Notes · WelshUK · A-Levels

Gwaith Cwrs: Argumentative Essay (NEA)

Task Two of AS Unit 2 is the second half of the non-examination assessment and it is the only piece of work in the whole qualification written under SPECIAL CONDITIONS: two hours, conditions similar to an ordinary examination, no consultation between candidates, a week's notice, a dictionary permitted, no word processor, and up to one side of A4 of short bullet points prepared in advance and submitted with the finished work. The task is to produce an essay or written speech, suitable for delivery, presenting an opinion on a controversial topic that you have researched — using sources, CROSS-REFERENCING them, reflecting on viewpoints and reaching conclusions. It carries twenty raw marks on AO3, is between 1,000 and 2,000 words, and must not be on the same subject as Task One. Task One is taught in gwaith-cwrs-ysgrifennu-creadigol; the whole unit's procedural rules are set out there.

5 sections~31 min reading time2 competenciesLevel Foundation 1 · Standard 3 · Advanced 1

T·0444 / 14

Exam profile

AO3 · Write correctly, clearly and proficiently, demonstrating a range of linguistic resources; use knowledge of grammar effectively within various contextsAO3 · Demonstrate awareness of various linguistic registers and make effective use of Welsh in different situations and for different purposes

Operators:argueresearchcross-referencesummariseevaluateanticipateconcludestructure

basic level

Two hours is not long for 1,000 to 2,000 words of argued Welsh, so the research and the plan must be complete before you sit down. Choose a question you already care about and can find sources for in your own language, and start reading in the autumn term rather than the week before.

higher level

This task rehearses, under milder conditions, exactly what Unit 6 Section B asks for in an examination: writing to a format and an audience from supplied material with a controlling register. It also rehearses the argued essay of Units 5 and 6. Treat it as the training piece for 38.1% of the A level rather than as ten per cent in its own right.

Depth

Text

Contents · 5 sections

Gwaith Cwrs: Argumentative Essay (NEA)

The task, and the special conditions that govern it#

FoundationUnit 2 Task Two — Researching and Expressing an Opinion on a Controversial Topic (Task under Special Conditions): produce an essay or written speech, suitable for delivery, presenting an opinion or viewpointCandidates are expected to have researched the topic chosen by them, to demonstrate that they can use sources and cross-reference them, to reflect on viewpoints and to reach conclusions§3.2 — two hours; conditions similar to an ordinary examination; candidates may not consult each other; a week's notice; dictionaries permitted; a word processor must NOT be used; up to one side of A4 of short bullet points in font size 11 or above, which may include statistics, facts, examples and relevant quotations but must not include full paragraphs or full sentences, submitted with the completed task

The two NEA tasks and the conditions each is written under

Fig. 1One unit, two very different working conditions. The emphasised cell is the provision candidates most often waste: one side of A4 of short bullet points, prepared in advance, which may carry statistics, facts, examples and quotations but no full sentences — and which is handed in with the finished work.

Task Two asks for an essay or a written speech, suitable for delivery, presenting an opinion or viewpoint on a controversial topic. That phrase 'suitable for delivery' is doing real work: it means the piece may legitimately be written to be spoken, with the rhythm, the direct address and the rhetorical shape that implies, and it is one of the register decisions to take before you begin. The topic is chosen by the candidate, must be controversial — that is, one on which reasonable people genuinely disagree — and must be researched. Candidates are expected to demonstrate that they can use sources and cross-reference them, reflect on viewpoints, and reach conclusions.

The special conditions are what make this task unlike anything else in the qualification. Two hours are allocated. The conditions are similar to those of an ordinary examination: candidates are not permitted to consult each other, and centres must ensure that the tasks set are of an equal standard. A week's notice is given before the task is undertaken. More time is allocated to candidates with special needs. Dictionaries ARE permitted, which is unusual — Units 3 and 5 prohibit them — and a word processor must NOT be used, which reverses the recommendation for Task One. Two hours, by hand, with a dictionary.

The most distinctive rule concerns what you may bring. Candidates are permitted to take into the assessment up to ONE SIDE of an A4 page of short bullet points, in font size 11 or above, prepared in advance. That page may include statistics, facts, examples and relevant quotations. It must NOT include full paragraphs or full sentences. And it must be submitted with the completed task, which means a moderator can see it. This is a genuinely generous provision and it is routinely under-used: a well-built A4 side removes almost all the recall load from a two-hour argued essay and leaves the time for thinking and writing.

