ap® english literature and composition 2016 scoring guidelines

ENGLISH LITERATURE AND COMPOSITION

2016

SCORING GUIDELINES

Question 3: Intentional Deception

The score should reflect the quality of the essay as a whole — its content, style, and mechanics. Reward

the students for what they do well. The score for an exceptionally well-written essay may be raised by 1

point above the otherwise appropriate score. In no case may a poorly written essay be scored higher than a 3.

9–8 These essays offer a well-focused and persuasive analysis of the motives for the character’s

deception and how the deception contributes to the meaning of the work as a whole. Using apt and specific

textual support, these essays analyze what motivates the character’s deception and how the work as a whole

is shaped by it. Although these essays may not be error-free, they make a strong case for their interpretation

and discuss the literary work with significant insight and understanding. Essays scored a 9 reveal more

sophisticated analysis and more effective control of language than do essays scored an 8.

7–6 These essays offer a reasonable analysis of the motives for the character’s deception and how the

eception contributes to the meaning of the work as a whole. These essays analyze what motivates the

character’s deception and how the work as a whole is shaped by it. While these papers demonstrate insight

and understanding, their analysis is less thorough, less perceptive, and/or less specific in supporting detail

than that of the 9–8 essays. Essays scored a 7 present better-developed analysis and more consistent

command of the elements of effective composition than do essays scored a 6.

5 These essays respond to the assigned task with a plausible reading, but they tend to be superficial or

hinly developed in analysis. They often rely upon plot summary that contains some analysis, implicit or

explicit. Although the writers attempt to discuss what motivates the character’s deception, they may

demonstrate a rather simplistic understanding of its significance, and support from the text may be too

general. While these writers demonstrate adequate control of language, their essays may be marred by

surface errors. These essays are not as well conceived, organized, or developed as 7–6 essays.

4–3 These lower-half essays fail to offer an adequate analysis of the motives for a character’s deception

d how that deception contributes to the meaning of the work as a whole. The analysis may be partial,

unsupported, or irrelevant, and the essays may reflect an incomplete or oversimplified understanding of the

significance of what motivates the character’s deception. They may not develop an analysis of the

contribution of the character’s deception to the meaning of the work as a whole, or they may rely on plot

summary alone. These essays may be characterized by an unfocused or repetitive presentation of ideas, an

absence of textual support, or an accumulation of errors; they may lack control over the elements of college-

level composition. Essays scored a 3 may contain significant misreading and/or inept writing.

2–1 Although these essays make some attempt to respond to the prompt, they compound the

eaknesses of the papers in the 4–3 range. Often, they are unacceptably brief or incoherent in presenting

their ideas. They may be poorly written on several counts and contain distracting errors in grammar and

mechanics. The student’s remarks may be presented with little clarity, organization, or supporting evidence.

Essays scored a 1 contain little coherent discussion of the text.

0 These essays give a response that is completely off topic or inadequate; there may be some mark or a

rawing or a brief reference to the task.

— Th

ese essays are entirely blank.

Visit the College Board on the Web: www.collegeboard.org.

ENGLISH LITERATURE AND COMPOSITION

2016 SCORING COMMENTARY

Question 3

Overview

For Question 3, the “Open” question, students were asked to choose a novel or play in which a character

deliberately deceives others and then write an essay in which they analyze the motives for the character’s

deception and how the deception contributes to the meaning of the work as a whole. This year’s prompt, like

many previous “Open” question prompts, was deliberately worded so that students are challenged to focus

first on analyzing a specific element or dimension of a novel or play, in this case a character’s deception and

the motives for it, and then on broadening or expanding the analysis to address how the specific element

informs or impacts the work as a whole. Because students have the ability to choose the text they will

analyze for this question, many of these essays are far stronger than either of the more focused essays on

poetry or prose analysis. A hallmark of the “Open” question continues to be the broad and impressive range

of texts that students are able to base their analysis on.

Sample: 3A – An American Tragedy

Score: 8

This essay makes a persuasive argument that Clyde Griffith’s multiple acts of deception in pursuit of social

d financial advancement emblematize “the rapacious greed of Industrial America” and testify to “the

unsatiable [sic] desire of the consumer society.” The essay insightfully details how early acts of deception

give rise to others, each more morally corrupt than the last, culminating in the murder of Clyde’s lover,

Roberta. The essay builds to its conclusions about the meaning of the work as a whole through this sustained

focus on Clyde and his actions. It deftly analyzes Clyde’s motives and offers apt and specific textual support

for every point. While the essay offers a convincing, confident, and fine-grained analysis of the novel, its use

of language is not quite as carefully controlled. The essay contains some unwieldy sentences, for example:

“Although Dreiser’s novel is entertaining by putting Clyde in dangerous situations, forcing him to make

morally difficult decisions, and exploiting readers’ seemingly popular interest in a villanous [sic], yet good

hearted protagonist, the plotline, and Clyde’s fate, speak for the fate of Industrial culture.” Weak syntax and

poor phrasing, such as “An American Tradgedy [sic] is a warning, and a lesson, to the changes in human

spirit that occur once the mind is introduced to the idea that one should, and can, have everything they

want,” detract somewhat from the fluidity of the essay even though they do not weaken the argument. Such

language concerns prevent the essay from rising to the very top of the scoring guide; this essay earned a

score of 8.

Sample: 3B – Jane Eyre

Score: 5

This essay addresses the prompt and offers a plausible reading of the novel but does not have the

compositional control, focused argument, or clear structure of the essays that earned the highest scores. It

identifies three instances of deceit in the novel: Rochester’s family’s ‘trick’ of marrying him to Bertha,

Rochester’s representation of himself to Jane as single, and his deception of Bertha in courting Jane. The

latter two are attributed to Rochester’s being “a man with no morals” who seeks “his own selfish pleasure”

and whose first wife “didn’t qualify for his standars [sic].” While these observations are accurate and directly

address the prompt, the essay does not sufficiently explain how they shape the novel. Where the essay

attempts a discussion of theme, it manages only superficial analysis expressed in ungainly prose: “Rochester

[sic] deceit had a negative effect because he allowed Jane to loose [sic] her true self with God due to his lie of

love for her.” The essay fails to explore how Jane’s loss of self enlarges the meaning of the work as a whole or

how it forms the moral center of the novel. Instead of analysis, it relies heavily on extensive plot summary.

The essay is also marred by distracting surface errors, as well as poor syntax, grammar, and diction.

Visit the College Board on the Web: www.collegeboard.org.

ENGLISH LITERATURE AND COMPOSITION

2016 SCORING COMMENTARY

Question 3 (continued)

Sample: 3C – Great Expectations

Score: 3

This poorly written essay begins by echoing parts of the prompt that have no bearing on the essay that

ollows: “There is a truth that comes with every lies [sic] and that truth may unveils [sic] the undetected lies

that would either spare someone’s feelings or mislead others for personal safety.” Yet it does accurately

identify Miss Havisham as a character who deceives Pip and makes “Estella beautiful, decieving [sic] and

sentimental-less toward any men.” The essay offers a brief discussion of Miss Havisham’s “self-satisfying”

motives but resorts to plot summary rather than exploring those motives to analyze how they shape the work

and its theme. It exhibits an oversimplified understanding of the work and offers inadequate analysis

couched in inept language. This essay is therefore typical of essays at this level of the scoring range. This

essay earned a score of 3 because, despite its attempt to respond to the prompt, it is especially partial, poorly

supported, and unconvincing.

Visit the College Board on the Web: www.collegeboard.org.