• The following pages are the IB rubrics.
    Paper 2: Written productive skills (SL)
    Criterion A: Language
    • How effectively and accurately does the student use language?
    Failure to write the minimum number of words will result in a 1-mark penalty.
    Marks Level descriptor
    0 The work does not reach a standard described by the descriptors below.
    1–2 Command of the language is generally inadequate.
    A very limited range of vocabulary is used, with many basic errors.
    Simple sentence structures are rarely clear.
    3–4 Command of the language is limited and generally ineffective.
    A limited range of vocabulary is used, with many basic errors.
    Simple sentence structures are sometimes clear. 
    5–6 Command of the language is generally adequate, despite many inaccuracies.
    A fairly limited range of vocabulary is used, with many errors.
    Simple sentence structures are usually clear.
    7–8 Command of the language is effective, despite some inaccuracies.
    A range of vocabulary is used accurately, with some errors.
    Simple sentence structures are clear.
    9–10 Command of the language is good and effective.
    A wide range of vocabulary is used accurately, with few significant errors.
    Some complex sentence structures are clear and effective
     
    Criterion B: Message
    • How clearly can the student develop and organize relevant ideas?
    Marks Level descriptor
    0 The work does not reach a standard described by the descriptors below.
    1–2 The message has not been communicated.
    The ideas are irrelevant and/or repetitive.
    The development of ideas is unclear; supporting details are very limited and/or not
    appropriate.
    3–4 The message has barely been communicated.
    The ideas are sometimes irrelevant and/or repetitive.
    The development of ideas is confusing; supporting details are limited and/or not
    appropriate.
    5–6 The message has been partially communicated.
    The ideas are relevant to some extent.
    The development of ideas is evident at times; supporting details are sometimes
    appropriate.
    7–8 The message has been communicated fairly well.
    The ideas are mostly relevant.
    The development of ideas is coherent; supporting details are mostly appropriate.
    9–10 The message has been communicated well.
    The ideas are relevant.
    The development of ideas is coherent and effective; supporting details are appropriate.

    Criterion C: Format
    • How correctly does the student produce the required text type?
    • To what extent are the conventions of text types appropriate?
    Marks Level descriptor
    0 The work does not reach a standard described by the descriptors below.
    1 The text type is not recognizable.
    Conventions appropriate to the text type are not used.
    2 The text type is hardly recognizable or is not appropriate.
    Conventions appropriate to the text type are very limited.
    3 The text type is sometimes recognizable and appropriate.
    Conventions appropriate to the text type are limited.
    4 The text type is generally recognizable and appropriate.
    Conventions appropriate to the text type are evident.
    5 The text type is clearly recognizable and appropriate.
    Conventions appropriate to the text type are effective and evident.
     
    Written assignment: Receptive and written productive skills (SL)
    Criterion A: Language

    • How effectively and accurately does the student use language?
    Failure to write the minimum number of words will result in a 1-mark penalty.
    Marks Level descriptor
    0 The work does not reach a standard described by the descriptors below.
    1–2 Command of the language is generally inadequate.
    A very limited range of vocabulary is used, with many basic errors.
    Sentence structures are rarely clear.
    3–4 Command of the language is limited and generally ineffective.
    A limited range of vocabulary is used, with many basic errors.
    Sentence structures are sometimes clear.
    5–6 Command of the language is generally adequate, despite many inaccuracies.
    A fairly limited range of vocabulary is used, with many errors.
    Sentence structures are usually clear.
    7–8 Command of the language is effective, despite some inaccuracies.
    A range of vocabulary is used accurately, with some errors.
    Sentence structures are clear.

    Criterion B: Content
    • How well has the student used the sources to achieve the aim(s) stated in the rationale?
    • How skillfully are the sources used for the task?
    • How well organized is the information gathered from the sources?
    Marks Level descriptor
    0 The work does not reach a standard described by the descriptors below.
    1–2 The student makes little use of the sources and has not fulfilled the aim(s) stated in
    the rationale.
    Use of the sources is superficial or poorly developed.
    There is no evidence of organization.
    3–4 The student makes some use of the sources and partially fulfills the aim(s) stated in
    the rationale.
    Use of the sources is basic, though at least relevant.
    There is an attempt at organization.
    5–6 The student makes use of the sources and generally fulfills the aim(s) stated in the
    rationale.
    Use of the sources is adequate.
    There is some organization.
    7–8 The student makes good use of the sources and mostly fulfills the aim(s) stated in
    the rationale.
    Use of the sources is good.
    The work is mostly organized.
    9–10 The student makes effective use of the sources and fulfills the aim(s) stated in the
    rationale.
    Use of the sources is effective.
    The work is organized.
     
    Criterion C: Format
    • How correctly does the student produce the required text type?
    • To what extent are the conventions of text types appropriate?
    Marks Level descriptor
    0 The work does not reach a standard described by the descriptors below.
    1 The text type is not recognizable.
    Conventions appropriate to the text type are not used.
    2 The text type is hardly recognizable or is not appropriate.
    Conventions appropriate to the text type are limited.
    3 The text type is sometimes recognizable and appropriate.
    Conventions appropriate to the text type are evident.
    4 The text type is clearly recognizable and appropriate.
    Conventions appropriate to the text type are effective and evident.
     