Everything else about Unit 2 applies here too. The piece runs to between 1,000 and 2,000 words. It carries twenty raw marks on AO3 alone. It must not be on the same subject as Task One. It is marked when presented to the teacher and may not be rewritten afterwards — although in this case the no-redraft rule is nearly redundant, since the piece is written in one sitting. And the resources used in PREPARING for the task must be recorded, along with the submission date, on the WJEC form signed by teacher and candidate. Your reading list is part of the evidence.

Worked example

Choosing a topic that can actually carry the mark scheme

Three candidate topics are on the table. Test each against what the band descriptors require and pick the one that can reach the top band.

The test the grid imposes
The top band asks you to present arguments, anticipate negative arguments and present valid counter-arguments; to summarise relevant facts from DIFFERENT sources and cross-reference them; to consider viewpoints perceptively; and to structure the work purposefully to convey the COMPLEXITY of the subject. So the topic must have at least two defensible positions, a body of sources that disagree, and enough complexity that a structure is needed to convey it. Any topic failing one of those three cannot reach the top band however well it is written.
Topic one — a position nobody opposes
A subject on which every source you find agrees with you produces an essay with no counter-argument to anticipate and no viewpoints to weigh. You will end up inventing an opponent, and an invented opponent is always a weak one, which the descriptor 'valid counter-arguments' explicitly excludes. Reject it — not because the position is wrong but because the task cannot be performed on it.
Topic two — controversial but thinly sourced
A genuinely disputed subject on which you can find only two Welsh-language sources will stall at the cross-referencing requirement, which asks for facts from different sources applied and presented coherently. Before committing, do a one-hour search and count what you can actually read. If the answer is three or four substantial sources, the topic will support the essay; if it is one, it will not.
Topic three — controversial, sourced and complex
The right topic has two or more defensible positions, several accessible sources that genuinely disagree, and a structure that is not obvious — that is, one where the arguments do not fall neatly into two lists. The last of those is what the descriptor 'structure the work purposefully to convey the complexity of the subject' rewards, and it is why a subject where the two sides talk past each other, or where the disagreement is really about values rather than facts, is more productive than one with a clean for-and-against.
The last check
Ask whether it is genuinely different from Task One's subject, and whether you can still care about it in six months. You will read four or five sources, build an A4 page and write for two hours on this question. A topic chosen because it sounds serious rather than because it interests you produces an essay that is dutiful, and 'the writing is interesting' has an equivalent in this grid too: complex ideas expressed in a clear and articulate manner is not something a bored writer produces.

Result: Three tests, all imposed by the grid: at least two defensible positions (or there is no valid counter-argument to present), several accessible sources that disagree (or cross-referencing is impossible), and enough complexity that the structure is not obvious. Then check it differs from Task One and that you will still care in six months.

Typical mistakes

Bringing an A4 page of prose, which breaks the no-full-sentences rule and may invalidate the page.
Choosing a subject on which nobody actually disagrees, which makes the counter-argument requirement impossible to satisfy.
Under-using the A4 page and then spending the first twenty minutes trying to remember figures.
Forgetting that a dictionary is allowed here — and relying on it, when two hours is barely enough for the writing.

Active revision

Sit a full two-hour rehearsal under the real conditions — by hand, with a dictionary, with your A4 page, no consultation — at least six weeks before the real task. Then count your words and time each section. That number — YOUR handwriting rate for considered Welsh under pressure — is the single most useful figure you can have, because the required range is 1,000 to 2,000 words and you need to know where in it you can realistically finish with a conclusion attached rather than a paragraph that stops.

Active recall

Recall the key points — then reveal.

Sources: WJEC GCE AS/A level Welsh (First Language) specification — Unit 2 Task Two and §3.2 task under special conditions (WJEC CBAC)

Croesgyfeirio: the four-rung ladder the grid actually describes#

StandardUnit 2 Task Two assessment grid — 'skilled cross-referencing' (16–20); 'effective cross-referencing' (13–15); 'sensible cross-referencing' (10–12); 'attempt cross-referencing' (7–9); 'summarise some relevant facts from more than one source and refer to them occasionally' (4–6)Task Two — candidates are expected to use sources and cross-reference them when expressing an opinion

Cross-referencing appears in every band of the Task Two grid and the word in front of it changes each time, which makes it the clearest ladder in the whole specification. At 4–6 the requirement is to summarise some relevant facts from more than one source and refer to them occasionally. At 7–9 it is to ATTEMPT cross-referencing. At 10–12, SENSIBLE cross-referencing. At 13–15, EFFECTIVE. At 16–20, SKILLED. Nowhere does the specification define those words, so the useful question is what changes between them — and what changes is the relationship between the sources, not the number of them.

