As a student, it is essential that you know how you are assessed and what the criteria are in each assessed component of the course. Admittedly, there is a lot for you to take in. English language and literature has several assessment components, and English is only one of several subjects that, in most cases, you have to juggle. Nevertheless, if you don't know what the marking criteria are, it is difficult to understand what you are being assessed on, and it is difficult to improve your perrformance over time. Therefore, we don't suggest that you try to develop a detailed understanding of the individual markbands, but knowing what each criteria is and what is assessed is necessary. You can find the marking criteria below. We have modified them slightly from the IB's 'official' version to make them more 'student friendly'. The criteria can be accessed on the page and are available in a version to be printed off.
Paper 1: Guided Textual Analysis
Paper 1: Guided Textual Analysis
Criterion A: Understanding and interpretation
What is assessed?
An understanding of the text – what is revealed and inferred – using supporting references.
| Marks | Description of level |
| 0 | The response does not meet the standards described by the descriptors below. |
| 1 | There is little understanding of the surface meaning. The response seldom supports claims with evidence, or supporting evidence is seldom appropriate. |
| 2 | There is some understanding of the surface meaning. The response supports claims with evidence that is sometimes appropriate. |
| 3 | There is an understanding of the surface meaning and some inferential understanding. The response supports claims with evidence that is mainly relevant. |
| 4 | There is a detailed understanding of the surface meaning and a convincing inferential understanding. The response supports claims with relevant evidence. |
| 5 | There is a detailed and insightful understanding of surface meaning, and a convincing and nuanced inferential understanding. The response supports claims with well-selected evidence. |
Criterion B: Analysis and evaluation
What is assessed?
An understanding of language, style, and structure, and an ability to critically evaluate writer’s choices to construct meaning.
| Marks | Description of level |
| 0 | The response does not meet the standards described by the descriptors below. |
| 1 | There is little analysis of language and style to construct meaning. The commentary is descriptive. |
| 2 | There is some analysis of language and style to construct meaning. The commentary is mainly descriptive. |
| 3 | There is a mainly appropriate analysis of the ways language and style constructs meaning. Some of the analysis is insightful. |
| 4 | There is an appropriate analysis of the ways language and style constructs meaning. Some of the analysis is insightful. There is some evaluation of how meaning is shaped by writer’s choices. |
| 5 | There is an insightful and convincing analysis of the ways language and style constructs meaning. There is very good evaluation of how meaning is shaped by writer’s choices. |
Criterion C: Focus and organization
What is assessed?
An ability to organize ideas in a coherent and focused way.
| Marks | Description of level |
| 0 | The response does not meet the standards described by the descriptors below. |
| 1 | There is little organization and no obvious focus. |
| 2 | There is some organization and a degree of focus. |
| 3 | There is adequate organization, some coherence, and some focus. |
| 4 | There is good organization, a good degree of coherence, and adequate focus. |
| 5 | There is effective organization and coherence, and a good degree of focus. |
Criterion D: Language
What is assessed?
An ability to write with clarity, accuracy, and variety. An ability to write in an appropriate academic register. An ability to include relevant terminology where appropriate.
| Marks | Description of Level |
| 0 | The response does not meet the standards described by the descriptors below. |
| 1 | The is little clarity or accuracy. There is little sense of an appropriate register. |
| 2 | There is some clarity and accuracy. There is some sense of an appropriate register. Errors are apparent. |
| 3 | There is adequate clarity and accuracy. The register is mainly appropriate. Some lapses are apparent. |
| 4 | There is good clarity and accuracy. The register is consistently appropriate. |
| 5 | There is very good clarity and accuracy, and a strong sense of precision. The register is consistently appropriate and effective. |
Paper 2: Comparative Essay
Paper 2: Comparative Essay
Criterion A: Knowledge, understanding and interpretation
What is assessed?
A knowledge and understanding of literary works. A response to the question that is relevant, showing similarities and differences in the works studied.
| Marks | Description of level |
| 0 | The response does not meet the standards described by the descriptors below. |
| 1-2 | There is little knowledge and understanding of the works, and there is little comparison of works in relation to the question. |
| 3-4 | There is limited knowledge and understanding of the works, and there is limited comparison of works in relation to the question. |
| 5-6 | There is satisfactory knowledge and understanding of the works, and there is satisfactory comparison of works in relation to the question. |
| 7-8 | There is good knowledge and understanding of the works, and there is relevant comparison of works in relation to the question. The discussion is somewhat sustained. |
| 9-10 | There is very good knowledge and understanding of the works, and there is insightful comparison of works in relation to the question. The discussion is sustained and insightful. |
Criterion B: Analysis and evaluation
What is assessed?
