Revision Library

revisionlibrary.co.uk

11+ · English - Non-Fiction Writing (Persuasive, Discursive, Letter and Report Skills)

EP.E78 Persuasive and Discursive Writing Focus Set 2

GL ASSESSMENT / CSSE 11+ Entrance English (GL Assessment / CSSE style) · Calculators not allowed · about 250 minutes

Total Marks

Name: _______________________________ Date: ____ / ____ / ______

Answer ALL questions. Show all your working.

Persuasive writers use a small set of recognisable techniques. Identify which technique each short example below demonstrates: a rhetorical question, the rule of three, direct address, or emotive language.

(a)Wouldn't every child benefit from a warm, healthy meal at lunchtime?(1)

(b)The new plan is cheap, effective and long overdue.(1)

(c)You have the chance to make a real difference today.(1)

(d)It would be an utter disgrace to let this beautiful old building crumble into ruin.(1)

(Total for Question 1 is 4 marks)

Discursive writers use connectives to link their ideas. Identify whether each connective below is typically used to add a similar point, or to introduce a contrasting point.

(a)Furthermore(1)

(b)Nevertheless(1)

(c)In addition(1)

(d)By contrast(1)

(Total for Question 2 is 4 marks)

Formal writing avoids contractions, slang, vague quantifiers and personal opinion. Rewrite each informal sentence below, about feedback on the after-school club timetable, in a formal, impersonal register, keeping the same meaning.

(a)Honestly, hardly anyone signed up for the new coding club, it's a bit rubbish.(1)

(b)Kids reckon the new timetable clashes with football practice, no joke.(1)

(c)I dunno, but loads of parents weren't happy about the short notice.(1)

(d)The club leaders didn't sort out a proper register, to be fair.(1)

(Total for Question 3 is 4 marks)

Timed task: you have 5 minutes. Plan (do NOT write in full) a persuasive letter to Mrs Chen, the manager of Greenfield Stores, persuading her to remove unnecessary plastic packaging from the fruit and vegetable aisle. Use bullet points only, not full sentences.

Note: your main argument in one line; two supporting reasons or pieces of evidence; one objection Mrs Chen might raise, and a brief answer to it; a memorable closing line or call to action.

(Total for Question 4 is 6 marks)

Timed task: you have 5 minutes. Plan (do NOT write in full) a discursive (balanced-argument) essay on the question: 'Should all pupils be required to learn to swim before leaving primary school?' Use bullet points only, not full sentences.

Note: one viewpoint in favour, with a specific reason or piece of evidence; one contrasting viewpoint, with a specific reason or piece of evidence; a connective you will use to link the two viewpoints; a balanced concluding idea (not a one-sided opinion).

(Total for Question 5 is 6 marks)

Timed task: you have 5 minutes. Plan (do NOT write in full) a formal report to your Headteacher recommending changes to after-school clubs, based on a survey of Year 6 opinions. Use bullet points only, not full sentences.

Note: a heading or sub-heading you will use; two findings from the survey, each with a specific detail or statistic; one clear recommendation, using formal language (for example 'it is recommended that'); how you will keep the register formal and impersonal (for example, avoiding 'I think').

(Total for Question 6 is 6 marks)

Write a letter to Councillor Priya Nair, the leader of your local council, persuading her to build a new skate park on the disused land behind the leisure centre instead of leaving it empty (250-350 words, about 20-25 minutes).

PLANNING FRAME (not marked, but use it before you write): your main argument and at least two supporting reasons or pieces of evidence; a counter-argument the councillor might raise (for example cost or noise) and how you will answer it; at least one persuasive technique you plan to use (for example a rhetorical question or the rule of three); a memorable closing line.

Use appropriate letter conventions (for example an address and date, a suitable greeting and sign-off).

(Total for Question 7 is 18 marks)

Write a speech to be delivered in assembly, persuading your fellow pupils to take part in a new weekly 'Silent Reading Friday' session during form time (250-350 words, about 20-25 minutes).

PLANNING FRAME (not marked, but use it before you write): your main argument and at least two supporting reasons or pieces of evidence; acknowledge a reason pupils might not want to take part, and plan how you will answer this; at least one persuasive technique you plan to use; a memorable opening and closing line.

Use appropriate speech conventions (for example direct address to your audience).

