EuraStudy
Notes/Chinese (Mandarin)/The independent research project: Paper 3 Task 2
Notes · Chinese (Mandarin)UK · A-Levels

The independent research project: Paper 3 Task 2

This topic covers Task 2 of Paper 3 in the Pearson Edexcel 9CN0 specification: the presentation and discussion of the candidate's own independent research project, worth 42 marks - more than half of the speaking paper and 17.5 per cent of the whole A-Level, which makes it the single largest assessed task in the qualification after Paper 1's listening and reading sections. It runs a recommended 10 to 11 minutes in two parts. Part 1 is a presentation of no more than two minutes summarising at least two of the written sources used in the research, outlining the authors' main points and giving a personal response, marked out of 12 for responding in speech to written language (AO2). Part 2 broadens to the research as a whole and is marked by the same three grids as Task 1: knowledge and understanding of society and culture (AO4) out of 12, accuracy and range of language (AO3) out of 12, and interaction (AO1) out of 6. The project must relate to the cultural or social context of the Chinese-speaking world and must not be based on a work studied for Paper 2.

5 sections·~37 min reading time·4 competencies·Level Standard 1 · Advanced 4

T·131313 / 13
Exam profile
AO1 · Interact in speech, taking the lead and eliciting points of view in a discussion of one's own researchAO2 · Understand and respond in speech to written Chinese sources, summarising and evaluating themAO3 · Manipulate Chinese accurately in speech, using a range of lexis and structureAO4 · Show knowledge and understanding of, and respond critically to, a self-chosen aspect of the Chinese-speaking world
Operators:调查总结分析论证评价回应

basic level

At first-year standard the target is a clearly defined question, three or four sources found and understood, and a two-minute presentation that reports what two written sources say and what the candidate thinks of them. Choosing a question that is narrow enough to research is more than half the work.

higher level

The full A-Level expects a question that generates argument rather than description, sources that disagree with one another, findings the candidate can contextualise and analyse, and a discussion in which the candidate takes the lead and defends a position under questioning. The strongest projects are those where the candidate can say what surprised them.

Depth

Reading depth: In depth

Text

Text size: Standard

Contents · 5 sections▾
  1. The independent research project: Paper 3 Task 2
    • 01What Task 2 is, and the rules that decide whether it counts◐
    • 02From an interest to a defensible question●
    • 03Sources: finding them, reading them, and recording them on RP3●
    • 04The two-minute presentation: twelve marks in one hundred and twenty seconds●
    • 05Exam technique: defending the project in Part 2●
§ 01

What Task 2 is, and the rules that decide whether it counts#

●●○StandardLPPearson Edexcel 9CN0 Paper 3 Task 2 - independent research project, 42 marks, 10 to 11 minutesLPPearson Edexcel 9CN0 Appendix 1 - independent research project form (RP3)LPDfE GCE AS and A level subject content for modern foreign languages

Key points

Task 2 carries 42 of Paper 3's 72 marks and runs a recommended 10 to 11 minutes in two parts. Part 1: a presentation of no more than two minutes, summarising the main points or ideas of at least two of the written sources used in the research and giving a personal response to what was read; it is marked out of 12 for responding in speech to written language (AO2). Part 2: a discussion broadening from the presentation to the research as a whole, in which the teacher-examiner uses the key findings and source list recorded on the RP3 form to build their questions; it is marked out of 12 for knowledge and understanding of society and culture (AO4), 12 for accuracy and range of language (AO3) and 6 for interaction (AO1). The proportions inside Task 2 are worth noting because they are counter-intuitive. The two-minute presentation carries 12 marks and the eight or nine minutes of discussion carry 30, so the discussion is worth two and a half times the presentation despite receiving four times the attention in most candidates' preparation. Rehearse the presentation until it is reliable, then spend the remaining preparation on being questioned.
The eligibility rules are strict and one of them carries a zero. The project must be based on a question or statement defined and developed by the candidate individually, and it must relate to the cultural or social context of the Chinese-speaking world; it may be based on any of the four themes or on a subject of the candidate's own choosing. It must NOT be based on one of the literary works or films studied for Paper 2, and the specification states that a candidate whose project focuses on such a work receives a mark of zero for Task 2. It may, however, legitimately explore that author or film-maker more widely - the life of a writer, or a director's other work, rather than the set text itself. The permitted wider exploration is genuinely wide and worth understanding, because it turns an apparent restriction into an opportunity. If your Paper 2 work is a novel, its author's other writing, their life, the period they wrote in and the movement they belonged to are all available; what is closed is the novel itself. In practice that often produces a better project than a free choice would have, because the reading is already under way.
The written sources must be in Chinese. This is stated explicitly and it is the requirement candidates most often overlook: the sources referred to in the presentation must be written Chinese-language material - newspaper and magazine articles, online written sources, journals, literary texts or any other referenceable written source. Other authentic material - films, television, radio, online audio-visual sources, interviews - may be used in the research and referred to in the discussion that follows, but it does not satisfy the two-written-sources requirement for the presentation. The requirement also has a practical consequence for how early you must start. Finding Chinese-language written material you can actually read on a self-chosen question takes weeks rather than days, and a candidate who discovers in February that their question has no accessible sources has lost the year's work on it. The specification recommends beginning the identification stage as early as possible, and this is the reason.
The paperwork has its own deadlines and they matter. The candidate records 6 to 10 key findings of the research and the list of sources on the RP3 form, completes and signs it, and submits it no later than three weeks before the assessment. The teacher signs it to declare that the project is wholly the candidate's own work, and confirms that the question does not correspond to a Paper 2 work - which is how the zero-mark rule is enforced in practice. Where more than one candidate in a centre researches the same topic, the teacher must ensure that each has a different question, so an independent focus is a centre-level requirement and not only a personal one. Note what the teacher may and may not do, because misunderstanding it puts a candidate at risk. Independent research means research carried out without the help or instruction of others, including teachers; a teacher may advise on the suitability of an area, on research methods and on completing the form, and must confirm that the question does not correspond to a Paper 2 work - but the question itself, the sources and the findings must be the candidate's own.
Worked example

