Location via proxy:   [ UP ]  
[Report a bug]   [Manage cookies]                
SlideShare a Scribd company logo

A sample of assessment criteria

•
•

The document outlines assessment criteria for a paper 2 written production exam at both the higher and subsidiary levels. It describes 3 criteria: A) Task/Message, B) Presentation, and C) Language. Each criterion is broken down into descriptive bands ranging from 0-10 that examiners can use to assess a candidate's performance on that criterion for the exam. The bands describe the level of execution, structure, ideas, argumentation, and language usage that correspond to scores within the 0-10 range.

1 of 6

1

A sample of assessment criteria ASSESSMENT CRITERIA HIGHER LEVEL Assessment Criteria: Paper 2 (written Production) Descriptors The following descriptors are for examiner use and teacher information Criterion A: Task/Message Mark / Band 0 The candidate has not reached the standard described by any of the descriptors given below. 1–2 The execution of the task is barely adequate; the message is frequently unclear. The candidate can manage only very superficial statements. These are frequently repetitive and/or irrelevant to the task. The argument is unconvincing; the writer makes no attempt to respond to the reader’s expectations. 3–4 The candidate never goes beyond the obvious in carrying out the task; the message is sometimes unclear. The ideas may be superficial at times. They are sometimes repetitive ad/or irrelevant to the task. The argument is barely convincing; the writer makes little attempt to respond to the reader’s expectations. 5–6 The task is adequately carried out; the message is comprehensible. The ideas are commonplace. They are mostly relevant to the task. The argument is convincing at times, there is a clear attempt to respond to the reader’s expectations. 7–8 The task is well executed; the message is comprehensible and presented in an interesting way. The topic has been considered from several angles, some examples and illustrations have been given. All ideas are relevant to the task. The argument is usually convincing, the writer responds to the reader’s expectations. 9 - 10 The task is very well executed; the message is presented in an attractive, interesting and clear way. The topic has been considered from most angles, suitable examples and illustrations have been given, including some personal reactions and some of original insights. All the ideas are completely relevant to the task. The argument is very convincing, the writer responds to the reader’s expectations. 1

2

ASSESSMENT CRITERIA Criterion B: Presentation Mark / Band 0 The candidate has not reached the standard described by any of the descriptors given below. 1–2 The presentation is poor and unclear; there is no obvious structure. There is an absence of paragraphing; the ideas remain undeveloped. There is little linkage between sentences and/or paragraphs. There is little sense of register. 3–4 The presentation is barely effective; there is little evidence of structure. The paragraphing is not always appropriate; the ideas are not adequately arranged or developed. There is limited use of cohesive devices; these are not always correctly employed. There is some inappropriate and inconsistent use of register. 5–6 The presentation is reasonably effective and structured. The paragraphing contributes to the development of ideas. The use of basic cohesive devices is appropriate for the most part. The use of register is appropriate for the most part. 7–8 The presentation is effective; there is a clear structure. The paragraphing contributes effectively to the development of ideas. The use of cohesive devices is varied and effective. The register is appropriate; there is some evidence of the use of stylistic devices. 9 - 10 The presentation is imaginative; effective and well-balanced. The paragraphing is effective; the arrangement of ideas is logical and well- developed. The use of cohesive devices is consistently varied and effective. The register is consistently varied and effective and the style is appropriate to the task. 2

3

ASSESSMENT CRITERIA Criterion C: Language Mark / Band 0 The candidate has not reached the standard described by any of the descriptors given below. 1–2 The language on the whole is laboured, inaccurate and lacking in fluency. The sentences are simple; with a high proportion of grammatical errors. The use of vocabulary and idiom is limited and often inaccurate. It is consistently difficult to make sense of the spelling/writing. 3–4 The language on the whole is unambitious, with some lapses in fluency. There is some evidence of correct use of basic grammar, but with frequent errors if more complex structures are attempted. The use of vocabulary and idiom is only barely adequate for the task. Spelling/writing often impedes intelligibility. 5–6 The language is mostly fluent. Basic grammar is used correctly, but there are some inconsistencies and errors when more complex structures are attempted. The range and variety of vocabulary and idiom are adequate. Spelling/writing seldom impedes intelligibility. (the prescribed minimum number of words had been written) 7–8 The language is fluent. There is a good degree of grammatical accuracy, though there may still be a few errors when more complex structures are attempted. The vocabulary and idiom are quite rich and varied; occasional mistakes in spelling/writing do not impede intelligibility. (the prescribed minimum number of words had been written) 9 - 10 The writing has a fluent, authentic ring; the language is consistently accurate. The grammatical structures are varied; the grammar is almost error-free. The range of vocabulary and idiom is wide and varied and may show evidence of sophistication. The spelling/writing is consistently accurate. (the prescribed minimum number of words had been written) 3

