Marking Criteria 13-14

Marking Criteria: Essays and ExamsCriterion 1 st 2.1 2.2 3 rd Failrelevance tothe questionknowledge ofthe textsanalysis andinterpretationof textspresentationof argumentcriticalengagementuse oflanguageprecise grasp of the questionor topic, addresses it directlyand keeps it in focusthroughoutdisplays a detailed, accurateknowledge of the texts underdiscussion, including apt andexact quotationsdevelops an original approachto the material by questioningestablished views andadvancing a fresh analysis orinterpretationdemonstrates an ability toconstruct an exceptionallylucid and cogent argument,anchored in conciselyadduced textual evidenceEngages intelligently andquestioningly with a broadrange of secondary reading(critical or theoretical)reveals an advancedcommand of the language byexpressing ideas in clear,fluent and stylish prose, byusing appropriate criticalterms precisely, and byexhibiting an expert grasp ofthe rules of grammar, spellingand punctuationshows a soundunderstanding of thequestion or topic andtackles it effectivelydisplays a solidknowledge of the textsunder discussion andquotes them accuratelyprovides a complexaccount of the material,demonstrates superiorpowers of analysis andinterpretationexhibits an ability toconstruct a clearargument backed up byrelevant textualevidenceBrings relevantsecondary reading(critical or theoretical) tobear on the literatureunder discussionreveals a sure commandof the language byexpressing ideas in lucidprose, by usingappropriate criticalterms properly, and byevincing a firm grasp ofthe rules of grammar,spelling and punctuationshows an adequateunderstanding of thequestion or topic and showsreasonable competence inaddressing it, but prone tostray from the point or losefocusdisplays basic knowledge ofthe texts under discussionand can quote them, thoughnot always aptly oraccuratelydelivers an acceptableaccount of the materialwhich demonstrateseffective powers of analysisand interpretation, but doesnot do justice to thecomplexity of the issuesconstructs arguments thatfall short of full clarity andcoherence and are notsufficiently supported bytextual evidencedemonstrates limitedevidence, understanding orquestioning of relevantsecondary reading (criticalor theoretical)reveals a fair but limitedcommand of the languageby expressing ideas withoccasional clumsiness, byusing appropriate criticalterms imprecisely or not atall, and by evincing animperfect grasp of the rulesof grammar, spelling andpunctuationreveals an inadequateunderstanding of thequestion or topic and provesless than competent inaddressing it and keeping itin focusdisplays insufficientknowledge of the textsunder discussion, quotingthem only occasionally andseldom accuratelydelivers a rudimentary orincomplete account of thematerial, which betrayspoorly developed powers ofanalysis and interpretationconstructs arguments whichtend to be muddled andincoherent, and which arerarely substantiated bytextual evidencelittle evidence of relevantsecondary reading (criticalor theoretical)expresses ideas withhabitual clumsiness and lackof clarity; uses appropriatecritical terms incorrectly ornot at all; and shows weakgrasp of the rules ofgrammar, spelling andpunctuationshows little or nounderstanding of the questionor topic and either fails toaddress it at all or provides anirrelevant answerdisplays minimal or noknowledge of the texts underdiscussion and every sign of nothaving prepared for theassignmentbetrays few signs ofcompetence in the analysis andinterpretation of textsfails to construct an organised,consecutive argumentsupported by appropriatetextual evidenceno evidence of secondaryreading (critical or theoretical)fails to articulate ideas clearlyand coherently; displays ageneral ignorance of criticalterminology, and fails todemonstrate a basic grasp ofthe rules of grammar, spellingand punctuation