The bottom of the ladder is citation: two sources exist, and both are mentioned. The next rung is juxtaposition: two sources are placed side by side on the same point. Above that is comparison: the sources are shown to agree or disagree, and the disagreement is stated. Above that is adjudication: you say which is better supported, and why. And at the top is synthesis, where a claim is built that no single source makes but that follows from several together — the point at which the essay is arguing rather than reporting. Each rung is a different sentence structure, and each can be practised.

The other half of the requirement is that the facts are SUMMARISED, applied and presented coherently. Summarising is a skill in itself and it is where a great deal of an essay's authority comes from: a source reduced to one accurate sentence in your own Welsh reads as understood, while a source quoted at length reads as borrowed. In a handwritten two-hour task, length is also a practical matter — every line of transcription is a line not spent arguing, and the A4 page you bring in should already contain the summary rather than the passage.

Attribution is not formally prescribed here, but it is what makes cross-referencing visible to a marker, and the Welsh for it should be ready before the two hours begin. Yn ôl X… ; Fel y dadleua X… ; Mae X yn honni bod… ; Mae hynny'n groes i'r hyn a ddywed Y… ; Er bod X ac Y yn cytuno ar y ffeithiau, maen nhw'n anghytuno'n llwyr ar eu hystyr. That last construction is the one that carries the top of the ladder, because it separates agreement about facts from disagreement about meaning, which is where most real controversies actually live.

Worked example

The same two sources, five ways

Two sources on your topic agree about the numbers and disagree about what they mean. Write the paragraph at each rung and identify what changes.

Rung one — citation
“Mae dau adroddiad wedi ymdrin â'r cwestiwn hwn.” Both sources are acknowledged and nothing else has happened. The reader knows you have read something. This is what the 4–6 descriptor means by referring to sources occasionally, and it is worth exactly that.
Rung two — juxtaposition
“Mae'r adroddiad cyntaf yn nodi bod y ffigwr wedi codi; mae'r ail yn nodi'r un peth.” The two sources are on the same point at the same moment. This is an attempt at cross-referencing: they have been brought into the same sentence, but no relation between them has been stated, so the reader still has to do the work.
Rung three — comparison
“Mae'r ddau adroddiad yn cytuno ar y ffigurau ond yn anghytuno'n llwyr ynghylch beth sy'n eu hachosi.” Now the relation is named, and it is the interesting one: agreement about facts, disagreement about explanation. This is sensible cross-referencing and it is where a competent essay lives.
Rung four — adjudication
“O'r ddau esboniad, esboniad yr ail sy'n dal orau, am ei fod yn cyfrif am y newid yn y ddwy flynedd cyn i'r polisi ddechrau — rhywbeth y mae'r cyntaf yn ei adael heb sylw.” You have chosen between them and given a reason that is about evidence rather than preference. This is effective cross-referencing, and note that the reason names something one source explains and the other does not.
Rung five — synthesis
“Gyda'i gilydd, mae'r ddau adroddiad yn awgrymu rhywbeth nad yw'r naill na'r llall yn ei ddweud: nad y polisi sy'n achosi'r newid, ond bod y ddau'n deillio o'r un peth arall.” A claim built from both sources that neither makes alone. This is skilled cross-referencing, and it is also the point at which the essay stops reporting a controversy and starts contributing to it — which is what an opinion piece was asked for.

Result: Citation acknowledges; juxtaposition places side by side; comparison names the relation (usually: agreement about facts, disagreement about meaning); adjudication chooses with an evidential reason; synthesis builds a claim neither source makes. The ladder is about the relationship between sources, not the number of them.

Typical mistakes

Adding more sources rather than doing more with the ones you have.
Listing what each source says in turn, so the essay is a survey with an opinion attached at the end.
Quoting at length in a handwritten task, spending minutes on transcription.
Treating every disagreement as factual when most controversies turn on what the agreed facts mean.