An analysis and evaluation of language, technique, and style to establish meaning and effect. Through analysis and evaluation, appropriate similarities and differences are shown in response to the question.
| Marks | Description of level |
| 0 | The response does not meet the standards described by the descriptors below. |
| 1-2 | The response is descriptive, offering little relevant analysis. |
| 3-4 | The response is somewhat analytical, but mainly descriptive. There is limited comparison of writers’ choices |
| 5-6 | The response is generally analytical, offering some understanding of the ways in which language, technique, and style establish meaning and effect. The response offers some insight, and there is some comparison of writers’ choices. |
| 7-8 | The response is analytical and evaluative, offering understanding of the ways in which language, technique, and style establish meaning and effect. There is a good comparison of writers’ choices. |
| 9-10 | The response is analytical and evaluative, offering an insightful and convincing understanding of the ways in which language, technique, and style establish meaning and effect. There is a good comparison of writers’ choices. |
Criterion C: Focus and organization
What is assessed?
Structure, focus, and balance.
| Marks | Description of level |
| 0 | The response does not meet the standards described by the descriptors below. |
| 1 | There is limited focus, and the ideas are mainly unconnected. |
| 2 | There is some focus and some connection between ideas. Coherence may be inconsistent, and the discussion of works may lack balance. |
| 3 | There is mainly good focus despite some lapses. The is reasonable balance and general sense of cohesion in the development of ideas. |
| 4 | There is a good focus that is largely maintained. There is good balance, and ideas develop consistently and logically. |
| 5 | There is a clear and consistent focus. There is very good balance, and ideas develop in a logical and compelling way. |
Criterion D: Language
What is assessed?
An ability to write with clarity, accuracy, and variety. An ability to write in an appropriate academic register. An ability to include relevant terminology where appropriate.
| Marks | Description of level |
| 0 | The response does not meet the standards described by the descriptors below. |
| 1 | The is little clarity or accuracy. There is little sense of an appropriate register. |
| 2 | There is some clarity and accuracy. There is some sense of an appropriate register. Errors are apparent. |
| 3 | There is adequate clarity and accuracy. The register is mainly appropriate. Some lapses are apparent. |
| 4 | There is good clarity and accuracy. The register is consistently appropriate. |
| 5 | There is very good clarity and accuracy, and a strong sense of precision. The register is consistently appropriate and effective. |
Individual Oral
Individual Oral
Criterion A: Knowledge, understanding, and interpretation
What is assessed?
A knowledge and understanding of the extracts, and the wider works and texts from which they are taken. An application of this knowledge to the global issue chosen, drawing conclusions that are underpinned by reference to works and texts.
| Marks | Description of level |
| 0 | The response does not meet the standards described by the descriptors below. |
| 1-2 | There is little knowledge and understanding of extracts, texts, and works in the context of the global issue chosen. Supporting evidence is limited or inappropriate. |
| 3-4 | There is limited knowledge and understanding of extracts, texts, and works in the context of the global issue chosen. Supporting evidence is sometimes appropriate. |
| 5-6 | There is satisfactory knowledge and understanding of extracts, texts, and works, offering an interpretation in the context of the global issue chosen. Supporting evidence is mainly appropriate and supports the development of ideas. |
| 7-8 | There is good knowledge and understanding of extracts, texts, and works, offering a constant interpretation in the context of the global issue chosen. Supporting evidence is appropriate and supports the development of ideas. |
| 9-10 | There is excellent knowledge and understanding of extracts, texts, and works, offering a compelling interpretation in the context of the global issue chosen. Supporting evidence is appropriate, carefully selected, and supports the development of ideas. |
Criterion B: Analysis and evaluation
What is assessed?
A knowledge and understanding of the extracts, and the wider works and texts from which they are taken, showing how writers’ choices of language, structure, and style construct and establish a perspective on the global issue chosen.
| Marks | Description of level |
| 0 | The response does not meet the standards described by the descriptors below. |
| 1-2 | The oral is descriptive, or analysis is irrelevant. There is little discussion of language, structure, and style in the context of the global issue chosen. |
| 3-4 | There is some relevant analysis, but this largely derives from description. Aspects of language, structure, and style are highlighted, but partially understood in the context of the global issue chosen. |
| 5-6 | There is analysis, revealing appropriate and evaluative commentary. There is reasonable understanding of language, structure, and style in the context of the global issue chosen. |
| 7-8 | There is analysis, revealing appropriate and evaluative commentary that is at times insightful. There is good understanding of language, structure, and style in the context of the global issue chosen. |
| 9-10 | There is analysis, revealing appropriate and evaluative commentary that is insightful. There is excellent and nuanced understanding of language, structure, and style in the context of the global issue chosen. |
Criterion C: Focus and organization
What is assessed?
Structure, focus, and balance. The ability to connect ideas coherently.
| Marks | Description of level |
| 0 | The response does not meet the standards described by the descriptors below. |
| 1-2 | There is little focus, and ideas are rarely connected. |
| 3-4 | There is some focus, but there may be a lack of balance in how works and texts are discussed. |
| 5-6 | There is focus, but this may lapse. There may be a lack of balance in how works and texts are discussed. Connections are established between ideas, but not always coherently. |
| 7-8 | The oral is mainly clear and sustained. There is balance in how works and texts are discussed. Ideas develop consistently and coherently. The presentation of ideas is convincing. |
| 9-10 | The oral is mainly clear and sustained. There is good balance in how works and texts are discussed. The presentation of ideas is logical and convincing, connecting ideas insightfully. |
Criterion D: Language
What is assessed?
