Finnish or Swedish as a second language and literature (spring 2027–)
Approved 5.6.2024
The regulations for the Finnish or Swedish as a second language and literature test issued by the Matriculation Examination Board contain provisions based on the Act on General Upper Secondary Education and the Act on the Matriculation Examination, as well as on the Board’s general regulations and guidelines.
Section references in the text refer to the Act on General Upper Secondary Education (714/2018) and the Act on the Matriculation Examination (502/2019), unless otherwise indicated.
These regulations for the Finnish or Swedish as a second language and literature test apply for the first time in the spring 2027 examination.
1.1 General information on the Finnish or Swedish as a second language and literature test
A candidate participating in the matriculation examination must complete the test in mother tongue and literature (Act on the Matriculation Examination 502/2019, section 10). A candidate may take the mother tongue and literature test as a test based on the Finnish or Swedish as a second language and literature syllabus if their mother tongue is not Finnish, Swedish or Sámi and they have completed the studies in accordance with the Finnish or Swedish as a second language and literature syllabus, which are a prerequisite for participating in the test for those completing the general upper secondary education syllabus, or if they use sign language as their mother tongue or first language (Act 502/2019, section 11).
These regulations apply to both the Finnish as a second language test and the Swedish as a second language test, which are equivalent in terms of structure, tasks, and materials.
The Finnish or Swedish as a second language and literature syllabus is appropriate for a student if there are deficiencies in their basic Finnish or Swedish language skills in one or more areas of language proficiency (Education Committee Report SiVM 15/2018).
In the test, it is assessed how well the candidate has achieved the language proficiency objectives of the Finnish or Swedish as a second language and literature syllabus set out in the national core curriculum for general upper secondary education, as well as the candidate’s maturity and readiness for further studies. The test does not require native-level proficiency; instead, it takes into account that the candidate’s Finnish or Swedish language skills are still developing. The Finnish or Swedish as a second language and literature test replaces the mother tongue and literature test. Successful completion of the matriculation examination provides general eligibility for higher education.
The Finnish or Swedish as a second language and literature test is taken over two days, with a duration of six hours on each day. The test is taken on the scheduled mother tongue and literature examination days.
These regulations address only participation in the Finnish or Swedish as a second language and literature test. Consideration of insufficient proficiency in the language of instruction of a candidate with a foreign language background, as well as the consideration of hearing impairment through other arrangements in the matriculation examination tests, is addressed in the Board’s regulations on taking into account circumstances that adversely affect test performance in the matriculation examination.
1.2 Candidates who do not need to apply for the right to participate
It is the responsibility of the principal to determine whether the candidate meets the prescribed requirements for participation in the tests (Act on the Matriculation Examination 502/2019, sections 7–8). After the enrolment data have been received from the general upper secondary schools, the Matriculation Examination Board checks the candidate’s registered mother tongue in the Population Information System. A candidate has the right to participate in the Finnish or Swedish as a second language and literature test without a separate application if
- the candidate’s registered mother tongue in the Population Information System is not Finnish, Swedish or Sámi and the candidate has completed the compulsory studies of the Finnish or Swedish as a second language and literature syllabus included in the general upper secondary education syllabus, or
- the candidate uses sign language as their mother tongue or first language (Act 502/2019, section 11).
Not all general upper secondary schools organise or offer studies in Finnish or Swedish as a second language and literature. In such cases, prior learning may be recognised in accordance with section 27 of the Act on General Upper Secondary Education (714/2018) and the national core curriculum for general upper secondary education if the syllabus is appropriate for the student due to deficiencies in their basic language proficiency.
If the candidate has not completed the compulsory studies in Finnish or Swedish as a second language and literature by the time of enrolment for the test, the procedures in subchapter 1.3 (Right to participate) of the Board’s general regulations and guidelines shall be followed.
1.3 Application for the right to participate
Upon application, the Board may, for a compelling reason, grant the right to take the Finnish or Swedish as a second language and literature test to a candidate other than those referred to above (Act 502/2019, section 11).
A separate application is required, for example, if
- the candidate has completed studies in the mother tongue and literature syllabus intended for native speakers of Finnish, Swedish or Sámi
- the candidate’s registered mother tongue in the Population Information System is Finnish, Swedish or Sámi
- the candidate has completed a foreign education equivalent to the general upper secondary education syllabus
- the candidate has completed Finnish or Swedish as a second language studies as part of an upper secondary vocational qualification, but not studies in accordance with the general upper secondary education syllabus.
