HL Creating Grading Rubric

Creating (SLC, HL)

Five options are available to students who choose to study creating. Each option is assessed by applying six criteria (A–F).

Option Criterion	Composing	Music technology composing	Arranging	Improvising	Stylistic techniques
A	Control and development of musical elements	Control and development of musical elements	Control and development of musical elements	Control and development of musical elements	Control and development of musical elements
B	Musical coherence	Musical coherence	Musical coherence	Musical coherence	Musical coherence
C	Idiomatic understanding of instruments	Idiomatic understanding of instruments	Idiomatic understanding of instruments	Idiomatic understanding of instruments	Idiomatic understanding of instruments
D	Notation	Sound quality	Notation	Spontaneity	Notation
E	Impression	Impression	Impression	Impression	Impression
F	Reflection	Reflection	Reflection	Reflection	Reflection

AControl and development of musical elements

Composing, music technology composing, arranging, improvising, stylistic techniques

This criterion concerns the exploration, control and development of chosen musical elements (such as duration, pitch, timbre/tone colour, texture, dynamics).
Note: Form and structure are assessed in a separate criterion.

Marks	Level descriptor
0	The work does not reach a standard described by the descriptors below.
1	The work shows little control of the musical elements.
2	The work shows some control and development of the musical elements.
3	The work shows satisfactory control of the musical elements, and these are developed partially effectively.
4	The work shows good control of the musical elements, and these are developed mostly effectively.
5	The work consistently shows well-focused control of the musical elements, and these are developed highly effectively.

BMusical coherence

Composing, music technology composing, arranging, improvising, stylistic techniques

This criterion concerns the organization of materials into identifiable form and structure and style, thus giving the work musical coherence.

Marks	Level descriptor
0	The work does not reach a standard described by the descriptors below.
1	The work shows little musical coherence.
2	The work shows some musical coherence.
3	The work shows partially effective musical coherence.
4	The work shows mostly effective musical coherence.
5	The work consistently shows highly effective musical coherence.

CIdiomatic understanding of instruments

Composing, music technology composing, arranging, improvising, stylistic techniques

This criterion concerns the student’s understanding of the technical capabilities (and limitations) of chosen instruments as shown in the work.
An appropriate example would be a vocal quartet written for soprano, alto, tenor, bass (SATB) voices, which uses the correct ranges and registers, and which is sensitive to balance and blend between sections. An inappropriate example would be a work written for large brass band playing fortissimo accompanied by harp playing pianissimo.
For music technology compositions an appropriate example would be a composition that demonstrates a full understanding and competent use of the software and/or hardware capabilities. An inappropriate example would be a work where the student makes only partial use of the potential offered by the software and/or hardware.
In the case of improvising, this criterion concerns the student’s understanding and ability to perform with appropriate technique for the chosen instrument. An appropriate example would be a work that demonstrates fluency in articulation.

Marks	Level descriptor
0	The work does not reach a standard described by the descriptors below.
1	The work demonstrates little understanding of the technical capabilities (and limitations) of the chosen instrument or instruments.
2	The work demonstrates some understanding of the technical capabilities (and limitations) of the chosen instrument or instruments.
3	The work demonstrates satisfactory understanding of the technical capabilities (and limitations) of the chosen instrument or instruments.
4	The work demonstrates good understanding of the technical capabilities (and limitations) of the chosen instrument or instruments.
5	The work consistently demonstrates very good understanding of the technical capabilities (and limitations) of the chosen instrument or instruments.

DNotation

Composing, arranging, stylistic techniques

This criterion concerns the student’s ability to notate music correctly when composing, arranging, or studying the compositional styles of others.
While notations may take on different forms according to different styles, correctly notated works allow the intention of the composer to be realized.

Marks	Level descriptor
0	The notation does not reach a standard described by the descriptors below.
1	The notation used is inaccurate and rarely communicates the composer’s intention.
2	The notation used is sometimes accurate but only partially communicates the composer’s intention.
3	The notation used is generally accurate and communicates the composer’s intention partially effectively.
4	The notation used is generally accurate and communicates the composer’s intention mostly effectively.
5	The notation used is consistently accurate and communicates the composer’s intention highly effectively.

DSound quality

Music technology composing

This criterion concerns the control and manipulation of analogue and digital sound as shown on the submitted CD.

Marks	Level descriptor
0	The sound quality does not reach a standard described by the descriptors below.
1	The sound quality is poor, at an inappropriate signal level, and with no sense of balance. Equalizing and effects are used poorly, demonstrating little understanding of the recording process.
2	The sound quality is sometimes adequate, at an inappropriate signal level, and reflects a limited attempt to achieve balance. Equalizing and effects are used inconsistently, demonstrating partial understanding of the recording process.
3	The sound quality is adequate, mostly at an appropriate signal level, and reflects an attempt to achieve balance. Equalizing and other recording effects are adequately used, demonstrating partially effective understanding of the recording process.
4	The sound quality is good, at an appropriate signal level, and well balanced. Equalizing and other recording effects are generally used well, enhancing the quality of the work and demonstrating mostly effective understanding of the recording process.
5	The sound quality is consistently very good, at an appropriate signal level, and well balanced. Equalizing and other recording effects are used consistently well, enhancing the quality of the work and demonstrating highly effective understanding of the recording process.

DSpontaneity

Improvising

This criterion concerns spontaneity and musical expression in the improvisation. It relates to risk-taking, varied and imaginative use of musical ideas, and the interrelation between these ideas.

Marks	Level descriptor
0	The recorded improvisation does not reach a standard described by the descriptors below.
1	The recorded improvisation shows little spontaneity and musical expression.
2	The recorded improvisation shows some spontaneity and musical expression.
3	The recorded improvisation shows partially effective spontaneity and musical expression.
4	The recorded improvisation shows mostly effective spontaneity and musical expression.
5	The recorded improvisation consistently shows highly effective spontaneity and musical expression.

EImpression

Composing, music technology composing, arranging, improvising, stylistic techniques

This criterion concerns the student’s creativity, commitment and ability to communicate.

Marks	Level descriptor
0	The work does not reach a standard described by the descriptors below.
1	The work shows little creativity, shape and direction and offers little sense of communication and commitment.
2	The work shows some creativity, shape and direction. Some sense of communication and commitment is evident.
3	The work is creative, with satisfactory shape and direction. An adequate sense of communication and commitment is evident.
4	The work is creative with good shape and direction. A good sense of communication and commitment is evident.
5	The work is consistently creative and captivating, with very good shape and direction. A strong sense of communication and commitment is evident.

FReflection

Composing, music technology composing, arranging, improvising, stylistic techniques

This criterion concerns the student’s ability, in a written statement, to reflect on the intention, process and outcome of the work.

Marks	Level descriptor
0	The written reflective statement does not reach a standard described by the descriptors below.
1	The written reflective statement reflects little understanding of the intention, process and outcome.
2	The written reflective statement sometimes reflects understanding of the intention, process and outcome.
3	The written reflective statement partially reflects effective understanding of the intention, process and outcome.
4	The written reflective statement mostly reflects effective understanding of the intention, process and outcome.
5	The written reflective statement consistently reflects highly effective understanding of the intention, process and outcome.