Lower secondary School English Language Teacher Training
Master's Degree Programme
major and minor
State Exam in Literature for Master’s Students
The Assessment Rubric
| PRESENTATION | RESPONSES TO QUESTIONS | PREPARATION SHEET | |
|
A Exceptional |
Student’s critical perspective is clear and ideas are original; they are well-supported by evidence from both the primary and secondary sources; source information is scholarly, it is analyzed and synthesized effectively and persuasively | Responses are thoughtful; their quality is consistently solid; students convincingly defend their position on the topic | The topic introduced in the abstract is focused; student’s perspective on the topic is original. Sources listed in the annotated bibliography are scholarly, their connection to student’s presentation is justified |
|
B Above average |
Student’s critical perspective is clear; it is supported by evidence from both the primary and secondary sources; source information is mostly scholarly, it is analyzed and synthesized well | Responses are thoughtful, but their quality may appear slightly uneven; students convincingly defend their position on the topic | The topic introduced in the abstract is focused; student’s perspective on the topic is persuasive. Sources listed in the annotated bibliography are scholarly, their connection to student’s presentation is in most cases justified |
|
C Average |
Student’s critical perspective is rather commonplace; it is partly supported by evidence from both the primary and secondary sources; source information is mostly scholarly, it is analyzed and synthesized well | Responses are thoughtful, but their quality is uneven; when defending their position on the topic, students may occasionally use vague generalities or clichés | The topic introduced in the abstract is quite broad; student’s perspective on the topic is commonplace. Sources listed in the annotated bibliography are both scholarly and popular, their connection to student’s presentation is justified but only in some cases |
|
D Below average |
Student’s critical perspective is inconsistent; evidence from both the primary and secondary sources is limited; source information is mostly popular and too general, it is not analyzed and synthesized appropriately | Responses are too vague; when defending their position on the topic, students rely only on generalities or clichés | The topic introduced in the abstract is too broad; student’s perspective on the topic is rudimentary. Sources listed in the annotated bibliography are mostly popular, their connection the to student’s presentation is only vaguely explained |
|
E Poor |
Student’s critical perspective is superficial; evidence from both the primary and secondary sources is limited; source information is mostly unreliable and too general, it is not analyzed and synthesized appropriately | Responses are rudimentary; students cannot defend their position on the topic convincingly | The topic introduced in the abstract is broad and superficial; student’s perspective on the topic is rudimentary. Sources listed in the annotated bibliography are unreliable, their connection to student’s presentation is not clearly stated |
|
F Not passing |
Presentation lacks critical perspective, it is descriptive, and lacks relevant ideas. Source information is not analyzed or synthesized. | Responses are not satisfactory; students fail to defend their position on the topic | The abstract summarizes the content of the primary source and does not contain any topic. The sources listed in the annotated bibliography are missing or not reliable, their connection to student’s presentation is not explained |