Skill Align TASC English Level 3 2026 Practice Examination - Free Online Pack 0
English Level 3 | ENG315117 | External Assessment | Written Examination | 2026
- Paper
- Written Examination
- Reading
- 15 minutes
- Writing
- 3 hours
- Assessment
- 9 extended ratings attempted (15 extended ratings available)
This PDF simulates the structure, timing and analytical demands of the TASC English Level 3 written examination. It is not an official TASC examination. Type responses in a separate document when working digitally, or use the supplied response pages when printing. No prescribed-text extracts are reproduced.
English Level 3 (ENG315117) - Prescribed Text List from 2026
Module 1 - Genre Study: Dystopian Fiction
1. Atwood, Margaret. The Handmaid's Tale [1985 novel]
2. Blair, Wayne & Purcell, Leah. Cleverman - Season 1, Episodes 1 & 2 [2016 TV series] (MA15+)
3. Coleman, Claire G. Enclave [2022 novel]
4. Cuarón, Alfonso. Children of Men [2006 film] (MA15+)
5. Miller, George. Mad Max: Fury Road [2015 film] (MA15+)
6. Moore, Alan & Lloyd, David. V for Vendetta [1982 graphic novel]
7. Niccol, Andrew. Gattaca [1997 film] (M)
8. Oliver, Lauren. Delirium [2011 novel]
9. Orwell, George. 1984 [1949 novel]
10. Wood, Charlotte. The Natural Way of Things [2015 novel]
Module 1 - Genre Study: Thriller and Life Writing
Thriller
1. Coppola, Sofia. The Beguiled [2017 film] (M)
2. Harper, Jane. The Dry [2016 novel]
3. Highsmith, Patricia. Strangers on a Train [1950 novel]
4. Hitchcock, Alfred. North by Northwest [1959 film] (PG)
5. Liman, Doug. The Bourne Identity [2002 film] (M)
6. Mangan, Christine. Tangerine [2018 novel]
7. Minghella, Anthony. The Talented Mr. Ripley [1999 film] (M)
8. Perry, Kyle. The Bluffs [2020 novel]
9. Sen, Ivan. Mystery Road [2013 film] (M)
10. Temple, Peter. The Broken Shore [2005 novel]
Life Writing
1. Boochani, Behrouz. No Friend But the Mountains [2018 memoir]
2. Gillespie, Craig. I, Tonya [2017 film] (MA15+)
3. Heazlewood, Justin. Get Up Mum [2018 novel]
4. Hill, Alannah. Butterfly on a Pin [2018 memoir]
5. Kaufman, Moisés. The Laramie Project [2000 play]
6. Miller, Bennett. Capote [2005 film] (M)
7. Morris, Heather. The Tattooist of Auschwitz [2018 novel]
8. Singer, Bryan. Bohemian Rhapsody [2018 film] (M)
9. Szubanski, Magda. Reckoning: A Memoir [2015 memoir]
10. Spiegelman, Art. Maus Volumes 1 or 2 or both [1980-1991 graphic novel]
Module 2 - Adaptation Study
1. Brierley, Saroo & Buttrose, Larry. A Long Way Home [2013 memoir] AND Davis, Garth. Lion [2016 film] (PG)
2. Carver, Raymond. "So Much Water So Close to Home" in Short Cuts Selected Stories [1993] AND Lawrence, Ray. Jindabyne [2006 film] (M)
3. Ham, Rosalie. The Dressmaker [2007 novel] AND Moorhouse, Jocelyn. The Dressmaker [2015 film] (M)
4. King, Stephen. Rita Hayworth and Shawshank Redemption [1982] AND Darabont, Frank. The Shawshank Redemption [1995 film] (MA15+)
5. Lawson, Henry. The Drover's Wife [1892 short story] AND Purcell, Leah. The Drover's Wife: The Legend of Molly Johnson [2021 film] (MA15+)
6. Leigh, Julia. The Hunter [1999 novel] AND Nettheim, Daniel. The Hunter [2011 film] (MA15+)
7. Pilkington, Doris. Follow the Rabbit Proof Fence [1996 memoir] AND Noyce, Phillip & Olsen, Christine. Rabbit Proof Fence [2002 film] (PG)
8. Swarup, Vikas. Q&A [2005 novel] AND Boyle, Danny. Slumdog Millionaire [2008 film] (MA15+)
9. Thurber, James. The Secret Life of Walter Mitty [1939 short story] AND Stiller, Ben. The Secret Life of Walter Mitty [2013 film] (PG)
10. Torres, Justin. We the Animals [2011 novel] AND Zagar, Jeremiah. We the Animals [2018 film] (MA15+)
Module 3 - Close Text Study
1. Arnott, Robbie. Dusk [2024 novel]
