The Archbishops’ Certificate in Public Worship Mark Scheme

Component 1: Previous Experience

No marks are awarded for this Component. To pass, a candidate must satisfy the examiners by submitting either

  • one of the pieces of evidence listed in the syllabus for Component 1 (under the heading ‘You must submit ONE of the following’)

Examiners must be satisfied that the evidence provided is genuine, and that it fulfils the requirements of the syllabus. If they consider it necessary they may, at their discretion, seek additional information from the candidate and/or the writer of a testimonial.

When satisfied, the examiners must indicate their approval briefly on the ACertPW Mark Sheet.

If, after careful consideration, the examiners are of the opinion that the evidence provided is not genuine, or that it does not fulfil the requirements of the syllabus, the candidate will not gain a pass in Component 1. The examiners must indicate reason(s) for their dissatisfaction on the ACertPW Mark Sheet.

A candidate who fails to make a satisfactory submission for Component 1 may re-submit evidence for this Component not more than two years after the unsuccessful attempt.

Component 2: Courses and Training

Again, no marks are awarded for this Component. Note, however, that some marks in Component 4 are allocated to discussion of issues arising from the candidate’s involvement in approved courses and events.

To pass in Component 2 a candidate must satisfy the examiners by providing evidence (of the kinds required by the syllabus) that they have attended two appropriate courses provided by the Guild and/or by other body or bodies as approved by the Chairman of the Academic Board.

Part of the required evidence is the writing of an account of each course or event. The examiners will expect each account to be of the prescribed length, to be well written in the candidate’s own words (with few if any errors of spelling, punctuation and grammar), and to provide a clear impression of the nature of the course or event chosen, and its outcomes and opportunities.

Examiners must be satisfied that the evidence provided is genuine and that it fulfils the requirements of the syllabus. If they consider it necessary they may, at their discretion, seek additional information from the candidate and/or other party or parties.

When satisfied, the examiners must indicate their approval briefly on the ACertPW Mark Sheet.

If, after careful consideration, the examiners are of the opinion that the evidence provided is not genuine, or that it does not fulfil the requirements of the syllabus, the candidate will not gain a pass in Component 2. The examiners must indicate reason(s) for their dissatisfaction on the ACertPW Mark Sheet.

A candidate who fails to make a satisfactory submission for Component 2 may re-submit evidence for this Component not more than two years after the unsuccessful attempt. A re-submission will involve participation in new courses – not simply revised accounts of any previously attended.

Component 3: Practical and Written Work (60%)

30 marks are available for each section. Candidates offer EITHER Section A and Section C OR Section B and Section C.

Section A: Liturgical Creativity. Each candidate offers one activity – Hymns, Anthems or Songs, A Service Order for an Act of Worship, or Leadership. 

Hymns, Anthems or Songs

Examiners will use the following criteria as a guide, but will exercise discretion where elements from more than one band are present. A mark must be awarded from each of the four grids shown below. These four marks added together form the total mark out of 30 for the section. Marks in the Outstanding category are to be awarded in exceptional circumstances, where no more could reasonably be expected of the candidate at this level.

MarksResults
Suitability for musical setting in terms of subject matter (maximum 5 marks). The mark here may well be modified in the light of information provided during the Viva (Component 4).
1Poor
Both texts appear to be completely unsuitable for musical setting and for use before, during or after worship, and discussion in the course of the Viva does nothing to change this judgement.
2Limited
One or both texts appear to be of questionable suitability for musical setting and/or for use before, during or after worship. The Viva may clarify areas of uncertainty.
3Good
Both texts are suitable for musical setting and/or for use before, during or after worship, but in the Viva the candidate is unable to explain their usefulness in any detail.
4Excellent
Both texts are suitable for purpose, and the candidate is aware of, and in the Viva able to explain, the function of at least one of them in some detail.
5Outstanding

MarksResults
Presentation (maximum 5 marks)
1Poor
Either or both texts may be incomplete.
Much is hard to understand and/or full of errors (some or all of these: punctuation, grammar, spelling, typographical errors.
Layout is untidy and/or unsystematic.
2Limited
Either or both texts may be incomplete.
Some passages are hard to decipher and/or have serious errors of the kinds identified in the descriptor above.
In places, layout is untidy and/or unsystematic.
3Good
The texts are complete.
The writing is generally clear and has few errors.
Layout is generally tidy and systematic.
4Excellent
The texts are complete.
There are at most one or two errors or slips.
Layout is clear and systematic, but perhaps with one or two minor misjudgements.
5Outstanding

