Section outline
-
Middle-low level response
-
- Whole test - click to listen
Transcript and commentary
Example candidate answer – middle/low
Role play card 2
Teacher/examiner: Il tuo telefonino è rotto. Vuoi ripararlo e vai in un negozio. Buongiorno! Come posso aiutarti?
[The teacher/examiner begins with the first question as printed.]
Candidate: Il mio telefonino è rotto.
[A good answer.]
Teacher/examiner: Oh mamma mia, è proprio rotto…dov’è successo?
[The teacher/examiner reads the question as printed.]
Candidate: Alla mia casa.
[The answer is clear although ‘a casa’ is the correct form.]
Teacher/examiner: Però è abbastanza vecchio! Quando hai comprato il telefonino?
Candidate: L’anno scorsa … scorso.
[An accurate answer. The candidate manages to repair the adjective ‘scorsa’ and says ‘l’anno scorso’ .]
Teacher/examiner: Perché è importante il telefonino per te?
Candidate: Perché la mia padre… (long pause) …la mia padre… compr … ha comprato per me.
[The meaning is communicated despite the long pause, the wrong possessive ( ‘la mia padre’ ) and the linguistic imperfection ‘per me’ .]
Teacher/examiner: Il telefonino sarà pronto fra due ore. Cosa farai mentre aspetti?
Candidate: (Long pause) … Come si dice “can you please repeat the question?”
[The candidate does not understand the question and asks in English for the question to be repeated.]
Teacher/examiner: Il telefonino sarà pronto fra due ore. Cosa farai mentre aspetti?
[The teacher repeats the question exactly as printed.]
Candidate: (Long pause) … No. [The candidate does not answer.]
Teacher/examiner: Allora passiamo alla conversazione. Prima cosa : parliamo dei viaggi e dei mezzi di trasporto. [The teacher/examiner ends the role play and announces the transition to the first topic conversation.]
Topic conversation 2
Teacher/examiner: Come vai a scuola di solito?
[The teacher/examiner reads the question exactly as printed.]
Candidate: Generalmente vado a scuola… (pause) … a piede ma perché il mio fratello, il mio fratello vado questa scuola, vado in macchina con mia madre, la mia madre e il mio fratello.
[The candidate understands the question and responds satisfactorily. There are some ambiguities (‘mio fratello vado ’ ) and grammatical inaccuracies: ‘a piede’, ‘il mio fratello’, ‘la mia madre’ . However, the information is satisfactorily relevant and communicated.]
Teacher/examiner: Qual è il mezzo di trasporto che non ti piace usare?
[The teacher/examiner reads the question exactly as printed.]
Candidate: Non piace usare…(pause)…non mi piace usare il treno perché … (pause) … c’è un molti turisti e ci sono molto rumorosi e non mi piace.
[The candidate answers the question, and the meaning is clear despite the grammatical errors: ‘c’è un molti turisti’ . The adjective ‘rumorosi’ related to ‘turisti’ is accurately formed and the expression ‘mi piace’ is correct.]
Teacher/examiner: Parlami di una città che hai visitato. Cosa ti è piaciuto?
[The teacher/examiner reads the question exactly as printed.]
Candidate: Nella mia città mi piace guardare il film.
[The candidate does not give a relevant response as he does not understand the question. The teacher asks him the question again.]
Teacher/examiner: Parlami di una città che hai visitato. Cosa ti è piaciuto?
Candidate: Nella Italia ho visto … vistato … no, ho visto … un ristorante il chibo era molto buono e spero di andare a Italia anno prossimo.
[The candidate hesitates to provide a response. He mispronounces the high frequency word ‘cibo’ and has difficulties forming the past participle of ‘visitare’ (even though the teacher/examiner has used it in the question). The structuring of his sentence is quite inaccurate ( ‘a Italia anno prossimo’ ); however, he attempts an answer which is relevant to the question, although not quite satisfactorily.]
Teacher/examiner: Quali sono i vantaggi e gli svantaggi di viaggiare in aereo?
[The teacher/examiner reads the question exactly as printed.]
Candidate: Il … aereo è molto rapido, ma è molto inquinare, è molto inquina. Il mia padre è molto travail. La mio padre è …. Molto … La mio padre va molto molta città non in Inglaterra. Ma va in treno perché è meno inquinare.
[A lot of hesitations and a weak command of grammatical structures. However, at word level the candidate manages to give some relevant information that can be understood, and which includes both the advantages and the disadvantages of travelling by plane. ( ‘ mio padre va … molta città non in Inglaterra’; ‘Aereo è molto rapido ma è molto inquinare’ .]
Teacher/examiner: Quando sarai grande, viaggerai molto?
[The teacher/examiner reads the question exactly as printed.]
Candidate: Puo’ repere? [The candidate asks the teacher to repeat the question, but he mispronounces the verb ‘ripetere’ .]
Teacher/examiner: Quando sarai grande, viaggerai molto?
Candidate: [No answer.]
Teacher/examiner: Ti piacerebbe viaggiare da adulto?
