Analytic Scoring and Diagnostic Feedback

All recorded performances that receive an overall rating below the passing level receive an additional evaluation to provide feedback that can be used to improve communication performance in American Sign Language. In this additional round of scoring, called analytic scoring, scorers view the recorded performances to determine the analytic categories for which improvement is needed in order to receive a passing score. The analytic categories come from the performance characteristics and include:

  • range of communication
  • comprehension
  • fluency
  • vocabulary/grammar
  • use of space

Test takers who do not pass are often below Level C in several analytic categories. Scorers attempt to determine the categories that are most problematic in the responses so that test takers can focus efforts in these areas. These analytic categories are indicated on the score report as areas for improvement.

To provide candidates with a sense of how they might use the TASC–ASL Analytic
Feedback Scale
to understand these categories, an expanded interpretation of typical performance below Level C for each of these categories can be found below.


1.   Range of Communication

The candidate has difficulty communicating in American Sign Language and/or achieving the communicative purpose of the communication competencies (i.e., describe, instruct, hypothesize, problem solve, support opinion). Significant elements of the response requested in the communication competency are left out and/or miscommunicated.

2.   Comprehension

The candidate has limited ability to understand what is being communicated by the interviewer as demonstrated through the needed repetition of questions during the interview. Some clarification of communication may occur in the course of a normal conversation, but the candidate in general should be requesting expansion of the interviewer’s idea rather than asking the interviewer simply to repeat the question as it was initially given.

3.   Intelligibility

The candidate is difficult to understand, if he or she is understandable at all. Intelligibility is determined by looking more specifically at the three categories comprising these characteristics: fluency, vocabulary/grammar and use of space.

a.   Fluency

The candidate’s response is characterized by long pauses, struggles for expression, extreme brevity and/or even complete linguistic breakdown. Sign speed may be so slow or hesitant that it impedes communication. Signs may be malformed. Fingerspelling may be inaccurate or labored.

b.   Vocabulary/Grammar

The candidate fails to convey meaning because of the absence of needed vocabulary. The message is not communicated using American Sign Language and/or is seriously flawed or even severely unintelligible. The candidate’s pronunciation (as demonstrated through misused American Sign Language signs) may interfere with communication. The candidate’s lack of American Sign Language vocabulary may impede his or her ability to respond adequately.

c.    Use of Space

The candidate cannot properly make use of space and/or tends to sign outside of the appropriate area. These errors make the intelligibility of the intended message unclear. Signs may be inappropriately sized and placed, thus interfering with intelligibility.

NOTE: On the TASC–ASL, the candidate must communicate only in American Sign Language. Candidates with frequent or extensive use of non-American Sign Language signing and non-American Sign Language grammar may have one or more analytic categories reported on their score report indicating the areas for which they need improvement in American Sign Language.