Clarity and accuracy of language
| Marks | Description of level |
| 0 | The response does not meet the standards described by the descriptors below. |
| 1-2 | There is a general lack of clarity and precision. Aspects of style are inappropriate. |
| 3-4 | There is general clarity. Errors may affect communication. Errors are frequent. Aspects of style are often inappropriate. |
| 5-6 | There is clarity. Errors do not affect communication. Vocabulary and sentence structure are appropriate, but lack variation and sophistication. Aspects of style are appropriate. |
| 7-8 | There is clarity and accuracy. There may be small errors, but these do not affect communication. Vocabulary and sentence structure are appropriate and varied. Aspects of style are appropriate and may enhance the oral. |
| 9-10 | There is clarity, accuracy, and variation. There may be small errors, but these do not affect communication. Vocabulary and sentence structure are appropriate, varied, and enhance the presentation of ideas. Aspects of style are appropriate and enhance the oral |
Higher Level (HL) Essay
Higher Level (HL) Essay
Criterion A: Knowledge, understanding and interpretation
What is assessed?
A knowledge and understanding of literary works or texts, using appropriate supporting references to make inferences and draw conclusions relevant to the chosen focus.
| Marks | Description of level |
| 0 | The response does not meet the standards described by the descriptors below. |
| 1 | There is little knowledge and understanding of the works or texts relevant to the chosen focus. There are few references to the work or text, or references are mainly inappropriate. |
| 2 | There is some knowledge and understanding of the works or texts relevant to the chosen focus. There are some references to the work or text, and these are sometimes appropriate. |
| 3 | There is a satisfactory knowledge and understanding of the works or texts relevant to the chosen focus. References to the work or text are mainly relevant, and mainly support claims and arguments. |
| 4 | There is a good knowledge and understanding of the works or texts relevant to the chosen focus. Claims and arguments are sustained, and references support these claims and arguments. |
| 5 | There is excellent knowledge and understanding of the works or texts relevant to the chosen focus. Claims and arguments are persuasive, and references are well chosen, effectively supporting these claims and arguments. |
Criterion B: Analysis and evaluation
What is assessed?
An analysis and evaluation of language, technique, and style to establish meaning and effect relevant to the chosen topic.
| Marks | Description of level |
| 0 | The response does not meet the standards described by the descriptors below. |
| 1 | The response is descriptive, offering little relevant analysis relevant to the chosen topic. |
| 2 | The response is somewhat analytical, but is mainly descriptive relevant to the chosen topic. |
| 3 | The response is generally analytical, offering some understanding of the ways in which language, technique, and style establish meaning and effect relevant to the chosen topic. |
| 4 | The response is analytical and evaluative, offering understanding of the ways in which language, technique, and style establish meaning and effect relevant to the chosen topic. |
| 5 | The response is analytical and evaluative, offering an insightful and convincing understanding of the ways in which language, technique, and style establish meaning and effect relevant to the chosen topic. |
Criterion C: Focus, organization and development
What is assessed?
Structure, focus, balance, and the integration of examples.
| Marks | Description of level |
| 0 | The response does not meet the standards described by the descriptors below. |
| 1 | There is little organization. A sense of inquiry is not apparent. Supporting examples are not embedded into the essay. |
| 2 | There is some organization. The line of inquiry lacks development. Supporting examples are rarely embedded into the essay. |
| 3 | There is adequate organization and general cohesion. The line of inquiry shows some development. Supporting examples are sometimes embedded into the essay. |
| 4 | There is good organization and the essay is mostly cohesive. The line of inquiry is mainly well developed. Supporting examples mostly well embedded into the essay. |
| 5 | There is effective organization and the essay is cohesive. The line of inquiry is well developed. Supporting examples are well embedded into the essay. |
Criterion D: Language
What is assessed?
An ability to write with clarity, accuracy, and variety. An ability to write in an appropriate academic register. An ability to include relevant terminology where appropriate.
| Marks | Description of level |
| 0 | The response does not meet the standards described by the descriptors below. |
| 1 | The is little clarity or accuracy. There is little sense of an appropriate register. |
| 2 | There is some clarity and accuracy. There is some sense of an appropriate register. Errors are apparent. |
| 3 | There is adequate clarity and accuracy. The register is mainly appropriate. Some lapses are apparent. |
| 4 | There is good clarity and accuracy. The register is consistently appropriate. |
| 5 | There is very good clarity and accuracy, and a strong sense of precision. The register is consistently appropriate and effective. |
Marking Criteria for Printing
Feedback
Which of the following best describes your feedback?
Twitter 
Facebook 
LinkedIn