NAPLAN Narrative Marking

• Length (word count estimate)
• Overall impression
• Obvious strengths/weaknesses

Output to user: Brief acknowledgment that assessment is beginning.

Step 2: Structure Assessment (Criteria 1-3)

Analyze the foundational narrative elements in this order:

2A. Text Structure (0-4 points)

Focus: Organisation of narrative features (orientation, complication, resolution)

Read reference: references/02-text-structure.md

Assess:

• Is there a clear beginning (orientation)?
• Is there a complication that drives the story?
• Is there a resolution?
• Are plot devices used effectively?

Record:

• Score (0-4)
• Specific quotes showing structure elements
• Feedback explaining the score

2B. Audience (0-6 points)

Focus: Writer's capacity to orient, engage and affect the reader

Read reference: references/01-audience.md

Assess:

• Does the text orient the reader?
• Are narrative devices used to engage?
• Does language choice affect the reader?

Record:

• Score (0-6)
• Quotes demonstrating engagement techniques
• Feedback on audience awareness

2C. Ideas (0-5 points)

Focus: Creation, selection and crafting of ideas

Read reference: references/03-ideas.md

Assess:

• Are ideas elaborated or predictable?
• Is there a central storyline?
• Is there an underlying theme?

Record:

• Score (0-5)
• Quotes showing idea development
• Feedback on idea quality

Step 3: Content Assessment (Criterion 4)

3A. Character and Setting (0-4 points)

Focus: Character portrayal AND/OR setting development

Read reference: references/04-character-setting.md

Important: Stories may focus on character OR setting - both are not required for high scores.

Assess:

• How are characters developed? (actions, speech, thoughts, descriptions)
• How is setting established? (place, time, atmosphere)
• Is there effective characterisation or atmosphere?

Record:

• Score (0-4)
• Quotes showing character/setting development
• Feedback on which aspect is stronger

Step 4: Language Assessment (Criteria 5-6)

4A. Vocabulary (0-5 points)

Focus: Range and precision of language choices

Read reference: references/05-vocabulary.md

Assess:

• Are words mostly simple or precise?
• Is figurative language used effectively?
• Does vocabulary enhance meaning/mood?

Look for:

• Precise verbs, adjectives, adverbs
• Similes, metaphors, personification
• Technical, formal, or colloquial language appropriate to context

Record:

• Score (0-5)
• Multiple quotes showing vocabulary range
• Feedback on language sophistication

4B. Cohesion (0-4 points)

Focus: Control of text flow through referring words, substitutions, connectives

Read reference: references/06-cohesion.md

Assess:

• Are sentences linked correctly?
• Are referring words (pronouns) accurate?
• What connectives are used? (then, meanwhile, although, because, etc.)
• Is there word association to avoid repetition?

Record:

• Score (0-4)
• Quotes showing effective (or missing) connections
• Feedback on text flow

Step 5: Presentation Assessment (Criteria 7-10)

5A. Paragraphing (0-2 points)

Focus: Segmenting text into paragraphs

Read reference: references/07-paragraphing.md

Assess:

• Is paragraphing present?
• Are paragraphs focused on single ideas?
• Do paragraphs enhance narrative pacing?

Note: Paragraphs can be indicated by indentation, spacing, or student annotations.

Record:

• Score (0-2)
• Description of paragraphing strategy
• Feedback on effectiveness

5B. Sentence Structure (0-6 points)

Focus: Grammatically correct, structurally sound sentences

Read reference: references/08-sentence-structure.md

Assess:

• Are simple sentences correct?
• Are compound/complex sentences correct?
• Is there variety in sentence structure?

Important:

• Read intended sentences even if punctuation is poor
• Run-on sentences with repeated 'and'/'so' are NOT successful
• Verb control and preposition errors are sentence errors

Record:

• Score (0-6)
• Quotes showing sentence variety (or lack thereof)
• Feedback on grammatical control

5C. Punctuation (0-5 points)

Focus: Correct and appropriate punctuation

Read reference: references/09-punctuation.md

Assess:

• Sentence punctuation (capitals, full stops, question marks)
• Noun capitalisation (names, places, titles)
• Other punctuation (apostrophes, commas, quotation marks, etc.)

