Individual Oral Commentary

samples and grading

Note

• Class responses on the extract and commentary are provided with the understanding that we may not have read the work in question; and therefore, the response is based on only the information provided by the sample.

IB comments

Extract• 24-line poem offers ample material• Detail from all other poems studied might be

brought into discussion to support comparisons and contrasts

• Shorter poems can be traps for unwary or unprepared students

• In original, extract included typographical errors and guiding questions were difficult to read

IB comments

Questions•Neither offers any guidance as to how this particular poem might be approached•Both address technique and underplay content•Both are generic – asking about features that any poem might have

Sample 4 – Criterion A

• 2/5

• Some knowledge but superficial understanding

• Rightly identified but little offered by way of placing poem in context of works as whole

• Context not further explored in subsequent questions

Sample 4 – Criterion B

• 3/10• Very little explanation of effects of identified

techniques• Interpretation of thought and feeling are never

developed• At no time is an overview attempted of what

student feels poem is about• Not sustained

Sample 4 – Criterion C

• 3/10

• Some evidence of structure, too brief and underdeveloped to be awarded a 4

• Short and hesitant section that interprets one or two lines

• None of subsequent questions enables student to build anything more in way of sustained/developed response

Sample 4 – Criterion D

• 2/5

• Lack of clarity and coherence

• Too many sentences and assertions remain unfinished

• Vocabulary is sometimes a little vague and imprecise

Sample 5

Class discussion:

• In your opinion, is the extract suitable for commentary? Explain.

•  Are the guiding questions appropriate to the assignment? To the extract? To guide an unsure student? Explain.

IB comments

Extract• Slightly exceeds 40 lines, but opening and

closing speeches couldn’t be cut• Appropriately line-numbered

Questions• Generic (can apply to any extract or genre)• Balance between style and content• Should offset tendency to approach Shakespeare

as a reader instead of listener/spectator

Sample 5

• Now listen carefully to the actual student commentary on the extract. Make notes as needed to be able to support the grade you will give (later).

• Immediately after the extract audio, grade the commentary based on the IOC rubric.

Sample 5 – Criterion A

• Discuss the score given and the reasoning behind it.

• Compare to the actual score:

Sample 5 – Criterion A

• 3/5

• Context very briefly established

• To be reach level 4, needs greater sense of what happens on stage immediately before or after extract

• No real connections established with remainder of play

Sample 5 – Criterion B

• Discuss the score given and the reasoning behind it.

• Compare to the actual score:

Sample 5 – Criterion B

• 7/10

• Repeated reference to “reader” (effect on audience underplayed)

• Use of relevant references and detail; some effective analysis

• Valid and generally detailed

• Good interpretation of relationship revealed in answers to subsequent questions

Sample 5 – Criterion C

• Discuss the score given and the reasoning behind it.

• Compare to the actual score:

Sample 5 – Criterion C

• 7/10• Slightly rushed and jumpy delivery; then

relaxes• Well-integrated use of references• Follows largely linear approach; maintains

implicit focus on characters and relationship• Repetition following lengthy pause not

viewed as detraction

Sample 5 – Criterion D

• Discuss the score given and the reasoning behind it.

• Compare to the actual score:

Sample 5 – Criterion D

• 4/5• Relaxed register with no significant lapses in

grammar• Clear attempt to use appropriate speech• Use of inappropriate terms (“leadee”)

balanced by appropriate use of some literary terms

• Desire to communicate response in varied, interesting way for listener

Sample 6

Class discussion:

• In your opinion, is the extract suitable for commentary? Explain.

•  Are the guiding questions appropriate to the assignment? To the extract? To guide an unsure student? Explain.

Sample 6 – Extract/Questions

Extract• Exceeds lines, but parting speech needed• Ample material for wide variety of approaches• Line numbering acts as reminder of split lines

Questions• Generic; could have more precisely focused on

particular extract• Asks for content and style in interconnected way

(purpose of commentary exercise)

Sample 6

• Now listen carefully to the actual student commentary on the extract. Make notes as needed to be able to support the grade you will give (later).

