Writing assessment criteria: CEFR B2

Task Achievement Appropriacy Coherence Cohesion Grammatical Range Lexical Range &
and Accuracy Accuracy
1.0 Task well achieved at a high Style & Format: Structure: Ideas Grammatical Grammatical Wide range of lexis
level Appropriate to sequenced logically Structures: Structures: Complex to complete the task,
genre, no irrelevant and accurately Complex Spelling: Very good some original lexical
Intention: Entirely clear
information Purpose: Clear Word order: Correct solutions Lexis used
Instructions: Completely Spelling: Very good
Information: Well Punctuation: Used appropriately with
followed Register: Good Word order:
organised into a properly throughout isolated misuse
awareness of Correct
Effect: A positive effect on the coherent text Errors: Very few,
register and
target reader Punctuation: Used none of them
formality level
properly throughout impedes meaning,
Outcome: Sure to achieve a appropriate to
Errors:Very few, message
successful outcome genre
none of them
Content: All relevant details impedes meaning,
included. Some original ideas message
or presentation
0.8 Performance shares features Performance Performance shares Performance shares Performance shares Performance shares
of bands 2 and 3 shares features of features of bands 2 features of bands 2 features of bands 2 features of bands 2
bands 2 and 3 and 3 and 3 and 3 and 3
0.6 Task achieved, some gaps Style & Format: Structure: Some Grammatical Grammatical Sufficient range of
Intention: Clear in most areas Usually appropriate confusion in logical Structures: Simple structures: Simple lexis to complete the
Instructions: All important to genre with little and accurate but mostly correct, but mostly correct, task Lexis used
ones followed or no irrelevant sequencing Purpose: some attempts at some attempts at mostly appropriately
information Mostly clear complex structures complex structures with some
Effect: A generally positive
Register: Limited with some mistakes with some mistakes occasional misuse
effect on the reader. Information:
exponents but that do not impede that do not impede
Adequately organised
Outcome: Likely to achieve a awareness of comprehension comprehension
into a mostly coherent
successful outcome register is shown Spelling: Some Spelling: Some
text
mistakes that do not mistakes that do not
Content: Many relevant impede impede
details included comprehension comprehension
Word order: Mostly
Word order: Mostly
correct Punctuation:
correct. Punctuation:
Mostly effective
Mostly effective

0.4 Performance shares features
of bands 1 and 2
0.2 Task unachieved
Intention: Very unclear.
Instructions: Many not
followed
Effect: Negative
Outcome: Will not achieve a
successful outcome
Content: Omission,
irrelevance.
0.0 Task unattempted / partially
attempted Not enough
language to make an
assessment (under 60 words).
Adapted from: http://www.euroexam.com/sites/network/files/file/download/Marking_Criteria/EuroB2WritingScalesLevelDescriptorsE.pdf
Errors: Some, but Errors: Some, but do
do not significantly not significantly
impede meaning impede meaning.
Performance Performance shares Performance shares Performance shares Performance shares
shares features of features of bands 1 features of bands 1 features of bands 1 features of bands 1
bands 1 and 2 and 2 and 2 and 2 and 2
Style & Format: Structure: Muddled Grammatical Grammatical Poor range of lexis to
Inappropriate to Purpose: Unclear Structures: Very Structures: Very complete the task
genre, or minimal Information: Very simple with frequent simple with frequent Lexis used
evidence Register: confused and serious and serious mistakes inappropriately in
Minimal mistakes Spelling: Very poor most cases
Word order: Often
Spelling: Very poor
wrong
Word order: Often
wrong Punctuation: Often
wrong
Punctuation: Often
wrong
Writing assessment criteria: CEFR C1
Task Achievement
1.0 Task achieved at a high
level Intention
Intention: Entirely clear
Instructions: Completely
followed
Effect: A positive effect on
the target reader
Outcome: Sure to achieve
a successful outcome
Content: All relevant
details included. Some
original ideas or
presentation
0.8 Performance shares
features of bands 2 and 3
0.6 Task achieved, some gaps
Intention: Clear in most
areas
Appropriacy
Style & Format:
Appropriate to genre, no
irrelevant information
Register: Good
awareness of register and
formality level appropriate
to genre
Performance shares
features of bands 2 and 3
Style & Format: Usually
appropriate to genre with
little or no irrelevant
information
Coherence Cohesion Grammatical Lexical Range &
Range and Accuracy
Accuracy
Structure: Ideas Grammatical Grammatical Wide range of lexis
sequenced logically Structures: A wide Structures: to complete the task,
and accurately range of cohesive Complex Spelling: some original lexical
Purpose: Clear devices used Very good solutions Lexis used
Information: Well naturally, efficiently appropriately with
Word order: Correct
organised into a and appropriately isolated misuse
Punctuation: Used
coherent text to link words,
properly throughout
clauses, sentences
Errors: Very few,
and paragraphs
none of them
Reference: Skilled
impedes meaning,
use
message
Performance Performance Performance shares Performance shares
shares features of shares features of features of bands 2 features of bands 2
bands 2 and 3 bands 2 and 3 and 3 and 3
Structure: Some Grammatical Grammatical Sufficient range of
confusion in logical Structures: structures: lexis to complete the
and accurate Adequate amount Adequately complex task Lexis used
sequencing of devices used to structures with rare mostly appropriately
 Instructions: All important
ones followed
Effect: A generally positive
effect on the reader.
