A 95-Word Précis Against an 86-Word Ceiling
In a higher secondary final examination, the précis question carries 10 marks. The passage is 260 words on ‘বানপানী আৰু সম্প্ৰদায়ৰ সহযোগিতা’. A student, Priya, writes a précis of 95 words. The instruction says ‘এক-তৃতীয়াংশতকৈ বেছি নহ’ব’ (not more than one-third). One-third of 260 is about 87 words, so Priya exceeds the limit by 8 words. Her précis includes two examples from the passage (a relief camp and a boat) and one sentence of her own opinion: ‘মোৰ মতে চৰকাৰে অধিক সহায় কৰা উচিত’. The rest is accurate. The marking scheme gives 4 for content, 3 for concision, 2 for language, and 1 for format. The teacher must decide whether to deduct for exceeding the word limit, whether to ignore the opinion sentence as ‘not part of the précis’, and how to apply the one-third rule when the passage is 260 words and the count is borderline. Another teacher has already marked a different script with 88 words as full marks, creating a comparison problem.
1. Calculate the permissible limit and award Priya’s marks. Show your arithmetic and the principle you use for borderline cases.
Read the worked answer
Arithmetic: 260 ÷ 3 = 86.67. ‘Not more than one-third’ means the ceiling is 86 words if we round down; 87 is already over. Priya’s 95 words is 8–9 words over, about 9% over. I would not zero the concision mark: the précis is accurate and mostly selective, but it includes an opinion sentence and two examples, which are exactly what a précis should cut. Suggested marks: content 3.5/4 (accurate but examples are not needed), concision 2/3 (over limit and includes opinion), language 2/2, format 1/1 = 8.5/10, rounded to 8 or 8.5 according to the board’s convention. The opinion sentence should not earn content marks; if it is counted, it also worsens concision. Borderline principle: apply the ceiling strictly but deduct proportionally from concision, not from content or language.
2. Write a margin comment that teaches the one-third rule without arguing about 86 versus 87.
Read the worked answer
‘Your summary is clear, but at 95 words it is about 9% over the 86-word ceiling. Cut the opinion sentence and one example, then recount. The rule tests selection, not just compression.’
The comment gives the number, the percentage, and two concrete cuts. It does not debate whether 87 should be allowed, because that debate would distract from the main skill: choosing what to leave out. It also avoids a bare ‘too long’, which tells the student nothing about how to improve.
3. What would you do about the other teacher’s 88-word full-mark script?
Read the worked answer
Raise it at moderation, not in front of students. The issue is a shared rounding convention: if 88 is accepted, then 87 should also be accepted, and Priya’s 95 is still over. If the department agrees on a strict 86 ceiling, the 88-word script was over-marked; re-mark it or apply a one-mark concision deduction. Do not change Priya’s mark alone to match an inconsistent precedent, and do not ignore the precedent. Record the decision so future markers apply the same rule. Fairness is consistency of principle, not identical marks: the principle is that a précis over the one-third ceiling loses concision marks in proportion to the excess, regardless of who marked it.