Testing three candidate projects against the rules

Three candidates propose projects. A studies 故乡 for Paper 2 and wants to research 鲁迅's life and the language reform of his period. B studies a film for Paper 2 and wants to research the same film's reception in China. C wants to research Chinese New Year celebrations in British cities. Assess each.

  1. 01Candidate A: permitted, and well judged

    The project is not based on the set text; it explores the author more widely, which the specification expressly allows - the example it gives is the life of the author rather than the novella itself. The added focus on the shift from 文言 to 白话文 gives it a genuine research question and connects it to the 文化活动 material. Written Chinese sources on 鲁迅 and on the vernacular movement are abundant. Verdict: strong.

  2. 02Candidate B: prohibited, and the penalty is severe

    Researching the reception of the film studied for Paper 2 is a project focused on a work studied for Paper 2, and the specification states a mark of zero for Task 2. The teacher is required to identify this from the RP3 form, so it will be caught - but relying on that is a bad plan. The fix: keep the interest, move the object. Research the director's other films, or the reception of documentaries generally, or how Chinese films are received in Britain.

  3. 03Candidate C: permitted, but needs narrowing

    It relates to the cultural context of the Chinese-speaking world and does not touch Paper 2. Its problem is scope: Chinese New Year in British cities is a subject, not a question, and a subject produces a descriptive ten minutes. Narrow it to a question with an answer that could go either way - for example, whether public celebrations in Britain are aimed principally at Chinese communities or at a general audience, and what that says about how the festival has been adapted.

  4. 04Now apply the written-sources test to each

    A: plentiful Chinese written material. B: irrelevant, since the project must change. C: this is the real constraint - are there Chinese-language written sources about British Chinese New Year events? Very likely, in Chinese-language community media and in mainland or Hong Kong coverage of overseas celebrations, but this must be checked BEFORE committing, not after. A brilliant question with no Chinese written sources is not a viable project.

  5. 05Then the ten-minute test

    Can you talk about it for ten to eleven minutes, taking the lead, under questioning? A question that can be answered in one sentence fails this test. A question that has two defensible answers passes it, because you can spend the discussion weighing them. This is the practical reason the narrowing in candidate C's case is not a restriction but an enabler.

  6. 06Where the marks are

    All four tests - relevance, non-overlap with Paper 2, Chinese written sources, ten minutes of material - are answerable in an afternoon at the start of the year, and all four are far more expensive to answer in the spring. The specification recommends beginning the identification stage as early as possible in the academic year, and this is why.

Result: A is permitted and strong: exploring the author more widely is expressly allowed, and the vernacular-language angle gives it a question. B is prohibited and would score zero, since it focuses on the Paper 2 work; the fix is to keep the interest and move the object. C is permitted but is a subject rather than a question, and its Chinese-language written sources must be verified before committing.

Exam focus

  • 42 of the paper's 72 marks; prepare it proportionately (AO2, AO4).
  • A project based on a Paper 2 work scores ZERO for Task 2; exploring the author or film-maker more widely is permitted (AO4).
  • The at-least-two written sources must be in Chinese; audio-visual material counts only in the discussion (AO2).
  • Record 6 to 10 key findings and the source list on RP3, and submit it no later than three weeks before the assessment (AO4).

Typical mistakes

  • Researching the set text or film. It is the one error in this qualification with a stated mark of zero attached.
  • Preparing a presentation around English-language sources. The written sources must be in Chinese.
  • Treating a documentary or podcast as one of the two written sources. It may be used in the discussion but not to meet that requirement.
  • Leaving the RP3 form until the last week. It has a three-week deadline and it is what the examiner's questions are built from.

Active revision

写下你打算研究的问题, 然后做四项检查: 一, 它和中文世界的文化或者社会有关吗? 二, 它和你 Paper 2 的作品有没有重叠? 三, 你能不能找到至少两篇中文的书面资料? 四, 你能不能就它讲十分钟? 任何一项答不上来, 就改问题, 不要改答案.

Active recall

Recall the key points — then reveal.