(Total for Question 8 is 18 marks)

Write a balanced discussion of the question: should professional footballers be paid the same as nurses and teachers (250-350 words, about 20-25 minutes)? You must consider more than one point of view before giving your own opinion.

PLANNING FRAME (not marked, but use it before you write): at least one argument in favour of the current pay gap; at least one argument against it; a discourse marker to signal each shift in viewpoint (for example 'however', 'on the other hand'); your own considered conclusion.

Focus on fairness: give genuine weight to both sides before you reach your own view.

(Total for Question 9 is 18 marks)

Write a balanced discussion of the question: should the UK stop changing the clocks twice a year and keep the same time all year round (250-350 words, about 20-25 minutes)? You must consider more than one point of view before giving your own opinion.

PLANNING FRAME (not marked, but use it before you write): at least one argument in favour of keeping the clock changes; at least one argument against them; a discourse marker to signal each shift in viewpoint; your own considered conclusion.

Focus on fairness: give genuine weight to both sides before you reach your own view.

(Total for Question 10 is 18 marks)

Write a report to your class teacher, Mr Whitfield, evaluating the success of this year's Year 6 residential trip to Foxglove Outdoor Centre and recommending one change for next year (250-350 words, about 20-25 minutes). You may invent plausible details about what happened on the trip.

PLANNING FRAME (not marked, but use it before you write): a heading and at least one sub-heading (for example 'What Went Well' and 'Recommendation'); at least two specific pieces of evidence about the trip's success or shortcomings (for example a comment on a particular activity, or the level of staff supervision); one clear recommendation for next year, with a reason; how you will keep your register formal and impersonal throughout.

Use a formal, impersonal register; do not use contractions or personal opinion phrases such as 'I think'.

(Total for Question 11 is 18 marks)

You surveyed 50 pupils about a proposed breakfast club. The results were: 30 pupils (60%) said they would attend if it started 15 minutes earlier than currently planned; 10 pupils (20%) said the cost put them off attending; the remaining 10 pupils (20%) were not interested regardless. Write a formal report to your Headteacher, Mrs Adeyemi, presenting these findings and making one clear recommendation (250-350 words, about 20-25 minutes).

PLANNING FRAME (not marked, but use it before you write): a heading and at least one sub-heading (for example 'Findings' and 'Recommendation'); how you will present the survey results clearly and accurately; one recommendation that follows logically from the findings; how you will keep your register formal and impersonal throughout.

Use a formal, impersonal register; do not use contractions or personal opinion phrases such as 'I think'.

(Total for Question 12 is 18 marks)

Write a letter to Mr Ahmed, the editor of your local newspaper, persuading readers to support a campaign against cars idling with their engines running outside the school gates (250-350 words, about 20-25 minutes).

PLANNING FRAME (not marked, but use it before you write): your main argument and at least two supporting reasons or pieces of evidence; a counter-argument (for example that idling is only for a short time, or that it is a driver's own choice) and how you will answer it; at least one persuasive technique you plan to use; a memorable closing line.

Use appropriate letter conventions (for example an address and date, a suitable greeting and sign-off).

(Total for Question 13 is 18 marks)

You surveyed 70 pupils about a proposed change to school PE kit: allowing plain black trainers instead of the current all-white trainers. 49 pupils (70%) were in favour and 21 pupils (30%) were against. Write a formal report to your Headteacher, Mrs Adeyemi, that first presents both sides of the survey findings in a genuinely balanced way, before ending with a clearly and persuasively worded recommendation (350-450 words, about 30-35 minutes).

PLANNING FRAME (not marked, but use it before you write): a heading and sub-headings (for example 'Findings' and 'Recommendation'); at least one specific reason given by pupils in favour, and at least one specific reason given by pupils against, presented with genuine balance; a clear final recommendation that follows from the findings, using persuasive language appropriate to a formal recommendation (for example a confident, justified final sentence); how you will keep the findings section impersonal while making the recommendation section more persuasive in tone.

This task asks you to control two registers within one document: balanced and impersonal for the findings, then confident and persuasive for the recommendation.

(Total for Question 14 is 21 marks)

Write a discursive essay considering the question: should zoos exist in the 21st century (350-450 words, about 30-35 minutes)? You must present at least three distinct perspectives (for example those of conservation organisations, animal welfare campaigners, and local communities who rely on zoos for jobs and tourism), not simply two opposing sides, before reaching your own reasoned conclusion in your final paragraph.

