(+): Almost everyone knew to work with information given on visual stimulus.
(+) Stronger writers were able to inject personal flavour by adding good additional words/phrases that didn't distract them from the main writing. Examples include role model, skeptical, engrossed, convinced (though persuaded would be a better fit), enhanced. Quite a joy to read
(+): Students were largely cognisant of the need to include 6 content points. This has led to another challenge in which some students numbered their content points on the script, making it an awkward read - Have to tell them to stop doing that.

(-): Students who failed the script approached this as they would a compo - filling in the "missing gaps" with unncessary invented information, using dialogue. Some beat around the bush, which ironically led them to writing everything except the content points. Will give them another article (with annotations included on the question paper) so that they realise the importance of sticking to the content points.
(-): Many weak writers got 3 for Language, which suggested a slight improvement in their writing skills. Spelling and punctuation were not glaring issues this time round. To help them write better, I will give them sample compact SW essays and show them how writing effective short and punchy sentences enables them to fulfill the task requirements. Their stronger peers will be guided to use paragraphing because I think it's not only an effective way for them to structure their thinking, but also improve readability.

Next Steps
1) Weaker students to be given additional annotated practices and model essays. They have to acquire a feel of what a short and compelling SW writing looks like.
2) The entire class will write their second draft on SLS during class. Hopefully, with SALIS, they will gain greater clarity of what they have to do in order to score the topmost band for Language.