The application must be submitted in writing before the candidate enrols for the Finnish or Swedish as a second language and literature test. The application must be submitted to the Board
- by 30 November for the spring examination round, and
- by 30 April for the autumn examination round.
Applications submitted late or incomplete applications will be processed; however, the decision will apply at the earliest to the examination round following the one in question, unless the application presents a compelling reason why it was not submitted on time and why it would be important for the decision to apply already to the examination round in question. The application is made using the same form that is used to apply for consideration of insufficient proficiency in the language of instruction of a candidate with a foreign language background in the matriculation examination. The form is available in the Board’s electronic service.
It is advisable to submit the application before starting the examination, but only once the candidate has gained experience of completing general upper secondary studies and the persons providing statements have sufficient information about the candidate’s language proficiency.
The application must indicate the candidate’s registered mother tongue in the Population Information System, the languages used at home, as well as any schooling, studies or work conducted in Finnish or Swedish up to the estimated time of starting the examination. If the candidate has attended a school where instruction is provided in a foreign language, the time during which the student has participated in Finnish or Swedish language and literature or Finnish or Swedish as a second language and literature teaching is nevertheless regarded as studying in Finnish or Swedish. School holidays are not deducted from the time counted as schooling in Finnish or Swedish, even if the student has spent them outside Finland. A statement must be attached to the application presenting the necessary grounds and explanations of the compelling reasons on the basis of which the candidate should be granted the right to take the Finnish or Swedish as a second language and literature test instead of the mother tongue and literature test. The statement must also explain why the candidate does not meet the requirements for the right to participate described in subchapter 1.2.
The Board scores the candidate’s language background on the basis of criteria 1–2 in the table below. The table is the same as that used to assess the impact of insufficient command of the language of instruction of a candidate with a foreign language background in the matriculation examination.
| Scoring of the candidate’s language background | 0 points | 2 points | 4 points | 6 points |
| 1. Languages used at the candidate’s home | only Finnish or Swedish | in addition to a foreign language also Finnish or Swedish | only foreign languages | |
| 2. Schooling, studies, or employment mainly in Finnish or Swedish by the estimated starting date of the examination | over six years | six years or under | four years or under | two years or under |
The application must contain a statement from two teachers explaining how insufficient proficiency in the language of instruction affects the academic performance of a candidate with a foreign language background. If there are several languages of instruction, the assessment shall concern the language of the examination. One of the teachers must be a teacher of mother tongue and literature or Finnish or Swedish as a second language and literature. The other teacher must be a teacher of a subject in the humanities and natural sciences. Both teachers shall, in their statements, separately assess the impact on academic performance on the basis of criteria 3.1–3.4 in the table below.
The table is the same as that used to assess the impact of insufficient command of the language of instruction of a candidate with a foreign language background in the matriculation examination. If, for a justified reason, it is not possible to obtain statements from two teachers, in exceptional cases the application may include only one teacher’s statement. The Board will take this into account in the scoring of the application.
| Scoring of the teacher’s assessment | 0 points | 1 point | 2 points | 3 points |
| 3.1 Comprehension of reading materials | No difficulties | Minor difficulties | Clear difficulties | Severe difficulties |
| 3.2 Text production | No difficulties | Minor difficulties | Clear difficulties | Severe difficulties |
| 3.3 Ability to follow instruction | No difficulties | Minor difficulties | Clear difficulties | Severe difficulties |
| 3.4 Time required to complete the tasks | Does not differ from other students | Requires slightly more time | Requires clearly more time | Requires significantly more time |
The points obtained by the candidate for their language background and those obtained from each teacher’s assessment are added together. The Board may grant the candidate the right to take the Finnish or Swedish as a second language and literature test if the candidate scores at least 12/36 points on the basis of the criteria presented in the tables and if the application and the attached statements demonstrate sufficiently compelling grounds.
If a candidate receives a negative decision on their application after they have enrolled for the Finnish or Swedish as a second language and literature test, the test in question will be removed from the candidate’s subject combination by the Board (see the Board’s general regulations and guidelines, subchapter 1.3 Right to participate). The candidate may then, if they wish, enrol for the mother tongue and literature test even if the enrolment period has already ended.
Candidates who, prior to the entry into force of these regulations, have already taken the Finnish or Swedish as a second language and literature test as part of their examination retain the right to include the test in their examination and to take the Finnish or Swedish as a second language and literature test regardless of what is stipulated in these regulations regarding the requirements for participation.