PLANNING FRAME (not marked, but use it before you write): the conservation perspective, with a specific reason or piece of evidence; the animal welfare perspective, with a specific reason or piece of evidence; the local community/economic perspective, with a specific reason or piece of evidence; discourse markers to move between all three; your own considered, personal conclusion.

This task asks you to control more than a simple two-sided balance: give genuine, specific weight to three different perspectives before reaching your own view.

(Total for Question 15 is 21 marks)

Mark scheme · EP.E78 Persuasive and Discursive Writing Focus Set 2

Question 1

(a) B1 rhetorical question (oe: a question asked for effect, not to get a genuine answer) cao
(a) Answer: rhetorical question
(b) B1 rule of three (oe: three words or phrases grouped together for impact) cao
(b) Answer: rule of three
(c) B1 direct address (oe: speaks straight to the reader using 'you'/'your') cao
(c) Answer: direct address
(d) B1 emotive language (oe: word choices designed to make the reader feel a strong emotion, for example 'disgrace', 'crumble into ruin') cao
(d) Answer: emotive language

Question 2

(a) B1 adds a similar point (oe: continues or builds on the previous idea) cao
(a) Answer: adds a similar point
(b) B1 introduces a contrasting point (oe: signals a shift to an opposing or different idea) cao
(b) Answer: introduces a contrasting point
(c) B1 adds a similar point (oe: continues or builds on the previous idea) cao
(c) Answer: adds a similar point
(d) B1 introduces a contrasting point (oe: signals a shift to an opposing or different idea) cao
(d) Answer: introduces a contrasting point

Question 3

(a) B1 removes the informal filler ('honestly'), the contraction ('it's') and the slang ('rubbish'); uses formal, objective vocabulary oe: accept any grammatically correct rewrite that removes contractions/slang/fillers and keeps the original meaning in a formal, impersonal register
(a) Answer: Very few pupils registered for the new coding club, suggesting that interest was limited.
(b) B1 removes the informal noun ('kids'), the informal verb ('reckon') and the informal aside ('no joke'); uses formal, objective vocabulary oe: accept any grammatically correct rewrite that removes informal vocabulary while keeping the original meaning
(b) Answer: Pupils have reported that the revised timetable conflicts with football practice.
(c) B1 removes the first-person hedge ('I dunno'), the contraction ('weren't') and the vague quantifier ('loads of'); uses formal, objective vocabulary oe: accept any grammatically correct rewrite that removes contractions, hedging and vague quantifiers while keeping the original meaning
(c) Answer: A significant number of parents expressed dissatisfaction with the short notice given.
(d) B1 removes the contraction ('didn't'), the informal phrasal verb ('sort out') and the informal aside ('to be fair'); uses formal, objective vocabulary oe: accept any grammatically correct rewrite that removes contractions and informal phrasing while keeping the original meaning
(d) Answer: The club leaders did not maintain an accurate attendance register.

Question 4

Quality of plan (structure and ideas) (AO5)
- Level 3 (5-6): A well-structured plan with a clear main argument, at least two specific supporting reasons or pieces of evidence, a plausible objection that is briefly answered, and a memorable closing idea. Ideas are specific and relevant throughout.
- Level 2 (3-4): A clear plan with a main argument and at least one supporting reason, in a logical order. Some specific detail included, but the objection or the closing idea may be missing or underdeveloped.
- Level 1 (1-2): A basic plan with a main argument but little supporting detail, no clear objection considered, and no closing idea noted.
- Level 0 (0): Nothing worthy of credit.

Question 5

Quality of plan (structure and balance) (AO5)
- Level 3 (5-6): A well-structured plan with a specific viewpoint in favour and a specific contrasting viewpoint, each with a relevant reason or piece of evidence, a connective identified, and a genuinely balanced concluding idea.
- Level 2 (3-4): A clear plan with both viewpoints noted in a logical order, some specific detail, but the connective or the balanced conclusion may be missing or underdeveloped.
- Level 1 (1-2): A basic plan with one viewpoint noted but little sense of a genuine contrast or a balanced conclusion.
- Level 0 (0): Nothing worthy of credit.

