The main aim of this resource is to exemplify standards and show how different levels of candidate performance (high and middle) relate to the subject's curriculum and assessment objectives.
This resource includes
speaking test criteria
recordings of three speaking tests
moderator comments to indicate how the teacher / examiner and candidate perform during the test
transcript and moderator comments on where and why marks were awarded.
common mistakes and guidance about how candidates performed in this particular examination series.
Candidate responses have been chosen from June 2025 Component 5 to exemplify a range of answers to a selection of Speaking Assessment topics.
More information about this examination series can be found in the Principal Examiner
Report for Teachers available on the School Support Hub.
After reading the speaking assessment criteria below, 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 moderator comments and marks.
Please note: Information about the candidate and centre has been removed from the start of the recording to protect the identity of the candidate, however it is very important to include this information when submitting audios for moderation.
The candidate
did extremely well, presenting the
important facts and figures. They presented ideas, opinions and justified
arguments without hesitation with full coverage of the topic. The topic
was well prepared and researched. Ideas were well linked and presented in an
interesting style, sustaining the examiner’s
interest.
Quality of language:
The candidate had a good command of the Urdu language and used a wide range of precise vocabulary. They successfully communicated sophisticated ideas.
The candidate
used a variety of complex structures. They used mostly compound sentences joined
with connective words and were generally accurate.
They used at least two-time frames - present and future. Pronunciation and
intonation were clear and they met assessment criteria fully and were awarded
full marks.
Mark for Content and presentation = 10
out of 10
Mark for Quality of language = 10 out
of 10
Total mark awarded = 20 out of 20
Part 2 - Topic Conversation
Conduct of the test
An interesting discussion based on the presentation and continued in the right direction.
The teacher/examiner asked a close question at one point which resulted in a short response from the candidate. It was the nature of the question which meant the candidate could not add anything to it.
Candidate response
The candidate had a
good command of the Urdu language, and used
a wide range of precise vocabulary. It was an interesting discussion very well linked to Part 1.
The candidate
used a variety of complex structures. They used mostly compound sentences joined
with connective words and were generally accurate.
They used at least two-time frames - present and future. Pronunciation and
intonation were clear and they met assessment criteria fully and were awarded
high marks.
Mark for Comprehension and responsiveness = 9 out of 10
Mark for Quality of language = 10 out of 10
Total mark awarded = 19 out of 20
Part 3 - General Conversation
Part 3 is a three-to-four-minute
conversation with the teacher/examiner about general topics. At least two topics will be covered in the general conversation: one from Areas A–B and one from Areas C–E.
The candidate will not know in advance which topics will be covered by the teacher/examiner.
Topics must be chosen that do not overlap with the content of the candidate’s presentation.
Conduct of the test
The teacher/examiner led the
third part of the test well and covered two topics during the general conversation.
Two topics were covered well, daily life from topic area B and future career
plans from area D.
Timings were adhered to.
Candidate response
The candidate
used a variety of complex structures. They used mostly compound sentences joined
with connective words during all three parts of the test and were generally accurate.
They used at least two-time frames - present and future. Pronunciation and
intonation were clear and they met assessment criteria fully and were awarded
high marks.
Mark for Comprehension and responsiveness = 10 out of 10
Mark for Quality of language = 10 out of 10
Total mark awarded = 20 out of 20
Moderator comments - Whole test
Conduct of the test
The Speaking Test was conducted well.
The teacher/examiner clearly introduced the candidate at the start of the test.
The teacher/examiner clearly indicated the start of each section of the test.
The teacher/examiner had prepared their questions thoughtfully prior to the examination.
There was a closed question in Topic conversation which meant candidate could not add anything to the answer.
Candidate response
The candidate
did extremely well, presenting the
important facts and figures. They presented ideas, opinions and justified
arguments without hesitation with almost full coverage of the topic. The topic
was well prepared and researched. Ideas were well linked and presented in an
interesting style, sustaining the teacher's/examiner’s
interest.
The candidate’s responses were spontaneous,
fluent and they had good command of the Urdu language. They responded to all
questions successfully
The candidate had a
good command of the Urdu language, and used
a wide range of precise vocabulary during the whole test. They successfully
communicated sophisticated ideas, opinions and information.
The candidate
used a variety of complex structures. They used mostly compound sentences joined
with connective words during all three parts of the test and were generally accurate.
They used at least two-time frames - present and future. Pronunciation and
intonation were clear and they met assessment criteria fully and were awarded
high marks.
There was good coverage and sound
organisation of the topic. The candidate presented their topic clearly and made
relevant factual points with some ideas and opinions. The candidate was able to
present and defend a point of view.
The candidate showed sustained ability to
initiate and maintain conversation and to contribute at reasonable length.
