Example candidate response 2 - Part 2 Conversation
Conversation
Moderator comments (Part 2)
Conduct of the test:
The examiner links the conclusion of Part 1 with the beginning of
Part 2 by commenting that the talk was ‘quite interesting’. There is no break
between the two parts of the test and the recording is continuous.
The comment
is underwhelming but the conduct in bridging the two parts of the test is
appropriate.
Part 2 lasts for only 5 minutes and 17 seconds so is much shorter
than the minimum of 7 minutes required in the syllabus. The examiner controls
the timing of Part 2 so it should last for at least the minimum time allowed.
The examiner manages the actual conversation mainly using open
questions. The examiner begins with a closed question – ‘Do you know how to
swim?’ but includes a more helpful prompt asking the candidate to share her
thoughts. Her next question is an open one concerning the special skills and
training needed in scuba diving.
The general line of questioning encourages
the candidate to share her thoughts in detail although the next question, ‘Is
deep-sea diving safe or dangerous?’ has the potential to be a closed
question. The examiner chooses not to interrupt and allows the candidate to
complete each response in full before moving on to the next question. All the
questions focus on the chosen topic although they are not always linked
closely to the previous answer.
Candidate performance:
The candidate is enthusiastic and wants to engage in Part 2. She seizes
on the opening prompt with relish and responds with a detailed answer
regarding her experiences of swimming. There is some slippage of language use
– ‘I thought like sharks would get me’ and ‘yeah, you know, it was stupid’. Her
next response is also very developed covering a number of skills needed to be
successful when scuba diving. She organises her thoughts into a fluent,
well-constructed response. The candidate continues to dominate the
conversation with detailed answers throughout the rest of Part 2. As in Part
1, those language devices employed are used soundly. She injects some humour
into her response to how she learnt to swim and her voice has a natural
‘sing-song’ quality that adds emphasis and nuances of tone that engage the
audience. She is mainly consistent in her use of accurate language – ‘your
equipment could also malfunction’ and ‘in their habitat … you must remember
not to provoke them or disturb them in anyway’. Her use of technical terms is
good – ‘ascend’, ‘descend’, pressure chamber’ - and her explanations of how
scuba diving can be dangerous are detailed.
The candidate’s performance sits comfortably within Level 4. The
subject matter is organised and mostly, but not always, expressed competently.
There is some slippage in the use of language also so 7 is more appropriate
than 8 for Speaking. The candidate consistently responds fully and confidently
so there are elements of Level 5 present but there is little evidence of the
candidate shaping the conversation and it is significantly short of the
minimum 7 minutes required for a full Part 2. A best fit is a mark of 7 for
Listening.
Mark awarded = 7 (Speaking) + 7 (Listening) = 14
out of 20
How the examiner
performance could improve:
The examiner could ensure that a full test is completed by making
Part 2 last at least 7 minutes. The candidate has plenty to say and only needs
the minimal amount of prompting so there is no reason as to why a full Part 2
has not been completed. The examiner asks some relevant questions but does not
necessarily listen closely to the candidate’s answers by linking the next
question to the preceding response. This inhibits the candidate’s ability to
satisfy certain descriptors in the mark scheme. For example, the candidate
cannot satisfy the second half of the first descriptor in Level 4 for
Listening as a conversation ‘sometimes shaped by the candidate’ suggests the
examiner sometimes responds directly to what has just been said by the
candidate.
The examiner should avoid asking any closed questions. In this
Part 2 the candidate is more than willing to respond in detail to each
question, whether open or closed, but this may not be the case for other
candidates. Open questions and prompts encourage detailed responses or at
least give every opportunity for a candidate to respond in extended detail.
How the candidate
performance could improve:
The candidate is mostly very fluent and has
plenty of relevant ideas to share. At times though her eagerness to reply leads
her to stumble and her control of language slips as a result – ‘very close,
like around them’ and ‘yeah you could drown, yeah’. There is also some
evidence of awkward expression – ‘roam around’ and ‘so I can get less
intimidated’. Briefly pausing to reflect before responding may help to
eradicate these deficiencies.
Although the candidate is enthusiastic and
clearly has much to say on her chosen topic, she is content for the examiner
to lead the conversation and answer only the questions she is asked. It is
difficult to do but more able candidates, who are aware of the descriptors
they are trying to satisfy, will choose to shape the conversation by asking
their own questions or prompting their examiners to reply directly to their
comments, thus ensuring a natural conversation develops.
Common mistakes and
misconceptions:
The timings
in both parts of the test are important. The level criteria are based on a
full test being completed and some, particularly in Level 4 and Level 5,
cannot be applied to tests that are short of the minimum time requirement. For
example, the Level 4 criteria for Listening ‘consistently responds
appropriately and in extended detail …’ cannot be fully applied to a
conversation that is significantly shorter than the minimum 7 minutes.
Conversations that extend beyond the maximum 8 minutes are not as
problematical as the examiner may choose to dismiss anything said after the cut-off
point as it is unlikely that there will be any new evidence to suggest a
change in mark in this section of the conversation. It is the responsibility
of the examiner leading the test to guarantee a candidate is given every
opportunity to achieve the best mark possible by having enough material to
ensure Part 2 of the test lasts for at least 7 minutes.
Two common
mistakes for some examiners is talking too much in Part 2 and often
interrupting the candidates when they have more to say. The examiner should
not dominate the conversation but create opportunities for the candidate to
speak at length and in detail through open questioning and prompts. The
examiner should listen carefully to the candidate’s response and link the next
question so a natural flow is created. The descriptor referring to ‘changes in
the direction of the conversation’ does not mean the examiner must move away
from the central topic with tangential questioning. In its most successful
form, changing direction is a subtle process just as it may be in any
conversation that has a single focus.
