The federal examination in literature is one of the elective exams. In those days, when students and their parents did not have the slightest idea about such a form of graduation test as, literature was among the mandatory final exams at school. Then it was handed over in the form of an essay, and the mark in the certificate was set in two subjects at once: literacy influenced, and style influenced literature.
Today given USE can hardly be called popular: literature is needed only by those eleventh-graders who enter the philologist, linguist or teacher of the Russian language and literature, and these professions, unfortunately, are not considered. Many students believe that this exam can be passed with a swoop, without devoting much time to laborious preparation, leaving only residual knowledge and the ability to coherently express thoughts.
However, preparing for the Literature exam will require considerable time and effort, especially if your goal is to pass it with a "four" or "five". Let's find out what innovations in KIMs 2017 were prepared by specialists from, when literature will be handed in and what you should pay attention to Special attention in preparation for this exam.
Demo version of the USE-2017
USE Dates in Literature
Specialists from Rosobrnadzor reserved the following days for this exam:
- Early period. Early examination will take place on March 24, 2017, and April 3, 2017 is allocated as a reserve day. We also recall the list of persons who can write an application for the exam in the early period. Such students include: those who are going to go abroad for study or permanent residence, participants in international or all-Russian reviews, competitions, olympiads or sports competitions, students who were ordered to undergo rehabilitation, medical or preventive procedures during the main exam. Schoolchildren who graduated from a general education institution before 2016/2017 can also pass the exam ahead of schedule school year, students who studied at evening school, and young men who first want to go through, and only then go to university;
- Main stage. The main exam will be held on June 13, 2017.
- Backup date. The reserve day for literature is June 20, 2017 (just in case, there is one more reserve day for all subjects - June 30, 2017).
By the way, if you belong to the category of students who are able and willing to take the exam before the main deadline, do not forget that the application will need to be submitted before March 1, 2017. Otherwise, you will have to take the exam along with the main wave of graduates.
Statistical information
It is worth noting that the number of children who choose literature as a variable exam is growing from year to year. For example, in 2016 the number of such examinees was 43.5 thousand people, which is 6 thousand more than in 2015. The statistics also show an increase in the number of graduates who managed to pass the test with the highest test score.
According to statistics, a large number of schoolchildren pass literature successfully Thus, in 2016, 256 100-point works were identified, which is 26 works more than in 2015. Only 4.3% of students could not overcome the minimum threshold of 32 points, which is much better than the results of previous years (5.3% and 8% in 2015 and 2014, respectively). The average results for 2016 are as follows:
- 43.5% of the children received from 41 to 60 points for their work;
- 44.3% of students managed to score from 61 to 100 points.
How is the passing of the exam in literature?
You can work with the examination sheet for 235 minutes. Recall that the exam in literature does not provide for the use of any additional subjects or reference materials. Check pockets ahead of time mobile phone, remove your smart watch from your wrist and in no case try to carry cheat sheets with you. Any equipment with hints will be confiscated at the entrance to the classroom - each graduate passes through a metal detector frame before the start of the exam.
The classroom is under video surveillance, and about 20 thousand observers will keep order at the Russian USE, who are given strict instructions: any violator of the exam regulations must be removed from the audience! When you enter the classroom and take your seat, do not start conversations with your neighbors, get up or leave the classroom without permission. To visit the toilet room or first-aid post, you will need to contact the observers who are required to accompany you to your destination.
Passing this exam does not provide for the use of reference materials The structure of KIM USE-2017 in literature
The latest information regarding innovations in the Unified State Examination in the literature of the 2017 model indicated that this exam would soon consist only of creative tasks. This fact is confirmed by the heads of the educational sphere of the Russian Federation - Olga Vasilyeva, who holds the post of Minister of Education and Science, and Sergey Zinin, who leads the Federal Commission for the Development of the Unified State Examination in Literature.
The new exam model was developed in March 2016 and even managed to be tested by schoolchildren from six dozen educational institutions. In the new KIMs, short answer tasks will be completely excluded, the number of tasks involving multiple choice will be increased, and the requirements for . The structure of the exam will presumably be divided into three main blocks:
- the first, in which you will need to demonstrate the skills of analyzing works;
- the second - assuming that the student will show his ability to use visual and expressive means;
- the third is an essay on one of the five topics that suggest deep Scan work and its main problems.
