WRITING RESPONSE TO READING COMPREHENSION – MARKING CRITERIA – LEVEL 1 – Beginners Level
The criteria below give an indication of how examiners grade writing response to a reading comprehension task in the language of study. The criteria are cumulative (a higher
grade implies possession of the skills described at lower grades, as well as the absence of deficiencies described at lower grades). At the same time, the grade profiles are
necessarily general and typical: a candidate need not fit all aspects of a profile to fall into that grade band and there may be elements that do not apply to every reading
comprehension assessment. Students should be aware that different languages may have different learning outcomes. Moreover, depending on the exercise being assessed,
a proportion of the overall mark may be awarded for related skills. Students can expect to be told by their language discipline if this is the case and how the mark is split. There
may be elements that do not apply to every written assessment task.
The candidate demonstrated an exemplary ability to engage with the text in a sophisticated fashion. There was an exceptional ability to convey relatively
complex ideas clearly. Exemplary and accomplished structure. Writing skills were exceptional and error free. Exemplary use of grammatical structures.
High 1st
Absolute mastery of the linguistic learning outcomes at course level. Syntax and sentence structures were fully correct and extensively varied. Successful
90-100
implementation of other relevant linguistic resources where necessary. There was an exceptional and very extensive use of argumentation strategies.
Highly effective use and wide range of vocabulary and idiomatic language. Exemplary use of paraphrase and synonyms to avoid repetition, demonstrating
an exceptionally broad range of vocabulary at course level. Exemplary understanding of the register appropriate to the task.
The candidate demonstrated an outstanding ability to engage with the text in a sophisticated fashion. There was an impressive ability to convey relatively
complex ideas clearly in the majority of cases. Outstanding and accomplished structure. Writing skills were extraordinary and virtually error free. Errors of
very minor nature demonstrating an outstanding standard of accuracy. Outstanding mastery of the linguistic learning outcomes at course level. Syntax and
Good 1st
sentence structures were mostly correct and varied. Successful implementation of other relevant linguistic resources in many occasions. There was an
1st
80-89
extraordinary and extensive use of argumentation strategies. Outstanding ability to show a wide range of vocabulary and expressions idiomatic
expressions. Outstanding use of paraphrase and synonyms to avoid repetition, demonstrating an outstanding range of vocabulary at course level in most
cases. Outstanding understanding of the register appropriate to the task
Excellent engagement with the text in a sophisticated fashion. On the whole, there was an excellent ability to convey relatively complex ideas clearly.
Excellent structure overall. Writing skills were excellent and grammar was accurate in most cases, with some minor errors that were compensated by
demonstrable excellence in other areas. Excellent mastery of the linguistic learning outcomes at course level. Syntax and sentence structures were
Low 1st
generally correct and varied. Successful implementation of other relevant linguistic resources occasionally. There is a distinguished use of argumentation
70-79
strategies. Excellent ability to use a range of appropriate & sophisticated vocabulary, with excellent attempts to use idiomatic expressions. Excellent use of
paraphrase and synonyms to avoid repetition, demonstrating a broad range of vocabulary on the whole. Excellent understanding of the register appropriate
to the task.
The candidate demonstrated a good ability to engage with the text in a sophisticated fashion. There was a good ability to convey relatively complex ideas
clearly, though in some cases the information provided was imprecise and needed further clarification. Good structure and writing skills. Good expression
and accuracy with a few basic errors that do not compromise the written expression in general. Good range of syntax. The candidate made use of some
2:1
complex sentence structures and other relevant linguistic resources occasionally. Syntax and sentence structures were generally correct and varied. Good
60-69
ability to use a range of appropriate vocabulary, with some good attempts to use idiomatic expressions. Nevertheless, in some cases there were errors (eg.
spelling, erroneous implementation of English vocabulary, wrong word choice...). Good use of paraphrase and synonyms, though there was some
occasional repetition of vocabulary. For the most part, the candidate showed a sense of good sense of register appropriate to the task.
2nd
The candidate struggled to engage with the text in a sophisticated fashion. S/he also experienced difficulties to convey relatively complex ideas clearly, and
in many cases the information provided was imprecise and needed further clarification. Adequate structure and level of accuracy with some frequent
errors, which in some cases may be major and affect the overall written expression. The candidate introduced an adequate range of syntax, though s/he
2:2
rarely made use of complex sentence structures and other relevant linguistic resources. Adequate level of vocabulary, although the range is limited. No
50-59
discernible attempts to use idiomatic expressions appropriately. There were frequent errors (eg. spelling, erroneous implementation of English vocabulary,
wrong word choice...). Fair use of paraphrase and synonyms, although there was also a noticeable repetition of vocabulary. Adequate but intermittent use
of register for the task.
Basic ability to engage with the text critically. The candidate experienced serious difficulties to convey basic and/or complex ideas clearly, seriously
3rd
40-49
affecting the internal cohesion of the written task. In most cases the information provided was imprecise and needed further clarification. Very limited
writing skills on the whole. Very limited expression and accuracy; repetition of basic errors and very limited range of structures clearly affecting the written
Fail
0-39
communication. Very limited range of vocabulary. Isolated words & phrases related to the topic. No attempt to use any idiomatic expressions given the
difficulties with basic vocabulary. Pervasive errors (eg. spelling, erroneous implementation of English vocabulary, wrong word choice...). Very limited use of
paraphrase and synonyms, leading to a constant repetition of vocabulary and structures. Inappropriate register for the written task.
The candidate was unable to engage with the text. S/he did not convey ideas clearly. There was a lack of ability to convey basic information and much of
the details provided are hard to follow, affecting dramatically the structure and cohesion of the written task. Lack of writing skills on the whole. Non-existent
control of even the most simple grammatical structures and sentence pattern control of even the most simple grammatical structures and sentence pattern
resulting in comprehension being severely affected and impaired. Unacceptable range of expression. Extremely limited range of lexis and idiomatic
expressions, with frequent errors (ie. spelling, erroneous implementation of English vocabulary, wrong word choice...). The candidate did not attempt to
paraphrase and/or to use synonyms, leading to a systematic repetition of vocabulary. There was no awareness of register.