EXCELLENT - The sign/phrase conveys the concept as closely as can be achieved, given the difference in semantic fields for the ASL and English expressions and the time constraints of a speech event.

GOOD - The sign/phrase approximates the concept, but requires the receiver to do some processing of the message to make sense of the meaning.

AVERAGE - The sign/phrase does not fit the concept very well, and requires the receiver to do a good deal of processing of the message to make sense of the meaning.

POOR - The sign/phrase does not fit the concept at all and the meaning will probably not be recovered, even with extra processing.

EXCELLENT - The sign/phrase fits the context well, displaying that the interpreter has grasped how this term is used in a special setting. For example, the difference between "derivative" in calculus and "derivative" in chemistry.

GOOD - The sign/phrase does not quite match the way that this term is used in the special setting, but could be stretched to fit without a great loss in accuracy. For example, using the sign SUBSTANCE to convey the concept "substantive" versus "functional".

AVERAGE - The sign/phrase matches the English, but requires a significant stretch of the ASL meaning and a good knowledge of English expressions. For example, "hot wire [a car]" signed HOT WIRE/LINE.

POOR - The sign/phrase will not allow the average receiver to recover the meaning, even if they have a good knowledge of English usage. For example, TRIANGLE for "triangulate".

EXCELLENT - The sign/phrase has a very close match to the specificity of the English term. For example, M-A-M-M-A-L for "mammal".

GOOD - The sign/phrase has a reasonable match to the specificity of the English term. For example, CATHOLIC-PRIEST for "Greek Orthodox priest".

AVERAGE - The sign/phrase does not match precisely, but can be used as a nonce sign. ANIMAL GROUP, FEMALE BREAST-FEED CAN for "mammal".

POOR - The sign/phrase is a mismatch and misleading, CATHOLIC-PRIEST for "Buddhist priest".

EXCELLENT - The ASL phrase used to convey the English term is extremely value-added, excelling over any single sign that might be an alternative.

GOOD - The ASL phrase used to convey the English term is significantly value-added, an improvement over any single sign that might be an alternative.

AVERAGE - The ASL phrase used to convey the English term is not much of an improvement over any single sign that might be an alternative.

POOR - The ASL phrase has no benefit over a single sign that is an alternative.

EXCELLENT - The sign/phrase that will be used is not known to the consumer as an ASL equivalent for the English term it is mean to represent, but the interpreter did negotiate with the client to use it as a representation, because the interpreter intuited the need from knowledge of the consumer's background.

GOOD - The sign/phrase that will be used is not known to the consumer as an ASL equivalent for the English term it is mean to represent, but the interpreter did negotiate with the client to use it as a representation, because the client expressed puzzlement.

AVERAGE - The sign/phrase that will be used is not known to the consumer as an ASL equivalent for the English term it is mean to represent, and the interpreter explains the term only after repeated requests for clarification, either because s/he does not know how or because of perceived time pressure..

POOR - The sign/phrase that will be used is not known to the consumer as an ASL equivalent for the English term it is mean to represent, and the interpreter is unwilling or unable to negotiate with the client, either because s/he does not know how or because of perceived time pressure.

EXCELLENT - The interpreter is able to expand on the concept because of a perceived need to do so for maximum clarity, and then to develop a shorter expansion for later occurrences of the terminology.

GOOD - The interpreter is able to expand on the concept when the client asks him/her to do so, and is somewhat successful in choosing a shorter form for later.

AVERAGE - The interpreter sometimes expands on concepts when asked to do so, and has difficulty deciding on a shorter form.

POOR - The interpreter is never willing or able to expand on concepts or determine a shorter form.

EXCELLENT - The interpreter chooses fingerspelling a concept rather than using a sign, because it is the best choice for this setting or for this consumer.

GOOD - The interpreter is able to clearly fingerspell the word or phrase for a concept rather than using a sign, when the consumer asks him/her to do so.

AVERAGE - The interpreter is sometimes able to convey a concept by fingerspelling but is not always clear.

POOR - The interpreter does not know when fingerspelling is the best option and when s/he does, can not do it clearly.

EXCELLENT - The interpreter is able to restructure the sentence so that the resulting ASL sentence captures the meaning of the technical/specialized concept expressed in the original English very closely, better than trying to transliterate it in a more lexical way.

