Essay Assessment Scenarios

During the essay assessment process, you encounter a submission that deviates significantly from the conventional essay structure. Rather than presenting a clear introduction, body paragraphs, and a conclusion, the essay reads more like a narrative reflection. Despite the structural deviation, the content is highly original, and the language is rich and expressive. The participant demonstrates critical thinking and strong engagement with the topic, but fails to organize ideas using formal essay conventions. As an adjudicator, how should you respond?

• Award full marks to reward the creativity and originality of the content

• Deduct substantial points because the essay fails to follow the required structure

• Acknowledge the creative approach, but moderately reduce points for not adhering to expected structure

• Ignore all structural aspects and focus solely on the vocabulary and grammar

• Disqualify the essay entirely for not following structural guidelines

While reviewing a batch of essays, you notice that two participants have submitted essays with almost identical ideas, structure, and examples. Although the wording differs, the similarities raise your suspicion about possible academic dishonesty or unauthorized collaboration. However, you do not have concrete proof of plagiarism. What is the most responsible course of action in this situation?

• Assume it's a coincidence and score the essays as usual

• Immediately disqualify both participants on the grounds of plagiarism

• Lower both scores significantly as a precaution

• Confront the participants personally and ask for explanations

• Report the case to the organizing committee or chief adjudicator for further investigation

You come across an essay that uses extremely advanced academic vocabulary and complex sentence structures that seem inconsistent with the expected proficiency level of a polytechnic student. The essay is coherent and grammatically correct, but you begin to question whether the language used is truly the participant's own. It gives the impression that the essay may have been written with external help or generated by a language model. How should you handle this suspicion?

• Praise the vocabulary and give full marks for advanced language use

• Penalize the essay because the vocabulary is too advanced for the competition level

• Evaluate the coherence and fluency, but flag the essay for a possible review by the committee

• Disqualify the participant immediately due to suspected dishonesty

• Ignore your suspicion and treat the essay the same as others

One of the essays submitted is articulate and grammatically sound, and it demonstrates a strong command of written English. However, upon closer reading, you notice that the essay's content strays significantly from the topic assigned. The participant appears to have misunderstood or disregarded the prompt, resulting in an essay that, while well-written, fails to address the required issue. How should this affect your scoring?

• Award full marks because the writing quality is high regardless of topic relevance

• Substantially reduce points under the 'content relevance' criterion despite good writing

• Ignore the topic alignment and score the essay on grammar and fluency alone

• Give average marks as a compromise between content and writing quality

• Allow the participant to submit a corrected version

A participant writes a persuasive essay that is stylistically engaging and well-organized. However, it relies entirely on the writer's personal opinions and emotional appeals, without providing any data, examples, or factual support. The arguments, although passionately delivered, lack substantiation. What is the appropriate judgment in this case?

• Reward the writer for expressive language and strong voice

• Deduct marks for failing to support arguments with evidence, while recognizing the clarity of expression

• Focus only on grammar and coherence, ignoring content depth

• Give full marks if the participant's opinion seems valid

• Keep the score unchanged but suggest improvements in the comment section

You are assessing an essay that follows the prompt and is logically organized. However, the participant repeatedly uses the same words and phrases, such as 'in my opinion,' 'important,' and 'I think,' without variation. This overuse makes the essay monotonous and suggests a limited vocabulary range. How should this impact your evaluation?

• Deduct points under vocabulary and stylistic variation criteria

• Focus only on the content and structure, not the vocabulary

• Accept repetition as a sign of clarity and emphasize grammar instead

• Mark the essay as potentially plagiarized due to repeated phrases

• Ignore vocabulary entirely and give an average score

A participant submits an essay that barely meets the minimum word count requirement. While it includes a basic introduction, a few brief arguments, and a short conclusion, the content lacks depth and development. The ideas are only briefly mentioned and not explored in any detail. How should you respond?

• Award full marks for meeting the technical word count requirement

• Significantly reduce points for content development and idea elaboration

• Disqualify the essay for insufficient content

• Give an average score across all categories to be fair

• Score it only on grammar and punctuation

One essay stands out because the student presents their ideas in the form of a dramatic monologue, breaking away from the expected academic essay format. Though the content is relevant and the grammar is accurate, the structural choices (dialogue format, informal tone, no thesis) deviate from the competition guidelines. How should this affect your scoring?

• Score based on the quality of ideas and language, while deducting for structure deviation

• Award bonus points for creativity and uniqueness

• Reject the essay entirely for not meeting format expectations

• Ask the participant to rewrite the essay in standard format

• Ignore format concerns and focus only on the grammar

An essay addresses a sensitive or controversial topic. While the participant provides a clear stance, the tone becomes strongly biased and dismissive toward opposing views. Some arguments border on offensive language. Although the essay demonstrates fluency and cohesion, it lacks objectivity and respect for differing perspectives. What is the most ethical and professional response?

• Score it highly for argument clarity and passion

• Deduct marks for biased tone and lack of balance, especially in the 'critical thinking' criteria

• Disqualify the essay for offensive content

• Give an average score and avoid commenting on sensitive topics

• Encourage such passionate writing regardless of bias

You are reviewing an essay with relevant arguments and decent grammar, but it lacks clear transitions between paragraphs. The flow of ideas feels abrupt, and the organization is confusing, making it harder to follow the participant’s line of reasoning. What should be your approach?

• Reduce points for cohesion and structural organization

• Focus solely on grammar and vocabulary

• Overlook paragraphing issues if the content is relevant

• Provide written comments but no score reduction

• Award full points if the topic is addressed