§ 02

From an interest to a defensible question#

●●●AdvancedLPPearson Edexcel 9CN0 Paper 3 Task 2 - a question or statement defined and developed by the student individuallyLPDfE GCE AS and A level subject content for modern foreign languages

From interest to defended position

研究的过程Graph, 兴趣 → 范围, 范围 → 问题, 问题 → 资料, 资料 → 发现, 发现 → 立场, 发现 → 问题兴趣范围问题资料发现立场修改
Fig. 1The shape of a research project as a process rather than as a product. The dashed edge running backwards from findings to question is the one most candidates omit and the one that produces the best projects: real research changes the question, and a question revised in the light of what was found is what makes the surprise possible. The emphasised node is the question itself, because everything upstream of it is preparation and everything downstream depends on how well it was framed.

Key points

Almost every weak research project fails at the same point: the candidate chose a subject rather than a question. 中国的教育 is a subject. 中国的高考制度是不是在改变? is closer. 高考改革是不是真的减轻了学生的压力? is a question, because it has at least two defensible answers, it can be researched, and a ten-minute discussion of it will consist of weighing evidence rather than reciting it. The test to apply to any candidate question is simple: could two well-informed people disagree about the answer? If not, you have a topic to report on, and reporting for ten minutes is very hard. There is a second test that catches a different failure. Ask whether the answer could be looked up. A question whose answer is a fact - when did a policy begin, how many people live somewhere - is a research task with an end, and once you have the fact there is nothing to discuss. The questions that sustain eleven minutes are the ones whose answers are judgements supported by facts rather than facts themselves.
The narrowing procedure has four steps and should be done on paper. Start with the interest - film, food, migration, music, education, the environment. Add a place or a community: mainland, Hong Kong, Taiwan, Singapore, or Chinese communities in Britain. Add a time frame: the last ten years, since the reform era, since a specific policy. Then convert to a question with a verb that demands judgement - 是不是, 为什么, 在多大程度上, 有什么影响. 兴趣 to 范围 to 时间 to 问题. Each step makes the project smaller and the discussion richer, which feels counter-intuitive and is reliably true. The counter-intuitive part is worth stating plainly because candidates resist it. A broad question feels safer - surely there is more to say? - but breadth produces generality, and generality is what the AO4 grid's lowest band describes. A narrow question forces specificity, and specificity is what the top band rewards. The narrowing is not a concession to your limitations; it is the mechanism by which the answer becomes interesting.
Two further constraints should be applied before committing. First, source availability, which is the practical killer: search for Chinese-language written material on your candidate question before you commit, not after. A question about something very recent or very local may simply have no written Chinese sources you can find and read. Second, personal traction: the specification calls it a subject of personal interest, and it shows in the assessment - a candidate who is genuinely curious asks better questions of their own material and sounds it. If a question does not make you want to know the answer, it will not sustain eleven minutes. One further filter is worth applying at the same time as source availability: whether the question is answerable at all from written sources rather than from data you cannot obtain. A question that would need a survey, a statistic you cannot verify or access to people you cannot reach is not a school research project. Rephrase it as a question about what has been written and argued, which is what your sources can actually support.
The strongest projects have one further property that is worth aiming for deliberately: they contain a surprise. Somewhere in the research, something turned out not to be what you assumed. 我原来以为…, 后来发现… - I had assumed…, and then found… - is the single most impressive sentence a candidate can say in Task 2, because it demonstrates that real research happened rather than confirmation of a position held in advance. Design for it: choose a question you do not already know the answer to, and record the moment your view changed, because that moment is the spine of your presentation and of your defence. The surprise also has a practical function in the assessment itself. It gives the presentation a shape - assumption, evidence, revision - which is far more interesting to listen to than a summary; and it gives the discussion an obvious first question, which means Part 2 begins somewhere you have already thought hard about. Designing for it is therefore a tactical decision as well as an intellectual one.
Worked example

One interest narrowed four times, with the cost and gain at each step

A candidate is interested in Chinese food. Narrow it to a defensible research question, showing at each step what is lost and what is gained.

  1. 01Level 0: 中国菜 - the interest

    A subject, not a question. Ten minutes on Chinese food would be a list of regional cuisines, and the AO4 grid's word for that is generalised. Nothing here can be argued about, so the examiner's questions would be requests for more information rather than probes of a position, and the interaction grid would see a candidate being led.

  2. 02Level 1: add a place or community - 英国的中餐

    Chinese food in Britain. Better, because it now has a location and therefore a history, an audience and a set of choices somebody made. Lost: the breadth of regional cuisine. Gained: the possibility of comparison, which is the raw material of argument. Still a subject, not yet a question.

  3. 03Level 2: add a time frame - 最近二十年英国中餐的变化

    Changes in Chinese food in Britain over the last twenty years. Now there is a before and an after, and a claim becomes possible. Lost: the earlier history, which is real but would double the work. Gained: a shape - something changed - and with it the obligation to say what and why, which is analysis.

  4. 04Level 3: add a judgement verb - 为什么最近二十年英国的中餐变得更 地道 了?

