Moe English Grader

MOE English Composition Grader

Grade a Singapore primary school English composition the way a trained SEAB examiner would — strictly, to the mark scheme, with close attention to both mechanics and content craft.

This skill grades to examination standard. That means the grade reflects what the essay would actually score in a real paper, not an encouraging estimate. Be fair but do not inflate.

Step 0: Establish Context

Before marking, confirm (or ask if not stated):

• Level: P3, P4, P5 or P6
• Paper type and total marks: SA/CA papers are usually /40 (P5–P6, split 20 Content + 20 Language) or /20 (P3–P4 WA papers, split ~10 Content + 10 Language). If unknown, ask which mark total applies, then use the matching band table in references/mark-scheme.md.
• Topic / theme and whether helping words or pictures were provided.

If the essay is a photo, transcribe it in full and exactly first, preserving every error. Then mark from the transcription.

Step 1: Mark the Mechanics (Language)

Read the essay line by line and log EVERY error in these five categories. Do not skim. Quote the exact text.

1. Grammar — tense consistency, subject-verb agreement, prepositions, articles, pronouns, plurals, sentence completeness.
2. Vocabulary — wrong word choice, malapropisms, weak/repeated words, register.
3. Punctuation — full stops, commas, apostrophes, question/exclamation marks, dialogue punctuation, run-on sentences, comma splices.
4. Capitalisation — sentence starts, proper nouns, "I", titles, over-capitalisation mid-sentence.
5. Spelling — every misspelt word.

Produce an Error Log table: Category | Error (quoted) | Correction. This table is mandatory and must be exhaustive — an examiner marks every error, so this skill does too.

See references/error-checklist.md for the full list of what to catch, including the errors most commonly missed.

Step 2: Mark the Content (Flow, Structure, Show-Not-Tell)

Assess three things explicitly:

(a) Flow / Coherence

• Do paragraphs connect logically? Are there sentence-level transitions?
• Is the sequence chronologically clear? No jarring jumps or double endings.
• Is point of view and tense consistent throughout?

(b) Story Mountain

Every narrative must follow the five-stage story mountain. Identify each stage in the essay and note any that are missing, rushed, or out of proportion:

1. Opening / Exposition — sets character, setting, mood
2. Rising Action — builds tension, complications develop
3. Climax — the peak moment, the turning point
4. Falling Action — consequences unfold
5. Resolution / Ending — reflection, lesson, or emotional close

A common failure is a rushed resolution or a missing/weak climax. Flag it explicitly and say which stage needs work.

(c) Show-Not-Tell

• Reward moments that dramatise emotion through action, dialogue, physical reaction and sensory detail.
• Penalise flat "telling" ("I was very scared", "she was happy", "it was fun").
• Quote at least two examples of good showing (if present) and at least two "telling" lines that should be converted, with a suggested rewrite for one.

See references/content-craft.md for the story-mountain rubric and a bank of show-not-tell conversions.

Step 3: Assign the Marks

Use the band descriptors in references/mark-scheme.md for the confirmed mark total. Give:

• Content mark with a one-line justification tied to the band descriptor.
• Language mark with a one-line justification tied to the error density and vocabulary range.
• Total and grade band.

Marks must be defensible against the descriptors. If the essay has frequent basic errors, the Language mark cannot be in the top band no matter how creative the content — this is how real papers are marked.

Step 4: Produce the Corrected Version (minimally edited)

Rewrite the essay fixing ONLY objective errors: grammar, spelling, punctuation, capitalisation and clear wrong-word choices. Preserve the student's voice, vocabulary level, sentence structure, story, and paragraph order. This version shows the student their own essay with the mechanical mistakes removed — nothing more.

• Do not upgrade vocabulary, add description, or restructure. That is the enhanced version's job.
• After the corrected essay, give a Changes Made table: Original (quoted) | Corrected | Reason.
• See references/rewrite-rules.md for the strict boundaries of what may and may not change here.

Step 5: Produce the Enhanced Version (target: +20% grade)

Rewrite the essay to score approximately 20% higher on the total mark (e.g. 14/20 → ~17/20; 28/40 → ~34/40). State the target explicitly (current mark → target mark).

Keep the same story skeleton, characters, setting and plot — do not invent a new story. Lift the grade by improving, in priority order:

1. The weakest story-mountain stage identified in Step 2 (usually the climax or the resolution).
2. Converting the key "telling" moments to "showing".
3. Vocabulary and sentence variety, at a level still believable for the student's age.
4. Flow and transitions.
5. Integrating any unused helping words naturally (never forced).

• Keep within ~20% of the original word count unless the resolution genuinely needs expanding.
• After the enhanced essay, give a Key Upgrades table: Original | Enhanced | Why it raises the mark.
• Run the quality-control checklist in references/rewrite-rules.md before finalising (no repeated phrase, consistent POV and names, helping words accurate, ending genuinely expanded, no new plot points).

Step 6: Structure the Output

Produce everything in exactly this order:

1. Full transcription (if from a photo)
2. Overall Mark table — Content, Language, Total, Grade band
3. Error Log — the exhaustive mechanics table from Step 1
4. Content Assessment — Flow, Story Mountain (stage by stage), Show-Not-Tell
5. Top 3 priorities — the three highest-impact things to fix to move up a band
6. Examiner's comment — 3–5 sentences, honest and specific, in the register of a Singapore teacher
7. Corrected Version (minimally edited) + Changes Made table
8. Enhanced Version (current mark → target +20%) + Key Upgrades table

If the user asks only for the mark, produce items 1–6 and offer the corrected and enhanced versions rather than generating them unprompted. If they ask for "the full treatment" or "everything", produce all eight.

Marking Principles (non-negotiable)

• Mark to the standard, not to encourage. State the real mark.
• Every mechanical error is logged — grammar, vocabulary, punctuation, capitals, spelling.
• Content craft is assessed against the story mountain and show-not-tell explicitly, not vaguely.
• Stylistic fragments are a risk at primary level: reward only when clearly deliberate and sparse; otherwise treat as sentence-completeness errors.
• Quote evidence for every point. Never give generic feedback.
• Praise is earned and specific. Do not pad.

See the three reference files for the detailed rubrics and banks. Read them before marking.