Quality of language
The candidateused a sufficient range of vocabulary, which sometimes lacked accuracy, but
vocabulary errors did not impede communication. Pronunciation and intonation were
generally clear.
The candidate used simple structures and
a sufficient range of complex structures. Grammatical errors occurred when they
tried to use complex structures. However, errors did not impede communication. Explicit
examples were given in the moderator’s comments.
Mark for Content and presentation = 8 out of 10
Mark for Quality of language = 9 out
of 10
Total mark awarded = 17 out of 20
Part 2 - Topic Conversation
Conduct of the test
The examiner listens to the candidate’ s presentation
attentively and asks relevant and appropriate questions on the topic covered in
part one.
The teacher/examiner prompted the candidate during the
presentation and sometimes during other parts of the test to show they were listening.
Paraphrasing was also used by the teacher/examiner to reiterate what the candidate
had said which helped the candidate to focus.
Two questions were similar, it is good practice to avoid repeating similar questions.
Candidate response
The candidateused a sufficient range of vocabulary, which sometimes lacked accuracy, but
vocabulary errors did not impede communication. Pronunciation and intonation were
generally clear.
The candidate used simple structures and
a sufficient range of complex structures. Grammatical errors occurred when they
tried to use complex structures. However, errors did not impede communication. Explicit
examples were given in the moderator’s comments.
Mark for Comprehension and responsiveness = 9 out of 10
Mark for Quality of language= 7 out
of 10
Total mark awarded = 16 out of 20
Part 3 - General Conversation
Conduct of the test
Two areas were covered successfully for part three
of the test: health and fitness from area A and places and customs from area E.
However, some of the questions could have been
broken down into small questions to help the flow of discussion. At least
two-time frames were covered by the candidate.
Candidate response
The candidate showed sustained ability to
initiate and maintain conversation and to contribute at reasonable length.
There were a few problems of comprehension,
but the teacher/examiner’s interest was sustained for all three parts of the
test.
The candidate responses were a best fit within
the ‘good’ band of the mark scheme set by Cambridge.
Mark for Comprehension and responsiveness = 8 out of 10
Mark for Quality of language = 8 out of 10
Total mark awarded = 16 out of 20
Moderator comments - Whole test
Conduct of the test
The Speaking Test was conducted well.
The teacher/examiner clearly introduced the candidate at the start of the test.
The
quality of recording was good.
Timings were adhered to.
The teacher/examiner seemed well prepared for the conduct of the examination.
It is evident that the teacher/examiner read the guidelines provided by Cambridge prior to conducting the speaking test and they were confident of the requirements of all part of the test.
The examiner listens to the candidate’ s presentation
attentively and asks relevant and appropriate questions on the topic covered in
part one.
The teacher/examiner prompted the candidate during the
presentation and sometimes during other parts of the test to show they were listening.
Paraphrasing was also used by the teacher/examiner to reiterate what the candidate
had said which helped the candidate to focus.
Two areas were covered successfully for part three
of the test: health and fitness from area A and places and customs from area E.
However, some of the questions could have been broken
down into small questions to help the flow of discussion. At least two-time
frames were covered by the candidate.
Candidate response
There was good coverage and sound
organisation of the topic. The candidate presented their topic clearly and made
relevant factual points with some ideas and opinions. The candidate was able
to present and defend a point of view.
The candidate showed sustained ability
to initiate and maintain conversation and to contribute at reasonable length.
There were a few problems of comprehension,
but the teacher/examiner’s interest was sustained for all three parts of the
test.
The candidate responses were a best fit within
the ‘good’ band of the mark scheme set by Cambridge.
The candidateused a sufficient range of vocabulary, which sometimes lacked accuracy, but
vocabulary errors did not impede communication. Pronunciation and intonation were
generally clear.
The candidate used simple structures and
a sufficient range of complex structures. Grammatical errors occurred when they
tried to use complex structures. However, errors did not impede communication. Explicit
examples were given in the moderator’s comments.
The candidate covered their topic well. They
made relevant factual points with some ideas and opinions. There were a few problems of comprehension,
at times. Responses for the first
part were generally good as the topic was prepared well beforehand. Some were
adequate responses, but the candidate relied on using English words to carry on
with the flow of conversation. They responded thoughtfully and mostly coped
well with unexpected questions during all parts of the test.
Quality of language
The candidate used a
sufficient range of vocabulary but sometimes lacked precision. Vocabulary
errors did not impede communication. Pronunciation and intonation were
generally clear. However, the candidate used English words quite often to keep
the communication going.
The candidate generally used a mixture of
simple and complex structures, however, errors occurred often when they tried
to use complex structures accurately. Errors did not impede communication .
Mark for Content and presentation = 7 out of 10
Mark for Quality of language = 7 out
of 10
Total mark awarded = 14 out of 20
Part 2 - Topic Conversation
Conduct of the test
The teacher/examiner created a
comfortable environment initially to help the candidate overcome exam nerves.