1.4 Retaking a failed mother tongue and literature test as a Finnish or Swedish as a second language and literature test
If a candidate whose mother tongue is not Finnish, Swedish or Sámi and who has completed studies in accordance with the Finnish as a second language and literature syllabus has participated in the matriculation examination mother tongue and literature test but has failed it, they may, if they wish, retake the failed test by taking the Finnish or Swedish as a second language and literature test (Act 502/2019, section 16). If a candidate has participated in the matriculation examination mother tongue and literature test and has failed it and does not meet the above-mentioned conditions, they may apply to the Board for the right to participate in the Finnish or Swedish as a second language and literature test as described above. The Finnish or Swedish as a second language and literature test cannot replace a mother tongue test taken as a second national language test.
2.1 Tasks and materials of the test
The Board prepares the tasks for the matriculation examination tests in accordance with the compulsory and nationally optional studies in the relevant subject included in the general upper secondary education syllabus for young people (Government Decree on General Upper Secondary Education 810/2018; Government Decree on the Matriculation Examination 612/2019, section 5).
The tests include interdisciplinary tasks (Decree 612/2019, section 5). From the spring 2023 examination round onwards, such interdisciplinary tasks may be based on transversal competences as described in the national core curriculum for general upper secondary education (2019). Candidates are not required to demonstrate detailed knowledge or skills from another subject in their responses.
In the Finnish or Swedish as a second language and literature test, it is assessed how well the candidate has achieved the language proficiency objectives of the Finnish or Swedish as a second language and literature syllabus as defined in the national core curriculum for general upper secondary education: how well they understand spoken and written Finnish or Swedish, are able to produce communicative texts, and command vocabulary, language structures and expressions typical of Finnish or Swedish.
The test is based on a communicative view of language proficiency, according to which language proficiency includes both knowledge of the language and the ability to use it. Language proficiency is assessed in accordance with the objectives set out in the national core curriculum. The test assesses both comprehension skills (listening and reading) and production skills (writing). Oral production and spoken interaction can, for the time being, only be assessed in the matriculation examination language tests by simulating real interaction situations in writing. The test has a theme, and the texts dealing with it may relate to transversal competences in the national core curriculum for general upper secondary education, to the objectives and contents of the Finnish or Swedish as a second language and literature syllabus, or to those of other subjects. The tasks are designed to assess multiliteracy and different communicative functions as comprehensively as possible.
A variety of authentic materials are used in the test. In addition to written, visual and graphic text materials, various audiovisual texts are also used in line with a broad concept of text, such as advertisements, animations or excerpts from television programmes, films or plays. The material may also consist solely of an audio file, for example an excerpt from a radio interview, news broadcast, or radio play. The material may also consist of online texts or a website.
2.2 Implementation of the test
The Finnish or Swedish as a second language and literature test is organised on two examination days. The reading literacy and listening comprehension part is completed on the first day, and the writing part on the second day. On both examination days, the duration of the test is six hours.
The test is completed in a closed online environment. Dictionaries or electronic dictionaries are not permitted. For the Finnish or Swedish as a second language and literature test, the candidate needs headphones that can be connected to a computer.
The candidate may choose the order in which they complete the tasks for that examination day. The candidate may modify all their answers until they submit the test for that examination day. The candidate may draft their answers on paper (see the Board’s general regulations and guidelines, subchapter 1.5.2 Other equipment and aids).
The texts in the Finnish or Swedish as a second language and literature test are written in standard language unless the task or context requires otherwise. Paragraphing in the answer text is indicated by leaving a blank line between paragraphs. A blank line is also left after any title. No spell-checking programme is available. The text may also be written, for example, using the LibreOffice word processing programme, from which the candidate transfers the written text to the space provided for the answer. Only the text in the answer field is regarded as the answer to the task.
2.3 Features of a good answer
On the examination days of the Finnish or Swedish as a second language and literature test, the Board publishes the correct answers to multiple-choice tasks and the features of a good answer on its website under Features of a good answer. It should be noted that the correct answers provided by the Board at this stage are preliminary. The final assessment is decided by the censors of the test in question.
For the multiple-choice tasks, an item analysis is produced using statistical methods, indicating the distribution of answers across the response options. Once the analysis has been completed, the Board may accept several response options as correct in some items. The final accepted answers to the multiple-choice tasks are published by the Board in connection with the results.