2. Bovell, Andrew & Grenville, Kate. The Secret River [2012 play]
3. Doerr, Anthony. All the Light We Cannot See [2014 novel]
4. Harrison, Jane. The Visitors [2021 play]
5. Keegan, Claire. Small Things Like These [2021 novella]
6. Laguna, Sofie. The Eye of the Sheep [2014 novel]
7. Maynard, Nathan. 37 [2024 play]
8. Mulvany, Kate (adapter). Jasper Jones: Based on the novel by Craig Silvey [2017 play]
Text suspended until further notice — do not use for the 2026 examination.
9. Stedman, M.L. The Light Between Oceans [2012 novel]
10. Wright, Tom. Black Diggers [2014 play]
Section A - Genre Study
Answer ONE of Questions 1-3 in the form of an extended analytical essay written in the third person. Use TWO or THREE prescribed texts from the selected Module 1 elective. Suggested working time: approximately 60 minutes. Examine relationships among texts, genre and context, and analyse how genre codes and conventions, forms, mediums and modes shape meaning and audience response. This response is rated independently on Criteria 1, 4 and 6.
Question 1
3 extended ratingsDYSTOPIAN FICTION OPTION
Question 2
3 extended ratingsTHRILLER OPTION
Question 3
3 extended ratingsLIFE WRITING OPTION
Section B - Adaptation Study
Answer compulsory Question 4 in the form of an extended analytical essay written in the third person. Use BOTH texts in ONE prescribed Module 2 adaptation pair. Suggested working time: approximately 60 minutes. Analyse representations of themes, ideas and concepts and evaluate how adaptation transforms meaning through medium, genre, context, language, stylistic devices and conventions. This response is rated independently on Criteria 2, 4 and 6.
Question 4
3 extended ratingsChoose one prescribed Module 2 pair.
Section C - Close Text Study
Answer Question 5 in the form of an extended analytical essay written in the first or third person. Refer to one active Module 3 prescribed text. Suggested working time: approximately 60 minutes. This response is rated independently on Criteria 3, 4 and 6.
Question 5
3 extended ratingsSample Responses And Practice Marking Guidance
Section A Question 1
Gattaca and 1984 turn spatial organisation into an argument about who belongs. A strong response could compare the polished thresholds, restricted workplaces and genetic sorting of the film with the novel's monitored rooms, institutional zones and shrinking private space. In each text, boundaries appear administrative before they become openly violent. The comparison should show how framing, setting and narrative access invite audiences to notice that exclusion survives by presenting itself as ordinary procedure.
The sample models comparison between Gattaca and 1984 without reproducing either text.
Skill Align practice marking guidance - not an official TASC marking tool
Indicative content and practice rating guidance identify possible approaches only. Other relevant, well-supported and effectively expressed responses may receive the same or a higher practice rating. Assign the content criterion, Criterion 4 and Criterion 6 independently. Permitted practice ratings are A+, A, A-, B+, B, B-, C+, C, C-, t+, t, t-, or z. The z rating has no modifier. Do not add ratings into a numerical mark.
Criterion 1 - analyse how relationships between texts, genres and contexts shape meaning and response
Assign one independent Skill Align practice rating using Criterion 1 - analyse how relationships between texts, genres and contexts shape meaning and response E01-E03. Judge the response as a third-person extended analytical essay against the current Criterion 1 - analyse how relationships between texts, genres and contexts shape meaning and response elements.
