AE2 Reflective Writing Functions and Language
Reporting
Function:
 Describes the event and its
relevance with specific examples
 Clearly identifies & explains the
5 significance of the event
Language:
 Uses a range of narrative tenses
with a good degree of accuracy
 Uses cause / effect language
effectively
4 Contains three out of the four requisite criteria for the score above
Function:
 Describes the event & its
relevance, although with either too
much or too little detail
 Identifies the significance of the
event
3
Language:
 Uses narrative tenses to some
good effect, despite an occasional
loss of control
 Minimally attempts cause/effect
language
2 Contains three out of the four requisite criteria for the score above
Function:
 Describes the event although there
is a noticeable lack of detail
 Does not identify the significance
1 of the event
Language:
 Shows limited control of narrative
tenses
 Avoids the use of cause/effect
language
Reflecting
Function:
 Identifies what is most significant
about the event
 Gives good personal insight into the
learning the event provides
Language:
 Uses conditional language to frame
reflection
 Uses a range of evaluative word
forms to illustrate interpretation
Function:
 The significance of the event is
evident, although not clearly stated
 Gives a degree of personal insight
into learning i.e. only identifies
strengths OR weaknesses
Language:
 Use of conditional language is not
well managed
 Lacks evaluative vocabulary
(adjectives of feeling, superlatives)
Function:
 May not appropriately identify the
significance of the event
 The response lacks personal insight
into learning
Language:
 Reflective language is not attempted
or is poorly managed
 Avoids the use of evaluative
vocabulary
Acting Connecting
Function:
 Shows good understanding of
issues & strategies required
 Details an autonomous plan of
action for the future, with logical
reasons.
Language:
 Uses a range of future verb
tenses with accuracy
 Uses tentative language
appropriately to contextualize
plan of action
Function:
 Shows understanding of issues &
strategies required
 Devises a plan of action for the
future, but may not support the
plan with logical rationale
Language:
 Uses basic future structures for
planning
 Uses a limited amount of
tentative language
Function:
 Shows little understanding of
issues & strategies required
 Future plan lacks relevance /
direction
Language:
 Uses future structures with
limited success
 Avoids the use of tentative
language
Function:
 Successfully evaluates & explains
the impact of the learning event
 Clearly connects the event with
other areas of life or learning
Language:
 Uses appropriate discourse
markers & linking words to show
relationship between ideas
 Uses qualifying, comparative or
conditional language successfully
Function:
 Evaluates the impact of the
learning event
 Attempts to connect the event to
other areas of life or learning
Language:
 Uses a basic range of discourse
markers & linking words to show
relationship between ideas
 Uses a basic range of qualifying,
comparative or conditional
language with variable success
Function:
 Evaluation of the impact of the
event is not evident
 Connection to other areas of life
& learning is not evident
Language:
 Uses a limited range of discourse
markers & linking words, which
impedes clarity noticeably
 Only a limited range of
‘connecting’ language is
attempted