Skip to main content

Marking criteria (written) levels 3, 4, 5 and Business 1 (European)

Scale Mark Language:
accuracy, range and sophistication (80)
Mark Content/communication:
scope of ideas / task understanding & fulfilment / clarity and coherence of structure (20)
Excellent 1st 100 (80) Exceptional piece for level
Exemplary use of a wide range of specific vocabulary, expressions, structures and idiomatic language.
Exemplary use of advanced grammatical structures.
Exemplary level of grammar and spelling accuracy.
Style enhances text throughout.
100 (20) Highly persuasive, sophisticated argument.
Outstanding grasp of the subject matter.
Task fulfilled to the highest expectations.
Expertly structured piece of writing.
Fully coherent and effective argumentation.
Highly original, varied and insightful ideas and illustration/evidence.
Excellent use of register, fully appropriate to task.
94 (75) 94 (19)
High 1st High Mid 1st 88 (70) 82 (66) Outstanding piece of writing
Outstanding command of syntax.
Excellent range of topic-specific vocabulary, expressions, structures and idiomatic language.
Outstanding level of grammatical accuracy with minor errors that are largely compensated for by accuracy and stylish manipulation in other areas.
88 (18) 82 (16) Excellent grasp of subject matter.
Task fulfilled to very high expectations.
Excellent analytical approach to the subject.
Coherent and effective argumentation.
Expertly structured piece of writing.
Excellent range of ideas and illustration/evidence.
Excellent use of register, fully appropriate to task.
Low Mid 1st Low 1st 78 (62) 74 (59) Excellent piece of writing
Excellent command of syntax.
Excellent use of complex sentence structures.
Wide-ranging and varied topic-specific vocabulary.
Highly accurate: occasional minor errors occurring when more advanced structures and phrases are used.
Occasional spelling errors.
Language used naturally.
78 (15.5) 74 (15) Excellent grasp of subject matter.
Task fulfilled to high expectations.
Excellent analytical approach to the subject.
Coherent and effective argumentation.
Rigorously structured piece of writing.
Excellent range of ideas and illustration/evidence.
Excellent use of register, fully appropriate to task.
High 2:1 68 (54) A very good piece of writing
Very good command of syntax.
Complex sentence structures are attempted and well executed.
Very good range of vocabulary and idioms.
Generally accurate and fluent.
There may be isolated major grammatical and/or lexical errors.
Occasional spelling errors.
68 (14) A very good grasp of the subject matter.
A very good response to the task.
Very good analytical approach to the subject.
Coherent and reasonably effective argumentation.
Very well-structured piece of writing.
Very good range of ideas and illustration/evidence.
Very good use of register, appropriate to task.
Mid 2:1 65 (52) A good piece of writing
Good command of syntax.
Complex sentences structures are attempted and generally well executed.
Very good ability to use a range of appropriate vocabulary.
Generally accurate and fluent with some minor grammatical errors.
There may be isolated major grammatical and/or lexical errors.
Few spelling errors.
65 (13) A good grasp of the subject matter.
A good response to the task.
Good analytical approach to the subject.
Coherent and reasonably effective argumentation.
Well-structured piece of writing.
Good range of ideas and illustration/evidence.
Very good use of register appropriate to task.
Low 2:1 62 (50) A mostly good piece of writing
Mostly good command of syntax.
Complex sentence structures are attempted but are not always executed competently.
Good range of vocabulary and idioms, but some imprecision may occur.
Generally accurate and fluent but with occasional slips.
There are isolated major grammatical and/or lexical errors.
For the most part, these do not compromise clarity of meaning.
Few spelling errors.
62 (12) Mostly good grasp of the subject matter.
Mostly good response to the task.
Satisfactory analytical approach though this may be uneven.
Reasonably well-structured piece of writing.
Most ideas are well linked.
A fair range of ideas and illustration/evidence.
Good use of register, appropriate to task.
High 2:2 58 (46) A reasonable piece of writing
Reasonable command of syntax.
Reasonable manipulation of the language with some awkwardness of expression.
Some interferences from first language may be present in syntax and vocabulary.
Reasonable range of vocabulary and idioms, but some imprecision occurs.
Complex sentence structures are attempted but may be error-prone.
Or largely accurate but rather simple sentences.
Or mostly accurate but with occasional major errors.
Errors do not generally affect clarity of meaning.
58 (11.5) Reasonable grasp of the main issues.
Reasonable response to the task but some points may not have been addressed.
Key information is clearly conveyed.
Approach tends to be more descriptive than analytical.
A fair attempt to produce a structured piece of writing though this is not always successful.
Most ideas are linked.
Illustration may be limited.
Register mostly appropriate to task.
Mid 2:2 55 (44) An inconsistent piece of writing
Inconsistent command of syntax, which can be clumsy in places.