    Why has Chinese food in Britain become more authentic in the last twenty years? The word 地道 (authentic, true to the original) is doing real work: it is contestable, which is exactly what you want. Lost: nothing. Gained: a question two informed people could answer differently - is it demand from Chinese students and migrants, is it a general British appetite for regional cuisines, is it the availability of ingredients, or is 地道 itself a marketing category?

  5. 05Level 4: check sources, then sharpen once more

    Search first. Chinese-language written material on overseas Chinese restaurants, on 地道 as a concept, and on food and migration is findable. Then sharpen: 英国中餐的 地道 到底是谁定义的? - who actually defines authenticity in British Chinese food? This version invites disagreement, has a surprise built into it, and can be argued from sources rather than from taste.

  6. 06Where the marks are

    Four narrowings and the project went from unanswerable to genuinely interesting without leaving the original interest. Note that every step made the question smaller and the discussion larger, which is the general law here. Note also that the final version contains a contestable term - 地道 - and that interrogating a contestable term is one of the most reliable ways to fill eleven minutes with argument rather than with information.

Result: 中国菜 → 英国的中餐 → 最近二十年英国中餐的变化 → 为什么英国的中餐变得更地道了 → 英国中餐的 地道 到底是谁定义的? Each step narrows the question and widens the discussion; the final version turns on a contestable term, which is what makes eleven minutes of argument possible.

Exam focus

  • Test every candidate question by asking whether two well-informed people could disagree about the answer (AO4).
  • Narrow in four steps: interest, place or community, time frame, then a judgement verb (AO4).
  • Verify that Chinese-language written sources exist BEFORE committing to the question (AO2).
  • Design for a surprise, and record it; 我原来以为…后来发现… is the strongest sentence in Task 2 (AO4).

Typical mistakes

  • Choosing a subject rather than a question. Ten minutes of reporting is far harder than ten minutes of arguing.
  • Choosing a question so broad that any answer is defensible and none is interesting.
  • Committing before checking sources. Source availability is the constraint that actually decides viability.
  • Choosing a question whose answer you already hold. There will be no surprise, and the discussion will sound rehearsed.

Active revision

拿一个你感兴趣的领域, 做四步收窄: 兴趣 → 地区或者社群 → 时间范围 → 带判断动词的问题 (是不是, 为什么, 在多大程度上). 写出三个不同的最终问题, 然后对每一个搜索中文书面资料十分钟. 只保留那个既有争议又找得到资料的.

Active recall

Recall the key points — then reveal.

§ 03

Sources: finding them, reading them, and recording them on RP3#

●●●AdvancedLPPearson Edexcel 9CN0 Paper 3 Task 2 - at least two written sources in Chinese; RP3 form with 6 to 10 key findingsLPDfE GCE AS and A level subject content for modern foreign languages

Key points

The requirement is precise: written sources in Chinese, at least two of which are referred to in the presentation. The specification's own examples of acceptable written material are newspaper and magazine articles, online written sources, journals, literary texts and any other suitable written source that can be referenced - and the phrase that can be referenced is doing work: you must be able to say what the source was and who wrote it. Other authentic material - films, television, radio, online audio-visual sources, interviews - is legitimate research and may be discussed in Part 2, but it does not count towards the two written sources. One boundary is worth clarifying because it recurs. A Chinese-language article read in translation is not a Chinese written source; the requirement is about the language of the source, not about its subject. Equally, a Chinese-language page you had machine-translated in order to understand it is at best a doubtful source, because you will be asked what the author said and will have to answer from your own reading.
Finding readable Chinese sources is a skill and it repays a deliberate approach. Search in Chinese, not in English, because searching in English returns English-language writing about China rather than Chinese writing. Use the vocabulary of the field - if the topic is education, search 教育改革, 高考, 减负; if it is food, search 中餐, 地道, 海外华人. Prefer sources with a named author and a date, because an unattributed page is hard to summarise and impossible to defend. And accept that you will not understand everything: a source you understand seventy per cent of is a usable source, and reading it twice is how the other thirty comes. Two habits make the reading manageable. Read the same source twice a week apart rather than once slowly, because the second reading is far faster and retains far more; and keep a running list of the field vocabulary you meet, since a research topic generates a specialised lexicon of perhaps forty words that will recur in every source and in the discussion itself.
Read for the author's position, not just for facts, because Part 1 asks you to outline the authors' main points or ideas and to give a personal response. For each written source, write three things: what the author claims, what evidence they offer, and where you agree or disagree. That third item is the one candidates omit and it is the one the AO2 grid is looking for - the grid's descriptors move from a summary that makes generalised reference to named sources, up to a clear summary of named sources with a clear outline and a personal response. Two sources that DISAGREE with each other are worth far more than two that agree, because they generate both the outline and the response automatically. Recording the disagreement between sources is worth doing formally rather than mentally. Write the two claims side by side and then write one sentence saying what they disagree about - whether it is the facts, the interpretation of the facts, or what should follow from them. That single sentence is frequently the most analytically useful thing in the whole project, and it is exactly the sort of observation Part 2 rewards.
The RP3 form is not administration; it is the script the examiner's questions will be built from. You record 6 to 10 key findings and your source list, complete and sign it, and submit it no later than three weeks before the assessment; your teacher signs it to declare the work is wholly yours and confirms the question does not correspond to a Paper 2 work. Because the teacher-examiner uses those key findings and that source list to formulate their questions in Part 2, the findings you write are effectively your own question paper. Write findings that you can defend and that open onto argument - not 中国有很多网络文学 but 网络文学的长度主要是由收费方式决定的, which invites a probing question you have already thought about. One further point about the form: it is submitted through the Learner Work Transfer portal and one is required for every candidate in the cohort, so the deadline is a centre-level administrative fact and not a personal target. Missing it is not a matter of your own preparedness. Write the findings early, revise them if your view changes, and submit on time.
Worked example

