Marks

Description of level

0

The response does not meet the standards described by the descriptors below.

1

There is little understanding of the surface meaning. The response seldom supports claims with evidence, or supporting evidence is seldom appropriate.

2

There is some understanding of the surface meaning. The response supports claims with evidence that is sometimes appropriate.

3

There is an understanding of the surface meaning and some inferential understanding. The response supports claims with evidence that is mainly relevant.

4

There is a detailed understanding of the surface meaning and a convincing inferential understanding. The response supports claims with relevant evidence.

5

There is a detailed and insightful understanding of surface meaning, and a convincing and nuanced inferential understanding. The response supports claims with well-selected evidence.

Marks

Description of level

0

The response does not meet the standards described by the descriptors below.

1

There is little analysis of language and style to construct meaning. The commentary is descriptive.

2

There is some analysis of language and style to construct meaning. The commentary is mainly descriptive.

3

There is a mainly appropriate analysis of the ways language and style constructs meaning. Some of the analysis is insightful.

4

There is an appropriate analysis of the ways language and style constructs meaning. Some of the analysis is insightful. There is some evaluation of how meaning is shaped by writer’s choices.

5

There is an insightful and convincing analysis of the ways language and style constructs meaning. There is very good evaluation of how meaning is shaped by writer’s choices.

Marks

Description of level

0

The response does not meet the standards described by the descriptors below.

1

There is little organization and no obvious focus.

2

There is some organization and a degree of focus.

3

There is adequate organization, some coherence, and some focus.

4

There is good organization, a good degree of coherence, and adequate focus.

5

There is effective organization and coherence, and a good degree of focus.

Marks

Description of Level

0

The response does not meet the standards described by the descriptors below.

1

The is little clarity or accuracy. There is little sense of an appropriate register.

2

There is some clarity and accuracy. There is some sense of an appropriate register. Errors are apparent.

3

There is adequate clarity and accuracy. The register is mainly appropriate. Some lapses are apparent.

4

There is good clarity and accuracy. The register is consistently appropriate.

5

There is very good clarity and accuracy, and a strong sense of precision. The register is consistently appropriate and effective.

Marks

Description of level

0

The response does not meet the standards described by the descriptors below.

1-2

There is little knowledge and understanding of the works, and there is little comparison of works in relation to the question.

3-4

There is limited knowledge and understanding of the works, and there is limited comparison of works in relation to the question.

5-6

There is satisfactory knowledge and understanding of the works, and there is satisfactory comparison of works in relation to the question.

7-8

There is good knowledge and understanding of the works, and there is relevant comparison of works in relation to the question. The discussion is somewhat sustained.

9-10

There is very good knowledge and understanding of the works, and there is insightful comparison of works in relation to the question. The discussion is sustained and insightful.

Marks

Description of level

0

The response does not meet the standards described by the descriptors below.

1-2

The response is descriptive, offering little relevant analysis.

3-4

The response is somewhat analytical, but mainly descriptive. There is limited comparison of writers’ choices

5-6

The response is generally analytical, offering some understanding of the ways in which language, technique, and style establish meaning and effect. The response offers some insight, and there is some comparison of writers’ choices.

7-8

The response is analytical and evaluative, offering understanding of the ways in which language, technique, and style establish meaning and effect. There is a good comparison of writers’ choices.

9-10

The response is analytical and evaluative, offering an insightful and convincing understanding of the ways in which language, technique, and style establish meaning and effect. There is a good comparison of writers’ choices.

Marks

Description of level

0

The response does not meet the standards described by the descriptors below.

1

There is limited focus, and the ideas are mainly unconnected.

2

There is some focus and some connection between ideas. Coherence may be inconsistent, and the discussion of works may lack balance.

3

There is mainly good focus despite some lapses. The is reasonable balance and general sense of cohesion in the development of ideas.

4

There is a good focus that is largely maintained. There is good balance, and ideas develop consistently and logically.

5

There is a clear and consistent focus. There is very good balance, and ideas develop in a logical and compelling way.

Marks

Description of level

0

The response does not meet the standards described by the descriptors below.

1

The is little clarity or accuracy. There is little sense of an appropriate register.

2

There is some clarity and accuracy. There is some sense of an appropriate register. Errors are apparent.

3

There is adequate clarity and accuracy. The register is mainly appropriate. Some lapses are apparent.

4

There is good clarity and accuracy. The register is consistently appropriate.

5

There is very good clarity and accuracy, and a strong sense of precision. The register is consistently appropriate and effective.

Marks

Description of level

0

The response does not meet the standards described by the descriptors below.

1-2

There is little knowledge and understanding of extracts, texts, and works in the context of the global issue chosen. Supporting evidence is limited or inappropriate.

3-4

There is limited knowledge and understanding of extracts, texts, and works in the context of the global issue chosen. Supporting evidence is sometimes appropriate.

5-6

There is satisfactory knowledge and understanding of extracts, texts, and works, offering an interpretation in the context of the global issue chosen. Supporting evidence is mainly appropriate and supports the development of ideas.

7-8

There is good knowledge and understanding of extracts, texts, and works, offering a constant interpretation in the context of the global issue chosen. Supporting evidence is appropriate and supports the development of ideas.

