A Writing Scoring Rubric Adopted from on Reid (1993: 236-237)

Aspect of writing

Range 30-27

Score Excellent to very good

Content (appropriate topic/theme, originality, logic)

26-22

Good to average

21-17

Fair to poor

16-13

Very poor

20-18

Excellent to very good

Organization (coherence, cohesion, and unity)

17-14

Good to average

13-10 9-7 20-18

Fair to poor Very poor Excellent to very good

Diction (word selection, vocabulary idiom)

17-14

Good to average

13-10

Fair to poor

9-7

Very poor

Language use (tenses, articles, pronoun, etc)

25-22

Excellent to very good

21-18

Good to average

Criterion Knowledgeable. Substantive, through development of thesis. Relevant to assigned topic. Some knowledge of subject. Adequate range. Limited development of thesis. Mostly relevant to topic, but lacks detail. Limited knowledge of subject. Little substance. Inadequate development of topic. Does not show knowledge of subject. Non-substantive. Not pertinent, or not enough to evaluate. Fluent expression. Ideas clearly stated/supported. Succinct. Wellorganized. Logical sequencing cohesive. Somewhat choppy. Loosely organized but main ideas stand out. Limited support. Logical but incomplete sequencing. Non-fluent. Ideas confused or disconnected. Lack logical sequencing, and development. Does not communicate. No organization, or not enough to evaluate. Sophisticated range. Effective word/idiom choice and usage. Word form mastery. Appropriate register. Adequate range. Occasional errors of word/idiom form, choice, usage but meaning not obscured. Limited range. Frequent errors of word/idiom form, choice, usage. Meaning confused or obscured. Essentially translation. Little knowledge of English vocabulary idioms. Word form or not enough to evaluate. Effective complex constructions. Few errors of agreement, tense, number, word order/function, articles, pronouns, prepositions. Effective but simple constructions minor problem in complex

17-11

Fair to poor

10-5

Very poor

Excellent to very good

4 Mechanics (spelling and punctuation)

Good to average

Fair to poor

Very poor

constructions. Several errors of agreement, tense, number, word order/function, articles, pronouns, prepositions, but meaning seldom obscured. Major problems in simple/complex constructions. Frequent errors of negation, agreement, tense, number, word order/function, articles, pronouns, prepositions, and/fragments, run-ons, deletions. Meaning confused/obscured. Virtually no mastery of sentence constructions rules. Dominated by errors. Does not communicate. Or not enough to evaluate. Demonstrate mastery of conventions. Few errors of spelling, punctuation, capitalization, paragraphing. Occasional errors of spelling, punctuation, capitalization, paragraphing, but meaning not obscured. Frequent errors of spelling, punctuation, capitalization, paragraphing. Poor handwriting. Meaning confused or obscured. No mastery of convention. Dominated by errors of spelling, punctuation, capitalization, paragraphing. Handwriting illegible or not enough to evaluate.

Reference: Reid, Joy M. 1993. Teaching ESL Writing. London: Prentice Hall Englewood Cliffs.

A Speaking Scoring Rubric Guideline Adopted from Hughes (1989: 131)

Pronunciation
No. 1 2 3 4 5 6 Indicators Pronunciation frequently unintelligible. Frequent gross errors and very heavy accent make understanding difficult, require frequent repetition. Foreign accent requires concentrated listening and mispronunciations lead to occasional misunderstanding. Marked foreign accent and occasional mispronunciation which do not interfere with understanding. No conspicuous mispronunciations, but would not be taken for a native speaker. Native pronunciations, with no trace of foreign accent. Score 1.0-4.5 4.6-5.5 5.6-6.5 6.6-7.5 7.6-8.5 8.6-10.0

Grammar
No. Indicators 1 Grammar almost entirely inaccurate except in stock phrases. Constant errors showing control of very few major patterns and frequently 2 preventing communication. Frequent errors showing some major patterns uncontrolled and causing occasional 3 irritation and misunderstanding. Occasional errors showing imperfect control of some patterns but no weakness that 4 causes misunderstanding. 5 Few errors, with no patterns of failure. 6 No more than errors during the interview. Score 1.0-4.5 4.6-5.5 5.6-6.5 6.6-7.5 7.6-8.5 8.6-10.0

Vocabulary
No. Indicators 1 Vocabulary inadequate for even the simplest conversation. 2 Constant limited to basic personal and survival areas. Choice of words sometimes inaccurate, limitations of vocabulary prevent discussion 3 of some common professional and social topics. Professional vocabulary adequate to discuss special interest; general vocabulary 4 permits discussion of any non-technical subject with some circumlocutions. Professional vocabulary broad and precise; general vocabulary adequate to cope 5 with complex practical problems and varied social situation. Vocabulary apparently as accurate and extensive as that of an educated native 6 speaker. Score 1.0-4.5 4.6-5.5 5.6-6.5 6.6-7.5 7.6-8.5 8.6-10.0

Fluency
No. Indicators 1 Speech is so halting and fragmentary that conversation is virtually impossible. 2 Speech is very slow and uneven except for short or routine sentences. 3 Speech is frequently hesitant and jerky; sentences may be left completed. Speech is occasionally hesitant, with some unevenness caused by rephrasing and 4 groping for words. 5 Speech is effortless and smooth, but perceptively non-native in speed and evenness. Speech on all professional and general topics as effortless and smooth as a native 6 speakers. Score 1.0-4.5 4.6-5.5 5.6-6.5 6.6-7.5 7.6-8.5 8.6-10.0

Expression
No. Indicators 1 Facial expressions show absolutely no interest in topic presented 2 Facial expressions show some negativity toward topic presented. Facial expressions have either a deadpan expression of shows a conflicting 3 expression during entire presentation. Facial expression occasionally displays both a deadpan and conflicting expression 4 during presentation. Facial expressions occasionally demonstrate either a deadpan or conflicting 5 expression during presentation. Facial expressions give audience clues to what the content of speech is about; 6 appropriate expression Score 1.0-4.5 4.6-5.5 5.6-6.5 6.6-7.5 7.6-8.5 8.6-10.0

Reference: Hughes, Arthur. 1989. Testing for Language Teachers. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.