Ioc Rubric HL

Individual Oral Commentary and Discussion HL (first examinations 2013)
Criterion A: Knowledge and understanding of the poem How well is the students knowledge and understanding of the poem demonstrated by their interpretation? 0 does not reach standa rd 1 There is limited knowledge and little or no understanding, with poor interpretation and virtually no relevant references to the poem. 2 There is superficial knowledge and some understanding, with limited interpretation occasionally supported by references to the poem. 3 There is adequate knowledge and understanding, demonstrated by interpretation supported by appropriate references to the poem. There is adequate appreciation of the ways in which language, structure, technique and style shape meaning in the poem. The commentary shows evidence of a planned structure and is generally focused. 4 There is very good knowledge and understanding, demonstrated by careful interpretation supported by wellchosen references to the poem. 5 There is excellent knowledge and understanding, demonstrated by individual interpretation effectively supported by precise and wellchosen references to the poem. There is excellent appreciation of the ways in which language, structure, technique and style shape meaning in the poem. The commentary is effectively structured, with a clear, purposeful and sustained focus.
Criterion B: Appreciation of the writers choices To what extent does the student appreciate how the writers choices of language, structure, technique and style shape meaning? Criterion C: Organization and presentation of the commentary To what extent does the student deliver a structured, well-focused commentary? Criterion D: Knowledge and understanding of the work used in the discussion How much knowledge and understanding has the student shown of the work used in the discussion? Criterion E: Response to the discussion questions How effectively does the student respond to the discussion questions? Criterion F: Language How clear, varied and accurate is the language? How appropriate is the choice of register and style? (Register refers, in this context, to the students use of elements such as vocabulary, tone, sentence structure and terminology appropriate to the commentary.)
does not reach standa rd
There are few references to, and no appreciation, of the ways in which language, structure, technique and style shape meaning in the poem. The commentary shows little evidence of planning, with very limited structure and/or focus. There is little knowledge or understanding of the content of the work discussed.
There is some mention, but little appreciation, of the ways in which language, structure, technique and style shape meaning in the poem. The commentary shows some structure and focus.
There is very good appreciation of the ways in which language, structure, technique and style shape meaning in the poem. The commentary is clearly structured and the focus is sustained.
There is some knowledge and superficial understanding of the content of the work discussed.
There is adequate knowledge and understanding of the content and some of the implications of the work discussed.
There is very good knowledge and understanding of the content and most of the implications of the work discussed.
There is excellent knowledge and understanding of the content and the implications of the work discussed.
There is limited ability to respond meaningfully to the discussion questions.
Responses to the discussion questions are sometimes relevant.
The language is rarely clear and appropriate, with many errors in grammar and sentence construction and little sense of register and style.
The language is sometimes clear and appropriate; grammar and sentence construction are generally accurate, although errors and inconsistencies are apparent; register and style are to some extent appropriate.
Responses to the discussion questions are relevant and show some evidence of independent thought. The language is mostly clear and appropriate, with an adequate degree of accuracy in grammar and sentence construction; the register and style are mostly appropriate.
Well-informed responses to the discussion questions show a good degree of independent thought. The language is clear and appropriate, with a good degree of accuracy in grammar and sentence construction; register and style are effective and appropriate.
There are persuasive and independent responses to the discussion questions.
The language is very clear and entirely appropriate, with a high degree of accuracy in grammar and sentence construction; the register and style are consistently effective and appropriate.
Individual Oral Commentary and Discussion HL (simplified rubric)

Criterion A: Knowledge and understanding of the poem demonstrate knowledge and understanding 0 does not reach standa rd

1 limited knowledge little or no understanding poor interpretation no relevant references
2 superficial knowledge some understanding limited interpretation occasional references
3 adequate knowledge and understanding interpretation supported by appropriate references
4 very good knowledge and understanding careful interpretation well-chosen references
Criterion B: Appreciation of the writers choices appreciate how the writers choices of language, structure, technique and style shape meaning Criterion C: Organization and presentation of the commentary structured, well-focused Criterion D: Knowledge and understanding of the work used in the discussion show knowledge and understanding of work used in the discussion Criterion E: Response to the discussion questions effectively respond to discussion questions Criterion F: Language clear, varied and accurate language appropriate choice of register and style (Register = students appropriate use of elements such as vocabulary, tone, sentence structure and terminology)
does not reach standa rd does not reach standa rd does not reach standa rd
few references to no appreciation of
some references little appreciation
adequate appreciation
very good appreciation
5 excellent knowledge and understanding individual interpretation effectively supported by precise and wellchosen references excellent appreciation
little evidence of planning limited structure and/or focus.
some structure and focus
evidence of planned structure generally focused.
clearly structured sustained focus
little knowledge or understanding
some knowledge superficial understanding
adequate knowledge and understanding of content and some implications of the work
very good knowledge and understanding of content and most of the implications
effectively structured clear, purposeful and sustained focus excellent knowledge and understanding of content and implications
limited ability to respond meaningfully
sometimes relevant responses
rarely clear and appropriate many errors in grammar and sentence construction little sense of register and style.
sometimes clear and appropriate generally accurate grammar and sentence construction apparent errors and inconsistencies register and style appropriate to some extent
relevant responses some evidence of independent thought mostly clear and appropriate adequate degree of accuracy in grammar and sentence construction register and style mostly appropriate
well-informed responses good degree of independent thought clear and appropriate good degree of accuracy in grammar and sentence construction effective and appropriate register and style
persuasive and independent responses
very clear and entirely appropriate high degree of accuracy in grammar and sentence construction consistently effective and appropriate register and style

Ioc Rubric HL

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Ioc Rubric HL

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Ioc Rubric HL

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Individual Oral Commentary and Discussion HL (first examinations 2013)

does not reach standa rd

does not reach standa rd

does not reach standa rd

There is limited ability to respond meaningfully to the discussion questions.

Responses to the discussion questions are sometimes relevant.

does not reach standa rd

There are persuasive and independent responses to the discussion questions.

Individual Oral Commentary and Discussion HL (simplified rubric)

1 limited knowledge little or no understanding poor interpretation no relevant references

2 superficial knowledge some understanding limited interpretation occasional references

3 adequate knowledge and understanding interpretation supported by appropriate references

4 very good knowledge and understanding careful interpretation well-chosen references

few references to no appreciation of

some references little appreciation

very good appreciation

little evidence of planning limited structure and/or focus.

some structure and focus

evidence of planned structure generally focused.

clearly structured sustained focus

little knowledge or understanding

some knowledge superficial understanding

limited ability to respond meaningfully

sometimes relevant responses

does not reach standa rd

persuasive and independent responses

You might also like