NAPLAN Persuasive Marking

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

Output to user: Brief acknowledgment that assessment is beginning.

Step 2: Structure Assessment (Criteria 1-3)

Analyze the foundational persuasive elements in this order:

2A. Text Structure (0-4 points)

Focus: Organisation of persuasive text components (introduction, body, conclusion)

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

Assess:

• Is there a clear introduction with position statement?
• Is there a developed body with reasons and evidence?
• Is there a conclusion that reinforces the position?
• How are components developed?

Record:

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

2B. Audience (0-6 points)

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

Read reference: references/01-audience.md

Assess:

• Does the text orient the reader?
• Are persuasive techniques used to engage?
• Does language choice persuade effectively?
• Is there control of writer/reader relationship?

Record:

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

2C. Ideas (0-5 points)

Focus: Selection, relevance and elaboration of ideas for persuasive argument

Read reference: references/03-ideas.md

Assess:

• Are ideas elaborated or merely stated?
• Do ideas relate to the argument effectively?
• Is there reflection on wider issues?
• Are ideas crafted to persuade?

Record:

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

Step 3: Persuasion Assessment (Criterion 4)

3A. Persuasive Devices (0-4 points)

Focus: Use of persuasive devices to enhance position and persuade reader

Read reference: references/04-persuasive-devices.md

Important: About a page of writing is needed to consider sustained use.

Assess:

• What persuasive devices are used?
• How many instances? How many types?
• Are devices effective or ineffective?
• Is use sustained throughout?

Look for:

• Appeals (reason/logos, emotion/pathos, ethics/ethos)
• Rhetorical questions
• Repetition, rule of three
• Emotive language
• Expert opinion, statistics, facts
• Examples and anecdotes
• Modal verbs (should, must, could)
• Inclusive language (we, us, our)
• Counter-arguments and refutation

Record:

• Score (0-4)
• Multiple quotes showing different devices
• Feedback on effectiveness and range

Step 4: Language Assessment (Criteria 5-6)

4A. Vocabulary (0-5 points)

Focus: Range and precision of contextually appropriate language choices

Read reference: references/05-vocabulary.md

Assess:

• Are words mostly simple or precise?
• Is technical or specialized vocabulary used?
• Does vocabulary enhance the argument?
• Is language well-matched to argument style?

Look for:

• Precise nouns and verbs
• Modal adjectives/adverbs
• Technical terms
• Nominalisations
• Figurative language appropriate to persuasion

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? (however, although, therefore, etc.)
• Is there word association to avoid repetition?

Record:

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

Step 5: Presentation Assessment (Criteria 7-10)

5A. Paragraphing (0-3 points)

Focus: Segmenting text into paragraphs to follow line of argument

Read reference: references/07-paragraphing.md

Assess:

• Is paragraphing present and correct?
• Are paragraphs focused on single ideas?
• Do paragraphs include topic sentences?
• Do paragraphs build argument cumulatively?

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

Record:

• Score (0-3)
• Description of paragraphing strategy
• Feedback on how paragraphs support argument

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
• 'Most' is approximately 80%

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 rules:

• Splice commas joining two sentences are INCORRECT
• Don't penalise different heading styles (all acceptable)
• 'Mostly' is approximately 80%

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 (cat, shop, will, school)
• Common words (litter, jumped, wrong, between)
• Difficult words (chocolate, invisible, community, habitat)
• 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: 48 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/48)
   • 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 Persuasive 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 sustained persuasive devices" ✅ 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 - Assess devices and structure in context
• About a page needed - For sustained use (persuasive devices, vocabulary, cohesion)

Common Pitfalls to Avoid

1. Don't penalize age-appropriateness - Year 3 vs Year 9 expectations differ
2. Don't count splice commas as correct - They are punctuation errors
3. Don't ignore intended sentences - Read past poor punctuation to assess structure
4. Don't inflate scores - Be rigorous but fair
5. Don't require sustained use in short texts - About a page needed for sustained assessment

Persuasive Text Structure

• Introduction - Orients reader, states position
• Body - Develops argument with reasons and evidence
• Conclusion - Reinforces position, may reflect or recommend action

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-persuasive-devices.md - Persuasive devices 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 (0-3)
• 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 persuasive text according to NAPLAN standards? [provides text]"

Your workflow:

1. Acknowledge the task
2. Read the persuasive text 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 their persuasive writing skills.