Marking Criteria: Assessed PresentationsCriterion 1 st 2.1 2.2 3 rd FailRelevance to Topic Topic addressed directly,with originality and/ orcreativity;Topic addressed clearlyand comprehensivelytopic addressedadequately, but may losefocus or stray off-topicTopic not addressedclearly, or presentationirrelevant in placesFails to address topicContent and evidence ofresearchStructure and TimingAudibility, use of voice,body languageUse of audio-visual aidsdevelops an originalapproach to the materialby questioningestablished views andadvancing a fresh analysisor interpretationOriginal and creativestructure that is clearlysignposted and easy tofollow; Within allocatedtime; well-paced andbalancedExcellent audibility, tone,fluency, and enunciation;speaker has rapport withaudience; and workseffortlessly with withscript or audio-visual aids.Creative and engaging;instructive and thorough;properly formattedDemonstrates a thoroughand competentknowledge, but maysynthesise rather thanquestion establishedviews (lack of originality)structure clearlysignposted and easy tofollow; Within allocatedtime; well-paced andbalancedVery good audibility,tone, fluency, andenunciation; speaker hasattention of audience;and works well with withscript or audio-visual aids.Appropriate, instructiveand thorough; properlyformattedDelivers an acceptableaccount of the material,but may be descriptive,rather than criticalstructure may lose focusin places; may be slightlyover or under time(within 10%) or may haveproblems with the pacingand/or balanceAdequate audibility, tone,fluency, and enunciation;speaker may loseaudience attention inplaces; and may havesome problems with withscript or audio-visual aids.Largely relevant andproperly formattedRudimentary orincomplete, insufficientlysupported by evidencestructure loses focus;evidence of timingproblems, or seriousproblems with the pacingand/or balance ofmaterialPoor audibility; monotonedelivery, lack of fluency,and/or failure of eyecontact; speaker loses theaudience’s attention;problems with with scriptor audio-visual aids.Poorly constructed, notalways relevant, and/orhard to followDelivers an incoherentpresentation or fails todemonstrate research orknowledge of subjectStructure lacking;presentation more than10% over time limit;and/or complete lack ofbalanceInaudibile and/orincomprehensible;audience clearlydisengaged; seriousproblems with with scriptor audio-visual aids.Required materialsabsent, incomprehensibleor plagiarised

Marking Criteria: Creative WritingCriterion 1 st Class 2.1 2.2 3 rd FailCreativity &OriginalityHigh quality of creativity andoriginalityShows creativity andoriginalityEffort has gone into developing a setof creative ideasMedium & Form/ContextualisationUse of LanguageAudienceEmotional &IntellectualComplexityWriting StyleDemonstrates a clearunderstanding of the mediumand form in which it is working.Situates itself confidently andclearly alongside other work inthe same form/style and mayengage that work and thatform/style in creative dialogueUse of language is precise,sophisticated and imaginativelyrichDemonstrates sophisticatedand sustained understanding ofaudience and readershipShows evidence of emotionaland intellectual complexityDisplays a distinctive personalstyle, handled with confidenceand controlWork has a clear relation toother work in the same form,style or genreEvidence of insight intolanguage, even if thoseinsights are not consistentlytranslated into creativeachievementsAudience for piece will beclearly identifiedShows richness in the ideasand/or emotionality of thework. It may demonstrate ahigh level of ambition, thoughthis may not be fully realized;alternatively, the work mayachieve an impressivetechnical level though theimaginative reach may belimitedDemonstrates clear signs ofthe writer’s individual styleThe form, style and mode oflanguage have been chosenintelligently and with sensitivity;however, the work may seemuncertainly located among otherwork in a similar style, form, orgenreMoments of confidence and powerin the language use, even if this isnot consistently achievedthroughout the workConsideration of audience mayfalter or is not pursued withsufficient rigourSigns of emotional richness, and theideas will have a level of complexity,though this may be intermittent andnot tied securely in the structure ofthe workShows little evidence of anindividual style, but is free fromtechnical error and reveals someskill or insightMay demonstrate anincomplete grasp of the taskand will show onlyintermittent signs oforiginality and creativeintelligence; no overallsense of creative coherenceSigns that the writer is notfamiliar with much otherwork in the same form andstyle.Shows signs of having beenrushed hinderingconsideration of languageAudience not consideredwith sufficient depth orsubtletyDemonstrates aninappropriately low level ofambition and the ideas andemotional texture may besuperficialMay show some or all of thefollowing: clear technicalerrors; evidence of beingrushed; poor engagementwith advice and feedback;errors of proofreadingShows very limited ability torecognise the issuesrepresented by the brief;shows a clear inability orunwillingness to make therequired effortDemonstrates little or nounderstanding of other workin the same form, style orgenre.Shows little sign that thelanguage has been chosenand organized with thoughtand careAudience consideredinadequately or not at allIdeas will be incoherent andthe emotional level of thework may be disorganizedand emptyDisplays considerable errorsof presentation, signs of thework being incomplete orproduced in haste; adviceand feedback ignored.