MarksResults
The first text: Quality of expression, coherence, metre, rhyme (if used), etc. (maximum 10 marks)
1-3Poor
The text lacks coherence, and shows little or no skill in the handling of metre (and rhythm if attempted).
4-5Limited
The text has some positive features, but these are outweighed by difficulties and obscurities.
6-7Good
The texts are competent in most respects, although there are occasional lapses (for example in clarity of expression or in the handling of metre).
8-9Excellent
The texts are very well written, though they may possibly contain one or two flaws or inconsistencies.
10Outstanding

MarksResults
The second text: Quality of expression, coherence, metre, rhyme, etc. (maximum 10 marks).
1-3Poor
The submission probably falls short of the 4-minute minimum, and lacks any clear sense of structure or coherence.
4-5Limited
In each piece a basic form is attempted, but is mismanaged, and there may be passages that lack coherence.
6-7Good
In each piece a basic form is handled successfully but without obvious enterprise (for example the second A section in a ternary form may be a literal repeat of the first A section), or there may be attempts at originality which misfire.
8-9Excellent
In each piece a basic form is treated with some enterprise (for example the second A section in a ternary form may be successfully extended, compressed, or otherwise adapted), or there may be some successful demonstrations of originality.
10Outstanding

A Service Order for an Act of Worship

Examiners will use the following criteria as a guide, but will exercise discretion where elements from more than one band are present. A mark must be awarded from each of the four areas shown below. These four marks added together form the total mark out of 30 for the section. Marks in the Outstanding category are to be awarded in exceptional circumstances, where no more could reasonably be expected of the candidate at this level.

MarksResults
Design and layout (maximum 5 marks)
1Poor
Very little attention has been given to design and layout.
2Limited
Some attention has been given to design and layout, but the overall impression is untidy (e.g. with a clearly unworkable mixture of fonts or font sizes).
3Good
Design and layout are generally satisfactory, but there may be some fairly minor failings (e.g. some awkward page turns).
4Excellent
Design and layout are proficient, workable and consistent, even if there may be a few very minor failings or missed opportunities (such as a title page that lacks appeal and impact).
5Outstanding

MarksResults
Accuracy (including spelling and punctuation) and completeness (maximum 10 marks)
1-3Very poor
The work is very incomplete - possibly with whole items missing, and/or showing a serious lack of detail (e.g. containing very few if any rubrics, and/or failing to provide full texts for congregational items).
There are likely to be frequent spelling errors, typographical errors, and/or much missing or incorrect punctuation.
4-5Limited.
The work may occasionally be incomplete (possibly with one or two whole items missing) and/or with some lack of detail (e.g. the omission of some rubric(s), and failing to provide full text(s) for one or two congregational items).
There are likely to be some spelling errors, typographical errors, and/or there may be some missing or incorrect punctuation.
6-7Good.
The work is complete, apart perhaps from some isolated points of detail).
Spelling and punctuation are correct and complete, except perhaps for a handful of small lapses or omissions. There are very few (if any) typographical errors.
8-9Excellent.
The work is complete, apart perhaps from one or two tiny omissions.
Spelling and punctuation are complete and correct throughout, apart perhaps from one or two small lapses or omissions. There are at most one or two typographical errors.
10Outstanding

MarksResults
Appropriateness for stated occasion (maximum 5 marks)
1Poor
The material included in the order is entirely or almost entirely inappropriate for the stated occasion.
2Limited
The material included in the order is, in places or in some respects, inappropriate for the stated occasion (e.g. an All-Age Worship service may fail to cater for the very young or the elderly).
3Good
The material included in the order is appropriate in all important respects for the stated occasion.
4Excellent
The material included in the order is entirely appropriate for the stated occasion, apart perhaps from some small reservation(s).
5Outstanding

MarksResults
Structure and content of the order (maximum 10 marks). It is unreasonable to ask for an order which is completely original and ground-breaking, but for marks of 6 and above, examiners should ensure, so far as is possible, that the work is not too heavily indebted to liturgical models, and that there is some consistency and sense of unity in the work.
1-3Poor
The order lacks clear structure.
The contents lack consistency, unity and/or imagination.
4-5Limited
Parts of the order lack clear structure.
There is some lack of consistency and unity, and very little imagination is evident.
6-7Good
Most of the order is clearly structured.
Regarding content, see the introduction to this section of the mark scheme. Some imagination is evident.
8-9Excellent
The order is clearly structured throughout.
In terms of content, see above. The service shows some imagination, and is likely to be effective and appealing in practice.
10Outstanding

Leadership

Examiners will use the following criteria as a guide, but will exercise discretion where elements from more than one band are present. A mark must be awarded from each of the three areas shown below. These three marks added together form the total mark out of 30 for the section. Marks in the Outstanding category are to be awarded in exceptional circumstances, where no more could reasonably be expected of the candidate at this level.