3.1 Preliminary assessment
The performances are checked and preliminarily assessed by a teacher of the Finnish or Swedish as a second language and literature syllabus or a teacher of mother tongue and literature at the general upper secondary school (Act 502/2019, section 18). All Finnish or Swedish as a second language and literature test performances must be preliminarily assessed in the general upper secondary school, even if the institution does not have its own teacher of the Finnish or Swedish as a second language and literature syllabus. The performances must be assessed in accordance with the schedule separately issued by the Board.
The assessment follows the scoring instructions provided in these regulations and in the Features of a good answer. The teacher assesses the answers using the criteria in the regulations and the test-specific Features of a good answer in the Board’s assessment service, where the teacher also records the scores for the answers. The teacher indicates deficiencies or errors related to the content of the answers by underlining and, where necessary, with brief comments. In addition, in the reading literacy task set and in the short and long writing tasks, direct copying and quotations from the source text without a reference are marked. Linguistic deficiencies are not marked.
A missing answer or an answer that cannot be assessed receives 0 points. If the candidate has answered more tasks than required, in the final assessment those answers with the lowest total score are taken into account. The teacher preliminarily assesses all answers and records their scores in the assessment service. The Board selects the answers that constitute the test performance.
If a candidate submits more than one answer to the same task, the task is assessed according to the answer that yields the lowest number of points. The teacher assesses all answers; in the Board’s processing, the answer that yields the lowest number of points is selected for the test performance.
3.2 The final grade
The grade for the test is determined in the final, relative assessment based on the total score for all tasks in the test. The maximum total score for the entire test is 160 points. In the reading literacy and listening comprehension part, the maximum score is 80 points: the listening comprehension task set accounts for 30–40 points and the reading literacy accounts for 40–50 points. In the written part, the maximum score is 80 points: the short writing task accounts for a maximum of 20 points and the long writing task for a maximum of 60 points.
| Reading literacy and listening comprehension part maximum 80 points | Listening comprehension 30–40 points |
Reading literacy 40–50 points | |
| Written part maximum 80 points | Short writing task maximum of 20 points |
Long writing task maximum of 60 points | |
| Total for the entire test | maximum of 160 points |
A passing grade in the Finnish or Swedish as a second language and literature test requires that the candidate has a performance in both parts of the test, which are completed on different days. If the candidate fails to attend either test session or does not submit a performance for assessment in both test sessions, the overall performance is considered interrupted, and compensation is not possible. When retaking the test, the candidate must complete both parts of the test again.
The test performances are checked and finally assessed by the Board (Act 502/2019, section 18). The Board’s censors assess all performances and assign scores to them in accordance with the assessment criteria jointly determined within the subject section. Statements in an answer that are clearly contrary to the law or good practice are regarded as a factor lowering the value of the performance.
Each year, the Board appoints the first censor for the Finnish or Swedish as a second language and literature test for each general upper secondary school. A censor appointed by the Board must not assess performances from a general upper secondary school with which they have a close connection due to teaching duties, family ties, or similar reasons. In addition, the Board issues instructions on the use of second and third censors.
If an answer has been assessed by more than one censor, the final score for the answer is the score jointly decided by the censors who assessed the test. The Board decides the grade boundaries for grades after the assessment work has been completed, separately for each examination round.
4 Reading literacy and listening comprehension part
On the first examination day of the Finnish or Swedish as a second language and literature test, candidates complete the reading literacy and listening comprehension part, including task sets related to both skills.
4.1 Listening comprehension
In the listening comprehension task set, the candidate’s ability to understand spoken language is assessed, whether in the form of a monologue, dialogue, or group discussion. The tasks may assess, for example, understanding and interpretation of main ideas or key details, as well as recognition of interaction and various audiovisual means. The tasks may represent different task types, such as multiple-choice tasks, matching tasks, true/false questions requiring justification, open questions, or various response or summarising tasks. The audio texts may represent different language registers. They may consist of read-aloud speech or spontaneous spoken language. Some of the texts in the listening comprehension task set may also be videos.
Answers to open questions assessing listening comprehension must interpret the content of the text. The questions do not necessarily relate only to a specific point in the audio recording or video but may also test overall comprehension. Some questions may also require personal interpretation or a position.
Instructions for answering are provided with each task. The maximum score for a task or its items is specified for each task or item. The task may limit the length of the answer. The recommended length may vary by task or item. The length of the answer is calculated in characters. Spaces and line breaks are not included in the character count. The test system counts the number of characters in the answer but does not automatically restrict it.
4.1.1 Assessment
The scores for tasks assessing listening comprehension are provided for each task. The results of tasks that are scored automatically by the test system are transferred to the assessment service.