Acceptable alternatives: Credit any defensible interpretation that uses eligible prescribed text evidence and meets the criterion elements. The response need not use the indicative guidance's text selection, argument, sequence or wording.
Do not credit by itself: Naming genre conventions without analysing how they shape meaning or response. Comparing plots while omitting relationships among text, genre and context.
Criterion 4 - compose and craft responses to texts
Assign one independent Skill Align practice rating using Criterion 4 - compose and craft responses to texts E01-E04. Judge the response as a third-person extended analytical essay against the current Criterion 4 - compose and craft responses to texts elements.
Acceptable alternatives: Credit any defensible interpretation that uses eligible prescribed text evidence and meets the criterion elements. The response need not use the indicative guidance's text selection, argument, sequence or wording.
Do not credit by itself: Presenting disconnected observations without a sustained contention or developed analytical structure. Using evidence as illustration without integrating it into the argument.
Criterion 6 - use accurate and effective language
Assign one independent Skill Align practice rating using Criterion 6 - use accurate and effective language E01-E04. Rate language control independently from task interpretation; do not reduce Criterion 6 solely because the response misunderstands the question.
Acceptable alternatives: Credit any defensible interpretation that uses eligible prescribed text evidence and meets the criterion elements. The response need not use the indicative guidance's text selection, argument, sequence or wording.
Do not credit by itself: Reducing this criterion because the task interpretation is weak even though language control is demonstrated. Ignoring persistent grammar, punctuation, vocabulary, syntax, clarity or cohesion problems.
Section A Question 2
Mystery Road and The Talented Mr. Ripley are both films that use portable objects to redirect suspicion while controlling discovery through film form. A strong response could compare framing, editing, performance, sound, mise-en-scene and restricted narration as evidence moves between people and places. In each film, possession may confirm a theory or produce another misreading. The objects matter because their cinematic presentation exposes unstable relationships and changing audience alignment, not because they solve the mystery alone.
The sample models comparison between Mystery Road and The Talented Mr. Ripley.
Skill Align practice marking guidance - not an official TASC marking tool
Indicative content and practice rating guidance identify possible approaches only. Other relevant, well-supported and effectively expressed responses may receive the same or a higher practice rating. Assign the content criterion, Criterion 4 and Criterion 6 independently. Permitted practice ratings are A+, A, A-, B+, B, B-, C+, C, C-, t+, t, t-, or z. The z rating has no modifier. Do not add ratings into a numerical mark.
Criterion 1 - analyse how relationships between texts, genres and contexts shape meaning and response
Assign one independent Skill Align practice rating using Criterion 1 - analyse how relationships between texts, genres and contexts shape meaning and response E01-E03. Judge the response as a third-person extended analytical essay against the current Criterion 1 - analyse how relationships between texts, genres and contexts shape meaning and response elements.
Acceptable alternatives: Credit any defensible interpretation that uses eligible prescribed text evidence and meets the criterion elements. The response need not use the indicative guidance's text selection, argument, sequence or wording.
Do not credit by itself: Naming genre conventions without analysing how they shape meaning or response. Comparing plots while omitting relationships among text, genre and context.
Criterion 4 - compose and craft responses to texts
Assign one independent Skill Align practice rating using Criterion 4 - compose and craft responses to texts E01-E04. Judge the response as a third-person extended analytical essay against the current Criterion 4 - compose and craft responses to texts elements.
Acceptable alternatives: Credit any defensible interpretation that uses eligible prescribed text evidence and meets the criterion elements. The response need not use the indicative guidance's text selection, argument, sequence or wording.
Do not credit by itself: Presenting disconnected observations without a sustained contention or developed analytical structure. Using evidence as illustration without integrating it into the argument.