9-10

There is excellent knowledge and understanding of extracts, texts, and works, offering a compelling interpretation in the context of the global issue chosen. Supporting evidence is appropriate, carefully selected, and supports the development of ideas.

Marks

Description of level

0

The response does not meet the standards described by the descriptors below.

1-2

The oral is descriptive, or analysis is irrelevant. There is little discussion of language, structure, and style in the context of the global issue chosen.

3-4

There is some relevant analysis, but this largely derives from description. Aspects of language, structure, and style are highlighted, but partially understood in the context of the global issue chosen.

5-6

There is analysis, revealing appropriate and evaluative commentary. There is reasonable understanding of language, structure, and style in the context of the global issue chosen.

7-8

There is analysis, revealing appropriate and evaluative commentary that is at times insightful. There is good understanding of language, structure, and style in the context of the global issue chosen.

9-10

There is analysis, revealing appropriate and evaluative commentary that is insightful. There is excellent and nuanced understanding of language, structure, and style in the context of the global issue chosen.

Marks

Description of level

0

The response does not meet the standards described by the descriptors below.

1-2

There is little focus, and ideas are rarely connected.

3-4

There is some focus, but there may be a lack of balance in how works and texts are discussed.

5-6

There is focus, but this may lapse. There may be a lack of balance in how works and texts are discussed. Connections are established between ideas, but not always coherently.

7-8

The oral is mainly clear and sustained. There is balance in how works and texts are discussed. Ideas develop consistently and coherently. The presentation of ideas is convincing.

9-10

The oral is mainly clear and sustained. There is good balance in how works and texts are discussed. The presentation of ideas is logical and convincing, connecting ideas insightfully.

Marks

Description of level

0

The response does not meet the standards described by the descriptors below.

1-2

There is a general lack of clarity and precision. Aspects of style are inappropriate.

3-4

There is general clarity. Errors may affect communication. Errors are frequent. Aspects of style are often inappropriate.

5-6

There is clarity. Errors do not affect communication. Vocabulary and sentence structure are appropriate, but lack variation and sophistication. Aspects of style are appropriate.

7-8

There is clarity and accuracy. There may be small errors, but these do not affect communication. Vocabulary and sentence structure are appropriate and varied. Aspects of style are appropriate and may enhance the oral.

9-10

There is clarity, accuracy, and variation. There may be small errors, but these do not affect communication. Vocabulary and sentence structure are appropriate, varied, and enhance the presentation of ideas. Aspects of style are appropriate and enhance the oral

Marks

Description of level

0

The response does not meet the standards described by the descriptors below.

1

There is little knowledge and understanding of the works or texts relevant to the chosen focus. There are few references to the work or text, or references are mainly inappropriate.

2

There is some knowledge and understanding of the works or texts relevant to the chosen focus. There are some references to the work or text, and these are sometimes appropriate.

3

There is a satisfactory knowledge and understanding of the works or texts relevant to the chosen focus. References to the work or text are mainly relevant, and mainly support claims and arguments.

4

There is a good knowledge and understanding of the works or texts relevant to the chosen focus. Claims and arguments are sustained, and references support these claims and arguments.

5

There is excellent knowledge and understanding of the works or texts relevant to the chosen focus. Claims and arguments are persuasive, and references are well chosen, effectively supporting these claims and arguments.

Marks

Description of level

0

The response does not meet the standards described by the descriptors below.

1

The response is descriptive, offering little relevant analysis relevant to the chosen topic.

2

The response is somewhat analytical, but is mainly descriptive relevant to the chosen topic.

3

The response is generally analytical, offering some understanding of the ways in which language, technique, and style establish meaning and effect relevant to the chosen topic.

4

The response is analytical and evaluative, offering understanding of the ways in which language, technique, and style establish meaning and effect relevant to the chosen topic.

5

The response is analytical and evaluative, offering an insightful and convincing understanding of the ways in which language, technique, and style establish meaning and effect relevant to the chosen topic.

Marks

Description of level

0

The response does not meet the standards described by the descriptors below.

1

There is little organization. A sense of inquiry is not apparent. Supporting examples are not embedded into the essay.

2

There is some organization. The line of inquiry lacks development. Supporting examples are rarely embedded into the essay.

3

There is adequate organization and general cohesion. The line of inquiry shows some development. Supporting examples are sometimes embedded into the essay.

4

There is good organization and the essay is mostly cohesive. The line of inquiry is mainly well developed. Supporting examples mostly well embedded into the essay.

5

There is effective organization and the essay is cohesive. The line of inquiry is well developed. Supporting examples are well embedded into the essay.

Marks

Description of level

0

The response does not meet the standards described by the descriptors below.

1

The is little clarity or accuracy. There is little sense of an appropriate register.

2

There is some clarity and accuracy. There is some sense of an appropriate register. Errors are apparent.

3

There is adequate clarity and accuracy. The register is mainly appropriate. Some lapses are apparent.

4

There is good clarity and accuracy. The register is consistently appropriate.

5

There is very good clarity and accuracy, and a strong sense of precision. The register is consistently appropriate and effective.