Outcome: Likely to
achieve a successful
outcome
Content: Many relevant
details included
0.4 Performance shares
features of bands 1 and 2
0.2 Task unachieved Intention:
Very unclear.
Instructions: Many not
followed
Effect: Negative
Outcome: Will not achieve
a successful outcome
Content: Omission,
irrelevance.
0.0 Task unattempted / partially
attempted Not enough
language to make an
assessment, or under 70
words.
Adapted from: http://www.euroexam.com/sites/network/files/file/download/Marking_Criteria/EuroC1WritingScalesLevelDescriptorsE.pdf
Purpose: Mostly link words, mistakes that do not with some occasional
clear Information: clauses, sentences impede misuse
Register: Limited
Adequately mostly comprehension
exponents but awareness
organised into a appropriately Spelling: Some
of register is shown
mostly coherent Reference: mistakes that do not
text Limited and impede
inaccurate use comprehension
Word order: Mostly
correct. Punctuation:
Mostly effective
Errors: Some, but
do not significantly
impede meaning.
Performance shares Performance Performance Performance shares Performance shares
features of bands 1 and 2 shares features of shares features of features of bands 1 features of bands 1
bands 1 and 2 bands 1 and 2 and 2 and 2
Style & Format: Structure: Grammatical Grammatical Poor range of lexis to
Inappropriate to genre, or Muddled Structures: Structures: Very complete the task
minimal evidence Minimal simple with frequent Lexis used
Purpose: Unclear
Register: Minimal and serious inappropriately in
Information: Very Reference: Simple
mistakes Spelling: most cases
confused / none
Very poor Word
order: Often wrong
Punctuation: Often
wrong
Not enough language to No meaning or the No effective use of Little or no evidence No relevant lexis
make an assessment, or meaning conveyed cohesive devices of grammatical organized into
under 70 words is irrelevant, or and reference, or knowledge of simple sentences, or under
under 70 words under 70 words structures, or under 70 words
70 words.
Speaking Assessment Criteria: CEFR A1
Range and Accuracy
1.0 Sufficient range of grammar and lexis to adequately complete the
tasks. Errors, although they may be frequent even when using
very simple language, do not significantly hinder communication.
0.8 Performance shares features of bands 2 and 3
0.6 Range of grammar and lexis sufficient to adequately complete the
tasks. Repeated errors even in very simple sentences but they do
not generally hinder communication.
0.4 Performance shares features of bands 1 and 2
0.2 Range of grammar and lexis insufficient to adequately complete
the tasks. Too many errors in simple sentences significantly
hinder communication.
0.0 Insufficient language for assessment
Adapted from: http://www.euroexam.com/sites/network/files/file/download/Marking_Criteria/mc_level_a1_speaking.pdf
Fluency and Coherence, Pronunciation
Can link ideas into very simple sentences although with noticeable jumpiness.
Pronunciation is intelligible in spite of evident foreign accent. Occasional
mispronunciations put some strain on the listener but rarely impede
communication.
Performance shares features of bands 2 and 3
Can communicate in very simple sentences in spite of considerable jumpiness.
Pronunciation is intelligible, although mispronunciations and inability to produce
certain sounds may sometimes impede communication of the message.
Performance shares features of bands 1 and 2
Frequent hesitation and inability to link ideas causes great strain on the listener.
Cannot produce simple sentences. Places strain on the listener.
Insufficient language for assessment
Speaking Assessment Criteria: CEFR A2
Range and Accuracy
1.0 Sufficient range of grammar, lexis and cohesive devices to
adequately complete the tasks. Errors, although they may be
frequent even when using simple language, do not significantly
hinder communication.