The examiner links the conclusion of Part 1 with the beginning of Part 2 by commenting that the talk was ‘quite interesting’. There is no break between the two parts of the test and the recording is continuous.
The comment is underwhelming but the conduct in bridging the two parts of the test is appropriate.
Part 2 lasts for only 5 minutes and 17 seconds so is much shorter than the minimum of 7 minutes required in the syllabus. The examiner controls the timing of Part 2 so it should last for at least the minimum time allowed.
The examiner manages the actual conversation mainly using open questions. The examiner begins with a closed question – ‘Do you know how to swim?’ but includes a more helpful prompt asking the candidate to share her thoughts. Her next question is an open one concerning the special skills and training needed in scuba diving.
The general line of questioning encourages the candidate to share her thoughts in detail although the next question, ‘Is deep-sea diving safe or dangerous?’ has the potential to be a closed question. The examiner chooses not to interrupt and allows the candidate to complete each response in full before moving on to the next question. All the questions focus on the chosen topic although they are not always linked closely to the previous answer.
Candidate performance:
The candidate is enthusiastic and wants to engage in Part 2. She seizes on the opening prompt with relish and responds with a detailed answer regarding her experiences of swimming. There is some slippage of language use – ‘I thought like sharks would get me’ and ‘yeah, you know, it was stupid’. Her next response is also very developed covering a number of skills needed to be successful when scuba diving. She organises her thoughts into a fluent, well-constructed response. The candidate continues to dominate the conversation with detailed answers throughout the rest of Part 2. As in Part 1, those language devices employed are used soundly. She injects some humour into her response to how she learnt to swim and her voice has a natural ‘sing-song’ quality that adds emphasis and nuances of tone that engage the audience. She is mainly consistent in her use of accurate language – ‘your equipment could also malfunction’ and ‘in their habitat … you must remember not to provoke them or disturb them in anyway’. Her use of technical terms is good – ‘ascend’, ‘descend’, pressure chamber’ - and her explanations of how scuba diving can be dangerous are detailed.
The candidate’s performance sits comfortably within Level 4. The subject matter is organised and mostly, but not always, expressed competently. There is some slippage in the use of language also so 7 is more appropriate than 8 for Speaking. The candidate consistently responds fully and confidently so there are elements of Level 5 present but there is little evidence of the candidate shaping the conversation and it is significantly short of the minimum 7 minutes required for a full Part 2. A best fit is a mark of 7 for Listening.
Mark awarded = 7 (Speaking) + 7 (Listening) = 14 out of 20
How the examiner performance could improve:
The examiner could ensure that a full test is completed by making Part 2 last at least 7 minutes. The candidate has plenty to say and only needs the minimal amount of prompting so there is no reason as to why a full Part 2 has not been completed. The examiner asks some relevant questions but does not necessarily listen closely to the candidate’s answers by linking the next question to the preceding response. This inhibits the candidate’s ability to satisfy certain descriptors in the mark scheme. For example, the candidate cannot satisfy the second half of the first descriptor in Level 4 for Listening as a conversation ‘sometimes shaped by the candidate’ suggests the examiner sometimes responds directly to what has just been said by the candidate.
The examiner should avoid asking any closed questions. In this Part 2 the candidate is more than willing to respond in detail to each question, whether open or closed, but this may not be the case for other candidates. Open questions and prompts encourage detailed responses or at least give every opportunity for a candidate to respond in extended detail.
How the candidate performance could improve:
The candidate is mostly very fluent and has plenty of relevant ideas to share. At times though her eagerness to reply leads her to stumble and her control of language slips as a result – ‘very close, like around them’ and ‘yeah you could drown, yeah’. There is also some evidence of awkward expression – ‘roam around’ and ‘so I can get less intimidated’. Briefly pausing to reflect before responding may help to eradicate these deficiencies.
Although the candidate is enthusiastic and clearly has much to say on her chosen topic, she is content for the examiner to lead the conversation and answer only the questions she is asked. It is difficult to do but more able candidates, who are aware of the descriptors they are trying to satisfy, will choose to shape the conversation by asking their own questions or prompting their examiners to reply directly to their comments, thus ensuring a natural conversation develops.
Common mistakes and misconceptions:
The timings in both parts of the test are important. The level criteria are based on a full test being completed and some, particularly in Level 4 and Level 5, cannot be applied to tests that are short of the minimum time requirement. For example, the Level 4 criteria for Listening ‘consistently responds appropriately and in extended detail …’ cannot be fully applied to a conversation that is significantly shorter than the minimum 7 minutes. Conversations that extend beyond the maximum 8 minutes are not as problematical as the examiner may choose to dismiss anything said after the cut-off point as it is unlikely that there will be any new evidence to suggest a change in mark in this section of the conversation. It is the responsibility of the examiner leading the test to guarantee a candidate is given every opportunity to achieve the best mark possible by having enough material to ensure Part 2 of the test lasts for at least 7 minutes.
Two common mistakes for some examiners is talking too much in Part 2 and often interrupting the candidates when they have more to say. The examiner should not dominate the conversation but create opportunities for the candidate to speak at length and in detail through open questioning and prompts. The examiner should listen carefully to the candidate’s response and link the next question so a natural flow is created. The descriptor referring to ‘changes in the direction of the conversation’ does not mean the examiner must move away from the central topic with tangential questioning. In its most successful form, changing direction is a subtle process just as it may be in any conversation that has a single focus.