However, the 2017 graduates can breathe easy. This model will come into force only in 2018. To date, it has been decided that promising KIMs will first be finalized and posted on the FIPI portal for demonstration, and only then the methodological council will make a final decision. In general, the structure of the 2017 ticket has not changed significantly. The ticket consists of 17 tasks divided into two parts:
- part 1, which includes two sets of tasks. The first of them will combine fragments of epic, lyrical and dramatic works with questions to them. For the first 7 tasks, students will have to give a short answer, and for another 2 - a detailed answer of 5-10 sentences. The second set of tasks assumes that the graduate will solve 5 more tasks in which he will analyze the lyrical work. For tasks numbered from 10 to 14, you will need to give a short answer, and numbers 15-16 suggest a detailed answer;
- part 2 is an essay of at least 200 words on one of the three proposed topics.
Do not underestimate the importance of the composition - you need to prepare well for it! We also note that FIPI recommends that the time allotted for examination paper. For the first part of the ticket, it is worth allocating no more than 120 minutes from the total time allotted for the exam, and devote all the remaining time to writing an essay.
Assessment of the Unified State Examination in Literature
In 2009, it was decided that the scores received for the Unified State Exam do not affect the student's attestation mark and are not transferred to the usual scale from two to five. However, as of 2017, the nationwide exam may be an opportunity to improve a school teacher's grade. When translating the USE assessment system into a five-point picture, it will look like this:
- scores in the range from 0 to 31 mean that the student is not prepared for the exam and receives a mark of "2";
- scores in the range from 32 to 54 mean that the student is satisfactorily prepared for the literature exam and receives a mark of "3";
- scores in the range from 55 to 66 mean that the student knows literature well and receives a mark of "4";
- points in the range from 67 to 100 mean that the student has prepared perfectly and receives a well-deserved "5".
It will be possible to get acquainted with the points earned on the Unified State Examination in Literature on the official portal of the Unified State Examination. To do this, the student will need to log in by entering data from his passport.
Preparation for the exam in literature
In order to competently prepare for the exam in this subject, it is worth starting the advance study of demo versions of KIMs, which have already been developed by FIPI representatives. You can download a demo CMM on our website (see the beginning of the article). This approach will orient you to the approximate content of the ticket, help you identify your weaknesses and set you up psychologically for the real exam. This attitude is very important, because many students make stupid mistakes simply from stress and tension.
When preparing for the 2017 exam, it is important to study the demo versions of the exam Remember the importance of preparing for writing an essay in the second part of KIM. Check out the topics that were offered to graduates last year, and try to write an essay on each of these topics. Stock up on literature manuals recommended by the Ministry of Education and read criticism of works from the recommended list of literature.
Experts note the importance of general erudition and erudition, which will help to argue the opinion expressed. Moreover, at least two examples from different works must be cited as an argument. In general, when writing this part of the exam, it is recommended to adhere to the following approach:
- first you should read all the proposed topics and determine which one is the most successful for expressing your thoughts;
- try to find a suitable epigraph. It is not mandatory, but knowing the exact and contextually appropriate quotes makes the job more advantageous. Remember that it is recommended to write the epigraph without quotation marks, and put the author's surname in brackets;
- think through the key aspects of the topic, the main questions, answers and evidence for your point of view. Write down the abstracts on a draft;
- write down suitable quotes from the works. But don't get carried away with quoting. It is desirable that each of the quotes include no more than 2-3 small sentences; (0 ratings)
In 2019, 67,500 graduates chose the USE in Literature. This exam is considered one of the most difficult.
The minimum USE score in literature for admission to a university in 2019 is 32 points
How to file an appeal for disagreement with USE scores
First, you should know that you must file an appeal within 2 days of the official announcement of the results. Due to the fact that the date of the official announcement of the results is never known in advance (only approximate dates are written on the official sites), you should carefully monitor when in your personal account literature results will appear. Secondly, keep in mind that Saturday can also be considered a working day, so it is important not to miss the deadline for filing an appeal.
Where can you file an appeal?
Graduates of the 11th grade file an appeal at the flagship school. This "crusade" must begin from your own school. It is at your school that you must report that you intend to protest the points received for the Unified State Examination in Literature. They must tell you where and how to do it. It is imperative to download all exam materials in your personal account and show them to the teacher before the appeal in order to understand how to behave during a dialogue with members of the Conflict Commission.
How to prepare for an appeal
Step 1. Download all USE materials in literature from your personal account.
Step 2 Carefully compare the answer sheet to the test questions, which was filled in with your hand, with the so-called "read sheet". What should be checked here? You need to make sure that your answers are correctly interpreted by the computer everywhere, that is, all letters and numbers must match. Sometimes there are "computer" errors that deprive graduates of legitimate points, so such a technical overlay must be challenged on appeal.