The answers must be independent and natural responses to the questions posed. The assessment criteria for listening comprehension are:
- the content elements of the answer
- readability.
In the assessment of listening comprehension tasks, the most important aspect is the content of the answer. In assessing the content elements, attention is given to how relevant the answer is and how well it addresses the features of a good answer.
Readability is considered from the perspective of comprehensibility.
Each task and item are assessed separately. Answers are assessed using the criteria defined in Table 1 and the test-specific features of a good answer. If an answer is considerably too long or too short, this affects the score in accordance with the criteria.
Table 1: Assessment criteria for open-ended responses in the listening comprehension.
| Scoring | General description
| Content elements and readability |
| 10-point task: 10 points | Very good A highly comprehensive response in terms of content. | The response fully meets the task requirements and covers the features of a good answer very well. The response is easy to understand. |
| 5-point task: 5 points | ||
| 3-point task: 3 points | ||
| 10-point task: 8 points | Good A largely comprehensive response in terms of content. | The response meets the task requirements and includes key features of a good answer. The response is understandable.
|
| 5-point task: 4 points | ||
| 10-point task: 6 points | Satisfactory A partly inadequate response in terms of content. | The response largely meets the task requirements and includes some features of a good answer. The response is mostly understandable. |
| 5-point task: 3 points | ||
| 3-point task: 2 points | ||
| 10-point task: 4 points | Adequate A highly inadequate response in terms of content and/or one that contains incorrect information. | The response only partially meets the task requirements and includes only a few features of a good answer. The response maybe somewhat difficult to understand.
|
| 5-point task: 2 points | ||
| 10-point task: 2 points | Weak The response is difficult to understand or misleading in terms of content. | The response shows weak relevance to the task and includes very few features of a good answer. The content contains errors. The response may be difficult to understand. |
| 5-point task: 1 point | ||
| 3-point task: 1 point | ||
| 10-point task: 0 points | Inadequate (fail) A completely incorrect or missing response in terms of content. | The response shows no relevance to the task, and its content does not reflect the features of a good answer. The response may be very difficult to understand. |
| 5-point task: 0 points | ||
| 3-point task 0 points |
4.2 Reading literacy
In the reading literacy task set, the candidate’s ability to understand written language is assessed, as well as their ability to respond to tasks based on what they have read. These tasks require writing in the target language. The texts to be read represent different text types and vary in length. They include both informational and literary texts.
The reading literacy task set may consist of different task types, such as tasks focusing on the meaning of vocabulary, terms and other expressions, various types of multiple-choice tasks, matching tasks, tasks in which statements are identified as true or false and justified using the material, and open questions.
The task set also assesses the candidate’s critical and cultural reading literacy.
Open questions in the reading literacy task set assess the candidate’s ability to understand and interpret the text and to present their observations and conclusions in their response. Answers to the questions must interpret the content of the text and comply with the task instructions. The questions do not necessarily relate only to a specific part or paragraph of the text but may also test overall comprehension. Some questions may also require personal interpretation or a position.
Instructions for answering are provided with each task. Each task or item has a maximum score, which is indicated in the task instructions. The task instructions may limit the length of the answer. The recommended length may vary by task or item. The length of the answer is calculated in characters. Spaces and line breaks are not included in the character count. The test system counts the number of characters in the answer but does not automatically restrict it.
4.2.1 Assessment
The answers must be independent and natural responses to the questions given. The assessment covers both content and presentation. In terms of content, the key aspects assessed are the relevance of the answer to the task instruction, its alignment with the features of a good answer, and the degree of independence shown in the response. In terms of presentation, the response is assessed for clarity, comprehensibility, and coherence, as well as for the appropriateness of vocabulary and expressions. Extensive verbatim copying lowers the value of the answer considerably.
In the reading literacy task set, the assessment criteria are:
• the overall level of reading literacy demonstrated by the response
• the content of the response
• the presentation of the response.
In the assessment, primary emphasis is placed on the overall level of reading literacy demonstrated in the response, with secondary emphasis on its content.
The criteria concerning the content elements are supplemented by the test-specific features of a good answer. The presentation of the answer is also taken into account, but its weight in assessing reading literacy is not as significant as that of the other criteria.
In the reading literacy task set, each task and item is assessed separately. The answers are assessed using the criteria defined in Table 2 and the test-specific features of a good answer. The teacher records the scores for individual items in the assessment service. If an answer is considerably too long or too short, this affects the score in accordance with the criteria.
