firstly, the use of imperative 'look' highlights her power over Macbeth, which would again be viewed by the audience as an unnatural gender and power dynamic, as women were supposed to be subservient to men. Additionally, the symbolism of 'flower' is of a more feminine beauty and is therefore an emasculating image to compare Macbeth to. All of this combines to present their relationship as unnatural as the gender roles appear to be reversed. Secondly, by presenting Lady Macbeth as manipulative, Shakespeare is able to raise the question of the role that their relationship has played in Macbeth's immoral actions. For example, the biblical allusion to a 'serpent' connotes evil and betrayal, referencing the serpent that betrayed Adam and Eve, foreshadowing the evil act of betrayal that Macbeth will later commit by killing King Duncan. As it is Lady Macbeth's command for Macbeth to be the serpent, the audience may therefore view her relationship as directly corrupting him and turning him towards evil. This would also fit with the allusion by making Lady Macbeth feel like a type of Eve, and the audience would therefore view her behavior as playing a key role in Macbeth's downfall, just as the biblical Eve did for Adam."

Now, I kept this version a lot more similar to the student's original version and the ideas that they have, and you can see that it absolutely was possible to make their ideas really relevant and focused onto the question, and have that analysis as well. Again, you know it's analysis because I'm talking about the techniques—I'm not just naming them, I'm actually talking about their effect: the effect of the imperative, the effect of the symbolism. I also have a lot in this version on Shakespeare's intentions as well as our audience's response to it as well. So it's got that similar structure: having a clear topic sentence followed by analysis, followed by audience reaction and Shakespeare's intentions; but the analysis is a little bit more detailed, and everything is really focused into being about their relationship. So even though I talk about Lady Macbeth's gender subversion on its own, I then link that back to what that tells us about their relationship.

Back to the student's response now. As you would expect, it's the same person writing it, so they continue in the same kind of style:

"In Act 4, Scene 1, we see the witches' control of Macbeth as he comes back to them asking for questions. In return, he gets told to keep an eye on Macduff, which results in Macduff's reaction of, 'Oh, horror! Oh, horror!' The repetition of 'horror' and exclamation marks suggests he is in immediate regret for not protecting his family. In contrast to Macbeth, where his ambition is more important, a Jacobean audience would feel sympathy to Macduff as realizing a family member is gone is horrifying, but would also rage at Macbeth for doing an evil act, wanting him to die, which Shakespeare fulfills. Shakespeare also presents Macbeth and Lady Macbeth's relationship as uncaring as committing regicide.

In Act 5, Lady Macbeth's trauma of the guilt she is covered in results in her moral decline as she says, 'I deserve to die.' Shakespeare uses the word 'I' to highlight how Lady Macbeth was the problem all along. As a result of her death, Macbeth responds with, 'She should have died hereafter,' which suggests he thinks it's inconvenient rather than bad news. Even though the audience may hate Lady Macbeth for the terror she planned, they could hate Macbeth more as this showed he was more focused on killing Macduff."

So, the strengths of this one: again, talking about Shakespeare's intentions, talking about how our audience would respond. We've got a little bit of analysis in there with the repetition and the exclamation marks—very promising stuff. Unfortunately, too much of it isn't focused on the question, and that is the biggest area of how it needs to improve.

Keeping absolutely everything that you say focused on the question is the key to getting into the very highest marks. And so this one has so much potential, but it's not driving that focus enough onto the question and therefore not demonstrating enough of that keen understanding.

Rather than me writing out for you another chunk of that essay, I want to hand things over to you this time. So what you can see here is the introduction from the very beginning, and I've highlighted the second round of ideas that need to be explored in this second part of the answer. Now, remember the main issue with our student's response: the structure was great, but it wasn't focused enough on the question. So, I hand it over to the rest of you:

How would you write a paragraph with that argument that's clearly focused on the question?
What quotes would you talk about?
What analysis would you do of those quotes in order to support those ideas?
And how would you explain Shakespeare's intention of exploring the corrupting power of ambition in more detail?

