What is "the Effect on the Reader"?
There is one aspect of my teaching that I am improving as a result of the Senior Examiner feedback in the current English Language course.
Several students were scoring 16/20 on Question 4 of Paper 1. 15/20 is a grade 9. But the examiner kept adding the same piece of advice:
“Write about the effect on the reader”.
I’ve always simplified this to:
“Write about how the writer makes us think, feel or predict”.
But, my students were still getting 16/20. So, I emailed one, with a much more detailed explanation, and a thinking question.
Her next Question 4 of Paper 1 scored 20/20!
So this is that explanation. Use it well!
The ‘effect on the reader’ means different things to different people - it feels vague.
So, I’m going to explain it in a few different ways. The first thing I’ve done is put a student answer into TILF - read through the comments and the examples where it has rewritten some of your sentences to show you what ‘the effect on the reader’ is.
Then, before you read anything else, write down in your own words what you think ‘the effect on the reader ‘means.
For example:
When I write about the effect on the reader, I need to first …., secondly… , and third …..
This is Tilf’s Feedback
What Went Well
The essay presents a balanced view, acknowledging both sides of the argument regarding the book’s significance to Percy. This demonstrates critical thinking.
There is a good use of textual references, such as “magical well” and “temptation,” which supports your points about the book’s value and Percy’s motivations.
The essay shows an understanding of various literary devices, such as personification and hyperbole, which enhances the evaluation of the text.
Even Better If
To improve, focus on providing more detailed analysis of how specific writer’s methods affect the reader’s understanding of Percy. For example, explain how the pacing contributes to the suspense and what that means for the reader’s engagement with the text.
Ensure that each point made is clearly linked back to the question. For instance, when discussing Percy’s actions, explicitly connect how these actions lead to the conclusion that the book is special and why that matters in the context of the theft.
Consider varying your sentence structure to enhance clarity and flow. Some sentences are quite long and could be broken down for easier understanding, which would strengthen your argument.
Stronger Writing
Instead of saying “The fact that Percy “rereads” the text could also imply that Percy has never seen something so significant and special,” you could say, “Percy’s decision to reread the text underscores his recognition of its significance, suggesting that he is not only captivated by its content but also aware of its potential impact on his future.”
Examples
Original Text:
he merely “glances” and “scans” the work – these verb choices seem to make Percy seem rushed and careless
Rewritten Example:
Percy’s tendency to merely ‘glance’ and ‘scan’ the work reflects not only his carelessness but also his initial disinterest in the book, suggesting a character who is overwhelmed by the information rather than engaged with it.
Reasoning:
This revision provides a deeper analysis of how Percy’s actions reveal his character development, enhancing the evaluation of the writer’s methods.
Original Text:
the hyperbole “quench his thirst for knowledge” that he definitely wants to learn from the book, to gain “knowledge” however, the “thirst” could reveal his desire for something he may want the book for monetary purposes.
Rewritten Example:
The hyperbole ‘quench his thirst for knowledge’ suggests that while Percy genuinely seeks knowledge, it also hints at a deeper, perhaps more selfish motivation for wanting the book, which complicates the reader’s perception of him as a purely academic character.
Reasoning:
This example clarifies the duality of Percy’s motivations, allowing for a more nuanced understanding of his character and how it affects the reader’s perception.
Original Text:
the climactic phrase “this knowledge was his alone” this could suggest that Percy will likely take the book for himself not the betterment of education.
Rewritten Example:
The climactic phrase ‘this knowledge was his alone’ not only highlights Percy’s internal conflict between the desire for personal gain and the ethical implications of his actions but also foreshadows his potential decision to keep the book for himself, raising questions about the morality of his character.
Reasoning:
This revision connects the analysis back to the overall argument about the book’s significance, emphasizing the implications of Percy’s internal conflict.
Ok, write down your definition of effect on the reader.
On the next page, I’ve given Tilf’s improvements to Gemini, and asked it to summarise what ‘effect on the reader means’. Read Gemini’s comments, and decide if your definition of effect on the reader needs to change.
Gemini’s Explanation
To achieve the top marks in a GCSE English Language exam (specifically AO2), students need to move away from “identifying” a feeling and toward evaluating the writer’s craft. Looking at your examples, here is the “formula” for what a student is actually doing when they successfully write about the effect on the reader.
Move from ‘What’ to ‘Why’ (Character Revelation)
In your first example, the original text simply labels Percy as “rushed.” The stronger version explains why the reader should care about that behavior.
The Technique: Instead of just spotting a verb, the student uses the verb to diagnose a state of mind.
The Effect: By linking “glancing” to “disinterest” and “feeling overwhelmed,” the student tells the reader that Percy’s actions are symptoms of his internal struggle.
Key takeaway: Don’t just say the reader sees him as “careless”; explain that the reader sees a character struggling to engage with his environment.
2. Explore ‘Duality’ and Ambiguity
The second example (the “thirst for knowledge” hyperbole) shows the difference between a surface-level reading and a high-level analysis.