Step 3 Carefully review Part II with an experienced teacher and compare the work with the scores received for this part of the work. The problem is that not a single USE participant sees either the tasks themselves or the correct answers to them. Part II in your personal account can be downloaded only in an unverified version. Where the experts found mistakes in you, for which they lowered the points - one can only guess. That is why it is very difficult to deal with this without an experienced mentor. By the way, at the appeal, you may also have points reduced if an unnoticed mistake is found. It is at this stage (after careful verification and analysis) that a detailed line of conduct on appeal to the Conflict Commission can be worked out. We even advise you to write down a plan of your claims with all the arguments in your favor.
Step 4 Be sure to go to the appeal with the teacher or tutor. If you manage to negotiate with your school teacher, then it will be wonderful. If it does not work out, then you can always resort to the paid help of professionals. If you have been studying with a tutor, it is better to take him with you too.
we are ready to provide support to everyone for appealing USE scores in many cities of Russia, since we have the largest network of branches in the country. To do this, you need to go to the main site, find your locality in the top location search bar and contact our employees by phone numbers listed on regional sites.
Attention! To accompany the USE participant to the appeal, it is necessary to issue a notarized power of attorney for the teacher.
2 days to prepare for the appeal is, of course, a very short time, but it will be enough if you are helped by a qualified and experienced teacher. Think for yourself how much money, effort and time was spent preparing for the exam, paying for one trip with you to appeal a teacher or tutor will seem like a drop in the ocean, because there are several primary exam scores at stake, which, in terms of test scores, can be quite impressive result. There is no need to remind that in the competition for budget places, each score is literally "worth its weight in gold."
Which university can I enter with points for the Unified State Examination in Literature
In 2019, about 370 different programs are open for graduates who successfully passed the Unified State Examination in literature in more than 140 universities of the country. To select a university and faculty, we recommend using the USE calculators. Read about it in our material.
Evaluation of tasks in part C.
EVALUATION CRITERIA FOR TASKS WITH A DETAILED ANSWER
Evaluation of the performance of tasks C1 and C3, requiring a detailed answer in the amount of 5–10 sentences
If, when checking the tasks of the specified group, the expert gives 0 points according to the first criterion, the task is considered not completed and is not evaluated according to the second criterion (0 points are given in the protocol for checking answers).
Criterion Points
The depth of the judgments made and the persuasiveness of the arguments
a) the examinee gives a direct coherent answer to the question, based on the author's position, if necessary, formulates his point of view; convincingly substantiates his theses, confirms his thoughts with a text, does not replace analysis with a retelling of the text; there are no factual errors or inaccuracies
b) the examinee gives a direct coherent answer to the question, relying on the author's position, if necessary, formulates his point of view, does not replace the analysis with a retelling of the text, but when answering, he does not convincingly substantiate all the theses; and/or makes 1 factual error
c) the examinee understands the essence of the question, but does not give a direct answer to the question; and / or does not rely on the author's position, limiting himself to his own point of view; and / or unconvincingly substantiates their theses; and / or partially replaces the analysis of the text with its retelling; and/or makes 2 factual errors
d) the examinee does not cope with the task: does not give an answer to the question; and/or replaces analysis with retelling of the text; and/or makes 3 or more factual errors
2. Following the rules of speech
a) no more than 1 speech error was made 1
b) more than 1 speech error was made 0
Maximum score 4
Evaluation of the performance of tasks C2 and C4, requiring a detailed answer in the amount of 5–10 sentences
Indication of the volume is conditional; the assessment of the answer depends on its content (with deep knowledge, the examinee can answer in a larger volume; with the ability to accurately formulate his thoughts, the examinee can answer quite fully in a smaller volume).
