The main aim of this resource is to exemplify standards and show how different levels of candidate performance (high, middle and low) relate to the subject's curriculum and assessment objectives.
This resource includes
speaking test criteria
recordings of three speaking tests
transcripts including moderator comments to indicate how the teacher/examiner and candidate perform during the test
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 2024 Paper 3 to exemplify a range of answers to a selection of Speaking Assessment topics. Details of the Speaking Assessments can be found on pages 10-29 of the Teacher's Notes available on the Mauritius
School Support.
Now that you have read the speaking assessment criteria, 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.
SPEAKING ASSESSMENT E (Teacher's Notes 32) was chosen by the teacher/examiner. Topics include languages and family time.
Conduct of the test
The test is well
conducted. The teacher/examiner keeps
to the script and the timing, and also uses follow-up questions to expand the
discussions.
Grammar
The candidate is at
ease with the language and speaks with the economy of language using a range
of structures competently and confidently with some slips, but these do not
impede understanding. She missed the
opportunity to use the past tense in Part 1, question 2, however, she
adequately demonstrated her competence in other parts of the test using a
range of past and present tenses, including the passive, gerunds, modals,
linking devices, comparatives …
The occasional slips
could limit her to 9 marks; however, it is important to remember that the test
does not have to be error free to get full marks.
Mark for grammar = 10 out of 10
Vocabulary
Vocabulary although not extravagant and flowery is
used precisely to convey quite sophisticated ideas – ‘boosts your experience’, language barrier’, ‘significant other’,
‘based on your preferences’, ’bonding time’, ‘socially aware’, ‘capture the
memory’.
Mark for vocabulary = 10 out of 10
Development
The candidate’s
responses are relevant and consistently well-developed. Communication is
maintained with ease.
The candidate
responds thoughtfully and relevantly to the teacher/examiner’s questions, with
very little hesitation.
In Part 2 the
candidate presents a well-balanced argument, clearly stating her preference.
Mark for development = 10 out of 10
Pronunciation
The candidate’s pronunciation is consistently clear.
The candidate’s delivery is quite rapid, but she is
easy to understand, and intonation is used to good effect.
SPEAKING ASSESSMENT D (Teacher's Notes 31) was chosen by the teacher/examiner. Topics include your local areaand a sports event.
Conduct of the test
The test was well
conducted in terms of timing, the teacher/examiner’s voice was clear and easy
to understand, and she kept to the script. However, she didn’t fully engage
with the candidate.
The teacher/examiner
did not extend any of the questions by responding to the candidate’s answers
to the questions and, on two occasions, interrupted him as the time was up.
There was probably too much focus on timing to allow a good flow of discussion.
Grammar
The candidate used a range of simple structures
mostly accurately. Errors sometimes occurred when he attempted more complex
structures ‘but the world of the
footballer is very influenced also for theeconomy of the the nation’, but not always ‘it’s a good sport because you can experience a lot of er... different
conditions in interacting with other people and also erm... facing other
opponents.
Although the candidate showed ambition in attempting
complex structures, particularly in the use of the passive, errors in
subject/verb agreement, use of prepositions, use of articles, verb tenses
limited his mark to 7.
Mark for
grammar = 7 out of 10
Vocabulary
The candidate used a
sufficient range of everyday and subject specific vocabulary to discuss a
variety of ideas, facts and opinions. E.g. to
face the other, an intellectual race against you, mental ability, improve the
behaviour of the individual, passionin
their hearts, to interact.
Mark for
vocabulary = 8 out of 10
Development
The candidate mainly
understood the questions asked and his responses were relevant and mostly
developed.
Communication was
maintained without support as this was not forthcoming from the teacher/examiner.
The candidate’s
response to Question 4 Part 3 was a little confusing, but the gist of his
response was easily understood.
Mark for development = 8 out of 10
Pronunciation
The candidate had
quite a strong Italian accent, however, his pronunciation was mostly clear,
and intonation was sometimes used to convey intended meaning.
SPEAKING ASSESSMENT H(Teacher's Notes 31) was chosen by the teacher/examiner. Topics include animals and ways of learning.
Conduct of the test
The test was conducted competently. The teacher/examiner
kept to the timings and had a warm and friendly manner.
The teacher/examiner asked the candidate to read
the card out loud in Part 2, which the candidate might have found helpful.
Grammar
The candidate uses a
range of simple structures that are sometimes accurate:’ I like doing the investigation’ .., ‘I like to ask a lot of
questions’…..’I didn’t touch that bird’… and sometimes inaccurate: ‘mosquito bite people too much’.., ‘we can
improving our knowledge’ … ‘they can be the stress and then just hurt, his,
himself’ …
Complex structures
are occasionally attempted: ‘I saw a bird
had broken her leg’…but they are quite rare.
Errors sometimes
impede understanding: ‘the spider will
help people to eat some bad, bad worms’ …
see also Part 3 Questions 1 and 2.
Mark for
grammar = 4/5 out of 10
Vocabulary
The candidate uses a
range of vocabulary mostly appropriately: investigation,
leisure time, disease, healthy, higher marks, reduce our pressure, just no
light in, in life to discuss simple ideas, facts and opinions.
There is some
inaccuracy in use: captivating,that’s the nature cannot touch inside, however,
the candidate shows some ambition and merits 5 marks.
Mark for
vocabulary = 5 out of 10
Development
The candidate’s
responses are mainly relevant with attempts at development. However, grammatical errors in Part 3
sometimes limit communication.
Mark for
development = 5 out of 10
Pronunciation
Pronunciation is
mostly clear.
Intonation is rarely
used to convey intended meaning.
Misunderstanding of some questions, e.g. ‘What would you like to do when you finish school?’ –
frequently interpreted as ‘What do you do at the end of the day ?’ Although
some candidates occasionally misunderstood some questions, they were able to
provide relevant responses. ‘Why ?
Why not ? at the end of a question can confuse candidates.
One of
the questions in Part 1 required a response in the past tense. Frequently,
candidates responded in the present tense and lost an opportunity to demonstrate
the use of a wider range of tenses.
Teacher/examiners
Part 2
is the only part of the test that candidates see in written form. Therefore it
is important for teacher/examiners to read out the questions in Parts 1 and 3
clearly and clarify, if required (not just repeat the question).
Very few
teacher/examiners picked up on the candidate’s responses to the questions in
Part 1 and Part 3 and developed a conversation by asking follow-up questions.
Some teacher/examiners
were very strict on timing, particularly in Part 2, which either resulted in
the candidate being cut off in mid sentence or the candidate struggling to
fill the last 30 seconds.