Question 6

Quality of plan (structure and register) (AO5)
- Level 3 (5-6): A well-structured plan with a specific heading/sub-heading idea, two findings each supported by a specific detail or statistic, one clearly worded recommendation using formal language, and a clear note on keeping the register formal and impersonal.
- Level 2 (3-4): A clear plan with a heading idea and at least one finding with some detail, and a recommendation noted, but the register note or a finding may be underdeveloped.
- Level 1 (1-2): A basic plan with a general idea for the report but little specific detail, no clear recommendation and no note on register.
- Level 0 (0): Nothing worthy of credit.

Question 7

Content and organisation (AO5)
- Level 4 (10-12): A sophisticated, sustained argument that manages the reader throughout, using precise, ambitious vocabulary, a confident range of persuasive techniques (for example rhetorical question, rule of three, direct address) used for deliberate effect, and a considered, well-answered counter-argument.
- Level 3 (7-9): A well-organised argument with a clear main position, relevant supporting reasons, and at least one deliberate persuasive technique used for effect. Appropriate letter conventions used correctly.
- Level 2 (4-6): A clear argument with a main position and some supporting reasons, using some appropriate vocabulary, but limited use of persuasive technique or letter conventions.
- Level 1 (1-3): A simple statement of opinion with limited supporting reasons; little use of persuasive technique or appropriate letter form.
- Level 0 (0): Nothing worthy of credit.
Technical accuracy (AO6)
- Level 3 (5-6): Consistently accurate spelling, punctuation and grammar throughout, including on ambitious vocabulary and more complex sentence structures; punctuation used precisely for effect.
- Level 2 (3-4): Mostly accurate spelling, punctuation and grammar; occasional errors on more ambitious vocabulary or complex sentences, but meaning is never lost.
- Level 1 (1-2): Frequent errors in spelling, punctuation and/or grammar; simple sentence structures used almost throughout.
- Level 0 (0): Nothing worthy of credit.

Question 8

Content and organisation (AO5)
- Level 4 (10-12): A sophisticated, sustained argument that manages the reader throughout, using precise, ambitious vocabulary, a confident range of persuasive techniques (for example rhetorical question, rule of three, direct address) used for deliberate effect, and a considered, well-answered counter-argument.
- Level 3 (7-9): A well-organised argument with a clear main position, relevant supporting reasons, and at least one deliberate persuasive technique used for effect. Appropriate speech conventions used correctly.
- Level 2 (4-6): A clear argument with a main position and some supporting reasons, using some appropriate vocabulary, but limited use of persuasive technique or speech conventions.
- Level 1 (1-3): A simple statement of opinion with limited supporting reasons; little use of persuasive technique or appropriate speech form.
- Level 0 (0): Nothing worthy of credit.
Technical accuracy (AO6)
- Level 3 (5-6): Consistently accurate spelling, punctuation and grammar throughout, including on ambitious vocabulary and more complex sentence structures; punctuation used precisely for effect.
- Level 2 (3-4): Mostly accurate spelling, punctuation and grammar; occasional errors on more ambitious vocabulary or complex sentences, but meaning is never lost.
- Level 1 (1-2): Frequent errors in spelling, punctuation and/or grammar; simple sentence structures used almost throughout.
- Level 0 (0): Nothing worthy of credit.

Question 9

Content and organisation (balance) (AO5)
- Level 4 (10-12): A sophisticated, well-balanced discussion that explores both sides of the argument with genuine even-handedness, using precise vocabulary, a confident range of discourse markers to signpost shifts in viewpoint, and a well-reasoned, independent conclusion that clearly weighs the evidence on each side.
- Level 3 (7-9): A well-organised discussion that considers both sides of the argument with reasonable balance, using appropriate discourse markers to signal each viewpoint and a clear final conclusion.
- Level 2 (4-6): A discussion that considers more than one viewpoint, but coverage may be uneven or one side underdeveloped; some appropriate vocabulary and connectives used.
- Level 1 (1-3): A largely one-sided discussion with limited genuine engagement with an opposing viewpoint; simple vocabulary and sentence structures; conclusion may simply restate one side.
- Level 0 (0): Nothing worthy of credit.
Technical accuracy (AO6)
- Level 3 (5-6): Consistently accurate spelling, punctuation and grammar throughout, including on ambitious vocabulary and more complex sentence structures; punctuation used precisely for effect.
- Level 2 (3-4): Mostly accurate spelling, punctuation and grammar; occasional errors on more ambitious vocabulary or complex sentences, but meaning is never lost.
- Level 1 (1-2): Frequent errors in spelling, punctuation and/or grammar; simple sentence structures used almost throughout.
- Level 0 (0): Nothing worthy of credit.