Criteria Points
Inclusion of the work in a literary context and persuasiveness of arguments
a) the examiner answers the question, indicates the names of two works and their authors*, convincingly justifies the choice of each work and convincingly compares these works with the proposed text in a given direction; there is no distortion of the author's position and factual errors in the answer
b) the examinee answers the question, indicates the names of two works and their authors*, but does not convincingly substantiate the choice of each work or convincingly substantiate the choice of one of the works; and/or allows some shortcomings when comparing these works with the proposed text in a given direction; and or convincingly compares only one work with the proposed text; and/or makes 1 factual error without generally distorting the author's position
c) the examiner answers the question, indicates the name of only one work and its author, convincingly justifies the choice of the work and convincingly compares this work with the proposed text in a given direction (in comparison, some minor flaws are allowed); and/or makes 2 factual errors without generally distorting the author's position
d) the examiner answers the question, indicates the names of two works and their authors, but does not justify his choice, does not compare the works with the proposed text or compares them with the proposed text without taking into account the given direction; or indicates the title of only one work and its author, but does not convincingly substantiate the choice of the work in everything and does not give a convincing comparison of this work with the proposed text; and / or in some cases allows for the distortion of the author's position; and/or makes 3 factual errors
e) the examiner does not answer the question, or gives an answer that is not meaningfully related to the task and is not based on the author's position; and / or indicates the title of one work and its author, but does not justify his choice and does not compare this work with the proposed text; and/or materially misrepresents the author's position; and/or more than 3 factual errors
Maximum score 4
When completing the task, the examinee must rely on the works of at least two authors (taking into account the author who owns the text proposed in the task).
Evaluation of the performance of tasks С5.1, С5.2, С5.3, requiring writing a detailed reasoned answer in the genre
Essays of at least 200 words
Among the five criteria by which the essay is evaluated, the first criterion (substantive aspect) is the main one. If, when checking the work, the expert puts 0 points according to the first criterion, the task of part 3 is considered not completed andnot checked further. According to four other criteria (2, 3, 4, 5) in the "Protocol for checking answers to tasks" of form No. 2, 0 points are set.
The assessment for the first position of the assessment of the task of part 3 is placed in column 7 of the protocol, for the second position - in column 8, for the third -
in column 9, in the fourth - in column 10, in the fifth - in column 11.
written essay. Examinees are recommended to have at least 200 words. If the essay contains less than 150 words (all words, including service words, are included in the word count), then such work is considered unfulfilled and 0 points are assessed.
Criteria Points
1. The depth of disclosure of the theme of the essay and the persuasiveness of judgments
a) the examinee reveals the topic of the essay, based on the author's position, formulates his point of view; convincingly substantiates his thesis; there are no factual errors or inaccuracies
b) the examiner reveals the topic of the essay, based on the author's position, formulates his point of view, but does not convincingly substantiate all theses; and/or makes 1-2 factual errors
c) the examiner reveals the topic of the essay superficially or one-sidedly, without relying on the author's position; and / or does not substantiate their theses; and/or makes 3-4 factual errors
d) the examiner does not disclose the topic of the essay; and/or more than 4 factual errors
2. Level of proficiency in theoretical and literary concepts
a) the examinee uses literary-theoretical __________ concepts to analyze the work; there are no errors or inaccuracies in the use of concepts
b) the examinee includes theoretical and literary concepts in the text of the essay, but does not use them to analyze the work, and / or makes 1 mistake in their use
c) the examinee does not use literary-theoretical concepts or makes more than 1 error in their use
3. The validity of the involvement of the text of the work
a) the text of the work in question is drawn in a versatile and reasonable way (citations with comments to them, brief retelling content necessary to prove judgments, reference to micro-themes of the text and their interpretation, various kinds of references to what is depicted in the work, etc.)
b) the text is involved in a variety of ways, but not always justified, and / or there are separate cases of using the text out of direct connection with the thesis put forward
c) the text is involved only as a retelling of the depicted 1
d) the text is not involved, judgments are not justified by the text 0
4. Compositional integrity and consistency of presentation
a) the composition is characterized by compositional integrity, its parts are logically connected, there are no violations of sequence and unreasonable repetitions inside the semantic parts
b) the composition is characterized by compositional integrity, its parts are logically interconnected, but within the semantic parts there are sequence violations and unreasonable repetitions
c) the compositional idea is traced in the composition, but there are violations of the compositional connection between the semantic parts and / or the idea is repeated and does not develop
d) there is no compositional intent in the composition, gross violations of the sequence of parts of the statement are made, which significantly complicate the understanding of the meaning of the composition
5. Following the rules of speech
a) there are no speech errors, or 1 speech error was made 3
b) 2–3 speech errors were made 2
c) 4 speech errors were made 1
d) the number of speech errors made significantly complicates the understanding of the meaning of the statement (5 or more speech errors were made)
Max score 14
When writing an essay (С5.1–С5.3), the graduate must be guided by the following requirements:
- disclosure of the topic of the essay based on the author's position;
- persuasiveness of the argumentation;
- the ability to formulate and justify one's point of view;
- accuracy in the presentation of literary facts;
- competent use of theoretical and literary concepts for the analysis of the work;
- versatile and reasonable involvement of the text of the work under consideration (citations with comments to them, a brief retelling of the content necessary to prove judgments, reference to micro-themes of the text and their interpretation, various kinds of references to what is depicted in the work, etc.);
- the compositional integrity of the work, the logical coherence of its parts, the absence of sequence violations within the semantic parts and unreasonable repetitions
- competent speech design of the essay.