Little or no attempt to create complex sentences, and these are frequently error-prone.
Adequate manipulation of the language with frequent awkwardness of expression.
Some interferences from first language may be present in syntax and vocabulary.
Range of vocabulary and idioms is somewhat limited and some imprecisions occur.
Persistent errors that may affect clarity of meaning.
55 (11) Some awareness of main issues but incomplete response to the task.
Essential information may be lacking.
Approach is more descriptive than analytical, and lacks focus.
Structure may be weak and/or unconvincing.
Illustration may be weak, inaccurate and/or not always to the point.
Register not always appropriate to task.
Low 2:2 52 (42) An insecure piece of writing
Insecure command of syntax, with some interference from first language.
Limited manipulation of the language with frequent awkwardness of expression.
Rare attempts to create complex sentences, and these are error-prone.
Limited range of vocabulary and idioms.
Persistent grammatical and/or lexical errors.
52 (10.5) Some awareness of the main issues but poor grasp of overall picture.
Key information is lacking and/or the piece contains some material that is irrelevant.
Approach is mostly descriptive rather than analytical, and lacks focus.
Structure is weak and/or unconvincing.
Illustration is weak, not to the point, inaccurate and/or offered in lieu of argument.
Register not always appropriate to task.
High 3rd 48 (38) A poor piece of writing
Poor command of syntax, which may impede comprehension in places.
Some interference from first language.
Frequent inability to manipulate the language.
Some sections are marred by persistent major and minor lexical and grammatical errors.
Poor range of vocabulary.
In the bottom range, comprehension may be hindered in places by awkward expression and interference of first language.
48 (10) Vague awareness of the main issues and/or struggles to convey an intelligible argument.
Key information is missing and/or inaccurate.
May contain an amount of material that is irrelevant.
Little evidence of analytical capacity.
Vague understanding of how to present the ideas.
Little appropriate illustration and/or illustration offered in lieu of argument.
Inconsistencies in register may be present.
Mid 3rd 45 (36) A very poor piece of writing
Very poor command of syntax.
Comprehension may be hindered in places by awkward expression and interference of first language.
Persistent inability to manipulate the language.
Overall performance affected by persistent major and minor lexical and grammatical errors.
Very poor range of vocabulary.
45 (9) Little awareness of the main issues and/or struggles to convey an intelligible argument.
Vague understanding of how to present the issues.
Frequent recourse to padding.
Contains a large amount of material that is irrelevant.
Key information is missing and/or inaccurate.
Very poor structure.
Very poor illustration and/or illustration offered in lieu of argument.
Inconsistencies in register may be present.
Low 3rd 42 (34) An extremely poor piece of writing
Extremely poor command of syntax, which impedes comprehension.
Overall performance is affected by persistent major and minor lexical and grammatical errors.
Extremely poor range of vocabulary.
42 (8) Very little awareness of the main issues and struggles to convey an intelligible argument.
Very vague understanding of how to present the issues.
Frequent recourse to padding.
Contains a significant amount of material that is irrelevant.
Key information is missing and/or inaccurate.
Extremely poor structure.
Hardly any illustration and/or illustration offered in lieu of argument.
Inconsistencies in register may be present.
High Fail (sub honours) 38 (30) An unsatisfactory piece of writing
Inadequate command of syntax, which impedes comprehension.
Widespread inability to manipulate the language.
Endemic major and minor lexical and grammatical errors predominate, which affect comprehension.
Extremely poor range of vocabulary.
Comprehension is hindered by awkward expression and interference of first language.
38 (7) Inadequate awareness of the main issues.
Key information is missing and/or inaccurate.
The argument is generally incoherent and/or irrelevant.
Poor or no structure.
Poor or no illustration.
Work fails to meet the required standards.
Inappropriate register.
May fall short of the length required.
Fail 32 (26) A very unsatisfactory piece of writing
Inadequate command of syntax, which impedes comprehension.
Severely limited in every aspect: grammar, vocabulary, register, spelling.
32 (6) Little or no awareness of the main issues.
Key information is missing and /or inaccurate.
The argument is incoherent and/or irrelevant, to the point that comprehension is hindered.
Poor or no structure.
Poor or no illustration.
Work is significantly below the standard required at this level.
Inappropriate register.
May fall short of the length required.
25 (20) A wholly inadequate piece of writing
Little evidence of grammatical / lexical competence.
Comprehension is near impossible.
Or not enough language to assess.
25 (5) Wholly inadequate grasp of the main issues.
Work that falls well below the standards required at this level, and a total inability to write to the conventions of the task set.
Low Fail 12 (10) 12 (2)
Zero 0 Essentially nothing of value. 0 Work of no merit OR Absent OR Work not submitted OR Penalty in some misconduct cases