0.8 Performance shares features of bands 2 and 3
0.6 Range of grammar, lexis and cohesive devices sufficient to
adequately complete the tasks. Repeated errors even in simple
sentences but they do not generally hinder communication.
0.4 Performance shares features of bands 1 and 2
0.2 Range of grammar, lexis and cohesive devices insufficient to
adequately complete the tasks. Too many errors in simple
sentences significantly hinder communication.
0.0 Insufficient language for assessment
Adapted from: http://www.euroexam.com/sites/network/files/file/download/Marking_Criteria/mc_level_a2_speaking.pdf
Fluency and Coherence, Pronunciation
Can link ideas into clear, cohesive sentences although with noticeable jumpiness
even in simple sentences. Pronunciation is intelligible in spite of evident foreign
accent. Occasional mispronunciations put some strain on the listener but rarely
impede communication.
Performance shares features of bands 2 and 3
Can communicate in simple sentences in spite of considerable jumpiness.
Pronunciation is intelligible, although mispronunciations and inability to produce
certain sounds may sometimes impede communication of the message.
Performance shares features of bands 1 and 2
Frequent hesitation and inability to link ideas coherently causes great strain on
the listener. Cannot produce simple sentences. Places strain on the listener.
Insufficient language for assessment
Speaking Assessment Criteria: CEFR B1
Range and Accuracy Fluency and Coherence Pronunciation Communication Strategies
1.0 A wide range of grammar, lexis and Some hesitation while formulating Pronunciation is clearly Initiates maintains and ends turns
cohesive devices attempted to in completing language, but can effectively intelligible in spite of evident satisfactorily although not always
the tasks although circumlocution may be maintain flow of speech. Can link foreign accent. Occasional smoothly. Uses basic repair
necessary. Few errors in simple sentences. ideas into clear, coherent mispronunciations put some strategies (clarification,
Errors when attempting more complex discourse although with strain on the listener but circumlocution) where necessary.
structures and lexis do not generally hinder noticeable jumpiness in especially rarely impede Uses appropriate register.
communication. in extended contributions. communication.
0.8 Performance shares features of bands 2 and Performance shares features of Performance shares features Performance shares features of
3 bands 2 and 3 of bands 2 and 3 bands 2 and 3
0.6 Sufficient range of grammar, lexis and Keeps going comprehensibly in Pronunciation is clearly Attempts made to initiate
cohesive devices to adequately complete the spite of frequent hesitation when intelligible, although maintain and end turns using
tasks although circumlocution is common formulating language and mispronunciations and basic language. Evidence of
and avoidance strategies may be necessary. considerable jumpiness and inability to produce certain ability to use repair strategies
Errors, although they may be frequent even reformulation during longer turns. sounds may sometimes (clarification, circumlocution)
when using simple language, do not Requires a patient listener. impede communication of although not always applied.
significantly hinder communication. the message.
0.4 Performance shares features of bands 1 and Performance shares features of Performance shares features Performance shares features of
2 bands 1 and 2 of bands 1 and 2 bands 1 and 2
0.2 Range of grammar, lexis and cohesive Frequent hesitation and inability Mispronunciations and Generally, fails to initiate maintain
devices insufficient to adequately complete to link ideas coherently causes inability to produce certain and end turns satisfactorily. Does
the tasks. Repeated errors even in simple great strain on the listener. sounds significantly impedes not use repair strategies
sentences significantly hinder communication of the (clarification, circumlocution).
communication. message.
0.0 Insufficient language for assessment
Adapted from: http://www.euroexam.com/sites/network/files/file/download/Marking_Criteria/mc_level_b1_speaking.pdf
Speaking Assessment Criteria: CEFR B2
Range and Accuracy
1.0 Wide range of grammar, lexis and
cohesive devices used to complete the
tasks, circumlocution only occasionally
necessary. Comfortable with more
complex structures and lexis although
errors still occur.
0.8 Performance shares features of bands 2
and 3
0.6 Sufficient range of grammar, lexis and
cohesive devices to adequately
complete the tasks although
circumlocution may be necessary. Few
errors in simple sentences. Errors when
attempting more complex structures and
lexis do not generally hinder
communication.
0.4 Performance shares features of bands 1
and 2
0.2 Range of grammar, lexis and cohesive
devices insufficient to adequately
complete the tasks. Repeated errors
even in simple sentences.