Active revision

Take two sources on your topic that disagree and write the same paragraph five times, once at each rung: citing both, juxtaposing them, comparing them, adjudicating between them, and synthesising a claim neither makes alone. Five paragraphs, twenty minutes. You will be able to feel the difference between rungs three and five, and rung five is the one to aim the whole essay at.

Active recall

Recall the key points — then reveal.

Sources: WJEC GCE AS/A level Welsh (First Language) specification — Unit 2 Assessment Grid, Task TWO (WJEC CBAC)

The architecture of an argued essay#

StandardTask Two grid, 16–20 — present arguments, anticipate negative arguments and present valid counter-arguments; consider viewpoints perceptively and reach a conclusion; structure the work purposefully to convey the complexity of the subjectTask Two grid, 13–15 — present some original arguments, anticipate negative arguments and present valid counter-arguments; plan the work carefully to convey the complexity of the subject

The shape of the argued essay

Fig. 2Six moves in order. The emphasised node is the one the grid names explicitly and candidates most often postpone: the counter-argument belongs in the middle of the essay, in its opponent's strongest form, because an objection you raise yourself is anticipation and an objection you concede at the end is defence.

The grid describes a shape rather than a formula, but the shape is unmistakable once you read the bullets together. Arguments are presented. Negative arguments are ANTICIPATED — that is, raised before an opponent could raise them. Valid counter-arguments are then presented against those. Viewpoints are considered perceptively. And a conclusion is reached. The word anticipate is the load-bearing one: it means the strongest objection to your position appears in your essay because you put it there, not because you were forced to acknowledge it. An essay that saves the objection for a defensive paragraph near the end has not anticipated anything.

The reason anticipation scores is that it changes what the essay is doing. An essay that states a position and defends it is advocacy, and advocacy is easy to write and easy to discount. An essay that states a position, presents the best case against it in its opponent's own strongest form, and then shows why the position survives, has done something much harder and much more convincing. The specification's phrase 'valid counter-arguments' bars the cheap version of this — the straw opponent whose objection is easy to answer. If the objection you raise is one no thoughtful opponent would make, you have wasted the paragraph.

Structure, in the grid's phrase, must convey the COMPLEXITY of the subject. That rules out a symmetrical for-and-against, which conveys simplicity: two lists of equal length imply a question with two sides of equal weight, and very few real controversies are like that. A structure that conveys complexity usually separates the levels of the disagreement — what the facts are, what the facts mean, and what should be done about them — because most controversies are settled on the first level and contested on the second and third. Organising by level rather than by side is the single most useful structural decision available in this task.

The conclusion must be reached, not announced. A conclusion that restates the opening has not been reached; it has been carried. What the grid rewards is a conclusion that has been earned by the middle of the essay — one that could not have been written before the counter-argument was answered, and that says something more precise than the opening did. In practice the strongest conclusions in this kind of essay narrow rather than widen: they say what the argument has established and, honestly, what it has not, which is also the reflective consideration of viewpoints the grid asks for.

Worked example

Structuring by level of disagreement rather than by side

Your topic has a clear two-sided look to it. Show how to restructure it by level, and what that gains.

The structure to avoid
Three paragraphs for, three against, a conclusion. It is easy to plan and it produces an essay that reads as a debate transcript. Worse, it forces every argument onto a side, when in most controversies some arguments belong to neither: the facts, for instance, are usually agreed by both sides and belong at the top of the essay rather than in one of the two columns.
Level one — what is agreed
Open by establishing what both sides accept, with the sources cross-referenced. “Nid oes anghytundeb ynghylch y ffigurau eu hunain: mae'r ddau adroddiad yn nodi'r un cynnydd.” This does three things at once — it demonstrates the sources, it clears ground, and it tells the reader that the disagreement lies elsewhere, which immediately conveys complexity.
Level two — what the agreed facts mean
This is where most controversies actually live and it is where your argument should spend the most words. State the two readings of the same evidence, in their strongest forms, and show what each has to assume. The anticipation of the negative argument belongs here, because at this level the objection is not an attack on your position but a rival interpretation of the same data — which is what a valid counter-argument looks like.
Level three — what should be done
Only now does the question of action arise, and it will not follow automatically from level two: two people can agree about what the evidence means and disagree about what to do, because that is a question about values and costs. Separating this out is often the most perceptive move available, and 'consider viewpoints perceptively' is the grid's own phrase for it.
What the restructure gains
The essay now has a shape that could not be rearranged without loss, which is what 'structure the work purposefully' means. It puts the sources at the top where they do most work, puts the anticipation in the middle where it belongs, and makes the conclusion genuinely reachable — because after three levels there is something specific to conclude, rather than a tally to add up.