MarksResults
Communication skills (maximum 10 marks)
1-3Poor
Faltering; it is often/almost always hard to hear what is being said
Very little or no engagement with the people being taught.
4-5Limited
Often hesitant; hard to hear at times.
Limited engagement with the people being taught.
6-7Good
Generally clear and easy to hear – perhaps inclined to speak too rapidly or too slowly.
Generally good engagement with the people being taught, with awareness of the needs of individuals as well as of the whole group.
8-9Excellent
Clear and easy to hear throughout.
Very good engagement with the people being taught. Able to anticipate the needs of individuals as well as of the whole group.
10Outstanding

MarksResults
Effectiveness of teaching (maximum 15 marks)
1-5Poor
Apparently unfamiliar with the material to be taught.
Little or no progress made during the session.
6-8Limited
Insufficiently familiar with one or both of the pieces to be taught and/or unable to progress beyond broad outlines.
Limited progress made during the session, because errors in the work of the group under direction are missed.
Little attention is paid to matters of expression and interpretation.
9-11Good
Sound knowledge of the pieces to be taught.
Good progress made during the session. The candidate misses one or two insignificant errors in the work of the group under direction.
Some attention is paid to matters of expression and interpretation.
12-14Excellent
Thorough knowledge of the pieces to be taught.
Considerable progress made during the session. The candidate misses at most one or two insignificant errors in the work of the group under direction.
Considerable attention is paid to matters of expression and interpretation.
15Outstanding

MarksResults
Time management (maximum 5 marks)
1Poor
The presentation lasts significantly more or less than the required time limit of 20–30 minutes.
Much time is wasted with inessential matters and/or is allocated without apparent regard to the relative demands of the two pieces to be taught.
2Limited
The presentation is more or less than the required time limit.
Some time is wasted with inessential matters and/or is allocated with insufficient regard to the relative demands of the two pieces to be taught.
3Good
The presentation may run slightly over or under the required time limit.
Little or no time is wasted with inessential matters.
Time is allocated with some clear regard to the relative demands of the two pieces to be taught, although time management generally could probably be more efficient.
4Excellent
No time is wasted with inessential matters.
Time is allocated with a clear regard throughout to the relative demands of the two pieces to be taught.
5Outstanding

Section B: Section B: Knowledge and Experience of Liturgy and Worship (30%)

Portfolio

MarksResults
Number of services described, their variety, and description (maximum 15 marks). There is no penalty if a candidate writes about more than 20–25 services, but this will not necessarily mean that the final total mark for the portfolio is high.
1-5Poor
Fewer than 10 services described, with (very) little detail and/or (very) limited variety.
6-8Limited
More than 10, but fewer than 20 services described, probably with (very) little detail and/or (very) limited variety.
9-11Good
20–25 services described, with some detail in most cases, but perhaps with little variety.
12-14Excellent
20–25 services described, with considerable detail in most if not all cases, and with some variety.
15Outstanding
20–25 services described, with considerable detail in all cases. A strong effort has been made to cover a variety of types of worship.

MarksResults
To what extent music enhances the liturgy/worship (maximum 10 marks)
1-3Poor
Few (or very few) comments are made on the relationship between music and liturgy/worship.
4-5Limited
Some comments are made on the relationship between music and liturgy/worship, but considerable parts of the submission do not go beyond straight description.
6-7Good
A clear attempt is made, in the case of most services, to comment perceptively on how music enhances the liturgy/worship.
8-9Excellent
Numerous perceptive comments are made on how music enhances the liturgy/worship, with some awareness of its limitations (the syllabus uses the expression ‘to what extent’).
10Outstanding

MarksResults
General conclusions/general impression (maximum 5 marks)
1Poor
No real attempt is made to draw any general conclusions from the evidence presented.
The submission seems haphazard, badly organised and poorly presented.
2Limited
Few attempts are made to draw general conclusions from the evidence presented.
The submission has some basic structure, but presentation leaves much to be desired.
3Good
Useful attempts are made to draw general conclusions from the evidence presented.
The submission shows evidence of considerable care in terms of structure and presentation.
4Excellent
Some effective general conclusions are reached, based on the evidence presented.
The submission has been very carefully, clearly and accurately presented.
5Outstanding

Written examination

MarksResults
Two short answers (maximum 5 marks each)
1One correct and relevant piece of information.
2Two correct and relevant pieces of information.
3Three correct and relevant pieces of information.
4Four correct and relevant pieces of information.
5Five or more correct and relevant pieces of information.