Answering a problematic question, a graduate can get from 0 to 14 points.
Among the five criteria by which the essay is evaluated, the first criterion (substantive aspect) is the main one. If, when checking the work, the expert gives 0 points according to the first criterion, the task of part 3 is considered not completed and is not checked further. According to four other criteria (2, 3, 4, 5) in the "Protocol for checking answers to tasks" of form No. 2, 0 points are set.
When assessing the performance of the tasks of part 3, the volume of the written essay should be taken into account. Examinees are recommended to have at least 200 words. If the essay contains less than 150 words (the word count includes all words, including service words), then such work is considered incomplete and 0 points are assessed.
When the volume of the essay is from 150 to 200 words, the maximum number of errors for each point level does not change.
In order to assess the quality of the tasks C1, C3, the expert needs to answer the following questions:
3. Does he formulate his well-founded point of view? (This aspect of assessment is optional and depends on the specifics of the task formulation).
4. Does the graduate make convincing arguments? How deeply does he penetrate into the essence of the author's idea and is able to interpret it?
5. Does he confirm his conclusions with the text, does he replace the analysis with a retelling of the text?
6. Does it make factual error(s)?
7. Does he make speech mistakes?
The answer to tasks C1 and C3 must meet the following requirements:
− formulating a direct coherent answer to a question, sometimes to the author's position, and, if necessary, taking into account one's own point of view;
− convincing substantiation of their theses, confirmation of their text without replacing the analysis with a retelling of the text;
− accuracy in the presentation of literary facts;
− correct wording of the answer.
The answer to tasks C2 and C4 must meet the following requirements:
− formulating a direct coherent answer to a question with sometimes to the author's position,
− attraction of a literary context with justification of the grounds for comparison (indication of the title of two works and their authors (it is possible to indicate two
− accuracy in the presentation of literary facts.
In order to assess the quality of the tasks C2, C4, the expert needs to answer the following questions:
1. Does the graduate give a direct coherent answer to the assignment question?
2. Does he name the work (s) of Russian classics, in which (s) the problem indicated in the task is reflected?
3. Does it provide a convincing rationale for the selection of each piece?
4. Does the graduate make factual error(s)?
For the convenience of analyzing the answers to tasks C1 and C3, 4 levels of fulfillment of this requirement can be distinguished (Reflection of the parameter "The depth of the judgments made and the persuasiveness of the arguments" in the Criteria for checking and evaluating the performance of tasks C1 and C3.):
1) the graduate gives a convincing reasoned answer to the question based on the author's position;
2) the graduate as a whole gives a legitimate answer to the question based on the author's position, but does not substantiate some theses;
3) when answering a question, the graduate makes serious miscalculations (for example, does not answer the question directly, does not rely on the author's position, is unconvincing
substantiates his theses, replaces the analysis with a retelling of the text);
4) the graduate does not cope with the task.
For the convenience of analyzing the answers to tasks C2 and C4, 5 levels of fulfillment of these requirements can be distinguished("Attracting a literary context; the depth of the judgments made and the persuasiveness of the arguments"):
1) the graduate answers the questions of the task taking into account the author's position, gives a detailed reasoned justification for the choice of two works and indicates the authors;
2) the graduate answers the questions of the task taking into account the author's position, gives a rationale for the choice of two works and indicates the authors, but this justification has flaws (does not always convincingly justify the choice of each work, and / or convincingly justifies the choice of only one of the works);
3) the graduate as a whole answers the questions of the task, taking into account the author's position, elaborately substantiates the choice of one work with an indication of the author;
4) the graduate indicates the titles of two works and their authors, but does not substantiate his choice, and / or, when substantiating, significantly distorts the author's
position;
5) the graduate does not cope with the task (does not answer the question or gives an answer that is not meaningfully related to the task and is not based on
When analyzing the graduate's response to tasks C1–C4 according to the specified parameters, the expert, checking the accuracy of the scores, must answer the following two additional questions.
1. Does the graduate make convincing arguments?
For convenience of analysis, 4 levels of fulfillment of this requirement can be distinguished:
1) the graduate reasonably answers the question, convincingly substantiates his theses;
2) the graduate reasonably answers the question, but does not substantiate all his judgments;
3) the graduate argues superficially, inaccurately, weakly arguing the answer;
4) the graduate does not give reasons for the answer.