In the reading literacy task set, the assessment places primary emphasis on the level of reading literacy demonstrated by the response, and secondary emphasis on its content. The presentation of the answer is also taken into account, but its weight in assessing reading literacy is not as significant as that of the other criteria.
Table 2: Assessment criteria for open-ended responses in reading literacy.
| Scoring | Overall assessment of reading literacy | Content of the response | Presentation of the response |
| 10-point task: 10 points | Excellent An exceptionally comprehensive response in terms of content. The message is conveyed extremely clearly. | The response fulfils the task instructions extremely well and meets the features of a good answer. An independent interpretation has been constructed from the material, and it is not in conflict with what is presented in the material. | As a whole the response is exceptionally clear and easy to understand. It is logically structured and coherent. Precise vocabulary and expressions appropriate to the task instructions are used. |
| 5-point task: 5 points | |||
| 3-point task: 3 points | |||
| 10-point task: 8 points | Good A response that is largely comprehensive in terms of content. The message is conveyed well. | The response fulfils the task instructions well and includes key features of a good answer. The response is largely independent and largely consistent with the material. | The response is clear and understandable. It is coherent, and the vocabulary and expressions are largely appropriate to the task instructions. |
| 5-point task: 4 points | |||
| 10-point task: 6 points | Satisfactory A response that is partly incomplete in terms of content. The message is conveyed for the most part clearly. | The response fulfils the task instructions fairly well and includes some features of a good answer. The response is fairly independent. The main content of the response is consistent with the material, but there may be some incorrect interpretations in the details. | The response is fairly clear and understandable, but it may be somewhat incoherent. The vocabulary and expressions are appropriate despite some shortcomings.
|
| 5-point task: 3 points | |||
| 3-point task: 2 points | |||
| 10-point task: 4 points | Adequate A response that is very incomplete in terms of content and/or contains incorrect information. The message is conveyed only partially. | The response fulfils the task instructions only partially and includes only a few features of a good answer. The response largely repeats the material as such. There may be errors in the content of the response. | The response is at times unclear and difficult to understand. It may be fairly incoherent. The vocabulary and expressions may be both inadequate and at times inaccurate. |
| 5-point task: 2 points | |||
| 10-point task: 2 points | Weak A response that is difficult to understand or misleading. The message is conveyed poorly. | The response has a weak connection to the task instructions and contains hardly any features of a good answer. The response repeats the material as such. There are errors in the content of the response. | As a whole, the response is poorly formulated, confusing, and lacks structure. The response is difficult to understand. The vocabulary and expressions may be very inadequate and/or inaccurate. |
| 5-point task: 1 point | |||
| 3-point task: 1 point | |||
| 10-point task: 0 points | Inadequate (fail) A completely incorrect or missing response. | The response has no connection to the task instructions, and/or its content does not align with the features of a good answer. | The message is not conveyed. |
| 5-point task: 0 points | |||
| 3-point task: 0 points |
5 Written part
On the second examination day of the Finnish or Swedish as a second language and literature test, candidates complete the written part, which consists of a short and a long writing task.
In the written part, the candidate’s ability to independently produce text and to express their thoughts in Finnish or Swedish is assessed in relation to themes connected with the Finnish or Swedish as a second language and literature syllabus in general upper secondary education, as well as to transversal competences and the materials.
5.1 Short writing task
The primary objective of the short writing task is communicative, that is, how well the candidate is able to respond to the task instruction and any material provided, such as a message from another person, and to take their features and requirements into account in their own text. The text may be, for example, a comment on a topic related to the source text, an email message, a blog post, or another everyday text.
Instructions for answering the short writing task are provided with the task. The recommended length is approximately 500–800 characters, excluding spaces and line breaks. The test system counts the number of characters in the answer but does not automatically restrict it.
5.1.1 Assessment
The short writing task is assessed in accordance with the criteria defined in Table 3. The lowest score is 0 and the highest is 20 points. The assessment criteria for the short writing task are:
- content elements
- argumentation
- communication of the message
- appropriateness to the situation.
In the assessment, primary weight is given to the content elements and argumentation.
If an answer is considerably too long or too short, this affects the score in accordance with the criteria. In such cases, for example, the structure of the text may be fragmented, or the task requirements may not be adequately fulfilled.