MarksResults
Essay question (maximum 20 marks)
1-7Poor
Sketchy and/or incomplete, lacking structured presentation, and/or showing a fundamental misunderstanding of the question.
Information provided is largely or wholly irrelevant and/or incorrect.
The writing is seriously defective (e.g. much is hard to understand and/or full of errors of punctuation, grammar and/or spelling).
8-11Limited
Addresses some aspects of the question, without any real sense of structure or argument.
A considerable amount of information may be irrelevant and/or incorrect.
The writing is at times defective (e.g. some sentences are hard to understand and/or have serious errors of punctuation, grammar and/or spelling).
12-15Good
Addresses most or all aspects of the question competently and fairly systematically.
Most information is relevant and correct.
The writing is generally clear and has few if any lapses of punctuation, grammar and spelling.
Some ability to make judgements and draw conclusions, but there may well be little or no real independence of thought.
16-19Excellent
The essay addresses all aspects of the question in detail, in a systematic way.
All (or almost all) points are correct and relevant.
Some considerable ability to make judgements and draw conclusions, but real independence of thought may still not be plentiful.
20Outstanding
Some considerable independence of thought; the work may even be suitable for publication.

Section C: Reflecting on Liturgy and Worship (30%)

MarksResults
Essay (maximum 30 marks)
1-11Poor
Sketchy and/or incomplete, and lacks structured presentation, and/or shows a fundamental misunderstanding of the chosen topic.
Information is largely or wholly irrelevant and/or incorrect.
The writing is seriously defective (e.g. much is hard to understand and/or full of errors of punctuation, grammar and/or spelling).
12-17Limited
Addresses some aspects of the chosen topic, without any real sense of structure or argument.
A considerable amount of information may be irrelevant and/or incorrect.
The writing is at times defective (e.g. some sentences are hard to understand and/or have serious errors of punctuation, grammar and/or spelling).
18-23Good
Addresses most or all aspects of the chosen topic competently and fairly systematically. Most information is relevant and correct.
The writing is generally clear and has few if any lapses of punctuation, grammar and spelling.
There is some ability to make judgements and draw conclusions, but there may well be little or no real independence of thought.
24-29Excellent
Addresses all aspects of the chosen topic in detail, in a systematic way.
All (or almost all) points are correct and relevant.
Some considerable ability to make judgements and draw conclusions, but real independence of thought may still not be plentiful.
30Outstanding
Some considerable independence of thought; the work may even be suitable for publication.

Component 4: Extended Viva (40%)

40 marks may be awarded for the component – consisting of five groups of 8 marks as shown below.

The two examiners will mark independently, and then confer in order to agree on a final mark.

Discussion of Component 2 (8 marks)

Candidates will have the opportunity to discuss the courses and/or training attended for Component 2, including the reasons for their choices. They may be asked to clarify, or to enlarge on, information that they have provided in their written accounts.

MarksResults
1-2Poor
Answers are generally too short and/or uninformative
Answers show little clarity or relevance.
3-4Limited
Some answers show some sound knowledge, but may not be well expressed
Others answers are inappropriately brief, lacking detail, and/or have dubious relevance.
5-6Good
Most answers go beyond short undeveloped remarks, and show sound knowledge, clarity and relevance
Some genuine sense of personal involvement.
7-8Excellent
All or almost all answers are clearly focused and effectively expressed, showing extensive first-hand knowledge
Some ability to argue persuasively, with a genuine sense of personal involvement and ownership.

Discussion of Component 3 (8 + 8 marks)

Candidates will have the opportunity to discuss the two sections submitted for Component 3. They may be asked to clarify, or to enlarge on, written information (such as the programme note for Leadership Skills in Section A).

The 8-mark grid provided above must be used twice – to provide for both of the two sections from Component 3.

Broader Discussion (8 + 8 marks)

The syllabus refers to discussion of the ‘structure and content of the services in which you participate, and the role of music in them’.

Although marking may take separate account of these two elements, it may be more convenient to consider them together: in this case the following 16-mark grid is to be used. Otherwise the 8-mark grid above should be used twice – once for each of the two elements.

MarksResults
1-4Poor
Answers are generally too short and/or uninformative
Answers show little clarity or relevance.
5-8Limited
Some answers show some sound knowledge, but may not be well expressed
Others answers are inappropriately brief, lacking detail, and/or have dubious relevance.
9-12Good
Most answers go beyond short undeveloped remarks, and show sound knowledge, clarity and relevance
Some genuine sense of personal involvement.
13-15Excellent
All or almost all answers are clearly focused and effectively expressed, showing extensive first-hand knowledge
Some ability to argue persuasively, with a genuine sense of personal involvement and ownership.
16Outstanding