The scale of points for exam assignments. Criteria for assessing the exam. Ethical Compliance
In the Unified State Examination in the Russian language 2017, 25 tasks are evaluated, of which 24 are tests, and 25 are an essay on the text. To date, in test tasks it is necessary either to write down the words correctly (and not just find them), or find two correct answers from the proposed ones (tasks 1 and 15), or name the numbers indicating correct setting commas. Task 7 remains difficult, where you need to correlate erroneous sentences with the rules according to which errors were made.
|
1 point for a correct answer, 0 points for an incorrect one |
0 to 2 points |
0 to 4 points |
0 to 5 points |
|
For the correct completion of tasks 2–6, 8–14, 16–23, the examinee |
For completing tasks 1 and 15, from 0 to 2 points can be set. |
Task 24 can be assigned from 0 to 4 points. Faithful |
Task 7 can be assigned from 0 to 5 points. Faithful |
|
Maximum Points |
|||
|
Minimum Points |
|||
Criteria for evaluating an essay
|
Points |
||
|
Statement of source text problems |
||
|
The examinee (in one form or another) correctly formulated one of the problems of the original text. There are no factual errors related to the understanding and formulation of the problem. |
||
|
The examinee could not correctly formulate any of the problems of the source text. |
||
|
Commentary on the formulated problem of the original text |
||
|
The problem formulated by the examiner is commented. There are no factual errors related to understanding the source text in the comments. |
||
|
The problem formulated by the examinee is commented, no more than 1 factual error was made in the comments related to the understanding of the source text. |
||
|
The problem formulated by the examinee is not commented, more than 1 factual error was made in the comments related to the understanding of the source text, commented on another problem not formulated by the examiner, a simple retelling of the text or its fragment is given as a comment, a large fragment of the original text is cited as comments. |
||
|
The examinee correctly formulated the position of the author (narrator) of the source text on the commented problem. There are no actual errors related to understanding the position of the author of the source text. |
||
|
Argumentation by the examinees of their own opinion on the problem |
||
|
The examinee expressed his opinion on the problem formulated by him, posed by the author of the text (agreeing or disagreeing with the position of the author), argued it (given at least 2 arguments, one of which was taken from fiction, journalistic or scientific literature). |
||
|
The examinee expressed his opinion on the problem formulated by him, posed by the author of the text (agreeing or disagreeing with the position of the author), argued it (given at least 2 arguments, based on knowledge or life experience), conducted only 1 argument from fiction, journalistic or scientific literature. |
||
|
The examinee expressed his opinion on the problem formulated by him, posed by the author of the text (agreeing or disagreeing with the position of the author), argued it (given 1 argument), based on knowledge, life or reading experience. |
||
|
The examinee expressed his opinion on the problem posed by the author of the text (agreeing or disagreeing with the position of the author), but did not give arguments, the examinee's opinion is only formally stated (for example: "I agree / disagree with the author"), not reflected in the work at all. |
||
|
SPEECH DESIGN OF AN ESSAY |
||
|
Semantic integrity, speech coherence and sequence of presentation |
||
|
The work of the examinee is characterized by semantic integrity, speech coherence and sequence of presentation: There are no logical errors, the sequence of presentation is not broken; There are no violations of paragraph articulation of the text in the work. |
||
|
The work of the examinee is characterized by semantic integrity, coherence and consistency of presentation, 1 logical error was made, there is 1 violation of paragraph articulation of the text in the work. |
||
|
In the work of the examinee, a communicative intent is visible, more than 1 logical error was made, There are 2 cases of violation of paragraph articulation of the text. |
||
|
Accuracy and expressiveness of speech |
||
|
The work of the examinee is characterized by the accuracy of the expression of thought, the variety of the grammatical structure of speech. |
||
|
The work of the examinee is characterized by the accuracy of the expression of thought, the monotony of the grammatical structure of speech is traced, the work of the examinee is characterized by a variety of grammatical structure of speech, there are violations of the accuracy of the expression of thought. |
||
|
The work of the examinee is distinguished by the poverty of the dictionary and the monotony of the grammatical structure of speech. |
||
|
LITERACY |