Result: Replace the for-and-against with three levels: what both sides agree (with the sources cross-referenced), what the agreed facts mean (where the anticipated counter-argument belongs, as a rival reading rather than an attack), and what should be done (a question of values that does not follow from level two). The order then cannot be rearranged without loss.

Typical mistakes

Saving the objection until a defensive paragraph near the end, which is acknowledgement rather than anticipation.
Choosing an easy objection to answer, which the phrase 'valid counter-arguments' excludes.
Writing a symmetrical for-and-against, which conveys simplicity rather than complexity.
Concluding by restating the introduction in different words.

Active revision

Write the strongest possible case AGAINST your own position, in 300 words, before you write a line of the essay. Do it properly — try to convince yourself. Two things follow: you will discover which parts of your position are actually weak, and you will have the anticipation paragraph already drafted. If you cannot write 300 convincing words against yourself, either the topic is not controversial or you have not read enough.

Active recall

Recall the key points — then reveal.

Sources: WJEC GCE AS/A level Welsh (First Language) specification — Unit 2 Assessment Grid, Task TWO band descriptors (WJEC CBAC)

Essay or speech? The register decision, and the Welsh that follows from it#

StandardUnit 2 Task Two — produce an essay or written speech, SUITABLE FOR DELIVERY, presenting an opinion or viewpointTask Two grid — give careful consideration to register, format and audience by appropriate variation of style WHEN NECESSARYAO3 — demonstrate awareness of various linguistic registers and make effective use of Welsh in different situations and for different purposes

The task permits two formats and they are not interchangeable. An essay is written to be read: it can carry subordination, parenthesis, a long sentence that unfolds, and a reader who can go back. A speech is written to be heard: it needs shorter units, repetition that would be redundant on the page, direct address, and a structure a listener can hold without re-reading. The specification's phrase is 'an essay or written speech, suitable for delivery', which means that if you choose the speech, deliverability is part of what is being assessed — and the surest test is to read it aloud, which is also the surest way to find out whether you have written a speech or an essay with vocatives in it.

The grid's phrasing on register here is subtly different from Task One's and worth noticing. Task One asks for register handled 'by using a variation of styles'; Task Two asks for it 'by appropriate variation of style WHEN NECESSARY'. That qualification matters. An argued essay does not want the range of registers a short story wants; it wants a controlling register held steadily, with departures only where the argument needs them — a change of tone for the counter-argument, a plainer register for the statistics, a warmer one at the conclusion if it is a speech. Variation for display will read here as instability rather than range.

If you choose the speech, the Welsh has particular resources and they should be prepared in advance. Direct address: Gyfeillion, Foneddigion a boneddigesau, or simply Chi sy'n gwybod hyn cystal â neb. Rhetorical questioning: Beth, felly, sydd ar ôl i'w ddweud? Triadic structure, which Welsh oratory has used for a very long time. And repetition of a phrase across paragraphs, which on the page looks like a fault and in a hall does not. None of this is decoration: it is the format's grammar, and the grid marks format.

If you choose the essay, the resources are different and mostly consist of connectives and precision. This is where the twelve argument-shaping connectives from iaith-ar-waith earn their place — serch hynny, er hynny, o ganlyniad, ar y llaw arall, at hynny, hynny yw, yn wir, beth bynnag — because in a written argument the connective is what tells the reader the relation between two claims, and a reader who has to infer it is being made to do the writer's work. In a two-hour handwritten task these are also efficient: one accurate connective can replace a sentence of explanation.

Worked example

The same argument opened as an essay and as a speech

Take one opening move and write it both ways, then say what each version costs and gains.