Original: Suggests he might want money.
Stronger: Uses the word “complicates.” * The Effect: A strong student shows how the writer makes the reader feel conflicted. By suggesting Percy has “selfish motivations,” the writer forces the reader to question whether they should be rooting for the protagonist or distrusting him.
Key takeaway: The best “effect on the reader” is often uncertainty. Use phrases like “this creates a sense of unease in the reader regarding...” or “the reader’s sympathy is subverted by...”
3. Structural Significance (Foreshadowing and Morality)
The final example regarding “this knowledge was his alone” shows how to link a specific quote to the “big picture” of the whole text.
The Shift: The student moves from a simple prediction (”he will take the book”) to a thematic evaluation (”the morality of his character”).
The Effect: The student explains that the writer is “raising questions.” This tells the examiner that the reader isn’t just a passive observer; they are a moral judge of the character’s actions.
Key takeaway: Link the effect of the language to the structural trajectory of the story. Use terms like “foreshadows,” “intensifies,” or “resolves.”
These signal to an examiner that the student is thinking about the text as a constructed piece of art designed to manipulate an audience, rather than just a story about a man named Percy.
By focusing on the “potential impact on his future” (as seen in your first rewritten example), the student proves they are tracking the character’s journey, which is exactly what a Level 4 (Perceptive/Detailed) response requires.
Now that you have read that, rewrite your definition of “the effect on the reader”.
In the next part, I asked Gemini to ignore Tilf’s sophisticated vocabulary. It isn’t the vocabulary that means you are analysing the effect on the reader.
Gemini’s Clarification
Yes, absolutely. While sophisticated vocabulary like “underscores” or “nuanced” acts as a shorthand for examiners, the logic of the analysis is what actually reveals the writer’s manipulation.
A student can demonstrate a “Perceptive” (Level 4) understanding even with simpler language, as long as they focus on the mechanism of the manipulation.
The Logic of Manipulation
The core of the “Advanced Method” is moving from describing a character to describing a writer’s tool. Even with simpler words, a student can show how a writer is “pulling the strings”:
Simple Vocabulary: “The writer uses the word ‘glance’ to make us think Percy doesn’t care yet. This makes us feel surprised later when he gets obsessed with the book.”
Why it works: Even without the word “subverts,” the student has identified that the writer is purposefully misleading the audience to create a specific emotional reaction later.
Three Ways “Simpler” Writing Still Proves Manipulation
A student can show they understand the writer’s “invisible hand” by focusing on these three shifts:
1. The Change in the Reader (The “Journey”)
Manipulation is about how the reader feels at Point A versus Point B.
Analysis: “At first, the writer makes us see Percy as lazy by saying he ‘scans’ the page. This is so that when he finally finds something important, the reader feels the same shock that Percy does.”
The Logic: This shows the writer is synchronizing the reader’s emotions with the character’s.
2. The “Choice” Factor
If a student uses the phrase “The writer chose to...” or “The writer could have said X, but said Y,” they are proving manipulation.
Analysis: “The writer calls his need a ‘thirst.’ They could have just said he ‘wanted’ to learn, but ‘thirst’ makes it feel like a physical need. This makes the reader wonder if Percy is actually in control of himself.”
The Logic: It recognizes the text as a series of deliberate decisions meant to shape our view of Percy’s “selfishness.”
3. The Moral Trap
Manipulation often involves the writer “trapping” the reader into judging a character.
Analysis: “By saying the knowledge was ‘his alone,’ the writer is testing the reader. We want him to share it, but the writer is showing us that Percy is becoming greedy. This makes the reader feel disappointed in him.”
The Logic: This identifies the moral conflict the writer has intentionally built for the audience to grapple with.
The “Layering” Method
Regardless of the complexity of the words used, a student reveals manipulation by layering their thoughts. You can think of it as a “because” chain:
Percy ‘scans’ the work BECAUSE the writer wants him to look bored, WHICH MEANS the reader doesn’t expect the ending, WHICH RESULTS IN a bigger emotional impact.
In a GCSE exam, the examiner is looking for the analytical bridge between the word on the page and the “lightbulb moment” in the reader’s head. If that bridge is there, the student is “Using the Image” (and the text) effectively, whether they use the word “underscores” or simply “shows.”
Does that help clarify how the “method” sits underneath the “vocabulary”?
Right, have one last go at writing your definition of the effect on the reader. Then I’ll give you my definition.
Mr Salles’s Explanation
To write about the effect on the reader,
I must write about how we think, feel, or predict.
But I also have to write about how the writer uses the character to make us think, feel, or predict.
So, what I am really writing about is:
How does the writer control what we think or feel about the characters actions?
How does the writer reveal details about the character which make us predict what the character will do?
If I wanted to make this even simpler, I would probably say:
Write about how the writer wants us to judge the character on a moral scale.
This exercise has helped me. I’ve never thought of the moral scale before.
