Skip to main content

Marking criteria (written) Chinese/Japanese level 5 - TBC for 2017/18

Scale
/Class
Numerical Equivalent
(100%)
Language:
accuracy, range and sophistication
(60%)
Content/communication:
scope of ideas / task understanding & fulfilment / clarity and coherence of structure (40%)
Excellent 1st 100 An exceptional piece of writing
Exceptional in every aspect.
Virtually flawless command of the language.
A stylish and ingenious manipulation of the language including vocabulary, idiomatic expressions, set phrases, and grammatical structures even in complex contexts.
Fully aware and accurate use of register and style.
All characters written accurately.
Exceptionally persuasive, sophisticated argument or analysis.
Outstanding grasp of the subject matterHighly original, with innovative and intellectually-challenging ideas.
Original or sophisticated illustration/evidence.
Expertly structured with appropriate introduction and conclusion and seamless and logical flow of communication.
Accurate use of formalities
94
High 1st 88 An outstanding piece of writing
Outstanding command of grammar
Stylish manipulation of the language with consistent flair in choosing idiomatic expressions and set phrases for the right contexts
Virtually error-free.
Wide-ranging and sophisticated topic-specific vocabulary.
Appropriate use of register and style throughout.
All characters written correctly.
Highly persuasive argument or analysisExcellent grasp of the subject matter.
Excellent structure with a logical sequence.
Excellent range of illustration/evidence.
Some originality in ideasAccurate use of formalities
High Mid 1st 82
Low Mid 1st 78 An excellent piece of writing
Excellent command of grammar.
An excellent manipulation of the language with flair in using idiomatic expressions and set phrases for the right contexts.
Wide-ranging and varied topic-specific vocabulary.
Very accurate: only very occasional minor mistakes occurring when more advanced structures and phrases are used
Appropriate use of register and style throughout.
Almost all characters written correctly.
Very persuasive argument or analysis
Excellent grasp of the subject matter.
Very well structured with logical flow of a range of good ideas.
Some interest and variety in the range of illustration/evidence.
Fully relevant and delivered clearly.
Very good use of formalities 
Low 1st 74
High 2:1 68 A very good piece of writing
Very good command of grammar.
Very confident manipulation of the language.
Very good range of vocabulary and idioms.
Generally accurate and fluent with few minor errors.
Complex sentence structures are attempted and well executed.
Largely appropriate use of register and style throughout.
Almost all characters written correctly.
persuasive argument or analysisVery good grasp of the subject matter.
Well-structured with appropriate introduction and conclusion.
Very good range of illustration/evidence.
Largely relevant and delivered in a good order.
good use of formalities
Mid 2:1 65 A good piece of writing
Good command of grammar.
Confident manipulation of the language.
Complex sentences structures are attempted and generally well executed.
Good range of vocabulary and idioms.
Generally accurate and fluent with some minor grammatical and/or lexical errors.
Mostly appropriate register and style.
Almost all characters written correctly.
Persuasive argument or analysisGood grasp of the subject matter.
Generally well-ordered with introduction and conclusion
Good range of illustration/evidence, mostly relevant and delivered quite clearly;good use of formalities 
Low 2:1 62 A fairly good piece of writing
Fairly good command of grammar.
Largely confident manipulation of the language.
Complex sentence structures may be attempted but are not always successfully executed competently.
Largely good range of vocabulary and idioms, but with some imprecision.
Largely accurate and fluent but with several grammatical and/or lexical errors.
Mostly appropriate register and style.
Some characters are written incorrectly but still recognisable
A fairly persuasive argument or analysis
Fairly good grasp of the subject matter.
Reasonably well ordered structure though may be uneven.
A fair range of illustration/evidence, still relevant;
Fairly good use of formalities 
High 2:2 58 A reasonable piece of writing
Reasonable manipulation of the language with some awkwardness of expression.
Some attempts to create complex sentences but these are often error-prone.
Or largely accurate but rather simple sentences.
A range of vocabulary and idioms, but many imprecision occurs.
Mostly accurate but with occasional major errors, and/or more regular minor grammatical and/or lexical errors.
Some occasional inconsistencies in register and style may be present.
Many characters are written incorrectly but mostly still recognisable.
A reasonable if rather flat argument or analysis.
Reasonable grasp of main issues but at times understanding of these can be somewhat limited.
Essential information may be lacking.
A fair attempt to produce a structured argument though its focus may be erratic.
Ideas may not always be sufficiently developed.
Illustration may not always be consistently provided.
Formalities not fully used.
Mid 2:2 55 An inconsistent piece of writing
Inconsistent command of grammar
Inconsistent manipulation of the language with frequent awkwardness of expression.
