|
|
Below standard
1
|
Standard
2
|
Above standard
3
|
Outstanding
4
|
| Mind maps stage (reading and design)
|
Ignored the mind map stage. Didn't use a mind map in the presentation.
|
Had a look at some of the articles and noted some ideas for later use. Their mind map was not presented in a very logical way, little data.
|
Read carefully the instructions, noted all new or important concepts. Used a mind map in later work which was logically organised, including a good range of facts and data.
|
Very good understanding of mind maps. Used a mind map in the presentation and it was very illustrative, organised, logical including a representative range of facts and data.
|
| Online stage
|
Just clicked and watched pictures
|
Worked through the websites and links step by step. Noted a few words and ideas for later use.
|
Both partners participated fully and effectively. While reading step by step, they prepared each section of the mind map carefully. Jotted down some new vocabulary for their presentation.
|
Thorough online research which has gone beyond the most obvious sources. Checking the dictionary for new words and expressions. Perfect preparation for the presentation based on their mindmap.
|
| Grammar stage
|
Careless work. Produced grammatically wrong sentences.
|
Some mistakes in grammar but the message was clear.
|
Grammatically correct sentences. Occasional mistakes.
|
Grammatically correct sentences.
|
| Presentation
|
Presentation was too short and/or difficult to follow, poorly researched; intrusive errors of vocabulary and grammar and/or large chunks copied directly from websites.
|
Average final work: presentation is interesting, sufficiently detailed to give a general idea; but there are problems with grammar, vocabulary or the logical development of ideas.
|
Well organised presentation, with clear and detailed rationale, showing evidence of thorough research and rehearsal; attractively illustrated; work well co-ordinated and evenly distributed; occasional mistakes in grammar or vocabulary.
|
Presentation in an engaging, even entertaining, way; impressive, well resourced; even distribution of work; questions handled effectively and spontaneously. Mistakes in grammar and vocabulary - almost none.
|
| Self-evaluation
|
Short, clumsily written and/or lacking in self-awareness; inaccurate to the point of unintelligibility.
|
Sufficiently detailed, balanced appraisal, covering all main points; grammatical and lexical mistakes do not impede overall intelligibility.
|
Perceptive self-appraisal; fair and balanced account of involvement, accurately and coherently written; all points covered and some in considerable depth.
|
Extremely insightful detailed and well-rounded account; balanced and informed; written in engaging, accurate and stylistically appropriate style.
|
| TOTAL MARKS AWARDED.........
|