Section outline

  • Collapse Expand

    Collapse all Expand all
    Cambridge International AS & A Level Portuguese 8684, 9718
    Example Candidate Responses (Component 1 Speaking Test)
  • Collapse Expand

    Topic 1

    • Introduction

      The main aim of this resource is to exemplify standards of Cambridge International AS & A Level Portuguese, Component 1 Speaking Test, and show how different levels of candidates' performance (high and middle) relate to the subject's curriculum and assessment objectives. 

      Candidate responses have been selected from the June 2024 series to exemplify a range of answers. 

      The recording of each Speaking Test is followed by moderator comments on where and why marks were awarded or omitted, followed by comments on how the answer could have been improved. In this way, it is possible for you to understand what candidates have done to gain their marks and what they could do to improve their answers. Common mistakes and guidance are also commented on for the whole test. 

      The moderator comments in full, for all three levels of candidates' performance, can also be found below for you to download and print. 

    • Moderator comments - Printable PDF File
      165.3 KB
  • Collapse Expand

    Topic 2

  • Collapse Expand

    Topic 3


    Now that you have read the mark schemes, you may want to practise marking a Speaking Test. Listen to the candidate responses below, make a note of the strengths and weaknesses of the candidate and give a mark, before you read the examiner comments and marks below.

    Please note: Information about the candidate and centre has been removed from the recording to protect the identity of the candidate.


    • High level 1 response



    • Transcript High 1 File
      127.6 KB
    • Section 1: Presentation

    • Content and Presentation: The teacher/examiner prompted the student to begin the presentation and appeared engaged throughout, as evidenced by their conversational expressions.

      The candidate demonstrated confidence in both language use and content. The presentation provided comprehensive and well-organised coverage of the topic, incorporating both ideas and opinions alongside factual points. It was a dynamic presentation that maintained the teacher/examiner’s interest throughout.

      The presentation did not make any reference to the contemporary society or cultural heritage of a country where Portuguese is spoken, therefore the mark should have been halved. 

      Mark awarded = 5 out of 10 


      Pronunciation and Intonation: The candidate demonstrated exceptional pronunciation and intonation, with only occasional minor slips or hesitations.

      Mark awarded = 5 out of 5


      Language: The candidate has a very good feeling for the language, speaks fluently and accurately. Moreover, they show good use of relevant idiom and use a wide range of structures and vocabulary. 

      Mark awarded = 5 out of 5


      Total mark awarded for Presentation = 15 out of 20 

    • Section 2: Topic Conversation

    • Comprehension & Responsiveness: The candidate has no problems with comprehension. The responses are natural and spontaneous even to unexpected questions. They are able to present and defend a point of view in discussion.

      Mark awarded = 10 out of 10


      Accuracy: Speech is consistently accurate, with only a couple of minor slips

      Mark awarded = 10 out of 10


      Feel for the Language: The candidate demonstrates a very good feeling for the language and is able to express concepts fluently in appropriate idiom

      Mark awarded = 10 out of 10


      Providing Information and Opinions: The candidate shows an extensive range of appropriate vocabulary and is able to use a wide range of structures with confidence. 

      Mark awarded = 5 out of 5


      Seeking Information and Opinions: The candidate asks one question spontaneously and another when prompted. In both cases, questions arose out of conversation and were relevant to the topic under discussion.

      Mark awarded = 5 out of 5


      Total mark awarded for Topic conversation = 40 out of 40


    • Section 3: General Conversation

    • Comprehension & Responsiveness: No problems with comprehension. The candidate responds naturally and spontaneously to a variety of questions related to hobbies and plans for after graduation from secondary school. They can defend a point of view in discussion.

      Mark awarded = 10 out of 10


      Accuracy: The candidate’s performance is consistently accurate throughout and shows a sound understanding of the grammar.

      Mark awarded = 10 out of 10


      Feel for the Language: The candidate has a very good feeling for the language and can discuss concepts fluently.  

      Mark awarded = 10 out of 10


      Providing Information and Opinions: The candidate shows great command of the language by using a wide range of vocabulary and structures with confidence. 

      Mark awarded = 5 out of 5


      Seeking Information and Opinions: The candidate asks questions to the teacher/examiner and engages with the answers. Questions are asked confidently and spontaneously, showing a high level of accuracy.

      Mark awarded = 5 out of 5


      Total mark awarded for General conversation = 40 out of 40


      Total mark awarded for Speaking test = 95 out of 100



    • Moderator comments (Whole test)

      Conduct of the test:
      The exam was conducted in a highly professional manner. The teacher/examiner introduced both the exam paper and the candidate appropriately. They adhered to the established guidelines, strictly observing the time allotted for each discussion. There were no noticeable deviations or considerable delays. The teacher/examiner engaged with thoughtful questions and offered relevant information when the candidate asked questions. These contributions arose naturally from the conversation and, while the teacher/examiner’s answers were brief, they were never rushed. The conversation flowed smoothly.