Few attempts to create complex sentences, and these are frequently error-prone, or largely accurate but rather simple sentence.
Reasonable range of vocabulary and idioms, but imprecisions frequently occur.
A number of major grammatical and/or lexical errors are present.
Frequent minor errors.
Some inconsistencies in register and style may be present.
Although there are a number of mistakes in characters, some are still recognisable, and the meaning not obscured.
An erratic or pedestrian argument or analysis.
Limited grasp of main issues.
Some attempt at discussion but understanding of these can be rather limited.
Structure can be incomplete and unconvincing.
Patchy evidence and weak, inaccurate illustration and not always to the point.
Limited use of formalities 
Low 2:2 52 An insecure piece of writing
Insecure command of grammarLimited 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.
Regular major grammatical and/or lexical errors.
Persistent minor errors.
Inconsistencies in register and style may be present.
Mistakes in writing characters are evident and affect meaning.
A consistently weak argument or analysis.
Some awareness demonstrated of main issues but poor grasp of overall picture.
May contain some material that is irrelevant.
Very little evidence of analytical capacity.
Little evidence of a structured approach.
Illustration may be weak, not to the point, inaccurate and irrelevant.
Very limited use of formalities 
High 3rd 48 A poor piece of writing
Poor command of grammar, which may compromise comprehension in places.
Frequent inability to manipulate the language.
Very rare attempts to create complex sentences and these are largely unsuccessful.
Some sections are affected by persistent major and minor lexical and grammatical errors.
Poor range of vocabulary.
Inappropriate register and style in many places.
Many character mistakes obscure the meaning.
A rather simplistic, superficial approach that struggles to convey an intelligible argument.
Rather vague understanding of how to present the issues.
May contain some irrelevant material.
Key information may be missing and/or inaccurate.
Poor structure.
Poor illustrationLittle use of formalities 
Mid 3rd 45 A very poor piece of writing
Poor command of grammar, which may occasionally impede comprehension.
Very rare attempts to create complex sentences and these are nearly always unsuccessful.
Some sections are seriously affected by persistent major and minor lexical and grammatical errors.
Very poor range of vocabulary.
Inappropriate register and style almost throughout.
Frequent character mistakes cause misunderstanding.
A simplistic, superficial approach that struggles to convey an intelligible argument.
Vague understanding of how to present the issues.
Contains some irrelevant material.
Key information is missing and/or inaccurate.
Very poor structure.
Very poor illustration Very little use of formalities
Low 3rd 42 An extremely poor piece of writing
Poor command of grammar, which often impedes comprehension.
Overall performance is affected by persistent major and minor lexical and grammatical errors.
Extremely poor range of vocabulary.
Inappropriate register and style throughout.
Persistent character mistakes cause nearly total misunderstanding.
A very simplistic, superficial approach that often struggles to convey an intelligible argument.
Very vague understanding of how to present the issues.
Contains a significant amount of irrelevant material.
Key information is missing and/or inaccurate.
Very poor structure.
Hardly any illustration.
Almost no use of formalities.
High Fail (sub honours) 38 An unsatisfactory piece of writing
Widespread inability to manipulate the language.
Very poor command of grammar, which hinders comprehension.
No successful attempts to create complex sentences.
Persistent major and minor lexical and grammatical errors predominate.
Very poor range of vocabulary.
Inappropriate register and style throughout
Frequent omissions and mistakes in writing characters and meaning not conveyed.
May fall short of the length required.
Largely inadequate grasp of the subject matter.
Little or no awareness demonstrated of the main issues.
The argument is generally incoherent and/or irrelevant.
Essential information is either missing and/or inaccurate.
Random or no structure.
Poor or no illustration.
Almost no awareness of formalities.
Work fails to meet the required standards.
Fail 32 A very unsatisfactory piece of writing
Extremely poor command of grammar which generally hinders comprehension.
Severely limited in every aspects: grammar, vocabulary, register and style and character writing.
Fall short of the length required.
 
Wholly inadequate grasp of the subject matter.
Inadequate awareness of the main issues.
The argument or analysis is so poor and/or irrelevant, that comprehension is hindered.
Essential information is missing and /or inaccurate.
Poor or no structure.
Poor or no illustration.
No awareness of formalities.
Work is significantly below the standard required at this level.
25 Little evidence of grammatical / lexical competence.
Comprehension is near impossible.
Or not enough language to assess.
Little grasp of the subject matter.
Work that falls well below the standards required at this level, and a total inability to write to the conventions of the task set.
No awareness of formalities
Low fail 12
Zero 0   Work of no merit or absent or work not submitted or penalty in some misconduct cases