||
|
Compliance with spelling rules |
||
|
no spelling errors (or 1 minor error) |
||
|
1-2 mistakes made |
||
|
more than 2-3 mistakes made |
||
| more than 3 errors | 0 | |
|
Compliance with punctuation rules |
||
|
no punctuation errors (or 1 minor error) |
||
|
made 1-2 mistakes |
||
|
made 2-3 mistakes |
||
| more than 3 errors | 0 | |
|
Language Compliance |
||
|
no grammatical errors |
||
|
made 1-2 mistakes |
||
|
more than 2 errors |
||
|
Compliance with speech norms |
||
|
no more than 1 speech error |
||
|
made 2-3 mistakes |
||
|
more than 3 errors |
||
|
Compliance ethical standards |
||
|
there are no ethical errors in the work |
||
|
ethical mistakes made (1 or more) |
||
|
Maintain factual accuracy in background material |
||
|
there are no factual errors in the background material |
||
|
factual errors (1 or more) in the background material |
||
|
Maximum score per essay |
When assessing literacy (K7-K10), the volume of the essay should be taken into account. The assessment standards indicated in the table are designed for an essay of 150-300 words. If the essay contains less than 70 words, then such work is not counted and 0 points are scored, the task is considered failed.
When counting words, both independent and auxiliary parts of speech are taken into account. Any sequence of words written without a space is counted (for example, "after all" - one word, "yet" - two words). Initials with a surname are considered one word (for example, "M.Yu. Lermontov" - one word). Any other characters, in particular numbers, are not taken into account when calculating (for example, "5 years" - one word, "five years" - two words).
If the essay contains a partially or completely rewritten text of the review of task 24 and / or information about the author of the text by the examinee, then the volume of such work is determined without taking into account the text of the review and / or information about the author of the text.
When evaluating an essay with a volume of 70 to 150 words, the number of permissible errors of four types (K7–K10) decreases.
2 points for these criteria are given in the following cases:
K7 - there are no spelling errors (or one minor mistake was made);
K8 - there are no punctuation errors (or one minor mistake was made).
1 point for these criteria is given in the following cases:
K7 - no more than two errors were made;
K8 - one or three mistakes were made;
K9 - no grammatical errors;
K10 - no more than one speech error was made.
The highest score according to the K7–K12 criteria is not given for a work of 70 to 150 words.
If the essay is a paraphrase or a completely rewritten source text without any comments, then such work for all aspects of the test (K1-K12) is estimated at 0 points. If the work, which is a rewritten or paraphrased source text, contains fragments of the text of the examinee, then only the number of words that belongs to the examinee is taken into account during the check. A work written without relying on the text read (not on this text) is not evaluated.
In accordance with the Procedure for conducting the state final certification for educational programs middle general education(Order of the Ministry of Education and Science of Russia dated December 26, 2013 No. 1400 was registered by the Ministry of Justice of Russia on February 3, 2014 No. 31205) “61. According to the results of the first and second checks, the experts, independently of each other, set points for each answer to the tasks of the examination USE work with a detailed answer... 62. In case of a significant discrepancy in the scores given by two experts, a third test is scheduled. A significant discrepancy in scores is determined in the assessment criteria for the corresponding academic subject. The expert who performs the third check is provided with information about the scores given by the experts who previously checked the examination paper.
A significant discrepancy is considered to be a discrepancy of 8 or more primary points between the sums of points given by the first and second experts for completing task 25 (for all 12 assessment positions). In this case, the third expert must give points only for those assessment items for which the points given by the first and second experts differ.
It might be useful to read:
- Passing a medical examination when applying for a job according to the Labor Code of the Russian Federation;
- The concept of perception, properties and types of perception;
- Quick scene for March 8;
- Fixed term contract What is a fixed term contract;
- Fixed-term employment contract: when and with whom it is possible to conclude a fixed-term employment contract;
- When is it allowed to involve an employee in overtime work Overtime work article of the Labor Code of the Russian Federation;
- How to close an IP online: step by step instructions What you need to do in advance;
- Federal Law on attestation of workplaces Labor Code attestation of workplaces;