[The teacher uses the alternative question to enable the candidate to understand and reply.]
Candidate: Puoi repere?
[The candidate (inaccurately) asks the teacher to repeat the question.]
Teacher/examiner: Ti piacerebbe viaggiare da adulto?
[The teacher repeats the alternative question.]
Candidate: No.
[The candidate answers with a ‘no’ but does not attempt a justification.]
Teacher/examiner: Perché?
[The teacher/examiner asks the second alternative question to encourage the candidate to expand his answer.]
Candidate: No mi piace … perché mi preferisco … viaggi …mi preferisco andare a solo.
[The candidate attempts to give an answer which is relevant to the question but uses the object pronoun ‘mi’ inaccurately before ‘preferisco’ .]
Teacher/examiner: Ok. Allora passiamo all’altro tema e parliamo dell’ambiente urbano.
[Clear ending to topic conversation 1 and transition to topic conversation 2.]
Topic conversation 5
Teacher/examiner: Vivi in città o in campagna?
[The teacher/examiner asks the question exactly as printed.]
Candidate: Vivo in città perché mi piace, mi piace, mi piace, che ci sono molti mezzi pubblici. Mi piace i miei amici, anche mi……anche ma detesto in campagna perché ci sono troppo di animali.
[The candidate hesitates to provide a response. However, despite using simple sentences and phrases with some effort, he conveys the meaning satisfactorily, justifying his answer: ‘mi piace (per)ché ci sono i mezzi pubblici’ and ‘detesto in campagna perché ci sono troppi di animali’ . He uses a limited range of vocabulary and structures with frequent grammatical errors.]
Teacher/examiner: Che cosa ti piace del posto dove vivi?
[The teacher/examiner reads the question exactly as printed.]
Candidate: Puoi ripetere?
[The candidate asks to repeat the question.]
Teacher/examiner: Che cosa ti piace del posto dove vivi?
[The teacher/examiner repeats the question as printed.]
Candidate: Mi piace la città perché c’è molti…..mi piace la città perché posso guardare un film con i miei amici in cinema…anche…anche…guardo molti….anche…perché visto…
[The candidate hesitates but manages to give a short satisfactory response using a complex sentence ( ‘mi piace la città perché posso guardare un film con i miei amici in cinema’ ). The grammar errors ( ‘c’è molti’, ‘in cinema’ ) do not affect the communication.]
Teacher/examiner: Raccontami di una città che ha una particolare importanza per te?
[The teacher/examiner reads the question exactly as printed.]
Candidate: Per me importante…puoi ripetere.
[The candidate attempts an answer but asks the teacher/examiner to repeat the question.]
Teacher/examiner: Raccontami di una città che ha una particolare importanza per te.
[The teacher/examiner repeats the question.]
Candidate: Per me Londra è importante perché vivo in Londra e molti…il mi ha molti amici anche vivo in Londra.
[The candidate provides a satisfactory answer using a simple justification. There are grammatical errors, but the information is satisfactorily conveyed.]
Teacher/examiner: Cosa rende bella la vita in città?
[The teacher/examiner reads the question exactly as printed.]
Candidate: Penso che la…in Londra un bello…puoi ripetere.
[The candidate attempts an answer, but he asks the teacher/examiner to repeat the question.]
Teacher/examiner: Cosa rende bella la vita in città?
[The teacher repeats the question.]
Candidate: Penso che in Londra un bella vista e la Big Ben e…
[The candidate hesitates; the teacher/examiner asks the alternative question.]
Teacher/examiner: Quali sono i vantaggi della vita in città?
[The teacher/examiner asks the alternative question exactly as printed.]
Candidate: In città ci sono molti traffico e molto inquinare.
[The candidate has difficulty in understanding the question and gives a wrong response (the disadvantages of living in a city). The teacher/examiner interrupts him and asks him the question again.]
Teacher/examiner: Quali sono i vantaggi della vita in città?
Candidate: Nella città ci sono molta tecnologia e molti mezzi transporti e mi piace perché i miei amici vivono in Londra in città.
[The candidate communicates a piece of information satisfactorily, using a limited range of vocabulary and phrases: ‘nella città ci sono molta tecnologia e molti mezzi transporti’ .]
Teacher/examiner: Come pensi che cambieranno le città in futuro?
[The teacher/examiner reads the question exactly as printed.]
Candidate: In futuro penso…penso che...penso che…penso che vivare in città perché la tecnologia è molti e tecnologia…
[The candidate attempts to communicate some information repeating stock phrases that have ambiguous relevance to the answer. The teacher/examiner interrupts him and asks the same question.]
Teacher/examiner: Come pensi che cambieranno le città in futuro?
Candidate: … No.
[The candidate does not provide an answer. The teacher/examiner asks the alternative question.]
Teacher/examiner: Pensi che le città del futuro saranno diverse?
Candidate: Puoi ripetere?
[The candidate asks for the question to be repeated.]
Teacher/examiner: Pensi che le città del futuro saranno diverse?
[The teacher/examiner repeats the question.]
Candidate: Sì.
