GCSE
How to Answer Evaluate Questions at GCSE
Evaluate questions want three things: a developed argument for, a developed argument against, and a judgement that actually follows from what you wrote. They are level-marked, so two explained points beat five listed ones. Use any data you are given, and never bolt on a conclusion you have not earned.
I lost marks on evaluate questions for a full year before anyone explained how they are actually marked. I sit Cambridge IGCSE rather than AQA or Edexcel, but the command word rules are nearly identical across boards, and the marking method is the same: examiners read your whole answer and place it in a level, not tick individual points. Once you know what pushes an answer from Level 2 to Level 3, these questions stop being scary and start being predictable. This page covers what evaluate, justify and discuss each demand, how level marking works, and a worked six-mark example with a model answer you can compare against your own attempt.
What evaluate, justify and discuss each ask for
Evaluate means weigh up. You need points on both sides and a judgement about which side wins, ideally tied to the context or data in the question. Discuss is softer: present both sides in a balanced way, and check whether the question says reach a conclusion, because sometimes the judgement is optional and sometimes it is where the last marks sit. Justify means the decision is already made, or you make it in your first line, and the whole answer defends it using the evidence provided. The common trap is treating all three the same and writing a list of facts. None of these command words rewards knowledge on its own. A six-mark evaluate answer with four accurate facts and no weighing up usually scores two or three, while an answer with two facts argued properly on each side plus a supported judgement can take full marks.
How level marking actually works
Nobody told me this until Year 10: on these questions, examiners do not tick points, they read the whole answer and match it to a level descriptor. A typical six-mark grid looks like this. Level 1 answers make simple, separate statements. Level 2 answers explain points on one or both sides but do not connect them into an argument. Level 3 answers build a coherent line of reasoning on both sides and finish with a judgement that follows from it. Two things push answers up a level. First, chains of reasoning: this happens, which causes this, which means this. Second, using the actual data or context in the question rather than writing a generic answer that could fit any question. If the question gives you numbers, quote them and do something with them. A sentence like the sample size of ten is too small to rule out chance moves you up a level almost by itself.
A structure that works under time pressure
Spend thirty seconds planning three boxes: for, against, judgement. Write one developed paragraph for each. In the for paragraph, make a point and push it two steps further with because and this means. Do the same against. Then write a judgement that names the deciding factor, not just a side. The phrase it depends on is genuinely useful here: the claim might be reliable if the study were repeated with a control group, or the strongest factor is the sample size because everything else could be fixed. Do not introduce brand new points in the conclusion, because examiners read that as an unfinished argument rather than a judgement. And do not hedge into nothing. Both sides have merit is not a judgement, it is a shrug. Commit to a side, name your reason, and stop writing. On a six-marker this whole routine fits comfortably into eight or nine minutes.
Worked questions, step by step
A drinks company claims that its new isotonic sports drink improves sprint performance. To test the claim, the company gave the drink to ten of its own employees and timed them running 100 m before and after drinking it. The average time improved by 0.2 seconds. There was no control group. Evaluate whether the evidence supports the company's claim. (6 marks)
- Plan three boxes before writing: what supports the claim, what weakens it, and your judgement. Aim for two developed points on each side.
- For the claim: the times did improve on average, and the improvement was measured with a before-and-after comparison of the same runners, which removes differences between individuals.
- Against the claim: the sample is only ten people, so the 0.2 second change could easily be chance. There is no control group drinking water or a placebo, so the improvement could be caused by being warmed up on the second run or by expecting to be faster, not by the drink itself.
- Also against: the runners were the company's own employees, so there is a risk of bias in who was chosen and how times were recorded, and 0.2 seconds may sit within normal variation between repeat sprints anyway.
- Judgement: weigh the sides and commit. The weaknesses in the method matter more than the result itself, because a repeat run is usually faster regardless of what you drink.
Answer: Model judgement: the evidence does not support the claim. The improvement is small, the sample of ten employees is too small to rule out chance, and without a control group the faster second run could be caused by practice or expectation rather than the drink. The claim could only be tested properly with a larger, independent sample and a placebo control group.
Where marks slip: Level 3 needs both sides plus a judgement that follows from your reasoning. A conclusion the examiner could delete without losing anything, like I think the drink is good, keeps you in Level 2.
Try one yourself: A toothpaste company claims its new formula reduces cavities. It surveyed 15 customers who bought the toothpaste, and 12 reported fewer cavities over one year. There was no comparison group. Evaluate whether the evidence supports the claim. (6 marks)
Stuck on a different question?
Paste or photograph it and get the full working, free — no account needed.
Solve my question →Quiz me on this topicQuestions students ask
Do I always need a conclusion in an evaluate answer?
Yes. For evaluate and justify, the top level of the mark scheme is effectively closed to answers without a supported judgement. For discuss, read the question: if it says reach a conclusion, treat it as compulsory. Either way, a one-line judgement costs thirty seconds and can be worth two marks.
How long should a 6 mark evaluate answer be?
Around three short paragraphs, roughly 120 to 180 words. Length is not marked, reasoning is. A tight answer with two developed points per side and a judgement beats a full page of listed facts, because level marking rewards the quality of the argument, not coverage.
Is evaluate the same as discuss?
Close but not identical. Both want balance. Evaluate always requires you to weigh the sides and commit to a judgement. Discuss sometimes lets you present both sides without picking one, though many mark schemes still reserve the top marks for a conclusion, so committing is the safer habit.
Do I lose marks for writing in bullet points?
You will not be penalised directly, but bullets push you toward listing instead of linking, and level marking rewards connected reasoning. Full sentences with because, so and which means make your chain of logic visible to the examiner. I only use bullet-style notes for the thirty-second plan.