Cambridge A-Level English Language: Paper 2 Writing (9093)

This guide covers Paper 2 Writing, the second of the two AS Level papers in Cambridge International AS & A Level English Language (9093). Where Paper 1 tests reading and analysis, Paper 2 tests production: writing to a brief, then reflecting on your own choices, followed by a longer piece of extended writing.

Where this fits in 9093

Paper 2 draws on the same underlying knowledge and understanding as Paper 1 – the specification is explicit that Paper 2 shares Paper 1’s content on textual forms, linguistic features and audience awareness – but applies it in the opposite direction: instead of analysing someone else’s writing, you produce your own to a specified form, audience and purpose. Together, Papers 1 and 2 make up the full AS Level; A Level candidates then add Paper 3 Language Analysis and Paper 4 Language Topics.

Assessment structure

CAMBRIDGE INTERNATIONAL AS & A LEVEL ENGLISH LANGUAGE (9093) — PAPER 2 WRITING

Two hours, 50 marks total, no dictionaries allowed.

• Section A — Shorter writing and reflective commentary (25 marks, compulsory Question 1). Part (a) is a shorter piece of writing (no more than 400 words) to a specified brief — typically a real-world form such as a leaflet, letter or speech — worth 15 marks. Part (b) is a reflective commentary of around 250 words, worth 10 marks, in which you explain how your linguistic choices in part (a) contribute to fulfilling the task.
• Section B — Extended writing (25 marks, choice of one from three). A longer piece of 600–900 words, chosen from three options that are typically one descriptive or narrative piece, one discursive piece (such as an article or letter debating an issue), and one review. All three are marked on the same 25-mark scale.

How to approach Section A

Part (a) rewards precision within a tight word limit: 400 words is not much room, so plan the piece’s structure before writing rather than discovering it as you go. Because the task always specifies a form, an audience and a purpose, the strongest responses adopt the conventions of that form immediately and consistently — a leaflet needs headings and direct address; a speech needs rhetorical patterning and a spoken register; a letter needs a level of formality appropriate to its recipient.

Part (b)’s reflective commentary is not a second piece of writing about the same topic — it is analysis of your own text. Structure it the same way you would analyse someone else’s writing in Paper 1: identify a specific linguistic or structural choice you made, quote it from your own part (a) response, and explain why it serves the brief’s audience and purpose. A commentary that only narrates (“I wrote a leaflet about moving away from home, and I used headings”) earns little; a commentary that justifies (“I used direct second-person address throughout, addressing the reader as ‘you’, to create the sense of personal, individual guidance that the brief’s teenage audience needed”) earns considerably more.

How to approach Section B

The three options on Section B test different registers of the same underlying skill: sustained, controlled writing at length. A descriptive or narrative piece rewards sensory detail and a controlled narrative voice — focus on a small number of well-developed images rather than cataloguing everything present in a scene. A discursive piece (an article or similar, debating an issue) rewards a balanced structure that gives genuine weight to more than one side of an argument before reaching a considered position, rather than a one-sided argument dressed up as balance. A review rewards a consistent evaluative voice and specific, concrete detail about the thing being reviewed, rather than vague praise or criticism that could apply to anything.

Whichever option you choose, the 600–900 word range is a genuine constraint in both directions: well under 600 words rarely allows the sustained development the mark scheme rewards, and well over 900 risks losing control of structure and running out of exam time for the checking pass every piece of extended writing needs.

Worked example: planning Section A part (a)

A brief asks for a leaflet for new students, giving advice on managing homesickness in their first term away. A strong plan, made before writing, might look like:

Heading/opening: warm, reassuring tone -- normalise the feeling
Section 1: practical advice (staying in touch, routine, campus resources)
Section 2: emotional advice (it gets easier, give it time, talk to someone)
Closing: a specific next step (a named contact, a society, a helpline)

Committing to this shape before drafting means the 400-word limit is spent on developed advice rather than on a rambling opening that has to be cut later — and it gives part (b)’s commentary something concrete and deliberate to reflect on, rather than choices made on the fly that are harder to justify afterwards.

Worked example: justifying a choice in the reflective commentary

Having written the leaflet above, a strong commentary sentence might read: “I used short, simple imperative sentences throughout (‘Keep a routine’, ‘Talk to someone’) rather than longer, hedged advice, because the brief’s teenage audience needed guidance that felt direct and actionable rather than tentative, especially given the emotional difficulty of the situation the leaflet addresses.” Notice the shape: the specific choice is named, quoted from the actual text, and explicitly linked back to audience and purpose — the three-part structure that examiners are looking for in every sentence of the commentary, not just a general summary of the piece at the end.

Common mistakes

Writing part (a) without first deciding on form, audience and purpose, so the piece drifts into generic prose. Treating the reflective commentary as a second essay about the topic rather than analysis of the writing itself. Choosing a Section B option based on which sounds most impressive rather than which can genuinely be sustained and controlled for 600–900 words. Running well under or well over the word ranges given for either section. Neglecting register — writing a leaflet in an academic-essay register, or a discursive article in a casual, unstructured one.

Quick revision checklist

• Identify form, audience and purpose before drafting part (a), and plan its structure first.
• Write the reflective commentary as analysis of your own choices — identify, quote, explain — not as narration.
• Match register and structure to the Section B option chosen: sensory detail for descriptive/narrative, balanced argument for discursive, consistent evaluative voice for review.
• Stay within the word ranges given for both sections.
• Leave time to check both pieces before the two hours end.

Official syllabus

Cambridge International AS & A Level English Language (9093) syllabus for 2024, 2025 and 2026 — cambridgeinternational.org.