Turning two disagreeing sources into two minutes of presentation

Your question is whether public Chinese New Year celebrations in British cities are aimed principally at Chinese communities or at a general audience. You have two Chinese-language written sources that disagree. Build the presentation.

  1. 01Name the sources properly, and quickly

    我主要用了两篇中文的资料. 第一篇是一家华人媒体的报道, 作者是…; 第二篇是一位学者写的文章, 发表在… . Naming takes fifteen seconds of your two minutes and is non-negotiable - the AO2 grid distinguishes a summary that refers to named written sources from one that does not. If you cannot name a source, it is not a source you can use.

  2. 02Source one: claim, then evidence, in three sentences

    第一篇文章认为, 这些活动主要是为华人社区办的, 因为组织者大多是华人社团, 内容也以传统节目为主. 作者指出, 参加的人里华人家庭占了很大比例. 认为 introduces the claim, 因为 gives the reason, 指出 introduces the evidence. Three sentences, roughly twenty seconds, and the structure is reusable for any source.

  3. 03Source two: the disagreement, marked as a disagreement

    第二篇的看法不一样. 这位学者认为, 活动的形式其实是为了吸引本地观众设计的: 时间安排在周末, 表演以舞狮和烟花为主, 解说也用英文. 看法不一样 is the pivot; 其实 marks the correction; the colon introduces the three pieces of evidence. Two sources that disagree have just given you a structure you did not have to invent.

  4. 04The personal response, which is where the AO2 marks concentrate

    我比较同意第二篇, 不过我觉得两者不一定矛盾. 我自己去过一次, 发现台上是给所有人看的, 台下的小摊反而更像社区活动. Note three things: a position, a qualification, and first-hand observation. 台上…台下… is a neat and concrete distinction, and it is your own - which is exactly what a personal response means.

  5. 05Close by pointing forward, not by summarising

    所以我的问题变成了: 到底是谁在定义这个活动的目的? 是组织者, 还是观众? Ending the presentation with the question your research arrived at hands the discussion to the examiner on your terms, and it signals that the research changed something. Do not end with 谢谢 and a summary; end with the live question.

  6. 06Where the marks are

    Under two minutes. Two named sources, each with a claim and its evidence; an explicit disagreement between them; a personal response that takes a position, qualifies it and adds first-hand observation; and a closing question that opens Part 2. That is the full AO2 grid - clear summary of named sources, clear outline of the authors' ideas, and a personal response - and it also sets up the eight minutes that follow.

Result: 我主要用了两篇中文的资料. 第一篇文章认为, 这些活动主要是为华人社区办的, 因为组织者大多是华人社团, 内容也以传统节目为主. 第二篇的看法不一样: 这位学者认为, 活动的形式其实是为了吸引本地观众设计的, 时间安排在周末, 表演以舞狮和烟花为主, 解说也用英文. 我比较同意第二篇, 不过我觉得两者不一定矛盾 - 我自己去过一次, 发现台上是给所有人看的, 台下的小摊反而更像社区活动. 所以我的问题变成了: 到底是谁在定义这个活动的目的?

Exam focus

  • At least two written sources, in Chinese, referenceable, named in the presentation (AO2).
  • Search in Chinese using field vocabulary; a seventy-per-cent-understood source is usable (AO2).
  • For each source record claim, evidence and your agreement or disagreement; the third is the AO2 mark (AO2).
  • Write RP3 findings you can defend and that invite argument - they become the examiner's questions (AO4).

Typical mistakes

  • Using English-language sources about China. The requirement is written sources in Chinese.
  • Counting a documentary or a podcast among the two written sources. It belongs in the Part 2 discussion.
  • Summarising sources without responding to them. The personal response is explicitly part of the AO2 grid.
  • Writing bland RP3 findings. They generate the examiner's questions, so a flat finding produces a flat discussion.

Active revision

为你的问题找四篇中文书面资料, 每篇写三行: 作者的主张是什么, 他用什么证据, 你在哪一点上同意或者不同意. 然后从四篇里挑出两篇互相不同意的, 那两篇就是你演讲里要用的. 最后把六到十条关键发现写出来, 每一条都必须是一个可以被追问的判断, 而不是一个事实.

Active recall

Recall the key points — then reveal.

