IB A2 Interactive Orals

Interactive Oral Presentations

Schedule

Following is the schedule for interactive oral presentations. Please note the date you are scheduled to present. Anyone who misses her/his scheduled date must re-schedule with the teacher a time outside class hours and arrange to have your classmates present as a suitable audience.

May 27
Ali; Cansu

May 30
Melisa, Can, Timur

May 31
Murat B

June 1
Okan, Deniz, Berk, Pooria; Murat G, Saşa, Işınsu

June 2
Nazlı, Begüm, Gökhan; Mert, Ebru, Yasemin

June 3
Sis, Aslı, Ege

Please review below a listing of the approaches your presentation might take, and for the scoring guide criteria.

Interactive Oral Activity

As part of the internal assessment, candidates are expected to participate in varied interactive oral activities that allow for the development and refinement of both listening and speaking skills.

Half of the internal assessment mark must be the mark of one interactive oral activity, based either on a cultural or a literary option (whichever was not the focus of the individual oral).

The following lists possible interactive oral activities:

  • Structured group discussions;

  • Discussions arising from materials prepared by a small group of candidates;

  • The presentation of material lending itself to discussion within the class, such as the offering of two opposing readings of a text or two opposing opinions on an issue;

  • Problem solving or reaching a collective decision on some matter;

  • The presentation of material from your blog, leading to group discussion;

  • Formal debate;

  • Role play;

  • A dialogue between two characters from different works (or from the same work) discussing their contrasting motivations, explaining their behavior, etc.;

  • A character from a work of fiction or a public figure interviewed by the candidate, as him/herself or in another role (e.g., a psychiatrist or social worker);

  • Reminiscences by a character from a point in later life;

  • A dialogue between two people with differing points of view on a topic;

  • An author interviewed by one of his/her characters;

  • Other types of interview;

  • A performance of a scene/scenes from a play with a particular focus or interpretation in mind;

  • Writing and performing an extra scene from a play or novel;

  • Writing and performing a scene concerning an issue encountered in the study of a cultural option;

  • A performance of a scene from a pre-twentieth century play in a modern language;

  • A formal speech (based on an aspect of one of the options studied);

  • A report (e.g., on a piece of research) related to an aspect of one of the options studied;

  • An introduction to a particular cultural option, text or writer;

  • An explanation of a particular aspect of a writer’s work;

  • The examination of a particular interpretation of a text;

  • The setting of a particular writer’s text against another body of material such as details on social background or political views;

  • A commentary on the use of a particular image, idea or symbol in one text;

  • A comparison of two passages, two characters or two texts;

  • An account of the candidate’s developing response to a text.

To allow the assessment criteria to be applied, candidates should provide an explanation of the above activities and/or be engaged in a discussion on what they have done.

Scoring Guide

The following descriptors will be used for the assessment of candidates’ work.

Criterion A: Quality of Ideas

How well does the candidate know and understand the subject matter?

To what extent are the candidate’s ideas relevant and focused?

Is there evidence of critical thinking?

Has the candidate shown an appreciation of language and style?

Are the ideas supported by relevant examples and illustrations?

9–10

  • The candidate has a good understanding of the subject matter.

  • Ideas are mostly relevant and focused.

  • A good degree of critical thinking is shown.

  • A good appreciation of language and style is shown.

  • Ideas are mostly supported by well-chosen examples and illustrations.

7–8

  • The candidate has an adequate understanding of the subject matter.

  • Ideas are generally relevant and focused.

  • There is evidence of critical thinking.

  • An adequate awareness of language and style is shown.

  • Ideas are generally supported by well-chosen examples and illustrations.

5–6

  • The candidate has some understanding of the subject matter.

  • Some ideas are relevant.

  • There is some evidence of critical thinking.

  • Some awareness of language and style is shown.

  • Some ideas are supported by examples and illustrations.

3–4

  • The candidate has a superficial awareness of the subject matter.

  • Ideas are frequently irrelevant and/or repetitive.

  • The analysis of the subject matter is superficial.

  • Little awareness of language and style is shown.

  • Ideas are rarely supported by examples and illustrations.

1–2

  • The candidate has little awareness of the subject matter.

  • Ideas are mainly irrelevant and/or repetitive.

  • There is little analysis of the subject matter.

  • No awareness of language and style is shown.

  • Ideas are not supported by examples and illustrations.

0

  • Level 1 is not achieved.

Criterion B: Presentation

How effective is the organization of the oral task?

How coherent is the structure?

Are examples and illustrations well integrated into the oral task?

9–10

  • The oral task is well organized.

  • The structure of the oral task is mostly coherent and effective.

  • Supporting examples and illustrations are mostly well integrated into the oral task.

7–8

  • The oral task is organized.

  • The structure of the oral task is mostly coherent.

  • Supporting examples and illustrations are generally well integrated into the oral task.

5–6

  • The oral task is generally organized.

  • The structure of the oral task is generally coherent.

  • Supporting examples and illustrations are sometimes integrated into the oral task.

3–4

  • Some organization is apparent.

  • The oral task has some structure.

  • Supporting examples and illustrations are rarely integrated into the oral task.

1–2

  • Little organization is apparent.

  • The oral task has little structure.

  • Supporting examples and illustrations are not integrated into the oral task.

0

  • Level 1 is not achieved.

Criterion C: Language

How fluent, varied and accurate is the language used by the candidate?

How appropriate to the oral task is the candidate’s choice of register and style?

(Register and style include the selection of appropriate vocabulary, structures, tone, etc.)

To what extent does the exchange flow?

9–10

  • The language is fluent and appropriate.

  • There is a good degree of accuracy in grammar and sentence construction, although the oral task is not necessarily free from error.

  • The register and style are effective and appropriate to the task.

  • Vocabulary and idiom are varied and appropriate to the task.

  • The exchange mostly flows freely.

7–8

  • The language is fluent and mostly appropriate.

  • There is an adequate degree of accuracy in grammar and sentence construction, although the oral task is not necessarily free from error.

  • The register and style are appropriate to the task.

  • Vocabulary and idiom are varied and mostly appropriate to the task.

  • The exchange generally flows freely.

5–6

  • The language is generally fluent and appropriate.

  • There is some degree of accuracy in grammar and sentence construction, although

    minor errors and inconsistencies are apparent.

  • The register and style are generally appropriate to the task.

  • Vocabulary and idiom are fairly varied and generally appropriate to the task.

  • The exchange flows but there are some hesitations.

3–4

  • The language frequently lacks fluency and appropriateness.

  • Grammar and sentence construction are often inaccurate.

  • The register and style are sometimes appropriate to the task.

  • The range of vocabulary and idiom is limited.

  • Occasional hesitations impede the flow of the exchange.

1–2

  • The language lacks fluency and appropriateness.

  • There are many basic errors in grammar and sentence construction.

  • There is little sense of register and style.

  • There is little variety in vocabulary and idiom.

  • Frequent hesitations impede the flow of the exchange.

0

  • Level 1 is not achieved.