      How the teacher/examiner performance could improve:

      The teacher/examiner should have clearly announced the start of section 2, topic conversation.

      How the candidate performance could improve:

      The candidate could have made some references to the chosen sport “racing cars /Formula 1” in the context of a Portuguese speaking country in their presentation.

  • Collapse Expand

    Topic 4

    • High level 2 response

    • Transcript High 2 File
      117.0 KB
    • Section 1: Presentation

    • Content and Presentation: The candidate delivered a well-organised presentation on the topic of “family,” making several relevant factual points and demonstrating a solid understanding of the subject. However, the presentation could be enhanced by incorporating more personal ideas and opinions to enrich the content. While there were moments of hesitation, and the delivery felt somewhat stilted, the candidate successfully maintained the teacher/examiner’s interest throughout. Additionally, the candidate referenced a Portuguese-speaking country, comparing cultural characteristics and differences between Portugal and England.

      Mark awarded = 7 out of 10


      Pronunciation and Intonation: The candidate shows good pronunciation and makes a fair attempt at correct intonation and expression, although there are some mistakes and hesitation.

      Mark awarded = 4 out of 5

       

      Language: They may speak with hesitation but show an adequate range of structures and vocabulary. There is no ambiguity in meaning.  

      Mark awarded = 3 out of 5


      Total mark awarded for Presentation = 14 out of 20


    • Section 2: Topic Conversation

    • Comprehension & Responsiveness: The candidate responds thoughtfully, and there are no problems with comprehension. Despite frequent hesitation, they cope well with unexpected questions but tend to follow the teacher/examiner’s lead.

      Mark awarded = 7 out of 10

       

      Accuracy: Accuracy is generally good, and although there are some frequent errors, the candidate shows a sound basic understanding of grammatical usage.

      Mark awarded = 8 out of 10

       

      Feel for the Language: The candidate has a very good feeling for the language and avoids significant influence from their mother tongue.  

      Mark awarded = 8 out of 10

       

      Providing Information and Opinions: There is limited expression of ideas due to limitations in range of vocabulary and structures, but no ambiguity.

      Mark awarded = 3 out of 5

       

      Seeking Information and Opinions: The candidate does not ask any questions.

      Mark awarded = 0 out of 5


      Total mark awarded for Topic conversation= 26 out of 40

    • Section 3: General Conversation

    • Comprehension & Responsiveness: The candidate answers confidently. There are no problems with comprehension, although their speech is marked by hesitations. They follow the teacher/examiner’s lead.

      Mark awarded = 8 out of 10

       

      Accuracy: The candidate makes some mistakes with gender agreement, uses a limited range of vocabulary and structures, but in general, shows a sound basic understanding of grammatical usage.

      Mark awarded = 8 out of 10

       

      Feel for the Language: The candidate has a very good feeling for the language and avoids significant influence from their mother tongue.

      Mark awarded = 8 out of 10


      Providing Information and Opinions: The candidate expresses themselves with no ambiguity, but there is a limitation in the expression of ideas due to a lack of vocabulary and structures. 

      Mark awarded = 3 out of 5

       

      Seeking Information and Opinions: The candidate asks one question spontaneously and arising from conversation

      Mark awarded = 3 out of 5


      Total mark awarded for General conversation = 30 out of 40


      Total mark awarded for Speaking test = 70 out of 100

    • Moderator comments (Whole test)

      Conduct of the test:
      The examination was well conducted with excellent time management. The teacher/examiner clearly introduced both the centre and the candidate’s details. They remained engaged throughout, asking insightful questions and fostering a positive, encouraging environment.

      How the examiner performance could improve:

      The teacher/examiner should have prompted the candidate to ask questions in sections 2 and 3. Also, the teacher/examiner could have introduced a couple more topics when asking questions in section 3 to provide more opportunities for the candidate to use a wider range of vocabulary and structures.

      How the candidate performance could improve:

      With less hesitation and more confident expression of opinions, the presentation could be more engaging. When preparing for the exam, the candidate could have anticipated a few potential questions that might arise from their presentation. This could have boosted their confidence and reduce hesitations during their speech, preventing these pauses from being interpreted as lack of comprehension.

  • Collapse Expand

    Topic 5

    • Middle level response

    • Transcript Middle File
      113.6 KB
    • Section 1: Presentation

    • Content and Presentation: The candidate provided an adequate exposition of the topic, demonstrating clear evidence of preparation. They presented relevant factual points along with some personal opinions. However, the presentation would have been more engaging with a greater display of enthusiasm, which could have helped capture and maintain the teacher/examiner’s interest more effectively.

      Mark awarded = 6 out of 10


      Pronunciation and Intonation: Although there are quite a few errors, there is a fair degree of accuracy and some attempt at intonation and expression.

      Mark awarded = 3 out of 5

       

      Language: There is occasional hesitation, but there is no ambiguity in meaning.   

