Paper One HL

Paper 1—HL

Script a:  This work conveys understanding of the primary contexts and audiences of the texts, notes several aspects and does try and consider some degree of purpose or effect.  At times, there is strong promise but at other times, the analysis just stops a little short and does not demonstrate greater sophistication.  Overall, there are aspects of the work that are good but others that are still more adequate than good.  This is work of a candidate that has solid understanding but just falls short in comprehensive consideration.

A:  4, B:  3, C:  3, D:  3

A:  Good understanding of the texts and contexts.  It is not exhaustive or always precisely considered but the general awareness of the texts, the different purposes and the effects of some elements are all evident.

B:  The analysis of stylistic features wavers between good and adequate.  Some of the purpose and effect is considered but can be a little limited or superficial at times.  A strong 3 but just a little short of 4.

C:  The organization is certainly adequate though the development of the central argument can be stronger.  The work does lack a more unifying interpretation though it is easy enough to follow the development of ideas.

D:  The language is perfectly readable and appropriate.  It lacks a degree of fluency, precision and sophistication that would really earn a 4 for this criterion but the easy style does allow for the clear communication of ideas.

Script b:  Very simplistic work overall.  This commentary involves only the most superficial of summaries and overviews rather than deeper analysis.  This does recognize what the main intentions are of the texts with minimal deeper consideration but the work never manages to dig beneath the surface.  This manages to earn marks just above summary only but only just.

A:  2, B:  2, C:  2, D:  3

A:  This is mostly overview and summary.  There is just enough awareness of the intentions of each article to earn a 2 in this criterion but there is almost no real analysis or deeper consideration.

B:  Though there is mention of a few of the more obvious stylistic features, there is little deeper consideration or work to consider more possibilities.  Purpose and effect are very simplistic is considered at all.

C:  There is an order to the presentation but not a larger, singular focus that betrays a clearer logic or interpretation.  Though there is basic balance in the treatment of the texts, it all remains quite simplistic.

D:  The language lacks sophistication or precision but is understandable.  There is little precise terminology or varied language but there is adequate fluency overall.