ASSESSMENT RUBRIC FOR OIB AMERICAN OPTION WRITTEN EXAMINATION: ESSAY
N.B. A short response may require assessment to be lowered.
-0.5 or more at the discretion of the examiner
|Level 0||Level 1
|Knowledge & Understanding||No true understanding or first-hand knowledge shown. Factual inaccuracies void argument.||Some understanding but superficial. Learned response replaces
first-hand knowledge. Factual inaccuracies affect argument.
|Satisfactory understanding and knowledge. Development may be limited with some inadvertent or minor factual inaccuracies.||Good overall understanding.
Knowledge is full and developed.
|Very good and thorough understanding, including some subtlety. Levels of meaning are apparent.||Excellent understanding, including some subtlety. Levels of meaning are apparent. Detailed and pertinent knowledge.|
|Off-subject or no clear response discernible. Observation, commentary or opinion may be present but no attempt to form an argument.||Response is partial or muddled. Argument is directed at the question but may be confused or superficial.||A satisfactory response to the main implications of the question. Some aspects of the question may be ignored.||A good response. Argument addresses the question but may need more development.||A very good response. Argument is complete and well-targeted,
and the question is well-understood.
|An excellent response. Argument demonstrates original thought and addresses the question with clarity and depth.|
& Depth(Includes discussion of style at Level 2 and above)
|Plot summary or generalizations dominate. No successful attempt at analysis.||Plot summary or generalizations frequent. Little or unsuccessful analysis.||Inconsistent analysis that does not always address important elements.
Analysis may be uneven or lacking in depth.
|Good analysis that appropriately addresses important elements. Generally appropriate analysis of style illustrated by relevant examples.||Very good analysis. Thoughtful, pertinent analysis of style.||Excellent analysis
and argumentation. Insightful,
coherent analysis of style.
of the Essay
|No logical sequence of ideas. Chronological confusion. Development is so inadequate that clarity is in danger of dissolving completely.||Weak or mechanical structure. Development is barely adequate and examples are either impertinent or lack clear connection to the argument.||Satisfactory structure and development. Sequence of ideas generally logical. Examples not always pertinent and integration may be awkward.||Good structure with some transitions. Sequence of ideas logical. Examples are generally pertinent and most often integrated appropriately.||Very good essay structure with solid transitions. Clear development throughout and good integration of supporting evidence.||Excellent essay structure with clear transitions. Carefully planned, persuasive development throughout. Sophisticated integration of supporting evidence.|
|Expression||Meaning often cannot be surmised. The essay is very difficult to read.||Prose can be read and
its meaning surmised even if hampered by weak control (or French interference).
|Prose conveys the writer’s ideas adequately. Vocabulary is sufficient and notions of good English usage are evident if sometimes inconsistently applied.||Prose shows evidence of good writing skills. Lapses are minor and do not impede understanding. Some care is shown in word choice and register.||Prose is clear and coherent. A rare lapse does not mar ideas or flow. Effective use of vocabulary and register.||Prose is articulate,
fluid, and displays an excellent command of written language. Sophisticated use of vocabulary and register.
Adopted Nov 2015 OIB