Table 3: Assessment criteria for short writing task.
| Scoring and general description | Content elements and argumentation | Communication effectiveness and situational appropriateness |
20 points A natural and appropriate response to the task instruction | The text presents an independent perspective on the issue outlined in the task instruction or presented in the source text. The argumentation is convincing. | The message is conveyed with precision. The level of formality as well as the vocabulary and expressions used are idiomatic for the situation. The style and language are appropriately adapted to the intended reader or recipient. |
16 points A good response to the task instruction | The text responds well to the task instruction. The candidate’s own opinion is justified in a versatile and convincing manner. | The message is conveyed clearly. The level of formality as well as the vocabulary and expressions used are appropriate to the situation. The style and language take into account the intended reader or recipient. |
12 points An appropriate response to the task instruction | The text addresses the task instruction, but the approach is conventional. The candidate’s own opinion is expressed and supported with arguments. | The message is conveyed in a largely comprehensible manner. The text generally follows the conventions of the genre, although there may be some inconsistency in the level of formality, style, and language. The intended reader or recipient is taken into account to some extent. |
8 points Inadequate response to the task instruction | The text does not fully address the task instruction. The candidate’s own opinion is expressed, but it is supported with limited or unconvincing arguments. | The message is conveyed, although some sections may be difficult to read. The style and language take into account the situation and the intended reader or recipient, but this remains somewhat inadequate. |
4 points Limited connection to the task instruction | The text addresses the task instruction only to a limited extent. There are major shortcomings in the presentation of the candidate’s own opinion or in the supporting arguments. | The message is conveyed poorly or unclearly. The language is not well suited for the situation, the level of formality is inappropriate, and little attention is paid to the intended reader or recipient in the style and language. |
0 points No response to the task instruction or no response at all | The text shows no connection to the task instruction, or the connection is extremely weak. The text does not present the candidate’s own opinion. | The message is not conveyed, or the language is inappropriate for the situation. |
5.2 Long writing task
In the long writing task, the candidate is required to produce a reflective or argumentative text using the materials provided. The long writing task includes 4–6 materials with related title options. The materials may include, for example, informational texts, media texts, and fictional texts in various forms. The candidate must use one or two of the materials in their own text.
The long writing task is used in particular to assess the candidate’s written expression, ability to present and develop ideas, to express and justify opinions, and to address the subject matter as a whole. It also assesses the candidate’s ability to independently produce a coherent text on a given topic and to express their ideas in Finnish or Swedish. The content of the long writing task must correspond to the task instructions.
The recommended length of the long writing task is approximately 2,000–2,700 characters, excluding spaces and line breaks. This character count is, however, a recommendation rather than a strict requirement. A character counter is available in the answer field, but the length of the response is not automatically restricted. The candidate must monitor the character counter themselves and ensure that the long writing task remains within the recommended length.
5.2.1 Assessment
The long writing task is assessed using the criteria defined in Table 4. The maximum score for the long writing task is 60 points, and the minimum is 0 points. The following score levels are used in the assessment: 0–5–10–15–20–25–30–35–40–45–50–55–60.
The assessment criteria for the long writing task are:
- the overall level of writing skills demonstrated by the response
- the task instructions and use of materials
- treatment of the topic and structure of the text
- language and style.
In the assessment, the greatest weight is given to the overall level of writing skills, that is, the candidate’s ability to convey a message based on the given task instructions.
If an answer is considerably too long or too short, this affects the score in accordance with the criteria. In such cases, for example, the treatment of the topic may be repetitive or limited, and the structure of the text may be inconsistent.
If the long writing task does not include a title, 3 points are deducted from the score.
Only the score levels specified in Table 4 are used in scoring the long writing task, except in cases where, due to the absence of a title or a score deduction based on reasons defined in the features of a good answer, the final score turns out to be different.
Table 4: Assessment criteria for the long writing task
assessment criteria are taken into account. In the assessment, primary emphasis is placed on the overall level of writing skills, that is, the candidate’s ability to convey a message in response to the given task.