2. Is reasoning replaced by retelling of the text?
For the convenience of analysis, 3 levels of task execution can be distinguished according to the specified parameter:
1) the graduate does not replace reasoning with a retelling of the text;
2) the graduate partially replaces reasoning with a retelling of the text;
3) The graduate replaces reasoning with a retelling of the text.
Attention should be paid to the consistent reflection of the “actual errors” parameter in the Criteria for checking and evaluating the performance of tasks C1–C4
Tasks C1 and C3
There are no actual errors or inaccuracies. 3
The examinee makes 1 factual error. 2
The examinee makes 2 factual errors. one
The examinee makes 3 or more factual errors. 0
Tasks C2 and C4
Accuracy and completeness of the answer Points
There are no actual errors in the answer. 4
The examinee makes 1 factual error. 3
The examinee makes 2 factual errors. 2
The examinee makes 3 factual errors. one
The examinee makes more than 3 factual errors. 0
When analyzing the graduate's response to tasks C1-C4 according to the specified parameter, the expert must answer the key question:Does the graduate make a factual error(s) And)?
In accordance with criteria C1 and C3, 4 levels of task completion are distinguished according to the specified parameter:
1) there are no factual errors;
2) 1 factual error was made;:
4) 3 or more factual errors were made.
In accordance with criteria C2 and C4, 5 levels of task completion are distinguished according to the specified parameter:
1) there are no factual errors;
2) 1 factual error was made;
3) 2 factual errors were made;
4) 3 factual errors were made;
5) more than 3 factual errors were made.
4. Reflection of the parameter "Following the norms of speech" in the Criteria for checking and evaluating the performance of tasks C1 and C3
Following the rules of speech
a) no more than 1 speech error was made; 1
b) more than 1 speech error was made 0
To evaluate the quality of the task C5, it is necessary to identify the following aspects of the examinee's answer:
1. Does the graduate reveal the topic of the essay?
2. Does he put forward the necessary theses when answering the question and does he support these theses with appropriate arguments, based on the author's position?
3. Does he formulate his point of view and provide a convincing justification for it?
4. Does the essay reflect knowledge of the general problems of the work (works)?
5. Does the graduate make factual errors or inaccuracies?
6. Does he use literary-theoretical concepts? Does he use them to analyze the work or is he limited to simply mentioning concepts in the text of the work?
7. Does the examinee make mistakes and inaccuracies in the use of theoretical and literary concepts?
9. Does the graduate attract the text artwork when answering a question? Doesn't analysis replace text retelling?
10. Do the involved fragments of the text provide a basis for judgments about what has been read?
11. Is the general logic of the answer traced in the structure of the work? Does the essay have compositional integrity? Are the parts of the sentence related?
between themselves logically?
12. Are there violations of the logical sequence of reasoning or unreasonable repetitions in the work of the examinee?
13. Are there any speech errors or shortcomings in the work? Are there similar or recurring errors among them? Does the number make it difficult?
speech errors understanding the meaning of the statement?
Logic errors
1) violation of the sequence of statements,
2) lack of connection between parts of the statement,
3) unjustified repetition of a previously expressed thought,
4) fragmentation of a micro-theme by another micro-theme,
5) disproportion of parts of the statement,
6) the absence of the necessary parts of the statement, etc.
Speech errors
1) the use of the word in an unusual meaning;
2) violation of lexical compatibility;
3) the use of an extra word (pleonasm);
4) repetition or double use in a verbal text of synonyms that are close in meaning without justified necessity (tautology);
5) unreasonable omission of a word;
6) violation of the species-temporal correlation of verb forms;
7) poverty and monotony of syntactic constructions;
8) bad word order.
Stylistic mistakes
1) the use of other style words and expressions;
2) unsuccessful use of expressive, emotionally colored means;
3) unmotivated use of dialect and colloquial words and expressions;
4) mixing vocabulary from different historical eras.
Indication of the volume is conditional; the score of the answer depends on its pithiness (with deep knowledge, the examinee cananswer in a larger volume, with the ability to accurately formulate your thoughtsthe examinee can answer quite fully in a smaller volume).
If Criterion 1 (“Compliance of the answer with the task”) is set to 0 points, the task is considered failed and is not checked further. Byother criteria in the "Protocol for checking answers to tasks" form No. 20 points are given.