    Criterion D: Rationale
    • How clear and convincing is the rationale?
    Marks Level descriptor
    0 The work does not reach a standard described by the descriptors below.
    1 The rationale is not clear.
    2 The rationale is clear to some extent.
    3 The rationale is clear and directly linked to the sources.

    Individual oral (SL)
    Criterion A: Productive skills
    How successfully does the student use the language in speech?
    • How fluent and clear is the student’s speech?
    • How accurate and varied is the language used?
    • How much does the student’s intonation aid communication?
    Marks Level descriptor
    0 The work does not reach a standard described by the descriptors below.
    1–2 Command of spoken language is very limited.
    The production of language is very hesitant and hardly comprehensible.
    Language is often incorrect and/or very limited.
    Intonation interferes seriously with communication.
    3–4 Command of spoken language is limited.
    The production of language is hesitant and not always comprehensible.
    Language is often incorrect and/or limited.
    Intonation sometimes interferes with communication.
    5–6 Command of spoken language is fairly good.
    The production of language is comprehensible and fluent at times.
    Language is sometimes correct, with some idiomatic expressions.
    Intonation does not interfere with communication.
    7–8 Command of spoken language is good.
    The production of language is mostly fluent.
    Language is generally correct, varied and articulate.
    Intonation contributes to communication.
    9–10 Command of spoken language is very good.
    The production of language is fluent.
    Language is correct, varied and articulate; errors do not interfere with message.
    Intonation enhances communication.
     
    Criterion B: Interactive and receptive skills
    To what extent does the student understand and demonstrate an ability to interact in a conversation?
    • How well can the student express simple and complex ideas?
    • How well can the student maintain a conversation?
    Marks Level descriptor
    0 The work does not reach a standard described by the descriptors below.
    1–2 Simple ideas are understood with great difficulty and interaction is very limited.
    Simple ideas and opinions are presented incoherently.
    The conversation is disjointed.
    3–4 Simple ideas are understood with difficulty and interaction is limited.
    Simple ideas and opinions are presented with difficulty, sometimes incoherently.
    The conversation does not flow coherently.
    5–6 Simple ideas are understood fairly well and interaction is acceptable.
    Simple ideas and opinions are generally presented clearly.
    The conversation flows coherently at times but with some lapses.
    7–8 Simple ideas are understood well and interaction is good.
    Simple ideas and opinions are presented clearly and coherently; there is some difficulty
    with complex ideas.
    The conversation generally flows coherently.
    9–10 Complex ideas are understood well and interaction is good.
    Both simple and complex ideas and opinions are generally presented clearly, coherently
    and effectively.
    The conversation flows coherently.
     
    Interactive oral activity (SL)
    Criterion A: Productive skills
    How successfully does the student use the language in speech?
    • How fluent and clear is the student’s speech?
    • How accurate and varied is the language?
    • How much does the student’s intonation aid communication?
    Marks Level descriptor
    0 The work does not reach a standard described by the descriptors below.
    1 Command of spoken language is very limited.
    The production of language is very hesitant and hardly comprehensible.
    Language is often incorrect and/or very limited.
    Intonation interferes seriously with communication.
    2 Command of spoken language is limited.
    The production of language is hesitant and not always comprehensible.
    Language is often incorrect and/or limited.
    Intonation sometimes interferes with communication.
    3 Command of spoken language is fairly good.
    The production of language is comprehensible and fluent at times.
    Language is sometimes correct, with some idiomatic expressions.
    Intonation does not interfere seriously with communication.
    4 Command of spoken language is good.
    The production of language is mostly fluent.
    Language is generally correct, varied and articulate.
    Intonation contributes to communication.
    5 Command of spoken language is very good.
    The production of language is fluent.
    Language is correct, varied and articulate; errors do not interfere with message.
    Intonation enhances communication.
     
    Criterion B: Interactive and receptive skills
    To what extent does the student understand and demonstrate an ability to interact in a conversation?
    • How well can the student express ideas and opinions?
    • How well can the student maintain a conversation?
    Marks Level descriptor
    0 The work does not reach a standard described by the descriptors below.
    1 Simple ideas are understood with great difficulty and interaction is very limited.
    Simple ideas and opinions are presented incoherently.
    The conversation is disjointed.
    2 Simple ideas are understood with difficulty and interaction is limited.
    Simple ideas and opinions are presented with difficulty, sometimes incoherently.
    The conversation does not flow coherently.
    3 Simple ideas are understood fairly well and interaction is adequate.
    Simple ideas and opinions are generally presented clearly.
    The conversation flows coherently at times but with some lapses.
    4 Simple ideas are understood well and interaction is good.
    Simple ideas and opinions are presented clearly and coherently; there is some difficulty
    with complex ideas.
    The conversation generally flows coherently.
    5 Complex ideas are understood well and interaction is very good.
    Both simple and complex ideas and opinions are generally presented clearly, coherently
    and effectively.
    The conversation flows coherently.