The teacher/examiner listened to the candidate
attentively during the presentation. They always linked the conversation to the
presentation by asking relevant questions to help the candidate reach their
potential by paraphrasing before asking questions.
Candidate response
There were adequate
responses, but the candidate relied on using English words to carry on with the
flow of conversation. They responded thoughtfully and mostly coped well with
unexpected questions during all parts of the test.
The candidate generally used a mixture of
simple and complex structures, however, errors occurred often when they tried
to use complex structures accurately. Errors did not impede communication .
Mark for Comprehension and responsiveness = 8 out of 10
Mark for Quality of language = 7 out of 5
Total mark awarded = 15 out of 20
Part 3 - General Conversation
Conduct of the test
The teacher/examiner led the discussion
and covered two-three topics- weather, holidays from topic area E and how to
maintain good health from topic area A which met the requirement set by the
syllabus.
The Teacher/examiner asked good questions
skilfully to utilise the candidate’s potential. For example, they started the
question on weather and when they realised the conversation may diminish, they
moved on to visiting places and what preparation was needed prior to travel. The
discussion flowed naturally into a new topic.
Different tenses were covered.
The correct timings were adhered to.
Candidate response
The candidate understood the discussion
around basic situations and concepts but had difficulty with more complex ideas
at times. They responded relevantly and at a length to most questions.
Mark for Comprehension and responsiveness = 8 out of 10
Mark for Quality of language = 7 out of 10
Total mark awarded = 15 out of 20
Moderator comments - Whole test
Conduct of the test
The test was conducted well. The teacher/examiner
had read the guidelines to conduct the test prior to the test. At the start of
the examination, they gave all the necessary details about the exam and the candidate
clearly understood, which is good practice. The teacher/examiner created a
comfortable environment initially to help the candidate overcome exam nerves.
The teacher/examiner listened to the candidate
attentively during the presentation. They always linked the conversation to the
presentation by asking relevant questions to help the candidate reach their
potential by paraphrasing before asking questions.
For part three, the teacher/examiner led
the discussion and covered two-three topics- weather, holidays from topic area
E and how to maintain good health from topic area A which met the requirement
set by the syllabus.
The Teacher/examiner asked good questions
skilfully to utilise the candidate’s potential. For example, they started the
question on weather and when they realised the conversation may diminish, they
moved on to visiting places and what preparation was needed prior to travel. The
discussion flowed naturally into a new topic.
The correct timings were adhered to.
Candidate
response
The candidate covered their topic well. They
made relevant factual points with some ideas and opinions. There were a few problems of comprehension,
at times.
Responses were varied, depending on the
topic. Responses for the first part were generally good as the topic was
prepared well beforehand. Some were adequate responses, but the candidate relied
on using English words to carry on with the flow of conversation. They responded
thoughtfully and mostly coped well with unexpected questions during all parts
of the test.
The candidate understood the discussion
around basic situations and concepts but had difficulty with more complex ideas
at times. They responded relevantly and at a length to most questions.
The candidate used a
sufficient range of vocabulary but sometimes lacked precision. Vocabulary
errors did not impede communication. Pronunciation and intonation were
generally clear. However, the candidate used English words quite often to keep
the communication going.
The candidate generally used a mixture of
simple and complex structures, however, errors occurred often when they tried
to use complex structures accurately. Errors did not impede communication.
Teacher/examiners should ensure that they have read the syllabus
requirements and instructions on how to conduct the speaking test. For example, they
should select topics for part 3 and prepare relevant questions. They should
show the flexibility to change prepared questions if they do not work with certain
candidates, and move on to a new topic. For example, if they start on weather
but the candidate cannot hold the conversation on this topic for the required
time, they can ask what their favourite season was and where they would you
like to go for a holiday during that season.
The examiner/teacher should ensure that the recording for both speakers
(examiner and candidate) is clear. It is advisable to carry
out a check before starting the actual test and before despatching the
recording to Cambridge.
Each candidate’s
performance depends on how well the examination is conducted and therefore it
is crucial that the teacher/examiner understands the requirements of each part
of the test. They need to prepare their questions thoughtfully and make sure
that questions are appropriate and relevant. Examiners should not ask too many
compound questions especially to low and middle level candidates. Where
necessary, questions can be broken into smaller segments.
Middle
and low- ability candidates lack practice, preparation and confidence. Language
skills could be built upon with adequate support, guidance, preparation and
practice. It is very important, for candidates to understand the format of the
speaking test and prepare their presentation topic well as the first two parts
of the test focus on the presentation.
It is good practice for each candidate to select a different topic for
their presentation to ensure the discussion is lively and interesting.
For further details about how candidates performed in this
particular examination series please refer to the Principal Examiner Report
for Teachers (PERT).