0.0 Insufficient language for assessment
Adapted from: http://www.euroexam.com/sites/network/files/file/download/Marking_Criteria/mc_level_b2_speaking.pdf
Fluency and Coherence
Maintains a smooth flow of language
with hesitation mainly to formulate
ideas, not language. Links ideas into
clear coherent discourse with little or
no jumpiness even in extended
contributions.
Performance shares features of
bands 2 and 3
Some hesitation while formulating
language, but can effectively
maintain flow of speech. Can link
ideas into clear, coherent discourse
although with noticeable jumpiness
in especially in extended
contributions.
Performance shares features of
bands 1 and 2
Frequent hesitation and inability to
link ideas coherently causes great
strain on the listener.
Pronunciation
Although there may still be an
evident foreign accent,
pronunciation is natural and
places little strain on the
listener. The candidate often
utilises features of connected
speech and English intonation
patterns.
Performance shares features
of bands 2 and 3
Pronunciation is clearly
intelligible in spite of evident
foreign accent and occasional
mispronunciations putting
some strain on the listener.
Performance shares features
of bands 1 and 2
Mispronunciations and
inability to produce certain
sounds frequently impedes co
Communication Strategies
Initiates maintains and ends
turns. Uses repair strategies
(clarification, circumlocution)
where necessary. Uses
appropriate register and
intonation.
Performance shares features of
bands 2 and 3
Initiates maintains and ends
turns satisfactorily although not
always smoothly. Evidence of
ability to use repair strategies
(clarification, circumlocution)
although not always applied.
Uses appropriate register.
Performance shares features of
bands 1 and 2
Generally, fails to initiate
maintain and end turns
satisfactorily. Does not use repair
strategies (clarification,
circumlocution). Uses
inappropriate register.
Speaking Assessment Criteria: CEFR C1
Range and Accuracy
1.0 Wide range of grammar, lexis and
cohesive devices used to complete
the tasks, with no real need to use
circumlocution. Very few errors,
mainly slips even when using
complex language.
0.8 Performance shares features of
bands 2 and 3
0.6 Sufficient range of grammar, lexis
and cohesive devices to complete
the tasks although circumlocution
may occasionally be necessary.
Occasional slips in simple
sentences. Comfortable with more
complex structures and lexis
although errors still occur.
0.4 Performance shares features of
bands 1 and 2
0.2 Range of grammar, lexis and
cohesive devices insufficient to
adequately complete the tasks.
Errors in simple sentences. Few
attempts at complex structures or
lexis with errors where attempted.
0.0 Insufficient language for
Fluency and Coherence
Maintains a seamless flow of
language with occasional
hesitation only to formulate ideas,
not language. Links ideas naturally
into clear coherent discourse with
no jumpiness even in extended
contributions.
Performance shares features of
bands 2 and 3
Maintains a smooth flow of
language with hesitation mainly to
formulate ideas, only occasionally
language. Links ideas into clear
coherent discourse with little or no
jumpiness even in extended
contributions.
Performance shares features of
bands 1 and 2
Noticeable hesitation while
formulating language. Can link
ideas into clear, coherent
discourse although with noticeable
jumpiness especially in extended
contributions
Pronunciation
Although there may still be an
evident foreign accent,
pronunciation is natural and
places no strain on the listener.
The candidate naturally
incorporates features of
connected speech and English
intonation patterns.
Performance shares features of
bands 2 and 3
Although there may still be an
evident foreign accent,
pronunciation places little strain
on the listener. The candidate
often utilises features of
connected speech and English
intonation patterns.
Performance shares features of
bands 1 and 2
Although pronunciation may be
intelligible, mispronunciations
and lack of features of
connected speech put some
strain on the listener.
Communication Strategies
Initiates maintains and ends turns very
naturally. Uses repair strategies
(clarification, circumlocution) where
necessary. Uses appropriate register,
demonstrating a sophisticated
awareness of different levels of
formality.
Performance shares features of bands
2 and 3
Initiates maintains and ends turns
comfortably. Uses repair strategies
(clarification, circumlocution) where
necessary. Uses appropriate register,
demonstrating an ability to use
different levels of formality in different
situations.
Performance shares features of bands
1 and 2
Initiates maintains and ends turns
although not always smoothly.
Evidence of ability to use repair
strategies (clarification,
circumlocution) although not always
applied. Attempts to use appropriate
register not always successful.
 assessment
Adapted from: http://www.euroexam.com/sites/network/files/file/download/Marking_Criteria/mc_level_c1_speaking.pdf