Thank you Leonne for the great question! This has me reflecting and thinking some more.
Yes, when something is out of 2 marks, the mastery level would be worth both marks, the middle worth 1 and the developing column worth a zero. For the section out of 7 marks, the students are aware they have three body paragraphs to write, each paragraph is worth 2 marks and 1 additional for overall clarity and connections.
Putting specific points per section is something I have struggled with. On one hand this helps students identify where to spend most of their time, yet on the other hand does create some confusion between the levels. I have a hard time when the levels are open ended because I do not have a concrete or consistent way to judge the different increments. For example, a level B paper between 70 and 79%, how does that score out? What does a 75% look like in comparison to the 79%? How do you differentiate within the criteria box. What makes one student paper a 72 and another a 78 when there is not specific points. How do we justify to the student where we got the mark from? How do we stay accountable, objective, and transparent?
I have always thought that to be objective and consistent that specific points were needed. With the points I can easily say to the student in this paragraph you gave me your experience, connection to theory, and analysis, there is your points. Or on similar assignments, a reflection out of 5, I am looking for 5 good ideas or moments of learning to be made. If a student only has 3, then it is very clear that is what they receive out of the 5.
I really appreciate this discussion and welcome more comments/ideas. i am trying to figure this all out in my head to make it make sense!