The comparison essay

One song, two productions. Every year since 2019 the paper plays you an original and a remake, and asks what the two production teams did differently, and why it matters.

(Total for Question 5 = 15 marks)

AO3 knowledge · 5 of 15 marks AO4 evaluation · 10 of 15 marks

Stimulus: Two recordings: an original and a remake
The task: Evaluate the production techniques used in both versions
How it is marked: Levels-based, every published year

01Learn the machine

The same question, year after year

Before you write a word, know what the machine rewards. None of this is guesswork. It is the exam board's own paper trail.

Version A, Version B: the seven pairings so far

In the exam you hear both versions. The command word has been 'Evaluate' every year since 2019: compare, then judge.

Year	Version A: the original	Version B: the remake
2019	Elvis Presley: A Little Less Conversation (1968)	Elvis vs. JXL: A Little Less Conversation (Radio Edit Remix) (2002)
2020	Ed Sheeran: Shape of You (2017)	Ed Sheeran & NOTD: Shape of You NOTD Remix (2017)
2021	R.E.M.: Losing My Religion (1991)	Lacuna Coil: Losing My Religion (2012)
2022	Pink Floyd: Comfortably Numb (1979)	Scissor Sisters: Comfortably Numb (2004)
2023	Van Halen: Jump (1984)	Paul Anka: Jump (2005)
2024	TOTO: Africa (1982)	BACALL & Malo (feat. Prince Osito): Africa (2016)
2025	Dean Martin: Sway (1954)	Shaft: (Mucho Mambo) Sway (1999)

Old classic, modern remake: the gap between the two production eras is the question's raw material every single year. The Summer 2026 paper was sat this May. It joins the table as Pearson publishes its materials.

The range of possible points across two recordings "would yield an unwieldy points-based mark scheme, therefore this question is marked using a levels-based mark scheme."

(2024 mark scheme, Q5 marking instructions)

What earns marks

AO4 carries the question: 10 of the 15 marksMost candidates take all five AO3 marks by naming what they hear. The 2019 examiner’s report notes candidates "did not perform as strongly in the AO4 element when providing explanations and qualitative statements": explaining what each technique does to each version is where the other ten marks live.
Chains of reasoning, then a conclusionNaming a difference is AO3. Explaining what it does to the sound of each version, then concluding, is AO4: the top level rewards "logical chains of reasoning throughout" and comparisons "reaching sophisticated conclusions".
Work aspect by aspect, both versions per aspectThe mark scheme organises its indicative content by production category with per-version rows. Answers organised the same way (one aspect at a time, covering both versions) map directly onto how the examiner credits.
Parameter-level detailThe 2019 report credits candidates "making close reference to effects parameters and their impact on the overall sound/arrangement": numbers and named settings, not vague description.

What loses them

Repeating one point across every instrumentThe 2019 report singles out "describing the pan position of every instrument in the mix": the same AO3 point restated spends time without earning marks.
Writing about the eras instead of the recordingsThe 2024 Level 2 exemplar (4 of 15) is summed up by the examiner: "most of the writing discusses the eras, but in a limited way and not applied to the songs."
Spotting without explainingNoticing that the remix uses samples earns little on its own: the 2019 report withholds credit where candidates did not explain how the samples were treated.

Level 11–3 marksVery limited
A very limited response with little credit-worthy content. Few AO3 points with no AO4 explanation. Many inaccuracies may be present.
Level 24–6 marksLimited knowledge / limited scope
A limited response — principally AO3 points, with some basic AO4 explanation rather than explaining parameters and/or the effect for each feature. Some inaccuracies may be present.
Level 37–9 marksClear / general, with limited explanation
Some valid technical detail for AO3, but with limited explanation for AO4. There are general points about technology and eras that could be applied to any song. Limited and/or general discussion of processors. Few inaccuracies are present.
Level 410–12 marksDetailed, with moderate explanation
Responses are moderately detailed, with most AO3 points accompanied by a functional AO4 explanation. Points about technology are applied to the specific songs. Parameters are discussed, with detail about the processors. Information is largely accurate. OR: a highly detailed, sophisticated response, but with limited scope.
Level 513–15 marksSophisticated / detailed, most or all points explained
Responses are sophisticated and detailed, with most/all AO3 points explained for AO4. Discussion of parameters is applied to specific instruments/time references within the songs. There is a wide scope that is not limited to one or two aspects of production. Information is accurate for the vast majority of the response.

This is the wording introduced in 2024 and kept for 2025. The dividing line it draws is the one that has always mattered: general points "that could be applied to any song" cap you at Level 3, while the top two levels demand points applied to these specific songs.

You do not have to write prose

Responses for questions 5 and 6 that used a tabular format/bullet points were generally more clearly structured and far more concise than those written in continuous prose. Candidates should be encouraged to take this approach if they prefer.

(2019 Principal Examiner’s Report)

The 2022 examiner’s report reproduces a full-marks Q5 script (15/15) written as a table, with the candidate’s plan pencilled in the margin, while the Level 2 script beside it (4/15) is continuous prose. The 2025 examiner FAQ confirms bullet points, diagrams and tables are all acceptable.

Real marked scripts exist at every level

2023Level 1 (2/15) → Level 3 (7/15) → Level 5 (15/15, four pages)
2024Level 2 (4/15) → Level 3 (9/15) → top of Level 5 (15/15)
2025Level 1 (3/15) → Level 4 (11/15)
2019Level 3 (8/15, table format) → Level 5 (15/15)

These are the exam board’s published exemplar scripts: match them against the ladder above, or ask your teacher to walk you through it.

02Practise the plan

Plan it the way it is marked

The mark scheme works aspect by aspect, with a column for each version. So should your plan.

Plan the comparison, aspect by aspect

Since 2023 the paper prints this menu of production aspects on the question itself. Pick one, plan both versions, then commit to a judgement: only then do the mark scheme’s own rows for that aspect open, right here on the page. Nothing you type is sent anywhere or marked by anyone.

Version A: the original

Version B: the remake

So what? (the evaluation)

Both versions play in the exam: plan this aspect for each before judging.

Scope: the Level 5 word0 of 6 aspects planned

03Do it for real

Write one, then hold the pen

A real past question, your own marking first, and if your class runs the dashboard, your teacher closes the loop.

First, mark it yourself

Write against a real past question, under the clock. Then pick up the pen: single underline for knowledge, double for evaluation (the board’s own notation), and set your script beside a marked exemplar to see the gap.

In a class that runs the dashboard?

Then the loop below closes it: your own teacher does the marking. Nothing on this page is sent anywhere.

1WriteYou write a set essay at your own student link.
2MarkedYour teacher marks it line by line, against AO3 and AO4.
3ImproveYou act on the notes in an improvement round.
4ReleasedMarks and feedback come back to your dashboard.

Open the grades dashboardSign in with your student link if your school runs it, or your member account if you joined independently.