Précis and formal letter: applying content, language and length rows consistently
You are marking Section D of a Functional Tamil paper. The précis question gives a 210-word passage on a Mumbai Tamil street-play troupe and asks for about 70 words in the candidate's own words, for 8 marks: 5 for content points, 2 for language, 1 for length. Three scripts matter. A: 58 words, copies the first two sentences almost verbatim. B: 96 words, covers all five points, then adds "such troupes must be funded". C: 68 words, merges points 2 and 3 and omits the final example. The same section has a 5-mark letter: write to the local library asking for longer hours for the Tamil section (2 marks format, 3 content and language). One candidate writes a 70-word note with the correct request but no sender address and no salutation. Two raters are within four marks on the section and need a common ruling.
1. Score A, B and C out of 8 and justify each row.
Read the worked answer
A - 4/8. Content 2: copied opening contains only two of five points. Language 1: accurate but not "in her own words", so it cannot earn the full 2. Length 1: 58 words is within a sensible range of 70. Copying is a language-row failure, not a content-row failure, which is why the mark sits at 4 and not 2.
B - 6/8. Content 5: all points present. Language 2: controlled and concise. Length 0: 96 words is well over one-third. Deduct 1 for the opinion, which is not in the source, giving 6. The opinion is not a content error because all source points are still there.
C - 7/8. Content 4: merging two points is acceptable if both survive, but the omitted example is one of the five. Language 2, length 1. This is the script to use as a model of compression: she cut an example, not the argument. Raters who scored C at 5 were counting points by sentence position rather than by idea.
2. Why is B's final sentence a fault in a précis but not in an essay? Where else in the paper could it earn credit?
Read the worked answer
A précis is a neutral reduction of the source; it may not add judgement, however sensible. B's sentence "such troupes must be funded" is her opinion, so it breaches the task even though it is a good sentence. In the essay question, the same sentence would be a thesis and could earn credit if supported. The distinction is purpose, not truth: précis tests faithful compression, essay tests argued response. Marking note: deduct once under language/appropriateness, never under content, because the source points remain intact. Tell B where the sentence belongs: "இதே கருத்தைக் கட்டுரையில் முன்வைத்தால் மதிப்பு உண்டு; சுருக்கத்தில் அது மூலத்தில் இல்லாத கருத்து." This protects the rater from double-penalising a candidate who has actually understood the passage.
3. Mark the letter out of 5, and state the format rule for missing address and salutation.
Read the worked answer
Award content and language 3/3: the request is clear, the purpose is stated, and the register is polite. Format 1/2: the sender's address is absent, and so is the salutation. One mark is deducted for the missing address block; the missing salutation is folded into the same deduction because both are openings of the same formal frame. Do not deduct for length: 70 words is short but functional, and no minimum was set. Final 4/5. Comment: "கடிதத்தின் இரு முகவரிகளும், வணக்கத்தொடரும் இல்லை; வேண்டுகோள் தெளிவாக உள்ளது." For consistency, raters should deduct format marks only for absent structural elements (address, salutation, closing, signature), not for stylistic preferences such as "இங்ஙனம்" versus "நன்றி".