As an essay
“Mae'n demtasiwn trin y cwestiwn hwn fel un y mae ffeithiau'n gallu ei setlo, ac mae'r ddau adroddiad diweddaraf, sy'n cytuno'n llwyr ar y ffigurau, yn dangos pam nad yw hynny'n wir.” One sentence, subordinated, carrying a claim and its evidence together. A reader can hold it because they can re-read the middle clause. It is efficient, and it establishes at once that this essay knows where the disagreement is not.
As a speech
“Mae'r ffigurau'n glir. Does neb yn eu herio nhw. Mae'r ddau adroddiad yn cytuno — ac eto rydyn ni'n dal i anghytuno. Pam?” Four units, none subordinated, ending on a question the rest of the speech answers. A listener can follow all of it at first hearing. It has used more words to say less and it has bought comprehension with them, which is the trade every speech makes.
What the speech gains
Momentum and a hearer who is with you. The short units carry the listener forward and the closing question creates an expectation the speech can satisfy. Read aloud, the essay version needs to be heard twice; the speech version does not, and 'suitable for delivery' is the specification's own criterion.
What the speech costs
Density. Over 1,500 words a speech will carry noticeably less argument than an essay of the same length, because repetition and short units use words that the essay spends on content. If your topic's complexity is its main interest, the essay is the better format; if your topic's difficulty is that people will not listen to the other side, the speech is.
The decision rule
Choose the speech when the obstacle is persuasion and the essay when the obstacle is complexity. Then commit: the worst outcome is a piece that hedges between the two, because format is one of the three things the register bullet marks, and a piece with no format has nothing for that bullet to reward.

Result: The essay subordinates and is dense; the speech uses short units, direct address and a closing question, and buys comprehension with words the essay spends on content. Choose the speech when the obstacle is persuasion and the essay when the obstacle is complexity — then commit, because a hedged format leaves the register bullet nothing to reward.

Typical mistakes

Writing an essay and adding vocatives to it, which produces neither format.
Varying register for display in a piece whose grid asks for variation only when necessary.
Building a speech from long subordinated sentences a listener could not follow.
Rotating between four connectives in an argued essay, so the argument's shape is never signalled.

Active revision

Write your opening 200 words twice, once as an essay and once as a speech, then read both aloud to somebody who does not know the topic and ask them to tell you what your position is. The version they can restate accurately after one hearing is the speech. If neither can be restated, the position is not yet clear enough to write either.

Active recall

Recall the key points — then reveal.

Sources: WJEC GCE AS/A level Welsh (First Language) specification — Unit 2 Task Two format and assessment grid (WJEC CBAC)

Exam technique: building the one legal A4 side#

Advanced§3.2 — candidates are permitted to take into the assessment up to one side of an A4 page of short bullet points (font size 11 or above) that they have prepared in advance; the bullet points may include statistics, facts, examples and relevant quotations; the candidate must NOT include full paragraphs or full sentences on this page; the page must be submitted with the completed task§3.2 — two hours; a week's notice; dictionaries permitted; no word processor for task 2

The rule has four parts and each of them is a design constraint. UP TO ONE SIDE of A4, so both sides is not permitted and the space is finite. FONT SIZE 11 OR ABOVE, so it cannot be shrunk to fit and there is a hard ceiling on how much it can hold — roughly forty to fifty short bullet lines at that size with normal margins. SHORT BULLET POINTS which may include statistics, facts, examples and relevant quotations, so content is generously permitted. And NOT full paragraphs or full sentences, which is the line that cannot be crossed. The page is submitted with the completed task, so a moderator will see whether you crossed it.

That combination means the page should be built for RETRIEVAL rather than for reading. What you cannot carry in your head under pressure is precise material: figures, dates, names, the exact wording of a quotation, the title and author of each source. What you do not need on the page is anything you could reconstruct — an argument you have rehearsed, a structure you have practised, a connective you use every day. Most under-performing pages are the reverse of this: half a page of remembered argument in near-sentences, and no figures.

A workable layout divides the side into four blocks. Sources, one line each: author, title, and the single thing that source is for. Figures, one line each, each with its source attached so that you can attribute it in the essay. Quotations, four or five at most, short, exact, each with its speaker. And a spine — the five or six structural moves of your essay as bare noun phrases, which is legal because a noun phrase is not a sentence, and which does the work of a plan without being one. Four blocks, forty lines, and nothing on the page that is not precise.

