Note: this formative version is identical to the original DP summative rubric, but mark numbers are changed to reflect each criterion's score to add up to a maximum of 20 points, instead of 30 points for summative tasks.
Criterion A: Language
How successfully does the candidate command spoken language?
To what extent is the vocabulary appropriate and varied?
To what extent are the grammatical structures varied?
To what extent does the accuracy of the language contribute to effective communication?
To what extent do pronunciation and intonation affect communication?
Ruì Lǎoshī 芮老师's summary: During all three parts--your presentation plus two interaction segments--did you use words in (1) accurate and (2) complex ways?
Marks Level descriptor
0 The work does not reach a standard described by the descriptors below.
1–2 Command of the language is limited.
Vocabulary is sometimes appropriate to the task.
Basic grammatical structures are used.
Language contains errors in basic structures. Errors interfere with communication.
Pronunciation and intonation are influenced by other language(s). Mispronunciations are recurrent and interfere with communication.
3-4 Command of the language is partially effective.
Vocabulary is appropriate to the task.
Some basic grammatical structures are used, with some attempts to use more complex structures.
Language is mostly accurate in basic structures, but errors occur in more complex structures. Errors at times interfere with communication.
Pronunciation and intonation are influenced by other language(s), but mispronunciations do not often interfere with communication.
5-6 Command of the language is effective and mostly accurate.
Vocabulary is appropriate to the task, and varied.
A variety of basic and more complex grammatical structures is used.
Language is mostly accurate. Occasional errors in basic and in complex grammatical structures do not interfere with communication.
Pronunciation and intonation are easy to understand.
7-8 Command of the language is mostly accurate and very effective.
Vocabulary is appropriate to the task, and varied, including the use of idiomatic expressions.
A variety of basic and more complex grammatical structures is used effectively.
Language is mostly accurate. Minor errors in more complex grammatical structures do not interfere with communication.
Pronunciation and intonation are easy to understand and help to convey meaning.
Criterion B1: Message—visual stimulus
How relevant are the ideas to the selected stimulus?
How well does the candidate engage with the stimulus in the presentation?
How well are the ideas linked to the target culture(s)?
Ruì Lǎoshī 芮老师's summary: During the first part--the presentation--did your ideas connect, refer to the image, and refer to global Chinese (华人 huárén、华语文化 huáyǔ wénhuà) social practices, perspectives, and/or issues?
Marks Level descriptor
0 The work does not reach a standard described by the descriptors below.
1 The presentation is mostly irrelevant to the stimulus.
The presentation is limited to descriptions of the stimulus, or part of it. These descriptions may be incomplete.
The presentation is not clearly linked to the target culture(s).
2-3 The presentation is mostly relevant to the stimulus.
With a focus on explicit details, the candidate provides descriptions and basic personal interpretations relating to the stimulus.
The presentation is mostly linked to the target culture(s).
4 The presentation is consistently relevant to the stimulus and draws on explicit and implicit details.
The presentation provides both descriptions and personal interpretations relating to the stimulus.
The presentation makes clear links to the target culture(s).
Criterion B2: Message—conversation
How relevant are the ideas in the conversation?
How appropriately and thoroughly does the candidate respond to the questions in the conversation?
To what depth are the questions answered?
Ruì Lǎoshī 芮老师's summary: During the second and third parts--interaction with the teacher--did your ideas connect and expand?
Marks Level descriptor
0 The work does not reach a standard described by the descriptors below.
1 The candidate consistently struggles to address the questions.
Some responses are appropriate and are rarely developed.
Responses are limited in scope and depth.
2-3 The candidate’s responses are mostly relevant to the questions.
Most responses are appropriate and some are developed.
Responses are mostly broad in scope and depth.
4 The candidate’s responses are consistently relevant to the questions and show some development.
Responses are consistently appropriate and developed.
Responses are broad in scope and depth, including personal interpretations and/or attempts to engage the interlocutor.
Criterion C: Interactive skills—communication
To what extent does the candidate understand and interact?
How well can the candidate express ideas?
How well can the candidate maintain a conversation?
Ruì Lǎoshī 芮老师's summary: During the second and third parts--interaction with the teacher--did you show understanding of each teacher question and teacher response in order to keep the interaction moving back and forth continuously?
Marks Level descriptor
0 The work does not reach a standard described by the descriptors below.
1 Comprehension and interaction are limited.
The candidate provides limited responses in the target language.
Participation is limited. Most questions must be repeated and/or rephrased.
2-3 Comprehension and interaction are mostly sustained.
The candidate provides responses in the target language and mostly demonstrates comprehension.
Participation is mostly sustained.
4 Comprehension and interaction are consistently sustained.
The candidate provides responses in the target language and demonstrates comprehension.
Participation is sustained with some independent contributions.