GOOD - The interpreter is able to restructure the sentence so that the resulting ASL sentence captures the meaning of the technical/specialized concept expressed in the original English somewhat better than trying to transliterate it in a more lexical way.

AVERAGE - The attempt to restructure the sentence is only a marginal success.

POOR - The attempt to restructure the sentence is not successful.

EXCELLENT - Using the standard symbol or abbreviation that the discipline under consideration uses for the term was definitely the best choice because other options are not very conceptual or would not be helpful to the consumer.

GOOD - Using the standard symbol or abbreviation that the discipline under consideration uses for the term was somewhat better than other options.

AVERAGE - Using the standard symbol or abbreviation that the discipline under consideration uses for the term was just as good as other options, but not much better.

POOR - Using the standard symbol or abbreviation that the discipline under consideration uses for the term was not as good as other options.

EXCELLENT - Using temporal aspect to capture the meaning of the concept is superior to any other representation.

GOOD - Using temporal aspect to capture the meaning of the concept is somewhat better than other representation.

AVERAGE - Using temporal aspect to capture the meaning of the concept is no better than other representation.

POOR - Using temporal aspect to capture the meaning of the concept is worse than other representation.

EXCELLENT - Using spatialization to convey the concept is superior to any other sign option without spatialization.

GOOD - Using spatialization to convey the concept is better than other sign option without spatialization.

AVERAGE - Using spatialization to convey the concept is as good as other sign option without spatialization.

POOR - Using spatialization to convey the concept is worse than other sign option without spatialization.

EXCELLENT - Coding the concept, that is, using some form of manually coded English, is superior to any other choice given the consumer or the situation due to pace or other concerns.

GOOD - Coding the concept is somewhat better than other choices given the consumer or the situation due to pace or other concerns.

AVERAGE - Coding the concept is no better than other choices.

POOR - Coding the concept is worse than other choices.

EXCELLENT - Using an indigenous sign, such as the Japanese sign for Japan, is superior to using the standard ASL sign or fingerspelling it, due to the preference of the consumer or other considerations.

GOOD - Using an indigenous sign is better than other options.

AVERAGE - Using an indigenous sign is as good as other options.

POOR - Using an indigenous sign is worse than other options.

EXCELLENT - The interpreter demonstrates an ability to be extremely flexible in terms of sign use that is beneficial to the consumer.

GOOD - The interpreter is pretty flexible.

AVERAGE - The interpreter is somewhat flexible.

POOR - The interpreter demonstrates an inability to be flexible.

EXCELLENT - The sign/phrase that is chosen to represent a concept fits perfectly into the grammatical rules of ASL.

GOOD - The sign/phrase that is chosen to represent a concept has a pretty good fit to grammatical rules of ASL.

AVERAGE - The sign/phrase that is chosen to represent a concept does not contradict the grammatical rules of ASL in a jarring way.

POOR - The sign/phrase that is chosen to represent a concept contradicts the grammatical rules of ASL in a jarring way.

EXCELLENT - The sign/phrase used is in perfect alignment to the word class (verb, noun, adjective) of the original language.

GOOD - The sign/phrase used is in reasonable alignment to the word class of the original language.

AVERAGE - The sign/phrase used has weak alignment to the word class of the original language.

POOR - The sign/phrase used conflicts with alignment to the word class of the original language.

EXCELLENT - The use of mouth movement to represent the English or ASL modulations is an excellent fit to the English concept.

GOOD - The use of mouth movement to represent the English or ASL modulations is a pretty good fit to the English concept.

AVERAGE - The use of mouth movement to represent the English or ASL modulations is an adequate fit to the English concept.

POOR - The use of mouth movement to represent the English or ASL modulations is a poor fit to the English concept.

EXCELLENT - The sign/phrase used fits perfectly with the way the concept is meant in the textbook or the instructor's use of the term.

GOOD - The sign/phrase used fits fairly well with the way the concept is meant in the textbook or the instructor's use of the term.

AVERAGE - The sign/phrase used fits adequately with the way the concept is meant in the textbook or the instructor's use of the term.

POOR - The sign/phrase used fits poorly with the way the concept is meant in the textbook or the instructor's use of the term.