ST.

PAUL COLLEGE OF MAKATI

D.M. Rivera St., Poblacion, Makati City

Narrative of the Authentic Task:

You are a member of the Paulinian Scribes and you were assigned by your Editor-in-Chief to write a play critique on “The Phantom of the Opera” performed at the
Royal Albert Hall in 2011. This will be part of the Arts and Culture page of your school paper’s upcoming issue. You are expected by your EIC to write with proper
structure, to scrutinize the summary, performance, and technical elements, and to have your own reaction to the play.

EXCEEDING MEETING APPROACHING BEGINNING

CRITERIA
8-10 points
Your writing is structured, clear,
and paragraphs are linked with
strong transitions.
Structure
Opening paragraph is concise
and
and contains all necessary
Introduction
information. Biographies of the
15%
playwright and director are
included. History of the theatre.
No mechanical errors.
Paragraph includes a brief
overview of the beginning,
Plot middle, and end of the show.
overview of the elements of the
Summary Reader does not 'give it away' &
story. Reader can grasp most of
15% has no difficulty knowing what
the basics of the play are. The
history of the play is also given.
6-7 points
You have clear opening, body
and conclusion paragraphs.
Paragraphs are structured
correctly.
You have almost all elements
necessary in the opening
paragraph.
There are one to three
mechanical errors.
Paragraph included a brief
what the story is.
4-5 points
Clear, though structure is weak.
Work on sentence structure
and/or paragraphing.
You have one or two elements
necessary in the opening
paragraph.
You have four to six mechanical
errors.
Plot summary only highlighted
one part of the story
(beginning, middle, or end).
Reader has a hard time figuring
out what the story is.
TOTAL
0-3 points
Disorganized. Topics are related
with little sense of structure.
You have not followed the
format for the opening
paragraph.
There are numerous mechanical
errors
Plot summary was missing,
incoherent, or wrong. Reader
cannot ascertain what the story
is about from the review.

The critique of the acting & The review includes some

There is no evaluation of the
directing is precise. Writer gives The critique is specific, including reference to the acting &
Performance actor’s performances & directing
evidence to support their many details and analysis. The directing. It makes observations
25% or evaluation is incomplete and
statements. It includes insightful writer supports each statement. without supporting their
unspecific.
detail and drama vocabulary. statements with examples.
 Costume evaluation is
descriptive and thoughtful.
Writer describes several
costumes and discusses how
the costumes tie to character.
Technical
Review addresses both lights
Elements
and set in detail. Evaluates how
25%
they were used and their
effectiveness. Writer describes
how the set was made.
Evidence of the 'Q & A' after the
show is evident.
Goes above and beyond
discussing their opinion of the
Reaction
play and defended their stance.
20%
They have compared the play
they saw to the original script.
Writer describes the main
costumes and includes
discussion of how it ties to
character. Needs to include
more depth.
Review addresses lights and set.
Could have used more detail.
Evaluates how they were used
and their effectiveness.
Discusses many opinions of the
play and defends most of their
stance.
There is no evaluation of
costume and no descriptions.
Writer describes costumes but
Writer needs to tie the
does not include how the
costumes back to the
costumes reveal character.
characters.
Describes lights and sets but
Review is missing a description
does not evaluate how they
of one or both the lights and the
were used or their
set. There is no evaluation of
effectiveness.
how they were used or their
effectiveness.
Discusses some opinions of the Discusses very few to no
play and defends some of their opinions of the play with no
stance. defense.