Reduce errors — run the tool AND act on each flag
Spell check flags typed words missing from its dictionary; grammar check flags sentences that seem to break a grammar rule. Both are automated software tools. Running one is only step one: the syllabus aim is that finished work has as few errors as possible, which needs the candidate to act on each flag — accept a correct suggestion, reject a wrong one, or retype a word the tool missed. Running a check and closing the dialog without reviewing every flag reduces nothing.
Validation — allowable against a rule, not proven correct
A validation routine is a rule built into a field that checks data as it is entered and rejects any value breaking the rule — e.g. an empty compulsory field, or a negative "age". Its purpose is to minimise data entry errors. But passing validation proves only that data is reasonable/allowable, not the true value: an age typed as 13 when it is really 14 is still a valid in-range number. Matching an entry to its source is verification — no single check proves data correct.
Six validation checks, each matched to a field
Six checks are named, each testing one property: presence (is anything entered), range (a number within set limits), length (the character count), type (the right kind of data), format (a set pattern like dd/mm/yyyy), character (only permitted characters). Match each field to the check(s) that fit: a "score out of 100" field suits range plus type; a six-digit "student ID" suits length plus presence. The full table sits in the study note.
Drawn from real examiner reports.
Validation proves allowable, not correct
Passing a validation check means only that the data is reasonable and allowable against the rule — never that it is the actual correct value. An age entered as 13 when it is really 14 passes a range check unchallenged. Checking an entry against its source is verification, a different technique. Defining validation as simply "checking the data is correct" loses the mark.
w23 P11 Q10, w23 P12 Q9, s22 P13 Q13b: candidates treated a passed validation check as proof the data was correct, not merely allowable.
Name the exact check, not a paraphrase
Cambridge rewards the precise term — presence, range, length, type, format or character check — not a paraphrase such as "empty check", "size check" or "letters check". The right idea does not rescue an imprecise name, and the check named must match the field described. Any field name quoted must be copied exactly, including underscores.
w22 P13 Q7, s22 P11 Q14, s22 P13 Q2, w23 P13 Q1: candidates lost marks for naming a check vaguely, not matching it to the field, or not copying the field name exactly.
Presence check needs a compulsory field
A presence check tests that a field is not left empty, so it only fits a field that can never legitimately be blank. Suggesting it for an optional field — an "additional comments" box a user may leave empty — is wrong, because a blank there is not an error. Check the field's rule (must it always hold a value?) before naming a presence check.
w23 P11 Q10b: a presence check only works where a field cannot legitimately be empty.
Spell check cannot catch homophones
A correctly spelled word is never flagged, even when it is the wrong word for the meaning. "Their", "there" and "they're" are all valid spellings, so "I went their yesterday" passes spell check untouched. The syllabus states automated suggestions do not always give the correct response: spell check catches misspelled words, not wrong-but-correctly-spelled ones.
Do not auto-accept a spell-check fix
An unrecognised proper noun or technical term not in the dictionary is flagged exactly like a genuine misspelling. Accepting the suggested "correction" without reading it can replace a correct word (e.g. a real surname) with a wrong dictionary one. Treat every suggestion as something to check against the intended meaning, not accept blindly.
Running a check is not acting on it
Reducing errors is a two-step process: run spell/grammar check, then make the appropriate change to each flag. Simply running the tool and closing the dialog without reviewing every item fixes nothing — the mark is for the correction, not for having run the check. For each flag, decide whether it is a genuine error or a false positive, then act.
Work the field through six questions
For "suggest a suitable check", test the field in turn: must it always hold a value (presence)? numeric limits (range)? a set character count (length)? a required data kind (type)? a fixed pattern (format)? only certain characters (character)? Then name it by its exact term.
A field can need more than one check
A field can have more than one relevant property (e.g. always present AND exactly six digits), so more than one check may be needed — name each and justify it separately, not one check for several properties. Say how each applies (what rule it enforces), not just its name.
Match the command word
Match your answer to the command word: "state/identify a check" wants the exact term only, while "explain/describe" wants the term plus a reason for why it suits the field. A bare name where a reason was asked, or a paragraph where one word was wanted, both cost marks.
Full notes, flashcards, Q&A and the topic quiz for every premium subject.
Premium plans are US$8.99/month or US$49.99/year — first month free.
Studying with a parent's blessing? Show them this.
