Pretty good, but ...

These two examples of student work came up in discussions with someone who had attended one of my workshops, and had subsequently contacted me, under my usual follow-up arrangement, to check marking standards.

Both scripts were written and submitted electronically, so they are reproduced below more or less exactly as presented (names and personal details have been changed).

The scripts are available (below) in handout form, so that you can either (a) print them out and mark them before looking at the analysis and marks given further down the page (so no peeking now!); or/and (b) copy them and give them out to the students for them to consider as models, and even mark.

The task

The students were addressing a version of a question set in the November 2010 SL Paper 2. The question had been re-written to fit the then-current Subject Guide (2011). As you'll see, there's not much difference :-

Actual question (previous Subject Guide')

Your grandmother has told you that she has great difficulty using the computer that your family gave
to her for her last birthday. You decide to send her clear and simple instructions explaining how to
send an email. Write the instructions.

Revised question (then-current Subject Guide')

Science & technology

Older people sometimes find it hard to adapt to new technologies such as computers. Write clear, helpful instructions to help your grandmother to carry out an operation on her new computer.

However, please note that neither of these questions are written in the way that current exam tasks would be written.

Script A

Analysis & marks

Since the task does not conform to the requirements of the 2018 Subject Guide, the following marking must be seen as a form of thought-experiment - valid enough, but not definitive.

HL Paper 1 (2018 Criteria)

Criterion A: Language = 9/12

• Command of the language is 'effective' in that it is (a) almost entirely clear, (b) is usually precise in how things are phrased (not always), and ( c ) is quite expressive of affection for Granmother [in final paragraph, see “...would actually like it very much...” = courteous + “As a prize ...” = nice little joke]
• The range of vocabulary is 'appropriate', and 'varied', and there is some idiomatic expression (7-9 band) - but there is not much sign that it is 'nuanced' and that it 'enhances the message' (10-12 band)
• There is some 'variety of basic and more complex grammatical structures' (7-9 band) - although sentence structure is mainly pretty simple – but then that is required and appropriate for instructions. Occasional signs of complex syntax – e.g. 2nd sentence, final paragraph – suggest that the student has a capable, but not yet sophisticated, grasp of how to construct a skilful sentence.
• Language is 'mostly accurate' - there are very few errors, and those that exist are mainly fine details of proper usage (a native-speaker might not say it precisely like that). Anyway, errors never significantly interfere.

Criterion B: Message = 9

• The message has certainly been communicated well – the question is, how well?
• Everything in the script is relevant, and pretty well focused on the task.
• However, I tend to see the instructions as 'well developed' (7-9 band), rather than 'fully developed' (10-12 band). For example, consider step 5 – the details given are clear enough for anyone who has some experience of computers, but the point is that Grandmother hasn't … in other words, can you take for granted that she knows what 'username' and 'password' mean ? For me, there are key bits of information lacking here – the message is a bit too thin and underdeveloped to deserve the 10-12 band.

Criterion C: Conceptual understanding = 4/6

This cannot be properly marked according to the 2018 Guide's Criterion C because the actual task set did not provide a choice of text types. The following comments simply assume that the candidate has chosen from a series of options, of which the 'appropriate' option was 'set of instructions', and the 'generally appropriate' option was 'letter'

• The choice of letter places the mark in the 'generally appropriate' markband - i.e. 3-4 band.
• The 'letter' text type is “generally appropriate to the context, purpose and audience” - the register and tone are correctly friendly and unpretentious, and the basic elements of format (opening and closing formulas) are fine.
• But how appropriate is it to the purpose ? The chatty letter elements are believable, but the task simply requires "clear, helpful instructions" so do the letter elements merely distract?
• In a sense, this is a hybrid text type, although it does include a list of instructions which show some sound grasp of the conventions of a 'set of instructions' - i.e. the clear use of the numbered list of steps.
• There are sound elements of both 'letter' and 'set of instructions', which suggests the top of the 3-4 band, but no higher.

So – TOTAL = 22/30 … which according to my suggested reckoner of grades would be the bottom of a grade 6.

*********************

Script B

Analysis & marks

HL Paper 2 (2018 Criteria)

Criterion A: Language = 12/12

• Command of the language is 'very effective' in that it is fluent, idiomatic and reads as 'authentic' overall.
• Vocabulary is clearly appropriate, nuanced and varied. The variety is perhaps more of phrasing than vocabulary as such, but there are signs that the student has both colloquial and more formal resources.
• The range of structures is mainly basic – but then that goes with his direct and straightforward approach to giving instructions. There are indeed a few signs of complex syntax – e.g. last sentence, final paragraph – suggesting that the student has quite an agile grasp of how to link various ideas together with varying language structures.
• There are very few errors, and what there are never significantly interfere with the communication of meaning. (Although there are points where meaning is not completely clear – but that is an issue of the precise control of ideas, not of language as such.)

Criterion B: Message = 10/12

• The task has certainly been fulfilled effectively – the question is, how effectively?
• Everything in the script is relevant, and pretty well focused on the task.
• However, I feel that the instructions are not "fully developed" in certain aspects. For example, see my comments on one of the paragraphs, given below **.
• Some sections are better handled – for example paragraph 4 has pretty much everything that can be expected.
• On balance, the script is not 'clear' enough to deserve more than the bottom of the 10-12 band.

Criterion C: Conceptual understanding = 4/6

This cannot be properly marked according to the 2018 Guide's Criterion C because the actual task set did not provide a choice of text types. The following comments simply assume that the candidate has chosen from a series of options, of which the 'appropriate' option was 'set of instructions', and the 'generally appropriate' option was 'letter'

• The choice of text type is not very clear: the script contains elements of both 'letter' and 'set of instructions'
• As a letter, the register and tone are appropriate enough for an informal letter - but there are no real salutations.
• As a set of instructions, register and tone are mainly appropriate, being business-like and concise - but there is no heading, or techniques such as bullet-points or headings.
• If we assume that the student mainly intended a set of instructions, there is a lack of appropriate conventions such as bullet-points, but the student compensates for this to some extent with other structural techniques - (i) reasonably effective use of sequence markers (e.g."The first..."; "The following..."; "Now..."; "Once...") ; and (ii) sensible use of bold to separate out phrases to be typed.
• Overall, the student's choice of text type is ambiguous, but does display some grasp of appropriate structures - so, it is '"generally appropriate".

So – TOTAL = 26/30 … which according to my suggested reckoner of grades would be a top grade 6. But, in fairness, this student has obviously not been trained in the text type expectations which now apply.

** Missing details – in the 2nd paragraph

The second paragraph contains a number of details that Grandma might find puzzling - here are the kind of questions she might ask :-

The most common way to send e-mails is through a webpage. First, you need a mail account. Open your internet-explorer, and write “www.gmail.com” in the top field * What's a 'field'? What does it look like? . When you’re at the webpage, you will see a clear text * What does this mean ? in the top right corner, saying; “create account”. So, here you just type in your first and last name in the fields asking for it. On the desired gmail name * What's a 'gmail name' ?, I would suggest to just write your first and last name in one word, as this is easy to remember. Now, you can choose a password. Think of something you will remember * What sort of thing ? For example ? . Write your desired password in the following field * Following what ? . Repeat your password once again in the field below.
 

Nota bene  -  Well written instructions anticipate possible gaps in the recipient's knowledge.