Register and Relevance: Marking a Letter and an Over-Length Essay
Composition section: 10 marks. Students choose either (a) a letter to the Municipal Commissioner about a streetlight that has been out for three weeks near a girls' school, or (b) an essay of 200-250 words on 'مشینوں کے دور میں انسان'. The rubric is format 2, content/relevance 3, organisation 2, language 3. Script P chooses the letter. It has a proper sender's address and date, but opens 'پیارے کمشنر صاحب', uses 'تم' twice, spends 120 words on a general complaint about roads, mentions the streetlight in one line, and ends 'آپ کا دوست'. The language is fluent, with two spelling errors. Script Q chooses the essay, writes 340 words, argues clearly that machines can deepen loneliness and replace craft, but has no paragraph breaks and two long quotations without attribution. The teacher must decide whether to cap P's format mark, whether over-length penalises Q, and how to give feedback that improves both without rewriting their scripts.
1. Award marks to P and Q using the rubric. Justify each mark and state the principle you used for format and length.
Read the worked answer
P: format 1/2 (address and date are right, but salutation and closing are informal for an official letter; 'پیارے' and 'آپ کا دوست' break the register), content 1/3 (the streetlight is the task, but most of the letter is about roads; relevance is weak), organisation 1/2 (the complaint is not ordered around the request), language 3/3 (fluent, only two spelling errors) = 6/10. I would not cap the whole letter at 5; the format error is serious but the rubric is analytic, and P's language is genuinely strong.
Q: format 1/2 (no title and no paragraph breaks, so the essay conventions are weak), content 3/3 (the argument is relevant and developed), organisation 1/2 (the sequence is buried in one block), language 2/3 (clear but quotations without attribution and over-length reduce control) = 7/10.
Principle: penalise length only where it damages a rubric criterion; do not deduct automatically for 340 words. For Q, the over-length is part of the organisation problem, not a separate punishment.
2. Rewrite the opening and closing of P's letter in a register suitable for an official complaint. Explain the changes in 40-60 words.
Read the worked answer
Opening: 'جناب کمشنر صاحب، میں اس خط کے ذریعے آپ کی توجہ اس مسئلے کی طرف دلانا چاہتا ہوں کہ ...' Closing: 'آپ کی توجہ کا منتظر، [نام]'.
Changes: replace 'پیارے' with 'جناب'; replace 'تم' with 'آپ'; replace 'آپ کا دوست' with a formal subscription; state the request in the first two lines instead of after a general road complaint. The register shift also changes the content order: streetlight, risk to girls, date since when out, requested repair.
3. Give P and Q a three-step revision plan each, without rewriting their scripts. One step must address organisation and one must address language.
Read the worked answer
P: (1) Re-order: first paragraph = one-sentence request and the three-week outage; second = risk to girls and the school gate; third = exact location and polite closing. (2) Register check: circle every 'تم' and 'پیارے' and replace with official forms; read aloud to a partner. (3) Proofread only the two spelling errors and the closing, not the whole letter.
Q: (1) Insert three paragraph breaks at the existing turns (claim, example, counterpoint); do not add new content. (2) Add a title and a one-sentence conclusion that answers 'so what?'. (3) For the two quotations, add the speaker/source or paraphrase; cut 60-80 words from the longest example to bring the essay near 250. Both plans give moves, not replacement text.