Criterion 6 - use accurate and effective language
Assign one independent Skill Align practice rating using Criterion 6 - use accurate and effective language E01-E04. Rate language control independently from task interpretation; do not reduce Criterion 6 solely because the response misunderstands the question.
Acceptable alternatives: Credit any defensible interpretation that uses eligible prescribed text evidence and meets the criterion elements. The response need not use the indicative guidance's text selection, argument, sequence or wording.
Do not credit by itself: Reducing this criterion because the task interpretation is weak even though language control is demonstrated. Ignoring persistent grammar, punctuation, vocabulary, syntax, clarity or cohesion problems.
Section A Question 3
Reckoning and Maus make ordinary experience visible through selection, omission and emphasis. A strong response could compare how retrospective prose memoir and graphic memoir accumulate family routines, work, material detail and acts of remembering while also signalling gaps or delayed disclosures. These formal choices make identity emerge through ordinary experience rather than dramatic revelation alone. The comparison should evaluate what each creator includes, leaves out or foregrounds and how those decisions invite a public response to private and inherited experience.
The sample models how selection, omission and emphasis operate differently in Reckoning and Maus.
Skill Align practice marking guidance - not an official TASC marking tool
Indicative content and practice rating guidance identify possible approaches only. Other relevant, well-supported and effectively expressed responses may receive the same or a higher practice rating. Assign the content criterion, Criterion 4 and Criterion 6 independently. Permitted practice ratings are A+, A, A-, B+, B, B-, C+, C, C-, t+, t, t-, or z. The z rating has no modifier. Do not add ratings into a numerical mark.
Criterion 1 - analyse how relationships between texts, genres and contexts shape meaning and response
Assign one independent Skill Align practice rating using Criterion 1 - analyse how relationships between texts, genres and contexts shape meaning and response E01-E03. Judge the response as a third-person extended analytical essay against the current Criterion 1 - analyse how relationships between texts, genres and contexts shape meaning and response elements.
Acceptable alternatives: Credit any defensible interpretation that uses eligible prescribed text evidence and meets the criterion elements. The response need not use the indicative guidance's text selection, argument, sequence or wording.
Do not credit by itself: Naming genre conventions without analysing how they shape meaning or response. Comparing plots while omitting relationships among text, genre and context.
Criterion 4 - compose and craft responses to texts
Assign one independent Skill Align practice rating using Criterion 4 - compose and craft responses to texts E01-E04. Judge the response as a third-person extended analytical essay against the current Criterion 4 - compose and craft responses to texts elements.
Acceptable alternatives: Credit any defensible interpretation that uses eligible prescribed text evidence and meets the criterion elements. The response need not use the indicative guidance's text selection, argument, sequence or wording.
Do not credit by itself: Presenting disconnected observations without a sustained contention or developed analytical structure. Using evidence as illustration without integrating it into the argument.
Criterion 6 - use accurate and effective language
Assign one independent Skill Align practice rating using Criterion 6 - use accurate and effective language E01-E04. Rate language control independently from task interpretation; do not reduce Criterion 6 solely because the response misunderstands the question.
Acceptable alternatives: Credit any defensible interpretation that uses eligible prescribed text evidence and meets the criterion elements. The response need not use the indicative guidance's text selection, argument, sequence or wording.
Do not credit by itself: Reducing this criterion because the task interpretation is weak even though language control is demonstrated. Ignoring persistent grammar, punctuation, vocabulary, syntax, clarity or cohesion problems.
Section B Question 4
The Dressmaker pair offers one pathway for analysing how adaptation transforms the significance of place and environment. The novel filters the town, its histories and social boundaries through prose narration, while the film uses composition, performance, movement, costume and sound to make the same environment publicly visible. A strong comparison would examine how place shapes belonging, exclusion and audience judgement in each medium. The focus is the transformed meaning of environment, not an assumption that weather or landscape must operate identically in every prescribed pair.
The sample uses The Dressmaker pair as one valid place-and-environment pathway; any current prescribed pair may be used.
