Section outline

    • High level response


    • Presentation and follow-up discussion

      The candidate presented an extremely well researched analysis of L’immigration en Europe, with supporting statistics and references to the political standpoints of specific countries. The candidate articulated her own take on this multi-layered problem with appropriate, varied vocabulary and complex, sophisticated constructions. The follow-up discussion was a lively, natural and spontaneous exchange of views and opinions.

      Presentation, interaction/responsiveness

      In line with the mark scheme for communication in the Presentation and follow-up discussion: Presentation, interaction/responsiveness (AO4:S1 and S2), Level 5:

      •  Communicates detailed information with clearly stated ideas and opinions.

      In addition to drawing on her in-depth research, the candidate can also speak from personal experience: Ces nombres montrent la grave situation…; Pour les pays de transit, ça a beaucoup d’impact; j’ai fait mon stage avec une OMG…

      • Consistently justifies, develops and explains ideas and opinions.

      The candidate has thought through the topic in detail and is familiar with its many aspects: Cela complique extrêmement les négotiations et la coopération dans l’Union Européenne…; Mais par contre je comprends aussi qu’il y a des gens qui ont des préoccupations, par exemple, de sécurité, même s’ils sont peut-être mal affrontés…; Il faudrait tout d’abord trouver des voies légales pour que les gens arrivent…

      • Fully engages in the conversation. Candidate has good interaction with the examiner and responds fully and confidently to all question types.

      The candidate answers immediately and fully, and is always in control of her subject: Sur les   immigrants ? Elles ferment beaucoup de routes pour les immigrants, mais ils vont pas arrêter de venir, ils vont juste prendre des routes plus dangereuses. Ils vont risquer leur vie et dans les cas les plus tragiques vont mourir. Alors, ça va pas arrêter l’immigration, ça va juste rendre l’immigration plus dangereuse.

      Mark awarded = 10 out of 10

      Language range

      In line with the mark scheme for Language in the Presentation and follow-up discussion (AO4:S3), Level 5:

      • Uses a wide range of linking and cohesive devices to connect a series of well-developed points.

      The candidate uses a very wide range of linking and cohesive devices: par contre, même si, moi, par exemple, mais, alors, tout d’abord, parce que, peut-être, aussi, quand-même, en tout cas.

      • Uses a wide range of vocabulary appropriate to the tasks. Often uses less common vocabulary.

      The candidate employs varied and appropriate vocabulary throughout: L’Union Européenne s’endurcit d’avantage envers l’immigration; cette politique s’avère efficace; et ils sont considérés comme anti-migratoires et eurosceptiques; ça s’avère très compliqué; ça recule dans les valeurs humanitaires qu’il devrait y avoir en Europe; pour que chaque pays puisse accueillir un nombre de personnes basé sur leur population et peut-être aussi coopérer avec les pays d’origine des immigrants.

      • Can vary formulation to avoid repetition.

      There is some repetition, but this is more than compensated for with the wide range of usage including conditional and relative clauses, subjunctives, a variety of tenses and unusual vocabulary.

      Mark awarded = 10 out of 10

      Language accuracy

      In line with the mark scheme for Language accuracy in the Presentation and follow-up discussion (AO4:S4), Level 5:

      •  Consistently accurate use of simple grammar.

      The candidate is almost always accurate in her use of simple grammar.

      • Shows a good degree of control of some complex grammar.

      The candidate’s use of sophisticated language is accurate most of the time and the occasional minor error ever impedes communication.

      Mark awarded = 10 out of 10

      Total mark awarded for Presentation and follow-up discussion = 30 out of 30

    • Conversation task card (Card 6)

      Task completion and communication

      In line with the mark scheme for Task completion and communication in the Conversation task card (AO4:S1 and S2), Level 5:

      • Completes all tasks fully and confidently.

      The candidate is able to complete each task with confidence and is able to draw once again on her own experience. Her responses are often strikingly original.

      • Communicates relevant information with clear and supported ideas and opinions. Develops a justified argument.  

      Although the candidate admits that she is feeling her way with the topic, what she says is clear and is supported by ideas and opinions: peut-être c’est pas nouveau, mais on entend plus en parler; c’est un procès compliqué pour les gens; une solution serait peut-être éduquer.

      • Fully engages in the conversation. Candidate has good interaction with the examiner and responds fully and confidently to all questions/prompts.

      The candidate’s engagement and interaction are excellent throughout.

      Mark awarded = 10 out of 10

      Language range

      In line with the mark scheme for Language range in the Conversation task card (AO4:S3), Level 5:

      • Uses a wide range of linking and cohesive devices to connect a series of well-developed points.

      The wide range includes par exemple, peut-être, alors, mais, à vrai dire, même, quand-même, parfois, c’est vrai que, surtout.

      • Uses a wide range of vocabulary appropriate to the tasks. Often uses less common vocabulary.

      The candidate’s performance matches both criteria. Less common vocabulary includes: les personnes âgées sont plus discriminées dans la société; entre guillemets; il y a maintenant plus de mesures en voie; pour qu’ils ne puissent pas virer les gens comme ça.

      • Can vary formulation to avoid repetition.

      Repetition, though more obvious here than in the first part of the test (et tout, ça), does not detract from the high level of variety of the candidate’s language usage.

      Mark awarded = 10 out of 10

      Language accuracy

      In line with the mark scheme for Language accuracy in the Conversation task card (AO4:S4), Level 5:

      • Consistently accurate use of simple grammar.

      There are occasional slips here e.g. connaître instead of savoir: je connaissais pas beaucoup au thème de l’âgisme, il y avait un homme âgé peut-être [de] soixante ans, il avait pas l’attention qu’il avait besoin, but for the most part simple grammar is consistently accurate.

      • Shows a good degree of control of some complex grammar.

      The candidate impresses again by her variety of usage: il y a quelques années, il y avait un homme; ça m’a fait réfléchir; mais c’est vrai que maintenant ils se sont fait entendre beaucoup plus; on voit beaucoup de gens agées qui se font virés du travail.

      Mark awarded = 10 out of 10

      Total mark awarded for Conversation task card = 30 out of 30

       

      Pronunciation and intonation for the whole speaking test

      In line with the mark scheme for Pronunciation and intonation (AO4:S5): Level 3:

      • Pronunciation is intelligible and intonation is appropriate.

      The candidate sounds like a native speaker.

      • Individual sounds are articulated clearly.

      Consistently clear.

      Mark awarded = 5 out of 5

        

      Total mark awarded for Speaking test = 65 out of 65 

    • Moderator comments (Whole test)

      Conduct of the test:

      The teacher/examiner spoke naturally, used a bit of humour to ease the tension, and her questions were always clearly formulated. This created an atmosphere in which the candidate clearly felt at ease and could perform to her best ability. The teacher/examiner followed the prescribed format of the test, including the 5-minute silence for preparation of Conversation Task Card 6. The teacher/examiner asked the questions suggested in the Instructions for Teachers/Examiners for the respective Conversation Task Card, adding little personal touches which were always appropriate.

      How the teacher/examiner performance could improve:

      This was examining at the highest level. The teacher/examiner observed the prescribed format of the test, including the recommended prompts in the Instructions for teachers/examiners booklet, but in a totally natural way, personalising without ever obscuring or over-elaborating. A model in how to examine this syllabus.

      How the candidate performance could improve:

      This was conversational French at its best which could be improved only by a slightly tighter grasp of grammar.