[The candidate uses a one-word answer.]
Teacher/examiner: In che modo?
[Second alternative question to help the student expand his answer.]
Candidate: Spero di meno inquinato e meno traffico perché … perché…la scuola ...la scuola insegnare…l’ambientale e varai meno macchine.
[The candidate demonstrates that he understands the question and provides a satisfactory response despite the many grammatical errors: ‘spero di meno inquinato’, ‘la scuola insegnare….l’ambientale’; ‘varai meno macchine’ (instead of ‘vorrei ’).]
Teacher/examiner: Ok grazie. End of test.
[The exam is finished. The exam lasted about 19’ 15’’]
- Whole test - click to listen
-
Moderator comments - Role play
Role play card 2
Conduct of the testAt the beginning of the exam the teacher/examiner identifies herself and then, as required, gives the candidate number and name followed by the date (this has been edited out). She then reads out the role play card number. The teacher/examiner reads the questions in the same order they are printed and listens to the candidate response. The candidate has difficulty in responding right away but the teacher/examiner patiently awaits his replies and does not move on to the next question. The candidate asks her to repeat question 5 and she complies. As the candidate does not produce a response, the teacher/examiner ends the role play. She then announces in Italian that it is time to move on to the topic conversations and gives the title of the first topic.
Candidate response
Mark awarded for task 1 = 2 out of 2 The response communicates an appropriate answer and is unambiguous.
Mark awarded for task 2 = 2 out of 2 The response communicates an appropriate answer and is unambiguous.
Mark awarded for task 3 = 2 out of 2 The response communicates an appropriate answer and is unambiguous.
Mark awarded for task 4 = 2 out of 2 The response communicates an appropriate answer and is unambiguous.
Mark awarded for task 5 = 0 out of 2 The response communicates an appropriate answer and is unambiguous.
Total mark awarded = 8 out of 10
Moderator comments - Topic conversationsTopic 2: Viaggi e mezzi di trasporto
Topic 5: Ambiente urbano
Conduct of the testAfter the role play has finished, the teacher/examiner correctly announces in Italian that it is time to move on to the topic conversations and gives the title of the first topic. The teacher/examiner allows the candidate to take his time to provide his answers without rushing him and moving on to the next question. She also reads the alternative questions correctly, exactly as printed, without being tempted to rephrase them when the candidate asks for the questions to be repeated.
Due to the fact that candidate has difficulties in understanding and responding, the exam becomes far too long, lasting over 19 minutes.
Candidate response
Topic conversation: Viaggi e mezzi di trasporto
The candidate understands questions 1 and 2. Despite many grammatical errors, he responds satisfactorily with simple but relevant information. In question 3, the candidate does not understand the question and the teacher/examiner has to repeat it. The candidate hesitantly communicates some relevant information with poor pronunciation (‘chibo’) and a very limited range of structures and vocabulary. In question 4 the candidate understands the question, replies using simple sentences which are not grammatically accurate, attempts to expand his answer and manages to respond satisfactorily. In question 5, the candidate does not understand the question, asking the teacher/examiner (with an incorrect verb) to repeat the question. The teacher/examiner uses the alternative question; after two more attempts, the candidate manages to produce a satisfactory response with respect to both language and communication.
Topic conversation: Ambiente urbano
In questions 1 and 2, the candidate, after much hesitation, satisfactorily responds to the questions using very basic vocabulary and structures. Question 2 is repeated. For question 3, the teacher/examiner needs to repeat the question and the candidate responds satisfactorily using simple vocabulary and structures with a justification. Despite the hesitancy, the grammatical errors and the limited vocabulary, he manages to convey relevant information. In question 4, the teacher/examiner has to repeat the question and rephrase it with the alternative question. The candidate satisfactorily responds using a limited range of vocabulary and phrases already used in previous answers. In question 5, after much hesitancy, the candidate is able to respond in a satisfactory way, despite many grammatical errors and incorrect use of verbs and general vocabulary.
The teacher/examiner awards 7 for Communication as the candidate requires alternative questions but manages to communicate relevant information with simple answers.
The teacher/examiner awards 7 for Quality of Language to reflect the candidate’s satisfactory use of vocabulary and structures with frequent errors.
Mark awarded for Communication = 7 out of 15
Mark awarded for Quality of Language = 7 out of 15
Total mark awarded = 22 out of 40
Moderator comments (Whole test)How the teacher/examiner performance could improve
During the exam, the candidate’s response was extremely slow, and the exam lasted over 19 minutes. The examination guidelines state that each Topic Conversation should last around 4 minutes. However, this was not possible as the candidate took time for each reply. The teacher/examiner timed the exam according to the candidate’s pace; if she interrupted the candidate to move to the next question, the latter would have not been able to attempt all parts of the exam.
How the candidate performance could improve
The candidate should have learned more general vocabulary and verb tenses. He also needed to practise how to form simple, compound and complex sentences in order to produce good answers. He would have benefited from listening to more spoken Italian. This would have helped him with his ability to respond with more confidence and ease.
-