But, how I think about the character is really how I judge their actions, on a scale of good to bad.
How I feel about the character is based on what I believe, as a reader, is morally right or wrong. The writer has a strong idea of what a reader will consider right or wrong, and so is trying to control that.
A final way we judge a character (or a person in real life) is to imagine what the consequences will be for the things they do.
So, this gives me a new way to think about how the writer makes us think, feel or predict.
✅ Paid subscribers get the grade 20/20 answer.
✅ Paid subscribers get a grade 9 answer with my comments every week except the summer holidays, and access to the over 350+ already published. 🎓
✅ Substack thinks this is so good, that you can sample them free for a week. 👏
I strongly agree that the writer clearly presents the letters as significant. However, I partly disagree that the writer makes it predictable that Roland will steal the letters.
Through the complex sentence ‘half-looking, half reading’, the writer cleverly suggests that Roland is hesitant and unenthusiastic about carrying out the research involving this book for his employer, Professor Blackadder.
This immediately creates the impression that Roland may be idle and that the book fails to capture his attention. Consequently, his decision to steal the letters is rather unexpected for both the reader and Roland himself, as he has previously displayed considerable indifference towards the task.
The repetition of ‘half’, beginning with ‘half-there’, implies that Roland rarely commits fully to anything, highlighting his poor dedication and suggesting that he is more likely to abandon the task or leave it only partially completed rather than steal the letters.
Nevertheless, the letters are evidently important to Roland because he later ‘reads the letter again’, implying that the contents have awakened a genuine interest within him and that he is rereading it to gain a deeper understanding.
As a consequence, readers are led to believe that the letters must be remarkable because someone who is normally detached and uninterested in this type of work undergoes a noticeable transformation after discovering them.
Conversely, the writer does make it seem less surprising that Roland will steal the letters when the extract states, “He enjoyed possessing this knowledge on his own.” This suggests to readers that Roland is selfish and that this possessive tendency will later be reflected in his theft.
Roland’s reluctance to inform Professor Blackadder about his discovery indicates that he is not motivated entirely by professional responsibilities but is also driven by personal ambitions.
This encourages the reader to believe that Roland will steal the letters because he appears to be pursuing a hidden and potentially more important purpose, making his later actions seem more understandable and foreseeable.
In contrast, the writer effectively shifts attention around Roland: “The clock ticked, specks of dust danced in sunlight, Roland meditated.” The movement from the clock to the dust and then to Roland suggests that he is so disengaged from the book that his attention drifts towards other thoughts and trivial details such as a ‘speck of dust’.
Alongside his wandering focus, readers may also feel that Roland is involved in a ‘bewitching’ and dangerous journey through the ‘tiresome endlessness of the quest for knowledge’.
This makes his later decision to steal the letters more surprising because of the dramatic change in attitude from aimlessly observing the room to being consumed by questions fuelled by curiosity.
Furthermore, when Roland opens the letter ‘delicately’, he examines it with great care, noticing the handwriting, describing it as ‘flowing’, and observing the address. The adverb ‘delicately’ highlights the depth of Roland’s fascination. The letters have captured his attention because they appear to contain something valuable, as shown by the care with which he handles them compared with his earlier ‘haphazardly’ approach.
Through the repeated use of rhetorical questions, the writer makes it unmistakably clear that the letters have sparked Roland’s curiosity because he now wishes to broaden his knowledge rather than merely continue the original search.
Therefore, readers become convinced that Roland has uncovered something extraordinary within the letters because he is eager to continue what was previously described as a ‘bewitching’ pursuit.
When Roland is ‘seized’ by an impulse, the use of this forceful verb foreshadows the later moment when Roland ‘slips’ the letters away. Alternatively, the aggressive verb suggests that stealing the letters has become unavoidable, as though he has been trapped by the temptation.
The hunger Roland had previously noticed — “faint constriction of his belly” — disappears after reading the letters; “He had forgotten about his lunch”. This implies that the letters are almost supernatural in their power, captivating Roland so completely that even someone portrayed as ‘greedy’ forgets about food.
Therefore, the reader is encouraged to view the letters as highly significant, meaning that Roland’s decision to steal them becomes less surprising.
In conclusion, after considering both sides of the statement, I strongly agree that the letters are special and disagree to some extent that the writer makes it surprising that Roland later steals the letters.
My Comments
You’ll notice she numbered her explanations to try to get to 20.
The examiner did not mark her down for this, but did comment that it was strange, and suggested that she did not do this in the actual exam.
I numbered my explanations like this when I sat the exam in June 2025. This annoyed the examiners, who marked me down.
When I sat the exam in November 2025, I still wrote exactly like this - writing as many explanations as I could. But I didn’t put them on separate lines or number them, which meant I couldn’t be sure how many I had written. The examiner loved this. I got very high marks on each question, even though I didn’t write enough explanations (because I didn’t have time to reread my answers and count them).
But my marks were never higher than the number of explanations I wrote. Points Make Prizes.