Question 10

Content and organisation (balance) (AO5)
- Level 4 (10-12): A sophisticated, well-balanced discussion that explores both sides of the argument with genuine even-handedness, using precise vocabulary, a confident range of discourse markers to signpost shifts in viewpoint, and a well-reasoned, independent conclusion that clearly weighs the evidence on each side.
- Level 3 (7-9): A well-organised discussion that considers both sides of the argument with reasonable balance, using appropriate discourse markers to signal each viewpoint and a clear final conclusion.
- Level 2 (4-6): A discussion that considers more than one viewpoint, but coverage may be uneven or one side underdeveloped; some appropriate vocabulary and connectives used.
- Level 1 (1-3): A largely one-sided discussion with limited genuine engagement with an opposing viewpoint; simple vocabulary and sentence structures; conclusion may simply restate one side.
- Level 0 (0): Nothing worthy of credit.
Technical accuracy (AO6)
- Level 3 (5-6): Consistently accurate spelling, punctuation and grammar throughout, including on ambitious vocabulary and more complex sentence structures; punctuation used precisely for effect.
- Level 2 (3-4): Mostly accurate spelling, punctuation and grammar; occasional errors on more ambitious vocabulary or complex sentences, but meaning is never lost.
- Level 1 (1-2): Frequent errors in spelling, punctuation and/or grammar; simple sentence structures used almost throughout.
- Level 0 (0): Nothing worthy of credit.

Question 11

Content and organisation (report structure and register) (AO5)
- Level 4 (10-12): A sophisticated, clearly structured report that uses headings/sub-headings and a genuinely impersonal, formal register throughout; findings are presented precisely, including specific detail or data, and the recommendation is clearly justified and directly linked to the findings.
- Level 3 (7-9): A well-organised report with headings/sub-headings and reference to specific findings, in a consistently formal register; a clear recommendation is given, connected to the findings.
- Level 2 (4-6): A report with some structure (for example a heading, or a separate findings section) and some formal register, but this may lapse into a more personal or informal tone in places; a recommendation is given but only loosely connected to the findings.
- Level 1 (1-3): A largely unstructured account with little use of headings or formal register; findings and/or recommendation may be vague or missing.
- Level 0 (0): Nothing worthy of credit.
Technical accuracy (AO6)
- Level 3 (5-6): Consistently accurate spelling, punctuation and grammar throughout, including on ambitious vocabulary and more complex sentence structures; punctuation used precisely for effect.
- Level 2 (3-4): Mostly accurate spelling, punctuation and grammar; occasional errors on more ambitious vocabulary or complex sentences, but meaning is never lost.
- Level 1 (1-2): Frequent errors in spelling, punctuation and/or grammar; simple sentence structures used almost throughout.
- Level 0 (0): Nothing worthy of credit.

Question 12

Content and organisation (report structure and register) (AO5)
- Level 4 (10-12): A sophisticated, clearly structured report that uses headings/sub-headings and a genuinely impersonal, formal register throughout; findings are presented precisely, including specific detail or data, and the recommendation is clearly justified and directly linked to the findings.
- Level 3 (7-9): A well-organised report with headings/sub-headings and reference to specific findings, in a consistently formal register; a clear recommendation is given, connected to the findings.
- Level 2 (4-6): A report with some structure (for example a heading, or a separate findings section) and some formal register, but this may lapse into a more personal or informal tone in places; a recommendation is given but only loosely connected to the findings.
- Level 1 (1-3): A largely unstructured account with little use of headings or formal register; findings and/or recommendation may be vague or missing.
- Level 0 (0): Nothing worthy of credit.
Technical accuracy (AO6)
- Level 3 (5-6): Consistently accurate spelling, punctuation and grammar throughout, including on ambitious vocabulary and more complex sentence structures; punctuation used precisely for effect.
- Level 2 (3-4): Mostly accurate spelling, punctuation and grammar; occasional errors on more ambitious vocabulary or complex sentences, but meaning is never lost.
- Level 1 (1-2): Frequent errors in spelling, punctuation and/or grammar; simple sentence structures used almost throughout.
- Level 0 (0): Nothing worthy of credit.