§ 04

The two-minute presentation: twelve marks in one hundred and twenty seconds#

●●●AdvancedLPPearson Edexcel 9CN0 Paper 3 Task 2 Part 1 - presentation, maximum two minutes, responding to written language in speech (AO2), 12 marksLPDfE GCE AS and A level subject content for modern foreign languages

Key points

The presentation is the only monologue in the whole qualification and it has a hard ceiling: it must not exceed two minutes. Twelve marks are attached to it under AO2, responding in speech to written language, and the grid's ladder is explicit - from a summary making limited, generalised reference to named written sources at the bottom, through a summary that refers to them but lacks clarity, to a mostly clear summary with a generally clear outline, and finally at the top a clear summary of named written sources, a clear outline of the authors' main points and ideas, and a clear personal response. Everything the grid names appears in that list: named, clear, outlined, responded to. It is worth noticing what the grid does NOT ask for. It does not ask for an account of your research process, for a description of your topic, or for a conclusion. It asks for named sources, a clear outline of their authors' ideas, and your response. Anything else in the two minutes is spending grid-relevant time on grid-irrelevant material, however interesting it is.
So the two minutes have a fixed budget and it should be rehearsed to the second. Roughly: 15 seconds naming the sources and the question; 30 seconds on source one's claim and evidence; 30 seconds on source two, marked as agreeing or disagreeing; 30 seconds of personal response with a reason; 15 seconds closing on the live question. That is 120 seconds and it fits, but only if rehearsed - candidates who have not timed it routinely spend ninety seconds on background and are cut off before the response, losing the top half of the grid. Rehearse it against a clock and against a listener, because the two failures are different. The clock catches overrun; a listener catches the sentences that were clear in your head and are not clear aloud. A presentation that survives both is one you can deliver while nervous, which is the only condition under which it will actually be delivered.
Two things must not be in the presentation. Background about the topic in general: the examiner does not need to be told what the Spring Festival is, and every second spent on it is taken from the grid. And a reading voice: this is the moment when a candidate is most likely to recite, and a recited presentation is audible - it will be flat, it will be too fast, and it will not survive the first interruption. Learn the shape and the key phrases, not the sentences. If you find yourself unable to say it any other way, you have memorised it. There is a third thing to exclude and it is subtler: apology. 我的研究不是很深入 or 我找到的资料不多 spends seconds on lowering the examiner's expectations, achieves nothing, and contradicts the confident framing the interaction grid rewards. The honest acknowledgement of limits belongs in Part 2, attached to a specific claim, not in the opening of the presentation.
What SHOULD be in it, beyond the four grid items, is one sign of real engagement, and the cheapest is the surprise. 有意思的是, 两篇资料的看法完全不一样 - what is interesting is that the two sources take completely opposite views. 我原来以为…, 读了以后发现… - I had assumed…, and after reading I found…. Either sentence takes eight seconds and converts a competent summary into evidence that thinking happened. It also gives the teacher-examiner an obvious first question, which is a good thing: you want Part 2 to begin somewhere you have prepared. One further advantage of ending on a live question rather than a conclusion: it removes the awkward pause. A presentation that ends with a summary invites silence while the examiner decides where to begin; one that ends with a question hands over cleanly and starts Part 2 on your material. It is a small piece of stagecraft and it is worth rehearsing as deliberately as the content.
Worked example

The two minutes, timed second by second

Your question is whether the double-reduction education policy of 2021 actually reduced pressure on students. You have two Chinese written sources that reach different conclusions. Build and time the presentation.

  1. 01Seconds 0 to 15: the question and the two sources, named

    我研究的问题是: 2021 年的 双减 政策是不是真的减轻了学生的压力? 我主要用了两篇中文文章, 一篇是教育类媒体的报道, 一篇是一位教育研究者写的评论. Question first, then sources named by type and author. Fifteen seconds, and the grid's first requirement - named written sources - is already met.

  2. 02Seconds 15 to 45: source one, claim then evidence

    第一篇认为效果是明显的. 作者指出, 学科类的校外培训机构大量减少, 学校的书面作业也确实变少了, 很多家长反映孩子的睡眠时间增加了. Claim, then three pieces of evidence in one sentence. 反映 (to report, to give feedback) is the right verb for what parents did. Thirty seconds.

  3. 03Seconds 45 to 75: source two, marked as disagreeing

    第二篇的结论不一样. 这位研究者认为, 压力并没有消失, 只是换了形式: 补习从机构转到了私人家教, 从公开转到了私下, 家庭的负担反而更不平等了. 结论不一样 pivots; 并没有消失, 只是换了形式 is the claim; the colon introduces the mechanism; 反而 delivers the sting. Thirty seconds.

  4. 04Seconds 75 to 105: the personal response with a reason and a surprise

    我原来以为这两篇会互相反驳, 后来发现它们其实在说不同的东西: 一篇说的是可见的减少, 一篇说的是看不见的转移. 我比较同意第二篇, 因为它解释了为什么政策看起来成功, 家长却还是焦虑. The surprise, the distinction it produced, the position and its reason. Thirty seconds and this is where the top band is earned.

  5. 05Seconds 105 to 120: close on the live question

    所以我现在的问题是: 如果压力只是转移了, 我们应该怎么衡量一个政策成功还是失败? Fifteen seconds, and it hands Part 2 to the examiner on ground you have prepared - measurement, visibility, and unintended consequences. Do not say 谢谢 and stop; end on the question.