      Mark awarded = 3 out of 5


      Total mark awarded for Presentation = 12 out of 20

    • Section 2: Topic Conversation

    • Comprehension & Responsiveness: The candidate demonstrated a few difficulties with comprehension, but effectively asked questions to clarify meaning when needed. They responded thoughtfully and handled unexpected questions well. While the candidate was reasonably forthcoming, they tended to follow the teacher/examiner’s lead rather than steering the conversation more independently.

      Mark awarded = 7 out of 10


      Accuracy: Although there are signs of significant gaps in grammatical usage, the candidate can express themselves without ambiguity and convey meaningful responses.

      Mark awarded = 5 out of 10

       

      Feel for the Language: The candidate’s feel for the language is evident, although thought processes and expression are influenced by their mother tongue.

      Mark awarded = 5 out of 10 

       

      Providing Information and Opinions: The limitations of vocabulary and structures restrict the discussion. It is noticeable that the candidate has interesting ideas to share but can’t express themselves more fluently. 

      Mark awarded = 2 out of 5

       

      Seeking Information and Opinions: The candidate asks two questions for clarification.   

      Mark awarded = 3 out of 5


      Total mark awarded for Topic conversation = 22 out of 40

    • Section 3: General Conversation

    • Comprehension & Responsiveness: The candidate responds thoughtfully, asks questions to clarify comprehension and copes well with unexpected questions. They are able to share interesting ideas and somehow overcome the gaps in vocabulary and grammar when discussing the questions.

      Mark awarded = 7 out of 10

       

      Accuracy: Although there are signs of significant gaps in grammatical usage, the candidate can express themselves without ambiguity and convey meaningful responses.

      Mark awarded = 5 out of 10

       

      Feel for the Language: Again, the candidate’s feel for the language is evident, although thought processes and expression are influenced by their mother tongue.

      Mark awarded = 5 out of 10

       

      Providing Information and Opinions: Although there is a limitation in the expression of ideas due to limitations in range of vocabulary and structures, the candidate can express themselves with no ambiguity.

      Mark awarded = 3 out of 5

       

      Seeking Information and Opinions: The candidate asked at least four spontaneous questions that arose naturally during the conversation and were relevant to the topic. Although the format of the questions was somewhat limited, the intended meaning was effectively conveyed, allowing the conversation to flow smoothly.

      Mark awarded = 4 out of 5


      Total mark awarded for General conversation = 24 out of 40


      Total mark awarded for Speaking test = 58 out of 100

    • Moderator comments (Whole test)

      Conduct of the test:
      The test was conducted effectively, with the teacher/examiner providing a proper introduction to both the centre and the candidate. Time management was excellent, and the teacher/examiner maintained a polite and engaging manner throughout. They demonstrated genuine interest in the conversation, offering meaningful insights and asking a variety of relevant questions.

      How the examiner performance could improve:

      The teacher/examiner could have encouraged the candidate to ask questions in section 2 and 3. Although the candidate asks a number of questions, they are intended to clarify the meaning, and not to ask questions to the teacher/examiner about the topic.
      How the candidate performance could improve:

      The candidate could enhance their grammar skills to avoid basic errors, such as issues with gender and number agreement. Additionally, their pronunciation is significantly influenced by their mother tongue. While it is evident that the candidate has meaningful insights to share, these fundamental mistakes hindered the clarity of their speech. By expanding their vocabulary, the candidate could have exhibited greater confidence during the test.
  • Collapse Expand

    Topic 6

  • Collapse Expand

    Topic 7

    • Common mistakes and guidance

      Presentation: 

      • Although the syllabus clearly states that candidates must refer to a Portuguese-speaking country during their presentation, some forget to do so. As a result, even strong presentations end up having their marks significantly reduced by half, which is unfortunate.
      • While it is acceptable to use cue cards with bullet points, reading the entire presentation is not allowed. The focus should be on delivering the content naturally and engagingly, rather than relying on a script.
      • Candidates are encouraged to research a topic of their choice when preparing their topic presentation. However, the material presented should be original, and not a copy of a webpage.

      Topic conversation: 

      • There were occasions when the teacher/examiner asked a series of prepared questions that led students to repeat material from the presentation. Although it is recommended that the candidate anticipates questions when preparing for the exam, the teacher/examiner should ask spontaneous questions and encourage students to share additional insights about the topics they have researched.
      • Asking questions in sections 2 and 3: candidates should ask at least 1 question in both sections. When candidates do not ask questions spontaneously, teacher/examiners should prompt and encourage them to do so. Candidates are not penalised for being prompted. Questions should be relevant to the conversation and well formulated. No marks can be awarded when candidates do not ask any questions in both sections.

      General conversation:

      • In this part of the conversation, the teacher/examiner should ask questions on at least two topics unrelated to the topic presentation. This approach aims to provide candidates with plenty of opportunity to demonstrate their abilities. Successful candidates can offer spontaneous answers that arise naturally during the discussion, expressing themselves clearly using correct language, a wide range of vocabulary, and varied structures, while minimising the influence of their mother tongue.


      For further details about how candidates performed in this particular examination series please refer to the Principal Examiner Report for Teachers (PERT).