Question 13

Content and organisation (AO5)
- Level 4 (10-12): A sophisticated, sustained argument that manages the reader throughout, using precise, ambitious vocabulary, a confident range of persuasive techniques (for example rhetorical question, rule of three, direct address) used for deliberate effect, and a considered, well-answered counter-argument.
- Level 3 (7-9): A well-organised argument with a clear main position, relevant supporting reasons, and at least one deliberate persuasive technique used for effect. Appropriate letter conventions used correctly.
- Level 2 (4-6): A clear argument with a main position and some supporting reasons, using some appropriate vocabulary, but limited use of persuasive technique or letter conventions.
- Level 1 (1-3): A simple statement of opinion with limited supporting reasons; little use of persuasive technique or appropriate letter form.
- Level 0 (0): Nothing worthy of credit.
Technical accuracy (AO6)
- Level 3 (5-6): Consistently accurate spelling, punctuation and grammar throughout, including on ambitious vocabulary and more complex sentence structures; punctuation used precisely for effect.
- Level 2 (3-4): Mostly accurate spelling, punctuation and grammar; occasional errors on more ambitious vocabulary or complex sentences, but meaning is never lost.
- Level 1 (1-2): Frequent errors in spelling, punctuation and/or grammar; simple sentence structures used almost throughout.
- Level 0 (0): Nothing worthy of credit.

Question 14

Content and organisation (balanced report with persuasive recommendation) (AO5)
- Level 4 (12-14): A sophisticated report combining genuinely balanced, impersonal findings, with accurate reference to both percentages and reasons, with a confidently and persuasively worded recommendation that follows logically from the findings, controlling the shift in register with real skill.
- Level 3 (8-11): A well-organised report with reasonably balanced findings referencing the given data and a clear, persuasively worded recommendation connected to the findings.
- Level 2 (4-7): A report that presents findings with some reference to the data, but balance may be uneven, or the recommendation may only be loosely persuasive or loosely connected to the findings.
- Level 1 (1-3): A largely unstructured account with little balance in the findings and a vague or missing recommendation.
- Level 0 (0): Nothing worthy of credit.
Technical accuracy (AO6)
- Level 3 (6-7): Consistently accurate spelling, punctuation and grammar throughout, including on ambitious vocabulary and more complex sentence structures, and across any shift in register the task requires; punctuation used precisely for effect.
- Level 2 (3-5): Mostly accurate spelling, punctuation and grammar; occasional errors on more ambitious vocabulary or complex sentences, but meaning is never lost.
- Level 1 (1-2): Frequent errors in spelling, punctuation and/or grammar; simple sentence structures used almost throughout.
- Level 0 (0): Nothing worthy of credit.

Question 15

Content and organisation (balance across three perspectives) (AO5)
- Level 4 (12-14): A sophisticated discussion that gives genuine, specific weight to at least three distinct perspectives, using precise vocabulary, a confident range of discourse markers to manage the shifts between them, and a well-reasoned, independent personal conclusion that clearly weighs all three.
- Level 3 (8-11): A well-organised discussion that considers at least three perspectives with reasonable balance, using appropriate discourse markers, and a clear personal conclusion.
- Level 2 (4-7): A discussion that considers more than one perspective, but may only fully develop two of the three, or coverage may be uneven; some appropriate vocabulary and connectives.
- Level 1 (1-3): A largely one-sided or two-sided discussion with little genuine engagement with a third perspective; simple vocabulary; conclusion may simply restate one side.
- Level 0 (0): Nothing worthy of credit.
Technical accuracy (AO6)
- Level 3 (6-7): Consistently accurate spelling, punctuation and grammar throughout, including on ambitious vocabulary and more complex sentence structures, and across any shift in register the task requires; punctuation used precisely for effect.
- Level 2 (3-5): Mostly accurate spelling, punctuation and grammar; occasional errors on more ambitious vocabulary or complex sentences, but meaning is never lost.
- Level 1 (1-2): Frequent errors in spelling, punctuation and/or grammar; simple sentence structures used almost throughout.
- Level 0 (0): Nothing worthy of credit.

Persuasive and Discursive Writing Focus Set 2 - Worksheets, Questions and Revision