| Scoring | Overall assessment of writing skills | Task instructions and use of materials | Treatment of the topic and structure of the text | Language and style (adherence to formal style, use of conceptual language, level of abstraction, degree of colloquiality) |
| 60, 55 points | The text is an excellent, independent realisation of the genre. It is highly effective communicatively: meanings are conveyed precisely and with nuance. | The text fully meets the requirements of the task to a high standard. The key meanings of the materials are perceptively understood. Information and ideas from the materials are integrated smoothly into the candidate’s own text and used naturally. In reflective writing, ideas from the materials are actively developed. In argumentative writing, the candidate’s own view or opinion is expressed very effectively and justified convincingly. | The treatment of the topic is versatile, original, and consistent. The topic is addressed at a general level. Personal experiences are naturally integrated into the broader discussion. The text forms a coherent and cohesive whole. | The text displays rich and varied language and adheres excellently to the conventions of formal style. Conceptual language is used. Linguistic accuracy is very high, although there may be occasional inaccuracies. |
| 50, 45 points | The text is appropriate to the genre. It is communicatively clear: meanings are conveyed smoothly and naturally. | The text meets the requirements of the task well. The purpose and content of the materials are understood. Information and ideas from the materials are distinguishable from the writer’s own. In reflective writing, the text is built on the writer’s own reflection, and observations and conclusions drawn from the materials are apt. In argumentative writing, the writer’s own view or opinion is expressed clearly and is justified in a versatile manner. | The treatment of the topic is fairly versatile. The topic is also addressed at a level beyond the writer’s own experience. The structure of the text is clear, and the ideas are logically connected. | The language is appropriate to the topic, and the text follows a formal style. Elements of conceptual language are also present. Linguistic accuracy is good, although there may be some inaccuracies. |
| 40, 35 points | The genre is recognisable. The text is communicatively mostly clear: meanings are conveyed, although there may be some imprecision in places. | The writer’s text largely corresponds to the task. The materials are used mostly appropriately for the task. Information and ideas from the materials are mostly distinguishable from the writer’s own but may remain somewhat disconnected. In reflective writing, the text includes the writer’s own reflection, and observations and conclusions are drawn from the materials. In argumentative writing, the writer’s own view or opinion is expressed and justified, but the arguments may be one-sided or not very convincing. | The treatment of the topic is adequate but rather conventional and somewhat limited. The text may remain largely at the level of personal experience, or the more general discussion of the topic lacks depth. The structure of the text is functional, although the ideas may not be clearly connected. | The text uses language that is sufficient for addressing the topic but somewhat conventional. The text mostly follows a formal style, although it may be somewhat informal in places. The level of abstraction is generally not very high. Linguistic accuracy may be uneven. |
| 30, 25 points | The text shows some features of the genre. The text is communicatively mostly understandable: in places, there may be some imprecision in how meanings are conveyed. | The writer’s text does not fully correspond to the task. For example, the perspective of the text may be unbalanced in relation to the task. The materials are used but not fully understood or are used mainly through summary or in a very one-sided way. In reflective writing, there is little reflection, or it is one-sided. In argumentative writing, the writer’s own view or opinion may remain unclear, although attempts are made to justify the claims. | The treatment of the topic is limited, or the balance between main and supporting ideas is uneven. The text may remain at the level of personal experience, or the more general discussion of the topic is poorly structured. The structure of the text is inconsistent, and the text may lack cohesion in places. | The text uses language that is one-sided in its treatment of the topic. There is some inconsistency in the use of formal style, and the language may include colloquial features. There may be systematic imprecision in the language. |
| 20, 15 points | The text does not follow the conventions of the genre. The text is communicatively unclear: meanings are conveyed only weakly in parts. | The writer’s text shows difficulty in responding to the task: the task may be partly misunderstood. The materials are used only to a limited extent, may be reproduced directly, or are largely misunderstood. Information and ideas from the materials may not be distinguishable from the writer’s own. In reflective writing, there is little reflection, or it remains superficial. In argumentative writing, the writer’s own view or opinion does not come across clearly, or the claims are at times not justified. | The treatment of the topic is limited and fragmented. The text remains at the level of everyday personal experiences, or the more general discussion of the topic is unclear. The structure of the text is fragmented, and connections between ideas are weak. | The text uses language that is limited and insufficient for addressing the topic. There are difficulties in adhering to formal style. The language contains a considerable number of inaccuracies. |
| 10, 5 points | The genre is not recognisable. The text is communicatively almost entirely unclear: meanings are barely conveyed. | The writer’s text meets the requirements of the task only to a limited extent. The response is very brief, for example consisting of only isolated paragraphs. The materials are not used or are completely misunderstood. The connection between the text and the materials is minimal. In reflective writing, there is little to no reflection. In argumentative writing, the writer’s own view or opinion is not expressed, or remains unjustified. | The topic is hardly addressed. The text shows little or no structure, and connections between ideas are not apparent. | The language of the text is simple. Command of language is very weak. |
| 0 points | The writer is unable to convey the message. Meanings remain unclear. | The task has not been followed, or the task has not been completed. The materials have been copied and presented as the candidate’s own work. | The text contains no comprehensible content and shows no recognisable structure. | The language is too limited to convey the message. |