4

ASSESSMENT CRITERIA SUBSIDIARY LEVEL Assessment Criteria: Paper 2 (written Production) Descriptors The following descriptors are for examiner use and teacher information Criterion A: Task/Message Mark / Band 0 The candidate has not reached the standard described by any of the descriptors given below. 1–2 The execution of the task is generally adequate; the message is frequently incomprehensible. The candidate can manage only very superficial statements. These are frequently repetitive and/or irrelevant to the task. The argument is unconvincing; the writer makes no attempt to respond to the reader’s expectations. 3–4 The execution of the task is barely adequate; the message may be incomprehensible at times. The ideas are basic and lacking in details. They tend to be repetitive and may be irrelevant to the task. The argument is barely convincing; the writer makes little attempt to respond to the reader’s expectations. 5–6 The task is adequately carried out; the message is generally comprehensible. The ideas are basic. They are mostly relevant to the task. The argument may be convincing at times, the writer makes some attempts to respond to the reader’s expectations. 7–8 The task is generally well executed; the message is comprehensible. The topic has been considered from more than one angle, and may include some examples and illustrations. All ideas are relevant to the task. The argument is mostly convincing, the writer makes a clear attempt to respond to the reader’s expectations. 9 - 10 The task is well executed; the message is comprehensible and clear. The topic has been considered from several angles, examples and illustrations have been given, including some personal reactions. All the ideas are relevant to the task. The argument is very convincing, the writer responds to the reader’s expectations. 4

5

ASSESSMENT CRITERIA Criterion B: Presentation Mark / Band 0 The candidate has not reached the standard described by any of the descriptors given below. 1–2 The presentation is poor and unclear; there is no attempt at a structure. There is an absence of paragraphing; the ideas remain undeveloped. There is no linkage between sentences and/or paragraphs. There is hardly any sense of register. 3–4 The presentation is occasionally clear; there is no real attempt at a structure. The paragraphing is generally inappropriate; the ideas are not adequately arranged or developed. There is very limited use of cohesive devices; these are often incorrectly employed. The use of register is not always appropriate. 5–6 The presentation is clear for the most part, with occasional lapses; there is an attempt at a structure. The paragraphing contributes to the development of ideas. The use of basic cohesive devices is not always appropriate. The use of register is not always appropriate. 7–8 The presentation is effective and clear; there is a reasonable attempt at a structure. The paragraphing contributes effectively to the development of ideas. The use and range of cohesive devices is appropriate. The use of register is appropriate with occasional lapses. 9 - 10 The presentation is effective; there is a clear structure. The paragraphing is effective; the arrangement of ideas is logical and well- developed. The use of cohesive devices is varied and effective. The register is varied and effective and the style is appropriate to the task. 5

6

ASSESSMENT CRITERIA Criterion C: Language Mark / Band 0 The candidate has not reached the standard described by any of the descriptors given below. 1–2 The language on the whole is not comprehensible. There are a high proportion of grammatical errors; almost all sentences contain mistakes. The use of vocabulary and idiom is limited and inaccurate; words are frequently invented. It is consistently difficult to make sense of the spelling/writing. 3–4 Not all the language is comprehensible. There are repeated errors in the use of simple grammatical structures. The range of vocabulary and idiom is basic with frequent repetition of common phrases. Spelling/writing often impedes intelligibility. 5–6 The language on the whole is comprehensible. There is evidence of fairly correct use of basic grammar, but with repeated errors when more complex structures are attempted. The use of vocabulary and idiom is generally appropriate, but there may be some lapses. Spelling/writing seldom impedes intelligibility. (the prescribed minimum number of words had been written) 7–8 The language is mostly fluent. There is a reasonable degree of grammatical accuracy, with some errors when more complex structures are attempted. There is some variety in the choice and use of vocabulary and idiom. Occasional mistakes in spelling/writing do not impede intelligibility. (the prescribed minimum number of words had been written) 9 - 10 The writing is fluent; the natural ring reduces the impact of any minor mistakes. A good range and variety of appropriate grammatical structures are used with a good degree of accuracy, though there may still be a few errors. The choice and use of vocabulary and idiom are varied and interesting. The spelling/writing is accurate. (the prescribed minimum number of words had been written) 6