If according to Criterion 2 (“Involving the text of the work for argumentation ”) is given 0 points, then according to Criterion 3 (“ Logic and compliance speech norms”) the work is not evaluated, in the “Protocolverification of answers to tasks ”of form No. 2 according to Criterion 3 is set 0 points.
| Criterion | Points |
| 1. Correspondence of the answer to the task | |
| a) The answer to the question is given and indicates the understanding of the text of the given fragment / poem | 2 |
| b) The answer is meaningfully related to the task, but does not allow to judge the understanding of the text of the given fragment/poem | 1 |
| b) The answer is not meaningfully related to the task | 0 |
|
but) analysis of fragments important for completing the task, |
2 |
|
b) To argue judgments, the text is involved at the levelretelling of a work or general discussions about it content, the author's position is not distorted, AND / |
1 |
|
in) Judgments are not substantiated by the text of the work, AND / OR the author's position is distorted 1 , And / OR there are two or more factual errors |
0 |
| 3. Logic and compliance with speech norms | |
| a) There are no logical, speech errors | 2 |
| 1 | |
| 0 | |
| Maximum score | 6 |
Evaluation of the performance of tasks 9 and 16, requiring a detailed answer in the amount of 5–10 sentences
The indication of the volume is conditional, the assessment of the answer depends on its content (with deep knowledge, the examinee can answer in a larger volume, with the ability to accurately formulate his thoughts, the examinee can answer quite fully in a smaller volume).
Criteria 1 and 2 (“Comparison of the first selected work with the proposed text” and “Comparison of the second selected work with the proposed text”) are the main ones. When assessing, the sequence of examples for comparison is determined by their sequence in the work of the examinee.
If for both criteria 1 and 2 put 0 points, then the task is considered unfulfilled and is not checked further. According to other criteria, 0 points are set in the "Protocol for checking answers to tasks" of form No. 2.
If according to criterion 3 (“Involving the text of the work for argumentation”), 0 points are given, then according to criterion 4 (“Logic and compliance with speech norms”), the work is not evaluated, in the “Protocol for checking answers to tasks” of form No. 2, according to criterion 4, 0 is set points.
Performing the task, the examinee independently selects two works for contextual comparison (it is permissible to refer to another work by the author of the source text). When specifying the author, initials are necessary only to distinguish between namesakes and relatives, if this is essential for an adequate perception of the content of the answer (for example, L.N. Tolstoy and A.K. Tolstoy, V.L. Pushkin and A.S. Pushkin).
| Criteria | Points |
| 1. Comparison of the first selected work with the proposed text | |
|
but) The work is named, and its author is indicated, work direction of analysis |
2 |
|
b) product convincingly compared with the proposed text in the given direction of analysis, OR the work is named, and / or its author is indicated, the work is superficial, formal 2 compared with the proposed |
1 |
| 0 | |
| 2. Comparison of the second selected work with the proposed text | |
|
but) The work is named, and its author is indicated, work convincingly compared with the proposed text in the givendirection of analysis |
2 |
|
b) Only the work is named without indicating the author orauthor only, no work specified, work convincingly compared with the proposed text in the givendirection of analysis, OR the work is named, and/or its author, work is indicated superficial, formal compared with the proposedtext in the specified direction of analysis |
1 |
|
c) The work is not named, and its author is not indicated, and / or the work is not compared with the proposed text in the given direction of analysis |
0 |
|
3. Involving the text of the work for argumentation |
|
|
a) works both texts are involved at the level of analysisfragments that are important for completing the task, images , microthemes , details , etc . P ., author's position of the original and selectedworks are not distorted, no actual errors |
4 |
|
b) For argumentation, the texts of two selected works, but the text of one work is involved inthe level of analysis of fragments important for completing the task, images, microthemes, details, etc. n ., and the text of the other - at the level of his retelling or general reasoning about the content, author's the position of the original and selected works is not distorted, AND / OR one factual error |
3 |
|
in) For argumentation, the texts of two selectedworks at the level of retelling or general reasoning abouttheir content (without analyzing the important fragments , images , microthemes , details , etc . p .), author's the position of the original and selected works is not distorted, OR the text of one selected work is involved inthe level of analysis of fragments important for completing the task, images , microthemes , details , etc . P ., and the text of another selectedworks are not involved, author's position of the original andselected works is not distorted, AND / OR there are two factual errors |
2 |
|
d) For argumentation, the text of the only selected work is involved at the level of a retelling of the work or general reasoning about its content (without analyzing fragments, images, microthemes, details, etc. important for completing the task), OR the text of one selected work is involved at the level of a retelling of the work or general reasoning about its content (without analyzing fragments, images, microthemes, details, etc. important for completing the task), and the text of another selected work is not involved, AND/OR there are three factual errors |
1 |
|
e) For the argumentation of judgments, the text of none of theselected works, AND / OR the author's position of the only one is distortedselected work, or two selected works, or original and selected(s) works, and / OR there are four or more factual errors |
0 |
|
4. Logic and compliance with speech norms |
|
|
a) There are no logical and speech errors |
2 |
|
b) No more than one error of each type is made: logical and / or speech (total no more than two errors) |
1 |
|
c) Two or more errors of the same type are made (regardless of the presence / absence of errors of other types) |
0 |
| Maximum score | 10 |
2 Formal comparison is considered to be the case when the examinee is limited to repetition of words from the task statement to indicate the aspect of comparison.
