Analytic criteria
| Criterion | Looks at | Common descriptor features |
|---|---|---|
| Task achievement / content | All parts of the task addressed; relevant, developed ideas; position clear (essays); correct format and purpose | Covers all points; ideas supported with examples; reader fully informed |
| Organisation and coherence | Paragraphing, logical progression, cohesive devices, referencing | Clear paragraphs with topic sentences; range of linkers used accurately; pronouns refer clearly |
| Lexical range and accuracy | Range, precision, collocation, spelling, word formation | Topic-specific vocabulary; less common items; errors rare and do not impede |
| Grammatical range and accuracy | Range of structures, complex sentences, error frequency and impact, punctuation | Mix of simple and complex sentences; errors rare and minor |
| Register and communicative effect (optional) | Appropriate tone and formality for reader and purpose | Consistent formal or informal tone; conventions of the genre (greetings, sign-off) |
Many exam boards use four criteria like these; Cambridge English uses content, communicative achievement, organisation and language. Pick names that match your task and keep them consistent across levels.
Example: 0-5 analytic rubric for a B1 email (100-120 words)
| Band | Content | Organisation | Language |
|---|---|---|---|
| 5 | All three points covered and expanded; reader fully informed | Well organised; varied linkers; clear paragraphs | Range of everyday vocabulary and simple and some complex grammar; errors rare |
| 4 | All points covered; most expanded | Generally well organised; simple linkers used well | Everyday vocabulary used appropriately; simple grammar good control; errors do not impede |
| 3 | All points covered, some briefly; or one point missing but others expanded | Connected using basic linkers (and, but, because) | Everyday vocabulary, sometimes overused; simple grammar reasonable control; errors noticeable but meaning clear |
| 2 | Points partly covered; some irrelevance | Some linking but sentences often unconnected | Basic vocabulary; frequent errors sometimes obscure meaning |
| 1 | Little relevant content | Little organisation | Very basic language; errors often impede |
| 0 | Off-task or too little to assess |
Genre-specific checks
| Genre | Content and format checks |
|---|---|
| Informal email / letter | Greeting and sign-off, all prompt points, friendly tone, questions to the reader |
| Formal email / letter | Purpose stated early, formal greeting and closing, polite requests, no contractions |
| Opinion essay | Clear position, reasons with support, counter-argument at B2+, conclusion restating position |
| Discursive essay | Both sides, balanced, linking contrast, conclusion |
| Report | Title, headings, purpose, findings, recommendations, impersonal style |
| Review | Description, evaluation, recommendation, engaging style |
| Story | Clear sequence, narrative tenses, setting and characters, ending |
Word counts by level (typical exam ranges)
| Level | Task | Words |
|---|---|---|
| A1 | Note, form, postcard | 25-35 |
| A2 | Short message, email, story | 35-100 |
| B1 | Email, article, story | 100-120 |
| B2 | Essay, article, review, letter | 140-190 |
| C1 | Essay, report, proposal | 220-260 |
| C2 | Essay, article, report | 240-320 |
Scoring procedure
- Read the whole text once for overall impression and task completion.
- Score task/content first: if off-task, score 0 and stop (
writing_score.py --gate task). - Score each remaining criterion with evidence noted (one or two examples).
- Use
essay_profile.pyfor length, paragraphing and linker data, not for the bands themselves. - Do not penalise one error in several criteria (a spelling error counts in lexis only).
- Double-mark a sample; standardise with benchmark scripts before marking.
Feedback from the rubric
Return the band per criterion with one strength and one target each. A "jagged" profile (one criterion far below
the others, flagged by writing_score.py) is the best target for the next piece of writing.
academic-english-eap-course-planner
Plan English for Academic Purposes (EAP) courses: pre-sessional, in-sessional, foundation, IELTS preparation and discipline-specific EAP, with syllabus strands (academic reading, lecture listening and note-taking, essay and report writing, paraphrase, summary and synthesis, referencing and plagiarism, seminars and presentations, academic vocabulary, critical thinking), a 10-week pre-sessional outline, exit assessment, IELTS-CEFR alignment and academic style (formality, hedging, cohesion, reporting verbs). Estimates study hours and weeks to close an IELTS gap from overall or per-skill scores (IELTS rounding, minimum per skill, priority skills, feasibility before a deadline), and checks learner texts for contractions, informal words with academic alternatives, unhedged claims, 'you', And/But/So starts, rhetorical questions and missing citations.
actfl-proficiency-curriculum-mapper
Map world language curricula to the ACTFL framework: proficiency levels (Novice, Intermediate, Advanced, Superior, Distinguished with sublevels), functions, contexts, text types and accuracy, proficiency vs performance, the three modes of communication (interpretive, interpersonal, presentational), the 5 Cs World-Readiness Standards, backward-designed thematic units with Integrated Performance Assessments, typical programme targets and FSI time estimates. Looks up approximate ACTFL-CEFR-ILR equivalences with what each level can do, and checks a unit map for missing modes, rehearsed skits mislabelled as interpersonal, translation or word lists as interpretive tasks, and units without an integrated performance assessment.
adult-literacy-esl-lesson-builder
Build lessons for adult ESL learners who are developing literacy (LESLLA learners: pre-literate, non-literate, semi-literate, literate in a non-Roman script): learner profiles and sensitive initial assessment, principles (oral language first, known to new, systematic phonics with adult-relevant text, repetition, classroom skills, respect for experience), a lesson routine (oral warm-up, review, new grapheme, blending, segmenting, decodable text, writing, functional literacy, Language Experience Approach), a phonics sequence for adults, sight words, functional literacy targets (forms, signs, medicine labels) and portfolio assessment. Checks whether a reading text is decodable with the letter-sound patterns and sight words taught so far, catching untaught digraphs, listing non-decodable words with the untaught part, and suggesting the most useful next patterns.
authentic-material-lesson-adapter
Turn authentic material (news articles, podcasts, videos, songs, menus, timetables, adverts, social media posts, forms, infographics) into language lessons by grading the task rather than the text. Selects texts for interest, relevance, exploitability, coverage, cultural load and rights; finds the 4-6 words to pre-teach, words to gloss on the page and words learners can ignore, plus names and cultural references to explain, with reading time by level; and builds a lesson shape (lead-in, pre-teach, gist or scanning, graded detail task, language focus on chunks and register, response) with task ideas per material type and level from A1 to C1. Covers copyright, fair dealing and fair use, Creative Commons and attribution.
can-do-statement-writer
Write and review can-do statements for language courses, units, lessons and learner self-assessment, CEFR or NCSSFL-ACTFL style: action (observable verb) + text or situation + level-specific conditions, learner ('I can') and descriptor ('Can') versions, progressions of one activity from A1 to C1, and coverage of reception, production, interaction and mediation. Includes a verb bank by mode and level and condition and text-type banks. Lints statements for teacher-centred phrasing, knowledge instead of use (learn, know, understand the passive), missing context, two skills in one statement, vague quality words, grammar items as outcomes, overlong statements and missing modes in a set.
cefr-aligned-syllabus-builder
Build language course syllabuses aligned to the CEFR (A1-C2, plus levels, Companion Volume 2020): entry and exit levels, guided learning hours and course length (with an L1-distance adjustment), syllabus type (topic, functional-notional, task-based, skills-based, multi-strand), unit-by-unit can-do outcomes, grammar from a core inventory by level, vocabulary, functions, pronunciation, balance of reception, production, interaction and mediation, recycling and assessment points. Checks a syllabus for units without can-do statements, core grammar for the level not covered, items above the course level, skills missing from most units and units with no vocabulary or functions.