More Related Content

A sample of assessment criteria

  • 1. A sample of assessment criteria ASSESSMENT CRITERIA HIGHER LEVEL Assessment Criteria: Paper 2 (written Production) Descriptors The following descriptors are for examiner use and teacher information Criterion A: Task/Message Mark / Band 0 The candidate has not reached the standard described by any of the descriptors given below. 1–2 The execution of the task is barely adequate; the message is frequently unclear. The candidate can manage only very superficial statements. These are frequently repetitive and/or irrelevant to the task. The argument is unconvincing; the writer makes no attempt to respond to the reader’s expectations. 3–4 The candidate never goes beyond the obvious in carrying out the task; the message is sometimes unclear. The ideas may be superficial at times. They are sometimes repetitive ad/or irrelevant to the task. The argument is barely convincing; the writer makes little attempt to respond to the reader’s expectations. 5–6 The task is adequately carried out; the message is comprehensible. The ideas are commonplace. They are mostly relevant to the task. The argument is convincing at times, there is a clear attempt to respond to the reader’s expectations. 7–8 The task is well executed; the message is comprehensible and presented in an interesting way. The topic has been considered from several angles, some examples and illustrations have been given. All ideas are relevant to the task. The argument is usually convincing, the writer responds to the reader’s expectations. 9 - 10 The task is very well executed; the message is presented in an attractive, interesting and clear way. The topic has been considered from most angles, suitable examples and illustrations have been given, including some personal reactions and some of original insights. All the ideas are completely relevant to the task. The argument is very convincing, the writer responds to the reader’s expectations. 1
  • 2. ASSESSMENT CRITERIA Criterion B: Presentation Mark / Band 0 The candidate has not reached the standard described by any of the descriptors given below. 1–2 The presentation is poor and unclear; there is no obvious structure. There is an absence of paragraphing; the ideas remain undeveloped. There is little linkage between sentences and/or paragraphs. There is little sense of register. 3–4 The presentation is barely effective; there is little evidence of structure. The paragraphing is not always appropriate; the ideas are not adequately arranged or developed. There is limited use of cohesive devices; these are not always correctly employed. There is some inappropriate and inconsistent use of register. 5–6 The presentation is reasonably effective and structured. The paragraphing contributes to the development of ideas. The use of basic cohesive devices is appropriate for the most part. The use of register is appropriate for the most part. 7–8 The presentation is effective; there is a clear structure. The paragraphing contributes effectively to the development of ideas. The use of cohesive devices is varied and effective. The register is appropriate; there is some evidence of the use of stylistic devices. 9 - 10 The presentation is imaginative; effective and well-balanced. The paragraphing is effective; the arrangement of ideas is logical and well- developed. The use of cohesive devices is consistently varied and effective. The register is consistently varied and effective and the style is appropriate to the task. 2
  • 3. ASSESSMENT CRITERIA Criterion C: Language Mark / Band 0 The candidate has not reached the standard described by any of the descriptors given below. 1–2 The language on the whole is laboured, inaccurate and lacking in fluency. The sentences are simple; with a high proportion of grammatical errors. The use of vocabulary and idiom is limited and often inaccurate. It is consistently difficult to make sense of the spelling/writing. 3–4 The language on the whole is unambitious, with some lapses in fluency. There is some evidence of correct use of basic grammar, but with frequent errors if more complex structures are attempted. The use of vocabulary and idiom is only barely adequate for the task. Spelling/writing often impedes intelligibility. 5–6 The language is mostly fluent. Basic grammar is used correctly, but there are some inconsistencies and errors when more complex structures are attempted. The range and variety of vocabulary and idiom are adequate. Spelling/writing seldom impedes intelligibility. (the prescribed minimum number of words had been written) 7–8 The language is fluent. There is a good degree of grammatical accuracy, though there may still be a few errors when more complex structures are attempted. The vocabulary and idiom are quite rich and varied; occasional mistakes in spelling/writing do not impede intelligibility. (the prescribed minimum number of words had been written) 9 - 10 The writing has a fluent, authentic ring; the language is consistently accurate. The grammatical structures are varied; the grammar is almost error-free. The range of vocabulary and idiom is wide and varied and may show evidence of sophistication. The spelling/writing is consistently accurate. (the prescribed minimum number of words had been written) 3
