The marking criteria are so similar for the unseen poetry comparison and the Shakespeare essay that I have lumped them together. The Shakespeare criteria include a little bit more, including everything marked AO3. Such additions are marked in red.

Mark		Typical features	How to arrive at a mark
Level 6 Convincing critical analysis and exploration 21-24 marks 26-30 for Shakespeare	AO1	Critical, exploratory conceptualised response to task and whole text. Judicious use of precise references to support interpretation(s).	At the top of the level, a candidate's response is likely to be a critical, exploratory, well-structured argument. It takes a conceptualised approach to the full task supported by a range of judicious references. There will be a fine-grained and insightful analysis of methods supported by judicious use of subject terminology. Convincing exploration of one or more ideas/perspectives/contextual factors/interpretations. At the bottom of the level, a candidate will have Level 5 and be starting to demonstrate elements of exploratory thought and/or analysis of writers' methods and/or contexts.
	AO2	Analysis of writer's methods with subject terminology used judiciously. Exploration of effects of writer's methods to create meanings.
	AO3	Exploration of ideas/perspectives/contextual factors shown by specific, detailed links between context/text/task.
Level 5 Thoughtful, developed consideration 17-20 marks 21-25 marks	AO1	Thoughtful, developed response to task and whole text. Apt references integrated into interpretation(s).	At the top of the level, a candidate's response is likely to be thoughtful, detailed and developed. It takes a considered approach to the full task with references integrated into interpretation; there will be a detailed examination of the effects of methods supported by apt use of subject terminology. Examination of ideas/perspectives/contextual factors, possibly including alternative interpretations/deeper meanings. At the bottom of the level, a candidate will have Level 4 and be starting to demonstrate elements of thoughtful consideration and/or examination of writers' methods and/or contexts.
	AO2	Examination of writer's methods with subject terminology used effectively to support consideration of methods. Examination of effects of writer's methods to create meanings.
	AO3	Thoughtful consideration of ideas/perspectives/contextual factors shown by examination of detailed links between context/text/task.
Level 4 Clear understanding 13-16 marks 16-20 marks	AO1	Clear, explained response to task and whole text. Effective use of references to support explanation.	At the top of the level, a candidate's response is likely to be clear, sustained and consistent. It takes a focused response to the task which demonstrates clear understanding. It uses a range of references effectively to illustrate and justify explanation; there will be clear explanation of the effects of a range of writer's methods supported by appropriate use of subject terminology. Clear understanding of ideas/perspectives/contextual factors. At the bottom of the level, a candidate will have Level 3 and be starting to demonstrate elements of understanding and/or explanation of writer's methods and/or contexts.
	AO2	Clear explanation of writer's methods with appropriate use of relevant subject terminology. Understanding of effects of writer's method to create meanings.
	AO3	Clear understanding of ideas/perspectives/ contextual factors shown by specific links between context/text/task.
Level 3 Explained structured comments 9-12 marks 11-15 marks	AO1	Some explained response to task and whole text. References used to support a range of relevant comments.	At the top of the level, a candidate's response is likely to be explanatory in parts. It focuses on the full task with a range of points exemplified by relevant references from the text; there will be identification of effects of a range of writer's methods supported by relevant use of subject terminology. Explanation of some relevant contextual factors. At the bottom of the level, a candidate will have Level 2 and be starting to explain and/or make relevant comments on writer's methods and/or contexts.
	AO2	Explained/relevant comments on writer's methods with some relevant use of subject terminology. Identification of effects of writer's methods to create meanings.
	AO3	Some understanding of implicit ideas/ perspectives/contextual factors shown by links between context/text/task.
Level 2 Supported, relevant comments 5-8 marks 6-10 marks	AO1	Supported response to task and text. Comments on references.	At the top of the level, a candidate's response is likely to be relevant and supported by some explanation. It will include some focus on the task with relevant comments and some supporting references from the text. There will be identification of deliberate choices made by the writer with some reference to subject terminology. Awareness of some contextual factors. At the bottom of the level, a candidate's response will have Level 1 and be starting to focus on the task and/or show awareness of the writer making deliberate choices and/or awareness of contexts.
	AO2	Identification of writers' methods. Some reference to subject terminology.
	AO3	Some awareness of implicit ideas/contextual factors.
Level 1 Simple, explicit comments 1-4 marks 1-5 marks	AO1	Simple comments relevant to task and text. Reference to relevant details.	At the top of the level, a candidate's response is likely to be narrative and/or descriptive in approach. It may include awareness of the task and provide appropriate reference to text; there will be simple identification of method with possible reference to subject terminology. Simple comments/responses to context, usually explicit. At the bottom of the level, a candidate's response will show some familiarity with the text.
	AO2	Awareness of writer making choices. Possible reference to subject terminology.
	AO3	Simple comment on explicit ideas/contextual factors.
0 marks	Nothing worthy of credit/nothing written.