Comment below with your version of that paragraph; I will comment and give you some feedback on what you have written!

One thing, though, I want to criticize about my own improved version is that, looking back at this introduction, I can again see areas where I lost sight of what I said in the beginning I was going to talk about and then what I talked about in my main paragraphs. For example, in my main paragraphs, I don't talk about breaking the Divine Right of Kings in any kind of detail, and so actually that comment in the introduction goes undeveloped. Secondly, I say down here that Shakespeare is able to heighten the audience's disapproval of Macbeth's regicide, and so again, I didn't really explicitly, clearly comment on that in my improved version of the paragraphs, and so I've left something from my introduction undeveloped. That's how easy it is to do, and to lose sight of what you said in your introduction! So what you can do as well, if you really fancy showing off, is improve my version of the paragraph even further by getting in there the comment on the Divine Right of Kings and the audience's disapproval of Macbeth's regicide.

Now, in terms of what mark this essay would get, I've got here a chunk of the Eduqas mark scheme that I think this piece fits into. And there's a huge pinch of salt that we have to take my comments here with. First of all is that English literature is notoriously difficult to mark because it's such a subjective subject, and there's been data that shows—I think it was something like there's a 50% chance of English literature essays being marked inaccurately because of a whole host of different reasons.

We've got here Level 3 and Level 4:

Obviously, one of my biggest areas of feedback for this essay was the lack of focus on the question. So that Level 4 description of a "sustained focus on the task"—it's not going to have; the Level 3 one of a "focus on the task"—it's also not really going to have. So that's our big one that's hurting us in the marks here.
On the other hand, the next point you've got: "convey ideas with considerable coherence and use an appropriate register"—our student does do that to a Level 4 style.
"Use a thoughtful approach to the task"—absolutely, it's a thoughtful approach to the task.
"Show a secure understanding of key aspects of the text with considerable engagement"—now, this is where I think teachers would have a big discussion battling it out, because of some inaccuracies in there. Would they call it a "secure understanding," or would they say it "shows an understanding"? I'm going to imagine worst-case scenario and say they would decide it shows an understanding of key aspects of the text.
And then on the final bullet point, they're again going to be more in Level 3 because of supporting and justifying their relationships with "appropriate direct reference to the text," compared to "well-chosen direct reference," because the quotes sometimes weren't focused enough on the question. I don't think you can call them "well-chosen direct references."

So overall, our essay is mainly a Level 3 with a little bit of Level 4. It's important to note that even if you're not doing Eduqas, this criteria is essentially identical to OCR, AQA, everybody else—it's just worded slightly differently.

You can also see on the other side, you've got this difference between "discuss and increasingly analyze writer's use of language, structure, and form" versus "comment on and begin to analyze." And this essay definitely fits more into that category of beginning to analyze and largely commenting on.

So overall, what grade would we be looking at? Well, the answer to that question varies heavily depending on what year of grade boundaries you're looking at, and how big of a chunk Macbeth is compared to the GCSE as a whole, and how somebody performed in the rest of the GCSE, blah blah blah blah. There are a bunch of asterisks on all of this! However, from this overall, when I've looked at the last Eduqas grade boundaries pre-pandemic and imagined that this person would perform exactly to the same level across everything they did in the course, you'd be looking at around a high Grade 5, low Grade 6 for this particular essay.

Getting yourself to the higher levels of the mark scheme is essentially about doing what I've said in this video:

Having a sustained focus on the task, as you can see there—that clear-cut focus on the question the whole way through makes a huge difference.
You also want to make sure that you're always showing that really secure and accurate understanding, with no sort of little inaccuracies or misconceptions, because that's going to help you on your way to having a more perceptive understanding. When you can combine the point of talking about characters as tools and do it really accurately and with a focus on the question, suddenly "perceptive" is going to become a lot more likely.
You also want to make sure, linked to that focus on the question, that you've got those quotes that are really relevant to the task, to your idea, and to the question—that's what they mean by the "pertinent direct references."
And finally, make sure you are analyzing!

Transforming a Real Essay from Grade 5 to Grade 9