Critical rule: Splice commas joining two sentences are INCORRECT. Example: "The dog ate my homework, it was hungry." ❌

Record:

• Score (0-5)
• Description of punctuation accuracy
• Feedback on punctuation control

5D. Spelling (0-6 points)

Focus: Accuracy of spelling and difficulty of words used

Read reference: references/10-spelling.md

Assess:

• Simple words (bad, shop, will, school)
• Common words (middle, jumped, wrong, between)
• Difficult words (chocolate, invisible, community)
• Challenging words (responsibility, physically, guarantee)

Important:

• Count at least 10 difficult words for scores 5-6
• For score 6, allow 1-2 minor errors (first draft consideration)

Record:

• Score (0-6)
• Count of difficult/challenging words spelled correctly
• List of spelling errors (if significant)

Step 6: Synthesis & Overall Assessment

Action: Review all criterion scores and identify patterns.

Compile:

1. Overall Strengths (3-5 items)

   • What does the writer do well?
   • Look across all criteria for standout elements
   • Be specific, not generic

2. Overall Weaknesses (3-5 items)

   • What needs most improvement?
   • Focus on actionable areas
   • Prioritize high-impact improvements

3. Total Score

   • Sum all criterion scores
   • Maximum possible: 47 points
   • Calculate percentage if helpful

Step 7: Generate Comprehensive Report

Use the report template: assets/report-template.md

Report must include:

1. Executive Summary

   • Total score (X/47)
   • Overall strengths (3-5 bullet points)
   • Areas for development (3-5 bullet points)

2. Detailed Assessment by Criterion (all 10 criteria) For each criterion:

   • Score (X/max)
   • Assessment paragraph explaining the score
   • Evidence from text (2-4 specific quotes)
   • Recommendations (2-4 actionable items)

3. Score Summary Table

   • All 10 criteria with scores
   • Total score

4. Original Narrative Text

   • Include the full text in a code block for reference

Formatting requirements:

• Use clear headings and structure
• Quote actual text, don't paraphrase
• Make recommendations specific and actionable
• Ensure feedback is constructive and encouraging

Optional: Use scripts/generate_report.py to format the report programmatically if needed.

Quality Standards

Scoring Accuracy

• Each score must align with the category descriptor in the reference
• Justify scores with specific evidence from the text
• Be consistent across criteria (e.g., sophisticated vocabulary should align with high audience score)

Evidence Quality

• Quote exactly from the text
• Select quotes that clearly demonstrate the point
• Include both positive examples and areas needing work

Feedback Quality

• Be specific, not generic ("Uses varied sentence structure" ✅ not "Good writing" ❌)
• Be constructive and encouraging
• Focus on what the writer is doing and what to improve
• Use professional language appropriate for educational assessment

Recommendations Quality

• Make recommendations actionable and specific
• Link recommendations to evidence
• Prioritize high-impact improvements
• Provide examples where helpful

Important Notes

Assessment Philosophy

• Digital text only - No OCR or handwriting interpretation required
• First draft consideration - Minor typos allowed at higher scores
• Context matters - Read complications, character development, etc. in context
• AND/OR flexibility - Character and Setting can be strong in one area only

Common Pitfalls to Avoid

1. Don't penalize age-appropriateness - Year 3 vs Year 9 expectations differ
2. Don't require both character AND setting - Either can carry the score
3. Don't count splice commas as correct - They are punctuation errors
4. Don't ignore intended sentences - Read past poor punctuation to assess structure
5. Don't inflate scores - Be rigorous but fair

When Multiple Interpretations Exist

• Choose the interpretation most favorable to the student
• Note ambiguity in feedback
• Explain your reasoning

Reference Files

Load these as needed during assessment:

• references/01-audience.md - Audience criterion (0-6)
• references/02-text-structure.md - Text structure criterion (0-4)
• references/03-ideas.md - Ideas criterion (0-5)
• references/04-character-setting.md - Character and setting criterion (0-4)
• references/05-vocabulary.md - Vocabulary criterion (0-5)
• references/06-cohesion.md - Cohesion criterion (0-4)
• references/07-paragraphing.md - Paragraphing criterion (0-2)
• references/08-sentence-structure.md - Sentence structure criterion (0-6)
• references/09-punctuation.md - Punctuation criterion (0-5)
• references/10-spelling.md - Spelling criterion (0-6)

Example Usage

User: "Can you grade this narrative according to NAPLAN standards? [provides text]"

Your workflow:

1. Acknowledge the task
2. Read the narrative carefully
3. Follow Steps 1-7 systematically
4. Read each reference file as you assess that criterion
5. Generate the comprehensive report with all components
6. Present the report to the user

Key principle: Be thorough, evidence-based, and constructive. The goal is to provide valuable feedback that helps writers improve.