  • 4. ASSESSMENT CRITERIA SUBSIDIARY LEVEL Assessment Criteria: Paper 2 (written Production) Descriptors The following descriptors are for examiner use and teacher information Criterion A: Task/Message Mark / Band 0 The candidate has not reached the standard described by any of the descriptors given below. 1–2 The execution of the task is generally adequate; the message is frequently incomprehensible. The candidate can manage only very superficial statements. These are frequently repetitive and/or irrelevant to the task. The argument is unconvincing; the writer makes no attempt to respond to the reader’s expectations. 3–4 The execution of the task is barely adequate; the message may be incomprehensible at times. The ideas are basic and lacking in details. They tend to be repetitive and may be irrelevant to the task. The argument is barely convincing; the writer makes little attempt to respond to the reader’s expectations. 5–6 The task is adequately carried out; the message is generally comprehensible. The ideas are basic. They are mostly relevant to the task. The argument may be convincing at times, the writer makes some attempts to respond to the reader’s expectations. 7–8 The task is generally well executed; the message is comprehensible. The topic has been considered from more than one angle, and may include some examples and illustrations. All ideas are relevant to the task. The argument is mostly convincing, the writer makes a clear attempt to respond to the reader’s expectations. 9 - 10 The task is well executed; the message is comprehensible and clear. The topic has been considered from several angles, examples and illustrations have been given, including some personal reactions. All the ideas are relevant to the task. The argument is very convincing, the writer responds to the reader’s expectations. 4
  • 5. ASSESSMENT CRITERIA Criterion B: Presentation Mark / Band 0 The candidate has not reached the standard described by any of the descriptors given below. 1–2 The presentation is poor and unclear; there is no attempt at a structure. There is an absence of paragraphing; the ideas remain undeveloped. There is no linkage between sentences and/or paragraphs. There is hardly any sense of register. 3–4 The presentation is occasionally clear; there is no real attempt at a structure. The paragraphing is generally inappropriate; the ideas are not adequately arranged or developed. There is very limited use of cohesive devices; these are often incorrectly employed. The use of register is not always appropriate. 5–6 The presentation is clear for the most part, with occasional lapses; there is an attempt at a structure. The paragraphing contributes to the development of ideas. The use of basic cohesive devices is not always appropriate. The use of register is not always appropriate. 7–8 The presentation is effective and clear; there is a reasonable attempt at a structure. The paragraphing contributes effectively to the development of ideas. The use and range of cohesive devices is appropriate. The use of register is appropriate with occasional lapses. 9 - 10 The presentation is effective; there is a clear structure. The paragraphing is effective; the arrangement of ideas is logical and well- developed. The use of cohesive devices is varied and effective. The register is varied and effective and the style is appropriate to the task. 5
  • 6. ASSESSMENT CRITERIA Criterion C: Language Mark / Band 0 The candidate has not reached the standard described by any of the descriptors given below. 1–2 The language on the whole is not comprehensible. There are a high proportion of grammatical errors; almost all sentences contain mistakes. The use of vocabulary and idiom is limited and inaccurate; words are frequently invented. It is consistently difficult to make sense of the spelling/writing. 3–4 Not all the language is comprehensible. There are repeated errors in the use of simple grammatical structures. The range of vocabulary and idiom is basic with frequent repetition of common phrases. Spelling/writing often impedes intelligibility. 5–6 The language on the whole is comprehensible. There is evidence of fairly correct use of basic grammar, but with repeated errors when more complex structures are attempted. The use of vocabulary and idiom is generally appropriate, but there may be some lapses. Spelling/writing seldom impedes intelligibility. (the prescribed minimum number of words had been written) 7–8 The language is mostly fluent. There is a reasonable degree of grammatical accuracy, with some errors when more complex structures are attempted. There is some variety in the choice and use of vocabulary and idiom. Occasional mistakes in spelling/writing do not impede intelligibility. (the prescribed minimum number of words had been written) 9 - 10 The writing is fluent; the natural ring reduces the impact of any minor mistakes. A good range and variety of appropriate grammatical structures are used with a good degree of accuracy, though there may still be a few errors. The choice and use of vocabulary and idiom are varied and interesting. The spelling/writing is accurate. (the prescribed minimum number of words had been written) 6