Skill Align practice marking guidance - not an official TASC marking tool
Indicative content and practice rating guidance identify possible approaches only. Other relevant, well-supported and effectively expressed responses may receive the same or a higher practice rating. Assign the content criterion, Criterion 4 and Criterion 6 independently. Permitted practice ratings are A+, A, A-, B+, B, B-, C+, C, C-, t+, t, t-, or z. The z rating has no modifier. Do not add ratings into a numerical mark.
Criterion 2 - analyse representations of themes, ideas and concepts in texts
Assign one independent Skill Align practice rating using Criterion 2 - analyse representations of themes, ideas and concepts in texts E01-E04. Judge the response as a third-person extended analytical essay against the current Criterion 2 - analyse representations of themes, ideas and concepts in texts elements.
Acceptable alternatives: Credit any defensible interpretation that uses eligible prescribed text evidence and meets the criterion elements. The response need not use the indicative guidance's text selection, argument, sequence or wording.
Do not credit by itself: Listing adaptation differences without analysing representations or transformed meaning. Treating the source and adaptation as unrelated works or analysing only one text.
Criterion 4 - compose and craft responses to texts
Assign one independent Skill Align practice rating using Criterion 4 - compose and craft responses to texts E01-E04. Judge the response as a third-person extended analytical essay against the current Criterion 4 - compose and craft responses to texts elements.
Acceptable alternatives: Credit any defensible interpretation that uses eligible prescribed text evidence and meets the criterion elements. The response need not use the indicative guidance's text selection, argument, sequence or wording.
Do not credit by itself: Presenting disconnected observations without a sustained contention or developed analytical structure. Using evidence as illustration without integrating it into the argument.
Criterion 6 - use accurate and effective language
Assign one independent Skill Align practice rating using Criterion 6 - use accurate and effective language E01-E04. Rate language control independently from task interpretation; do not reduce Criterion 6 solely because the response misunderstands the question.
Acceptable alternatives: Credit any defensible interpretation that uses eligible prescribed text evidence and meets the criterion elements. The response need not use the indicative guidance's text selection, argument, sequence or wording.
Do not credit by itself: Reducing this criterion because the task interpretation is weak even though language control is demonstrated. Ignoring persistent grammar, punctuation, vocabulary, syntax, clarity or cohesion problems.
Section C Question 5
In Small Things Like These, objects, settings and recurring details complicate competing loyalties more quietly than declarations do. A strong response could connect handled objects, domestic spaces, thresholds and repeated acts of looking to the central character's obligations. Close analysis should trace how these details gather ethical significance and reshape audience understanding of loyalty to household, community and conscience. The interpretation should remain open to tensions rather than treating one recurring object as mandatory.
The sample uses Small Things Like These as one valid pathway through recurring details, setting and competing loyalties.
Skill Align practice marking guidance - not an official TASC marking tool
Indicative content and practice rating guidance identify possible approaches only. Other relevant, well-supported and effectively expressed responses may receive the same or a higher practice rating. Assign the content criterion, Criterion 4 and Criterion 6 independently. Permitted practice ratings are A+, A, A-, B+, B, B-, C+, C, C-, t+, t, t-, or z. The z rating has no modifier. Do not add ratings into a numerical mark.
Criterion 3 - analyse how texts convey perspectives
Assign one independent Skill Align practice rating using Criterion 3 - analyse how texts convey perspectives E01-E04. Judge the response as a first- or third-person extended analytical essay against the current Criterion 3 - analyse how texts convey perspectives elements.
Acceptable alternatives: Credit any defensible interpretation that uses eligible prescribed text evidence and meets the criterion elements. The response need not use the indicative guidance's text selection, argument, sequence or wording.
Do not credit by itself: Asserting a perspective without analysing its language, textual, stylistic or contextual construction. Replacing a text-centred interpretation with personal reflection or plot summary.
Criterion 4 - compose and craft responses to texts
Assign one independent Skill Align practice rating using Criterion 4 - compose and craft responses to texts E01-E04. Judge the response as a first- or third-person extended analytical essay against the current Criterion 4 - compose and craft responses to texts elements.
