## **Learning Outcomes**

By the end of this revision article, you will be able to select the most relevant information from two unseen non-fiction texts (one 19th century and one modern) and synthesise it into a clear, comparative summary, using precise evidence and confident inferences to meet AO1 and AO3 on Paper 2.

## **AQA GCSE English Language 8700 Syllabus**

Paper 2 (1 hour 45 minutes, 80 marks) tests your ability to understand and compare two unseen non-fiction texts from different time periods, selecting evidence carefully and linking ideas across both sources.

- AO1: Identify and interpret explicit and implicit information and ideas; select and synthesise evidence from different texts
- AO3: Compare writers' ideas and perspectives, and how these are conveyed, across two or more texts
- Question 2 (8 marks, ~10 minutes): summarise similarities or differences using both sources — this is the key synthesis question
- Question 4 (16 marks, ~20 minutes): compare viewpoints and methods across both texts

## **Test Your Knowledge**

_Answer these without looking back at your notes first._

1. What does it mean to _synthesise_ information from two texts?
2. In Paper 2, which question most directly rewards synthesis (combining details from both sources)?
3. What is the difference between an explicit detail and an implicit idea?
4. Why is it risky to summarise each text separately in a comparison question?
5. What does AO3 expect you to do beyond spotting “similarities and differences”?

## **Introduction**

In Paper 2 you read two linked non-fiction texts: one from the 19th century and one from the 20th/21st century. Your job is not just to understand each text, but to _connect_ them. The highest-scoring answers feel like a conversation between the sources: you move back and forth, selecting details that match the question, and building a joined-up comparison.

> **Key Term: synthesise**
> Combine relevant information from both texts into a single, coherent comparison.
>
> **Key Term: inference**
> A logical conclusion drawn from evidence in the text, going beyond what is directly stated.
>
> **Key Term: perspective**
> A writer's viewpoint, attitude, or way of seeing an issue.

Synthesis is especially important in Question 2 (8 marks), where you summarise similarities/differences using details from _both_ sources. It also supports Question 4 (16 marks), where you compare viewpoints and methods across the whole texts.

## **What "selecting and synthesising" looks like in the exam**

Selecting means choosing only the details that answer the question. Synthesising means combining those chosen details into a single comparative point (rather than writing two mini-summaries).

A strong synthesis point usually follows this pattern:

- Make a comparison point (difference or similarity)
- Support it with a short quote or detail from Source A
- Support it with a short quote or detail from Source B
- Explain what this shows about the writers’ ideas/perspectives (often including an inference)

### **Worked Example 1.1**

**Task style:** “Summarise the differences between the writers’ attitudes to helping orphans.”

- Source A (19th-century letter) is shocked and morally driven: the writer is “_simply astonished_” and calls help a “_duty_”.
- Source B (modern diary) is saddened but resistant to personal responsibility: it is “_really sad_”, yet “_it shouldn’t be my job_”.

**Synthesised comparison sentence (model):**  
Both writers recognise the children’s suffering, but Source A presents charity as a moral obligation (“duty”), whereas Source B suggests responsibility lies with the state (“government should be providing”).

Why this works:

- It links both texts in one line of argument.
- It uses short, precise quotations.
- It moves beyond plot into _attitude_ and _responsibility_ (AO3).

### **Exam Warning**

If you write one paragraph on Source A and one on Source B, you cap your marks because you are not _linking_ the texts. Level 3 (5–6 marks) requires "secure synthesis of both texts" and Level 4 (7–8 marks) requires "perceptive synthesis and interpretation". You cannot reach these levels without joined-up comparisons. Note that Question 2 does not require language analysis (that is Question 3) — focus on _what_ is said and implied, not _how_ it is written.

## **A step-by-step method for Question 2 (AO1 synthesis)**

Question 2 rewards clear selection and summary. It is not a language analysis question, so keep your focus on _what_ is said and implied.