  6. 06Where the marks are

    Total 120 seconds, and every one of the AO2 grid's four requirements is present: sources named, summarised clearly, their main ideas outlined, and a personal response given with a reason. The surprise did double duty - it demonstrated real reading and it produced the distinction between visible reduction and invisible transfer, which is the intellectual content of the whole project. Rehearse to 110 so that nerves have somewhere to go.

Result: 我研究的问题是: 2021 年的 双减 政策是不是真的减轻了学生的压力? 我主要用了两篇中文文章. 第一篇认为效果是明显的: 学科类的校外培训机构大量减少, 学校的书面作业也变少了, 很多家长反映孩子的睡眠时间增加了. 第二篇的结论不一样 - 这位研究者认为, 压力并没有消失, 只是换了形式: 补习从机构转到了私人家教, 家庭的负担反而更不平等了. 我原来以为这两篇会互相反驳, 后来发现它们其实在说不同的东西: 一篇说的是可见的减少, 一篇说的是看不见的转移. 我比较同意第二篇, 因为它解释了为什么政策看起来成功, 家长却还是焦虑. 所以我现在的问题是: 如果压力只是转移了, 我们应该怎么衡量一个政策的成败?

Exam focus

  • Two minutes is a maximum; rehearse to 110 seconds so an interruption does not cost the response (AO2).
  • Budget it: name, source one, source two, personal response, closing question (AO2).
  • Cut all general background; the grid rewards named sources and your response, not context-setting (AO2).
  • Include one surprise - 我原来以为…后来发现… - and let it seed the examiner's first question (AO2, AO4).

Typical mistakes

  • Spending the first minute explaining the topic. The grid gives no marks for background.
  • Reciting a memorised text. It is audible and it collapses at the first interruption.
  • Omitting the personal response. It is explicitly in the top band of the AO2 grid.
  • Running to exactly two minutes in rehearsal. Rehearse to 110 seconds; nervous delivery runs long.

Active revision

把你的两分钟演讲录三遍: 第一遍看着稿子, 第二遍只看五个关键词, 第三遍什么都不看. 每一遍都计时, 目标是 110 秒. 然后请同学在第 60 秒的时候打断你问一个问题, 看你能不能回答完再接回去.

Active recall

Recall the key points — then reveal.

§ 05

Exam technique: defending the project in Part 2#

●●●AdvancedLPPearson Edexcel 9CN0 Paper 3 Task 2 Part 2 - AO4 12, AO3 12, AO1 6LPDfE GCE AS and A level subject content for modern foreign languages

Key points

Part 2 runs eight to nine minutes and carries 30 of Task 2's 42 marks across three grids: knowledge and understanding of society and culture out of 12, accuracy and range of language out of 12, and interaction out of 6. The teacher-examiner builds their questions from the key findings and source list on your RP3 form, supplemented by Pearson's optional generic questions. That means the questions are, to a substantial degree, predictable: they will be about what you wrote. Take your own six to ten findings, write two probing questions for each, and you have built most of the question paper yourself. The predictability is worth exploiting systematically rather than casually. Take each finding, and for each write the two questions a sceptical reader would ask: what is your evidence, and what else could explain this? Twelve to twenty questions, all of them prepared, and the great majority of what you are actually asked will be one of them or a near neighbour.
The four question types that recur are worth rehearsing separately. Clarification - 你说的…是什么意思? Answer with a definition and an example, never with a repetition. Evidence - 你有什么根据? Answer with a named source and what it said, not with an assertion. Challenge - 有没有别的解释? Answer by conceding that there is, naming it, and then saying why yours survives. And extension - 这个情况在别的地方也一样吗? Answer honestly about the limits of your research: 我只研究了…, 别的地方我不敢肯定, 不过我猜… - honesty about scope reads as rigour, not as weakness. A fifth type appears less often but is worth being ready for: the comparison. 英国有没有类似的情况? Because you are a UK candidate researching the Chinese-speaking world, this question is genuinely likely, and it is a gift - you can answer it from knowledge you already have. Prepare one comparison with Britain for your topic and it will almost certainly be usable.
The interaction grid is running throughout and it wants you to take the lead in what is nominally your own subject - which should be the easiest place in the whole assessment to do it. Volunteer connections: 说到这个, 我还发现了一件事. Offer the examiner a choice: 我可以说说资料的问题, 也可以说说我自己的看法, 您想听哪个? Ask them: 您觉得英国的情况是不是也这样? A candidate who is genuinely interested in their question does these things naturally, which is a further argument for choosing a question you actually want answered. There is also a difference between leading and dominating that matters in Part 2 specifically. Because the subject is yours, the temptation is to deliver prepared material at length. The grid wants interaction, so the shape to aim for is a substantial answer followed by a handover - a question, an offer of two directions, or an explicit invitation - roughly every ninety seconds.
Finally, know the limits of what you may claim and say so. You did a school research project, not a study; your sources were what you could find and read; your conclusions are provisional. Saying that is not a weakness - 我看到的资料有限, 所以这只是一个初步的结论 - it is precisely the critical awareness the AO4 grid rewards, and it protects you from being dismantled by a question about a source you never saw. The candidates who are most exposed in Part 2 are those who claimed more than their research supported, and the fix costs one sentence. Bounding your claims also changes the character of the questioning in your favour. An examiner probing an over-claim is testing whether you will retreat; an examiner probing a bounded claim is exploring it with you, which is a far easier conversation to sustain and a far better source of AO4 marks. The sentence that bounds a claim is therefore not a defensive move but an invitation.
Worked example

Four hard questions, answered four ways

Your project argued that the double-reduction policy displaced educational pressure rather than removing it. The examiner asks four questions in succession. Answer each in the form its type demands.

