Skip to main content

Marking Criteria (written) levels 1 and 2 European

Class Scale Mark Language:accuracy, range and complexity Task fulfilment and response
First Excellent 1st 100 Exceptional for level.
Exemplary use of a wide range of vocabulary, and structures.
Exceptional use of grammatical structures.
Exceptional level of grammar and spelling accuracy.
An exceptional piece of writing.
Outstanding for level.
Task fulfilled to highest expectations.
Highly coherent and original response to the task.
Outstanding range of ideas.
94
High 1st 88 Outstanding range of topic-specific vocabulary and complex structures.
Outstanding level of grammatical accuracy with hardly any errors.
A highly impressive piece of writing.
Task fulfilled to very high expectations.
Coherent and original response to task.
Excellent range of ideas.
High Mid 1st 82
Low Mid 1st 78 Excellent range of topic-specific vocabulary and complex structures.
Excellent level of grammatical accuracy with hardly any errors.
An impressive piece of writing.
Task fulfilled to high expectations.
Coherent and some original response to task.
Excellent range of ideas.
Low 1st 74
Upper second High 2:1 68 Complex sentence structures are attempted and well executed.
Very good range of vocabulary.
Generally accurate with only few major and minor errors.
Occasional spelling errors.
Very good piece of writing.A very good response to the task.
Regularly goes beyond a basic response to give more detailed information.
Effective engagement with the task.
Very good range of ideas.
Mid 2:1 65 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 major and minor errors.
Few spelling errors.
A good piece of writing.
A good response to the task.
Content effectively communicated.
Good range of ideas.
Low 2:1 62 Complex sentence structures are attempted but are not always executed competently.
Good range of vocabulary but some imprecision may occur.
Generally accurate but with occasional slips which for the most part do not compromise clarity of meaning.
Some spelling errors.
A mostly good piece of writing.
A mostly good response to the task.
An element of the task may lack clarity or be missing but generally meets the task demands effectively.
Most ideas are well linked.
A fair range of ideas.
Lower second High 2:2 58 Reasonable use of the language with some awkwardness of expression.
Some interference from other languages may be present.
Reasonable range of vocabulary, but some imprecision occurs.
Complex sentence structures are attempted but contain occasional major errors and persistent minor errors, or largely accurate but rather simple sentences.
Errors do not generally affect clarity of meaning.
A reasonable if rather simplistic piece of writing.
Reasonable response to the task but a few elements may not have been addressed.
Occasional additional details conveyed, (e.g. description, simple opinion).
Most ideas are linked.
Mid 2:2 55 Little or no attempt to create complex sentences, and these frequently contain errors.
Adequate use of the language with frequent awkwardness of expression.
Some interference from other languages may be present.
Range of vocabulary is somewhat limited and some imprecisions occur.
Persistent errors that may affect clarity of meaning in places.
A rather simplistic piece of writing.
Some awareness of main issues but incomplete response to the task.
Essential information may be lacking.
Some information is irrelevant to the task.
Low 2:2 52 Limited use of the language with frequent awkwardness of expression.
Rare attempts to create complex sentences, and these contain errors.
Some interference from other languages is present.
Limited range of vocabulary.
Persistent errors that may affect clarity of meaning.
A simplistic piece of writing.
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.
Third High 3rd 48 Frequent inability to use the language.
Very rare attempts to create complex sentences and these are largely unsuccessful.
Frequent interference from other languages.
Poor range of vocabulary.
Persistent errors that affect clarity of meaning.
A superficial piece of writing.
Vague awareness of the main issues and/or not appropriate to the task.
Key information is missing and/or inaccurate.
May contain a significant amount of material that is irrelevant.
Mid 3rd 45 Overall performance marred by persistent major and minor errors.
Very poor range of vocabulary.
Low 3rd 42 Comprehension is hindered in places by awkward expression and interference of other languages.
Fail High Fail 38 Widespread inability to use the language.
Persistent major and minor errors predominate, which affect comprehension.
Extremely poor range of vocabulary.
Comprehension is hindered by awkward expression and interference from other languages.
An unsatisfactory piece of writing.
Little or no awareness of the main issues.
Key information is missing and/or inaccurate.
Work fails to meet the required standards.
Occasional words recognisable within sentences.
May fall short of the length required.
Fail 32 Inadequate command of the language which hinders comprehension.
Severely limited in every aspect: grammar, vocabulary and spelling.
An inadequate piece of writing.
Inadequate awareness of the main issues.
Key information is missing and /or inaccurate.
Work is significantly below the standard required at this level.
May fall short of the length required.
25 Little evidence of language competence.
Comprehension is near impossible.
Or not enough language to assess.
A wholly inadequate piece of writing.
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 Nothing of merit. Nothing of merit.
Zero Zero 0 Essentially nothing of value. No attempt at response OR absent.

 

Each category may also be affected by considerations such as:

- the willingness to take risks;

- the attempt to introduce sophisticated/complex arguments;

- the relevance of points made;

- the readability of the text produced;

- the completeness of the text produced.