Use this quick method:

- Read the question and underline the focus (e.g. “differences”, “attitudes”, “experiences”)
- Skim both texts and highlight only details linked to that focus
- Pair up details: find a matching/contrasting detail in the other text
- Write 3-4 comparative points (quality beats quantity)
- Use brief evidence and explain the difference/similarity

### **Worked Example 2.1**

**Question style:** “Summarise the differences between the views in Source A and Source B about marriage.”

Source A (19th-century magazine) argues wives should be “_amenable_”, “_silent_”, and that “_The home is her sphere_”.  
Source B (21st-century article) insists marriage is “_a partnership of equals_” and domestic work should be “_shared evenly_”.

**Three synthesised points you could write:**

- Source A prioritises the husband’s comfort (“need not lift a finger”), while Source B prioritises fairness (“shared evenly”).
- Source A presents women’s role as fixed (“sphere”), whereas Source B presents roles as modern and changeable (“once considered”).
- Source A assumes male authority (“listen… be silent”), while Source B challenges gender assumptions (“Men are just as capable”).

Notice how each bullet:

- Stays on the question (views about marriage)
- Uses short evidence from both texts
- Makes a clear comparison (AO1 + AO3 overlap)

### **Revision Tip**

Before writing, create “pairs” in the margin: A detail + B detail. If you cannot pair it, it is probably not helping you synthesise.

## **Moving from explicit details to implicit ideas (AO1 inference)**

Top-band answers often include implicit comparisons: what can you _work out_ about the writers, their circumstances, or their assumptions.

To infer safely:

- Start from a clear detail
- Use cautious phrasing: “suggests”, “implies”, “indicates”
- Keep it anchored to the text (no wild guesses)

### **Worked Example 3.1**

From the orphanage extracts:

- Source A mentions “_investing our funds_” and speaks confidently about setting up an orphanage.
- Source B says “_even if I had money to give_”.

**Inference you can make:**  
Source A implies the writer is wealthy and socially positioned to act, while Source B implies limited personal resources and a more individualistic view of responsibility.

This supports synthesis because it explains _why_ their attitudes differ, not just _that_ they differ.

## **Comparing perspectives across time (AO3) without drifting into history**

You are expected to notice that one text is 19th century and one is modern, but you are not being marked on historical knowledge. Context should be used only when it clarifies perspective.

Useful AO3 comparison focuses:

- Responsibility (individual duty vs state support)
- Gender roles (traditional hierarchy vs equality)
- Tone towards social problems (shock vs resignation)
- Assumptions about society (fixed roles vs change)

### **Worked Example 4.1**

Using the marriage extracts:

Source A gives instructions for wives: “_she should_…”, “_she will_…”, creating a prescriptive, rule-based viewpoint.  
Source B uses modern generalisations: “_Today, it is common_…”, presenting equality as normal and expected.

**Synthesised AO3 point:**  
Source A conveys a traditional, male-centred perspective through certainty and instruction (“she should”), whereas Source B conveys a modern, egalitarian perspective by presenting shared roles as the social norm (“common”).

This is AO3 because you are comparing _perspectives_, not just listing content.

## **Summary**

Selecting and synthesising means choosing only question-relevant details, pairing them across sources, and writing joined-up comparisons showing explicit understanding and sensible inference. For AO1, prioritise clear summary with evidence; for AO3, compare perspectives and assumptions, moving between texts rather than treating them separately. Depth beats quantity: 3–4 well-developed comparative points will outscore a longer list of surface-level observations.

## **Key Point Checklist**

_Use this to self-check any synthesis answer before you move on._

- I underlined the key focus words in the question (e.g. differences, attitudes, experiences).
- I selected only details that directly match the focus.
- I paired evidence from Source A with evidence from Source B for each point.
- I wrote comparative sentences (not two separate mini-summaries).
- I used short quotations (single words/phrases) to support each point.
- I included at least one inference that is clearly rooted in the text.
- I compared perspectives (values, responsibility, assumptions), not just events.

## **Key Terms and Concepts**

- synthesis
- explicit
- implicit
- inference
- perspective
- viewpoint
- evidence
- comparative connective


Reading two non-fiction texts (19th and 21st century) - Selecting and synthesising information across texts