• Immediately after the extract audio, grade the commentary based on the IOC rubric.

Sample 6 – Criterion A

• 4/5

• Good rather than excellent, thorough or precise

• Correctly identified but more precise placing not offered

Sample 6 – Criterion A

• Discuss the score given and the reasoning behind it.

• Compare to the actual score:

Sample 6 – Criterion B

• 9/10

• Response is firm and convincing; interpretation is valid, considered and detailed

• Evident understanding and awareness of what is happening on stage and benefit of this exchange being played in front of whole court

Sample 6 – Criterion B

• Discuss the score given and the reasoning behind it.

• Compare to the actual score:

Sample 6 – Criterion B

• Good awareness of “experimentation” of blank verse’s interrupted lines though needs more and crisper detail

• Effects of caesura and enjambment need more development

• Shows awareness of other literary features (metaphor, personification, and plosives) and their effects, but could have further explored these with precise evidence

Sample 6 – Criterion C

• Discuss the score given and the reasoning behind it.

• Compare to the actual score:

Sample 6 – Criterion C

• 10/10

• Clear and purposeful structure with frequent structural reminders and a clear conclusion

• Independent presentation of just under 13 minutes

• Aim is to show significance and importance of extract of work as whole

• Illustration and reference flows into discourse

Sample 6 – Criterion D

• Discuss the score given and the reasoning behind it.

• Compare to the actual score:

Sample 6 – Criterion D

• 5/5

• “In spite of the frequent and sometimes distracting use of ‘um’ throughout, this is a correct, formal and lucidly delivered presentation that fulfills the criteria for level 5.”

Sample 7

Class discussion:

• In your opinion, is the extract suitable for commentary? Explain.

•  Are the guiding questions appropriate to the assignment? To the extract? To guide an unsure student? Explain.

IB comments

Extract

• Perhaps too long, but opens and closes with Aphra Behn

• Absence of line-numbering within single block of single paragraph – doesn’t facilitate nor encourage necessary detailed reference

IB comments

Questions

•Balanced

•Second question particularly useful guidance for students seeking to structure literary response to non-fiction

Sample 7

• Now listen carefully to the actual student commentary on the extract. Make notes as needed to be able to support the grade you will give (later).

• Immediately after the extract audio, grade the commentary based on the IOC rubric.

Sample 7 – Criterion A

• Discuss the score given and the reasoning behind it.

• Compare to the actual score:

Sample 7 – Criterion A

• 4/5• Good knowledge of appropriate context• More of an analysis of how extract is key to

overall concerns of work than commentary closely focused on internal workings of extract itself

• Recognizes origins but doesn’t link to internal clues or to rhetorical argument present in extract

Sample 7 – Criterion B

• Discuss the score given and the reasoning behind it.

• Compare to the actual score:

Sample 7 – Criterion B

• 4/10• Interpretation not grounded in extract itself• Literary devices remain unexplored• Little attention paid to precise details and effects• Some awareness of humor

• First question perhaps encouraged student to roam too widely in consideration of women writers rather than on precise details of extract itself

Sample 7 – Criterion C

• Discuss the score given and the reasoning behind it.

• Compare to the actual score:

Sample 7 – Criterion C

• 4/10

• Four areas of investigation mentioned as framework

• No subsequent control over pace and direction of presentation

• Digressions

• Ample references to work tend to broaden response instead of support precisely

Sample 7 – Criterion D

• Discuss the score given and the reasoning behind it.

• Compare to the actual score:

Sample 7 – Criterion D

• 3/5

• Talks effortlessly and volubly

• Not always precision and control appropriate to and necessary for formal commentary

• Style and register not consciously adopted

Homework:

• Listen to sample 8 and grade it. You may choose to listen to sample 9 or not to (I would suggest that you do listen to it, even if you choose not to grade it).

• I will give you the grades and comments for these samples next class.