GUIDELINES TO MARK AND GIVE FEEDBACK
Oral Work
Oral work for specialist language courses is marked considering general language
skills such as reading and speaking and comprehension and production. Markers
judge parameters like a) prosody: pronunciation, intonation, rhythm, tempo, pitch,
loudness, suprasegmental prosodic features (syllable, word, phrase, and clause),
stress, melodic character, syllable length, and b) content and expression.
LANGUAGE
I mark oral work for specialist language courses considering language parameters
such as
a) Prosody: pronunciation, intonation, rhythm, tempo, pitch, loudness, suprasegmental
prosodic features (syllable, word, phrase, and clause), stress, melodic character,
syllable length,
b) Language form and analytical skills: advanced lexical and syntactic structures,
innovative use of language, connectors and suprasentential relators, rhetorical devices,
and imagery. Markers will be looking for excellence and exceptionality.
c) Use of non-verbal communication: body language, voice quality, prosodic features,
interpersonal distance
MARKING SCALE
Features for marking and giving feedback
Exceptional
75+
Exceptionally clear control over pronunciation
features. There is innovative use of highly
advanced prosodic features and lexical and
syntactic structures, connectors and suprasentential
relators, rhetorical devices, and imagery. Almost
native and errorless. Exceptional use of non-
verbal communication
Excellent
70+
I can find very advanced prosodic and lexical and
syntactic structures, innovative use, connectors and
suprasentential relators, rhetorical devices, and
imagery. Couple of minor errors. Excellent use of
Class standard
First Class Standard
ABSTRACT
IMPRESSION
Very Good
65+
Feedback: as per Exceptional.
I can find advanced prosodic and lexical and
syntactic structures, innovative use, connectors and
suprasentential relators, rhetorical devices, and
imagery. Some minor errors. Very good use of
non-verbal communication
Good
60+
Feedback: as per Excellent.
Not so consistently advanced prosodic, lexical and
syntactic structures, innovative use, connectors and
suprasentential relators, rhetorical devices, and
imagery. Some minor advanced mistakes and a
couple of basic errors.
Feedback: as per Very good.
Upper Second Class Standard
non-verbal communication
Reasonable
50+
Feedback: as per Good.
Quite a few correct advanced prosodic, lexical and
syntactic structures, innovative use, less connectors
and suprasentential relators, less rhetorical devices,
and less imagery. Some minor and some basic
errors. No so obvious of non-verbal
communication
Pass
40+
Feedback: as per Very reasonable.
A few advanced but not too correct prosodic,
lexical and syntactic structures, innovative use,
rather less connectors and suprasentential relators,
rhetorical devices, and imagery. An acceptable
range of minor and basic errors. Erratic use of
non-verbal communication
Fail
Feedback: as per Reasonable.
Very little of the above.
Feedback: as per Pass.
Lower Second Class Standard
Perceptible use of non-verbal communication
Third Class
Standard
Fairly sprinkled advanced prosodic lexical and
syntactic structures, innovative use, connectors and
suprasentential relators, rhetorical devices, and
imagery. Some minor and some basic errors.
Below
Third
Class
Standard
Very Reasonable
55+
CONTENT
Markers are looking for the following features: understanding of questions and
instructions, a good title (where appropriate), and development of ideas (knowledge
of written tonal system, rhetorical devices, referential system, and punctuation), good
comprehension, solid analytical structure, originality, development and elaboration of
ideas, structural coherence and cohesion. Markers are searching for excellence and
exceptionality.
Excellent
70+
The student produces an excellent and solid argument,
with some original ideas, some development and
elaboration of others’ ideas, and structural coherence and
cohesion.
Feedback: as per Exceptional
The student presents a very clear and obvious argument;
there is a very good development and elaboration of
others’ ideas, and structural coherence and cohesion.
Feedback: as per Excellent
The student generally presents a fairly clear argument,
Very Good
65+
Good
The student produces an exceptionally clear and solid
argument, with many original ideas, an excellent
development and elaboration of others’ ideas, and
structural coherence and cohesion. An exceptional
performance.
Class
Standard
First Class Standard
Features for marking and giving feedback
Upper
Second
Class
Standard
Impressions &
Mark
Exceptional
75 +
Pass
40+
Fail
Very little of the above.
Feedback: as per Pass
Lower Second Class
Standard
Reasonable
50+
Third
Class
Standard
Very Reasonable
55+
some fair development and elaboration of pointers, and a
good degree of structural coherence and cohesion.
Feedback: as per Very good
More often than not the student produces a recognisable
argument, very reasonable development and elaboration
of others’ ideas, generally structurally coherent and
cohesive.
Feedback: as per Good
The student produces a weak argument, shows some
development and elaboration of others’ ideas, and sounds
fairly structurally coherent and cohesive.
Feedback: as per Very reasonable
There’s some argument that can be followed, some
development and elaboration of ideas, moderately
structurally coherent and cohesive.
Feedback: as per Reasonable
Below
Third
Class
Standard
60+
Analytical skills
Recognisable analytical structure, clear points, rational elaboration.
Features for marking and feedback
Exceptional ability to deal with abstract
concepts and ideas; to perceive
different aspects of a problem; to deal
with thought systems and articulate
them.
Excellent ability to deal with abstract
concepts and ideas; to perceive
different aspects of a problem; to deal
with thought systems clearly articulate
them.
Very good ability to deal with some
abstract concepts and ideas; to perceive
different aspects of a problem; to deal
well with thought systems and fairly
articulate them.
Good ability to deal with fairly abstract
concepts and ideas; to perceive
reasonably different aspects of a
problem; to deal fairly with thought
systems and reasonably articulate them.
Very reasonable ability to deal with
abstract concepts and ideas; to perceive
moderately different aspects of a
problem; to deal moderately with
Impression and Mark
Class standard
Exceptional (75-80)
First
Excellent (70 – 74)
Very Good (65 –69)
Upper second
Good(60-64)
Very Reasonable (55 – 59)
Lower second
thought systems and fairly articulate
them.
Reasonable ability to deal with abstract
concepts and ideas; to perceive
different aspects of a problem; to deal
with thought systems and articulate
them.
Modest ability to deal with abstract
concepts and ideas; to perceive
different aspects of a problem; to deal
with thought systems.
Below average ability to deal with
abstract concepts and ideas; to perceive
different aspects of a problem; to deal
with thought systems.
Reasonable (50 – 54)
Pass (40 – 49)
Fail
Third class
Below Third Class