Acceptable alternatives: Credit any defensible interpretation that uses eligible prescribed text evidence and meets the criterion elements. The response need not use the indicative guidance's text selection, argument, sequence or wording.
Do not credit by itself: Presenting disconnected observations without a sustained contention or developed analytical structure. Using evidence as illustration without integrating it into the argument.
Criterion 6 - use accurate and effective language
Assign one independent Skill Align practice rating using Criterion 6 - use accurate and effective language E01-E04. Rate language control independently from task interpretation; do not reduce Criterion 6 solely because the response misunderstands the question.
Acceptable alternatives: Credit any defensible interpretation that uses eligible prescribed text evidence and meets the criterion elements. The response need not use the indicative guidance's text selection, argument, sequence or wording.
Do not credit by itself: Reducing this criterion because the task interpretation is weak even though language control is demonstrated. Ignoring persistent grammar, punctuation, vocabulary, syntax, clarity or cohesion problems.
Diagnostic Checklist
| Review focus | Section | Reflection and next action |
|---|---|---|
| TE-D01 - Incomplete engagement with the stem | Sections A-C | Underline every demand in the selected question, then revise the contention and topic sentences so each demand is answered. |
| TE-D02 - Missing contention | Sections A-C | Write one arguable sentence that answers the question, then make every paragraph develop, qualify or test that contention. |
| TE-D03 - Plot retelling | Sections A-C | Replace event summary with analysis of how a precise language, structural, stylistic or medium-specific choice shapes meaning and response. |
| TE-D04 - Weak comparative integration | Section A | Organise each body paragraph around a shared analytical claim and compare the selected texts within the paragraph. |
| TE-D05 - Wrong module or suspended text | Sections A-C | Check every selected title against the 2026 list; replace any wrong-module text and do not use suspended Jasper Jones. |
| TE-D06 - Insufficient number of texts | Sections A-B | Use at least two eligible Module 1 texts in Section A and both works in one eligible Module 2 pair in Section B. |
| TE-D07 - Genre conventions named but not analysed | Section A | Explain how each named convention operates in the text and how it shapes meaning or audience response. |
| TE-D08 - Context mentioned without effect | Section A | Connect contextual information to a textual choice, genre expectation and resulting meaning rather than supplying background alone. |
| TE-D09 - Unbalanced adaptation pair | Section B | Add precise evidence and analysis from the underdeveloped work so source and adaptation contribute to every major claim. |
| TE-D10 - Surface-level adaptation differences | Section B | Move beyond added or removed events by analysing how medium, genre, context, language and conventions transform meaning. |
| TE-D11 - Source/adaptation confusion | Section B | Label the source and adaptation accurately, then verify which creator, medium and textual choice belongs to each work. |
| TE-D12 - Unsupported perspective claim | Section C | Support each claim about perspective, attitude or value with close analysis of language, style, structure, text and context. |
| TE-D13 - Personal reflection replaces interpretation | Section C | Reframe personal reaction as a reasoned, text-centred interpretation justified by close evidence. |
| TE-D14 - Evidence without analysis | Sections A-C | After each example, explain how the choice works, what it constructs and why it matters to the question. |
| TE-D15 - Inaccurate or fabricated quotation | Sections A-C | Verify quotation wording against the studied text or paraphrase accurately without quotation marks. |
| TE-D16 - Weak cohesion | Sections A-C | Revise paragraph order, topic sentences, transitions and reference chains so the argument develops logically. |
| TE-D17 - Inappropriate register | Sections A-C | Use formal analytical vocabulary and controlled first or third person as required; remove conversational or unsupported evaluative wording. |
| TE-D18 - Language errors obscure meaning | Sections A-C | Edit sentence boundaries, grammar, punctuation, spelling, vocabulary and syntax, prioritising errors that make the argument hard to follow. |
| TE-D19 - Incomplete response or poor time allocation | Sections A-C | Practise a 15-minute plan and three approximately 60-minute responses, reserving time to complete and proofread each essay. |