Evaluation of tasks 17.1–17.4 requiring writing a detailed reasoned answer in the essay genre of at least 200 words
Among the five criteria by which the essay is evaluated, the first criterion (substantive aspect) is the main one. If, when checking the work, the expert puts 0 points according to the first criterion, the task of part 2 is considered not completed and is not checked further. According to other criteria, 0 points are set in the "Protocol for checking detailed answers".
When evaluating the performance of tasks of the part 2 volume should be taken into account.written essay. Examinees are recommended a volume of at least 200 words. If the essay contains less 150 words ( all are included in the word count words , including service), then such work is considered not completed
and scored 0 points*.
With an essay of 150 to 200 words, the maximum number errors for each point level does not change.
If in the wording of the topic of a poetry essay there is an indication reveal it on the example of at least three works(poems, lyric poems), then when evaluating such an essay according to the criterion 2 the number of attracted lyrical works is taken into account: at Involving only two works, the score cannot be higher than two points , when attracting one work, the rating cannot be higher one point.
The number of the alternative shall be entered in column 20 of the protocol.
| 1. Correspondence of the essay to the topic and its disclosure |
Points |
| a) The essay is written on a given topic, the topic is disclosed deeply, multilaterally | 3 |
| b) The essay is written on a given topic, the topic is disclosed superficially, one-sidedly | 2 |
| c) The essay is written on a given topic, the topic is disclosed superficially, one-sidedly | 1 |
| d) The topic is not disclosed | 0 |
|
2. Involving the text of the work for argumentation |
|
|
but) For argumentation, the text is involved at the level of analysis of importantto complete the task of fragments, images , microthemes , details , etc . P ., the author's position is not distorted,no actual errors |
3 |
| (without analysis important for disclosureessay topics, images , microthemes , details , etc . P .), OR the argument is replaced by a retelling of the text,the author's position is not distorted, AND / OR there are three factual errors | 1 |
|
c) Judgments are not supported by the text of the work(s), OR four or more factual errors were made in the argumentation (with any level of involvement of the text of the work(s)) |
0 |
| 3. Reliance on theoretical and literary concepts | |
|
a) Literary-theoretic concepts are included in the essay and used to analyze the text of the work(s) in order to reveal the theme of the essay, there are no errors in the use of concepts |
2 |
|
b) Literary-theoretic concepts are included in the essay, but not used to analyze the text of the work(s), AND / OR one mistake was made in the use of concepts |
1 |
| c) Literary-theoretic concepts are not included in the essay, or more than one mistake was made in the use of concepts | 0 |
| 4. Compositional integrity and consistency | |
|
And his semantic parts are logically connected, there are no semantic parts insidesequence irregularities and unreasonable repetitions |
3 |
|
b) The composition is characterized by compositional integrity, |
1 |
|
in) There is no compositional intent in the composition; gross violations of the sequence of parts are allowed sayings, make it difficult to understand the meaning essays |
0 |
| 5. Compliance with speech norms | |
| a) There are no speech errors, or one speech error is made | 3 |
| b) Two or three speech errors were made | 2 |
| c) Four speech errors were made | 1 |
| d) Five or more speech errors were made | 0 |
| Maximum score | 14 |
* The rules for counting words are the same as the rules for the Unified State Examination in the Russian language: “When counting words, both independent and service parts of speech are taken into account. Any sequence of words written without a space is counted (for example, "after all" - one word, "yet" - two words). Initials with a surname are considered one word (for example, "M.Yu. Lermontov" - one word). Any other characters, in particular numbers, are not taken into account when calculating (for example, "5 years" - one word, "five years" - two words).
Loading...