  1. 01Clarification: 你说的 转移 具体指什么?

    我指的是压力从一个地方搬到另一个地方, 但总量没有减少. 比如说, 校外的培训班少了, 可是私人家教多了; 学校的作业少了, 可是家长自己给孩子加. Define, then exemplify twice. Never answer a clarification question by repeating the term - 转移就是转移的意思 wastes the exchange and signals that the term was borrowed rather than understood.

  2. 02Evidence: 你有什么根据这么说?

    主要是第二篇资料. 那位研究者采访了一些家长, 发现他们减少了机构的开支, 但增加了私人家教的开支. 当然, 这只是一个小范围的调查, 不能代表全国. Name the source, say what it did, say what it found, then bound the claim. The bounding sentence is what stops the next question from being a demolition.

  3. 03Challenge: 会不会只是因为政策刚开始, 还没见效?

    这个解释完全有可能, 我也考虑过. 不过我看到的两篇资料都是政策实行一两年以后写的, 而且第二篇特别提到费用的结构变了, 不只是暂时的反应. 当然, 要真正回答这个问题, 需要更长时间的数据. Concede sincerely, answer with a reason, then concede again about what would settle it. That three-move shape is the top band of AO4 in a single answer.

  4. 04Extension: 香港和台湾是不是也有类似的情况?

    我这次只研究了中国大陆的情况, 香港和台湾我没有查资料, 所以不敢肯定. 不过我知道这两个地方的升学竞争也很激烈, 如果有类似的政策, 我猜结果可能不一样, 因为教育制度不同. 我不敢肯定 is honest; 我猜 marks the speculation as speculation; and the reason - different education systems - shows you are still thinking rather than guessing.

  5. 05Then take the lead once, unprompted

    说到这个, 我还想补充一点: 在准备的时候我发现, 两篇资料衡量 压力 的方式完全不一样, 一篇看作业时间, 一篇看家庭开支. 我觉得这本身就是一个问题. Volunteering a methodological observation about your own sources is the single most impressive thing available in Part 2, and it takes twenty seconds.

  6. 06Where the marks are

    AO4: definitions with examples, named evidence, an alternative explanation conceded and answered, honest scope limits, and a methodological observation. AO3: 比如说, 当然, 不只是, 不敢肯定, 如果…可能…, 说到这个 - range in the service of argument. AO1: took the lead unprompted. None of these four answers required knowing more than the research produced; all four required having thought about what the research could and could not support.

Result: Clarification: define, then exemplify twice. Evidence: name the source, say what it did and found, then bound the claim. Challenge: concede sincerely, answer with a reason, concede again about what would settle it. Extension: state honestly what you did not research, then speculate marked as speculation with a reason. Then volunteer one methodological observation about your own sources, unprompted.

Exam focus

  • The examiner's questions come from your own RP3 findings; write two probing questions for each in advance (AO4).
  • Rehearse the four question types: clarification, evidence, challenge, extension (AO4, AO1).
  • Take the lead in your own subject; volunteer connections and ask the examiner questions (AO1).
  • State the limits of your research explicitly; scope-honesty reads as rigour (AO4).

Typical mistakes

  • Not anticipating questions from your own findings. They are the examiner's stated source of questions.
  • Answering a challenge by repeating the original claim more firmly. Concede the alternative, then say why yours survives.
  • Waiting to be asked in your own subject. It is the easiest place in the assessment to take the lead.
  • Over-claiming. One sentence acknowledging the limits of your sources protects the whole discussion.

Active revision

把你 RP3 上的六到十条关键发现抄下来, 为每一条写两个尖锐的问题 (一个要证据, 一个提出别的解释). 请同学按随机顺序问你, 每题限时九十秒, 全程录音. 事后检查: 有没有哪一次你只是把原来的话说得更大声.

Active recall

Recall the key points — then reveal.

Contents

Section -- / 05

    • 01What Task 2 is, and the rules that decide whether it counts◐
    • 02From an interest to a defensible question●
    • 03Sources: finding them, reading them, and recording them on RP3●
    • 04The two-minute presentation: twelve marks in one hundred and twenty seconds●
    • 05Exam technique: defending the project in Part 2●

0/5 Read

From notes into training

The independent research project: Paper 3 Task 2

Reinforce this topic with matching tasks from the question bank.

~37
min
4
Competencies
Practise

Previous topic

The film: Paper 2 Section C and writing about form

EuraStudy·Notes T·13·MMXXVI

Last topic of this subject — back to the subject overview.