Kia ora Claudia - great question.
There are many different ways of structuring an Unfamiliar Response - including a whole bunch of acronyms. Most of them come down to the basics below, but this is not the only right way to do it.
How to start - No need for a full essay style introduction - the easiest and best way to start is just with two or three sentences addressing the text and the author’s purpose in writing the text - (which is often to evoke an emotion or portray an idea) as well as your answer to the question - EG if the question was “Analyse how the author explores their appreciation for nature” then in your intro somewhere it should clearly state "The author portrays how they appreciate nature for/because of its…(some reasons).
The body - The crux of your response is here - this is where you identify techniques and examples from ACROSS the text, and analyse why the author has used them (in relation to the question). A good tip is to try your best to LINK your techniques together by using language of development - eg “The author develops this further” or " this is effectively contrasted later with the use of" I tend to tell my students to use the below as a basis - this can be repeated as many times as you want but at least three techniques is generally a good guide.
Example ( QUOTE )
Analysis (talk about the effect of this technique and relate it to the question - the depth of this is partially where your Es and Ms come from).
Try asking yourself some of the below questions to help with analysis
- What does this literally show us?
- Why have those two things in particular been compared?
- What tone or mood does it create?
- How does it affect the pace at which we read or consider the text?
- Does it complement, foreshadow, reference any other part of the text?
- Pick out one word from the quote - what does this word in particular suggest
- What other perspectives could be seen?
To finish - try to come back to the purpose of the author and the relevance to the reader - think carefully about why the message that comes across in the text might be an important one by making a connection to yourself, to humanity, to society or to other texts.
In terms of your question about key differences between level 1 and 2 - really it comes down to the difference in the title of the standard between “showing understanding of” at L1 and “analysing” at level 2. The step up between these two things can be shown in many different ways but some suggestions below
At level two you need to show much clearer understanding of what the author’s purpose might be in the text, and be more explicit about saying this.
Analysis should be more developed - this involves making more than one comment about the impact of a technique before moving on - past assessment reports have discussed how students do well when they can assess the tone or mood created by a technique and how that might be relevant to the question, so this can be a good thing to consider here to expand on analysis.
Think more about how the author develops the idea across the text - is their attitude or tone slightly different through the beginning/middle and end? is an idea built upon? - this can help you be more convincing or perceptive.
at Level 2 you are expected to weave your evidence into your discussion more - this is a style thing you can improve with practice.
Hope this helps!