Two warnings. First, the no-full-sentences rule is not a formality: a page of bullet points that are really sentences with the full stops removed is a page that a moderator can identify, and it puts the work's validation at risk rather than merely losing a mark. Write in noun phrases and fragments — “Adroddiad 2019 — 34% — cynnydd o 8 pwynt” rather than “Mae adroddiad 2019 yn dangos cynnydd o wyth pwynt canran.” Second, build the page at least a fortnight early and then use it in a full two-hour rehearsal. A page you have never written from is a page whose gaps you will discover in the second hour of the real thing.

Worked example

Building the A4 side, block by block

Build a legal, useful page for a researched argument. Show the format of each block and the line that must not be crossed.

Block one — sources, one line each
“Jones, Adroddiad y Pwyllgor 2019 — y ffigurau sylfaenol” · “Davies, erthygl Barn 2021 — yr esboniad economaidd” · “Adroddiad Llywodraeth Cymru 2022 — y cefndir polisi”. Author, title, and what the source is FOR. Four or five lines. This block alone lets you attribute everything in the essay, which is the visible part of cross-referencing.
Block two — figures, each with its source
“34% (Jones 2019)” · “codiad o 8 pwynt, 2015–19 (Jones)” · “£2.3m y flwyddyn (LlC 2022)”. Number, what it measures if that is not obvious, and the source in brackets. Ten to fifteen lines. These are the things that cannot be reconstructed under pressure and they are what a moderator would expect this page to be for.
Block three — quotations, short and exact
Four or five, none longer than about a dozen words, each with its speaker. A quotation is explicitly permitted by the rule, and it is the one kind of material where approximation is worthless — a misquoted source is worse than no quotation. Keep them short: in a handwritten two-hour task, a long quotation costs minutes.
Block four — the spine, in noun phrases
“1 Yr hyn y cytunir arno” · “2 Y ddau ddehongliad” · “3 Y wrthddadl gryfaf” · “4 Yr ateb iddi” · “5 Cwestiwn y gwerthoedd” · “6 Casgliad — beth sydd wedi ei sefydlu, a beth sydd heb”. Six noun phrases. Each names a move without stating a claim, which keeps the page inside the rule while giving you the structure you rehearsed.
The line, tested
Legal: “Adroddiad 2019 — 34% — cynnydd o 8 pwynt ers 2015”. Not legal: “Mae adroddiad 2019 yn dangos bod y ffigwr wedi codi i 34%, sef cynnydd o wyth pwynt canran ers 2015.” The second has a verb, a subject and a full stop; it is a sentence with a dash in front of it. The test to apply to every line before you print the page is simply: does this line contain a finite verb? If it does, rewrite it.

Result: Four blocks on one side: sources (author, title, what it is for), figures (each with its source in brackets), four or five short exact quotations with speakers, and a six-item spine written as noun phrases. Test every line with one question — does it contain a finite verb? If it does, it is a sentence and it must be rewritten.

Typical mistakes

Writing sentences with the full stops removed, which is the one rule that puts validation at risk.
Filling the page with argument you already know and omitting the figures you do not.
Recording a statistic without its source, so it cannot be attributed in the essay.
Building the page the night before and using it for the first time in the assessment.

Active revision

Build the page, then sit a two-hour rehearsal with it and mark, afterwards, every moment you reached for something that was not there. Rebuild the page from those gaps. Do this twice. The second page will be about half the length of the first and roughly twice as useful, because most of what you put on a first attempt turns out to be material you did not need to be told.

Active recall

Recall the key points — then reveal.

Sources: WJEC GCE AS/A level Welsh (First Language) specification — §3.2, the task under special conditions and the permitted A4 page (WJEC CBAC)

References & sources

Sources

WJEC CBAC

WJEC GCE AS/A level Welsh (First Language) specification — Unit 2 Task Two and §3.2 task under special conditions

Gwaith Cwrs: Argumentative Essay (NEA)

Key points

Choosing a topic that can actually carry the mark scheme

Key points

The same two sources, five ways

Key points

Structuring by level of disagreement rather than by side

Key points

The same argument opened as an essay and as a speech

Key points

Building the A4 side, block by block

Sources

Gwaith Cwrs: Argumentative Essay (NEA)

Key points

Choosing a topic that can actually carry the mark scheme

Key points

The same two sources, five ways

Key points

Structuring by level of disagreement rather than by side

Key points

The same argument opened as an essay and as a speech

Key points

Building the A4 side, block by block

Sources