Skip to main content

Marking criteria (oral) Higher level and business modules (beyond level 5)

Scale Language:
- accuracy, range and sophistication (40)
 
Mark Communication and interaction:
- scope, clarity and coherence of ideas presented
- comprehension and response (40)
Delivery:
- pronunciation & intonation
- flow, pace, spontaneity
- may include some or all of the following: body language, audibility… (20)
Mark
Excellent 1st  An exceptional performance
Native/near-native command of the languageA flawless performance in terms of grammatical and lexical accuracy.
An exceptional range of pertinent vocabulary and idiomatic expressions.
100 (40) 94 (38) An exceptional performance
Exceptional fulfilment of all aspects of the task(s).
An exceptional ability to present, analyse and develop ideas with clarity.
Register entirely appropriate to the context and task.
An exceptional ability to understand and respond to nuanced and detailed questions.
Exceptionally confident delivery
Exceptional ability to engage the interlocutor.
The candidate expresses themselves effortlessly and effectively.
Highly spontaneous delivery/responses.
No errors of pronunciation.
Exceptionally accurate intonation.
100 (20) 94 (19)
High 1st High Mid1st An outstanding performance
Near-native command of the language.
A virtually flawless performance in terms of grammatical and lexical accuracy.
An outstanding range of pertinent vocabulary and idiomatic expressions.
Virtually no grammatical and/or lexical slips.
88 (35) 82 (33)  An outstanding performance
Outstanding fulfilment of all aspects of the task(s).
An outstanding ability to present, analyse and develop ideas with clarity.
Register entirely appropriate to the context and task.
An outstanding ability to understand and respond to nuanced and detailed questions.
Outstanding delivery
Outstanding ability to engage the interlocutor.
The candidate expresses themselves effortlessly and effectively.
Highly spontaneous delivery/responses.
Virtually no errors of pronunciation.
Extremely accurate intonation
88 (18) 82 (16) 
Low Mid 1st Low 1st An excellent performance
Excellent command of the language.
Excellent performance in terms of grammatical and lexical accuracy.
Excellent range of pertinent vocabulary and idiomatic expressions.
There may be occasional minor grammatical and/or lexical slips.
78 (31) 74 (30) An excellent performance
Excellent fulfilment of all aspects of the task(s).
An excellent ability to present, analyse and develop ideas with clarity.
Register entirely appropriate to the context and task.
An excellent ability to understand and respond to nuanced and detailed questions.
Excellent delivery
Excellent ability to engage the interlocutor.
The candidate expresses themselves very confidently and effectively.
Spontaneous delivery/responses.
Excellent pronunciation and intonation displayed overall, though there may be occasional minor errors
78 (15.
5) 74 (15)
High 2:1 A very good performance
Very good command of the language.
Very good performance in terms of grammatical and lexical accuracy.
Very good range of pertinent vocabulary and idiomatic expressions.
There are occasional minor grammatical and/or lexical slips.
68 (27) A very good performance
Very good fulfilment of all aspects of the task(s).
Very good ability to present, analyse and develop ideas with clarity.
Register fully appropriate to the context and task.
Very good ability to understand and respond to detailed questions.
Very good delivery
Very good ability to engage the interlocutor.
The candidate expresses themselves confidently and effectively.
Very good pronunciation and intonation displayed overall, though there are occasional minor errors.
68 (13)
Mid 2:1 A good performance
Good command of the language.
Good performance in terms of grammatical and lexical accuracy.
Good range of pertinent vocabulary and idiomatic expressions.
There are some minor grammatical and/or lexical slips
65 (26) A good performance
Good fulfilment of the task(s).
Good ability to present, analyse and develop ideas with clarity.
Register appropriate to the context and task.
Good ability to understand and respond to detailed questions.
Good delivery
Good ability to engage the interlocutor.
The candidate generally expresses themselves confidently and effectively.
Good pronunciation and intonation displayed overall but there are some minor errors.
65 (12.
5)
Low 2:1 A mostly good performance
Mostly good command of the language.
Mostly good performance in terms of grammatical and lexical accuracy.
Mostly good range of pertinent vocabulary and idiomatic expressions.
Several minor grammatical and/or lexical errors are present.
Some major grammatical and/or lexical errors may be present, but the candidate shows some ability to self-correct these.
62 (25) A mostly good performance
Mostly good fulfilment of the task(s).
Mostly good ability to present, analyse and develop ideas with clarity.
Register mostly appropriate to the context and task.
Mostly good ability to understand and respond to detailed questions, though the candidate may occasionally need to ask for clarification.
Mostly good delivery
Mostly good ability to engage the interlocutor.
The candidate generally expresses themselves confidently and effectively, but may be hesitant in places.
Mostly good pronunciation and intonation displayed overall but errors may be more frequent.
62 (12)
High 2:2 A reasonable performance
Reasonable command of the language.
Reasonable performance in terms of grammatical and lexical accuracy.
Reasonable range of pertinent vocabulary and idiomatic expressions.
Several minor and major grammatical and/or lexical errors are present, but the candidate occasionally shows some ability to self-correct these.
58 (23) A reasonable performance
Reasonable fulfilment of the task(s).
Reasonable ability to present, analyse and develop ideas, but these may be lacking in scope.
Register generally appropriate to the context and task.
Reasonable ability to understand and respond to a range of detailed questions but the candidate may need to ask for clarification and may not sufficiently develop their response.
Reasonable delivery
Reasonable ability to engage the interlocutor
(some of the following may apply: over-reliance on notes; pre-prepared verbatim delivery).
The candidate expresses themselves reasonably well, but is hesitant in places.
Reasonable pronunciation and intonation displayed overall but errors are more frequent.
58 (11.
5)
Mid 2:2 An inconsistent performance
Inconsistent command of the language.
Uneven performance in terms of grammatical and lexical accuracy.
Fairly limited range of pertinent vocabulary and idiomatic expressions; some mother tongue interference may occur.
Frequent minor and several major grammatical and/or lexical errors.
55 (22) An inconsistent performance
Task(s) fulfilled but pedestrian approach.
Inconsistent ability to present, analyse and develop ideas.
Ideas are lacking in scope.
Register not always appropriate to the context and task.
Some or all of the following will apply:- The candidate aptly answers simple questions but starts to struggle with more detailed/complex questions.
- The candidate may need to ask for clarification.
- The candidate maintains the flow of discussion and communication to some degree, but with frequent hesitation.
- The candidate does not sufficiently develop their response; the discussion may falter in places.
Inconsistent delivery
Engagement with the interlocutor is inconsistent
(some of the following are likely to apply: over-reliance on notes; pre-prepared verbatim delivery).
The candidate has some difficulty in expressing themselves (e.g. frequent hesitation).
Frequent errors in pronunciation and intonation occur that reveal gaps in knowledge of the rules.
55 (11)
Low 2:2 An insecure performance
Insecure command of the language.
Poor in terms of grammatical and lexical accuracy.
Limited range of pertinent vocabulary and idiomatic expressions; some mother tongue interference occurs.
Frequent minor and regular major grammatical and/or lexical errors.
52 (21) An insecure performance
Fairly unconvincing approach to the task(s).
The candidate tends to struggle to present and analyse ideas in a coherent way.
Ideas are generally underdeveloped.
Register not always appropriate to the context and task.
In places, the candidate has difficulty in understanding questions, even when they have been rephrased/simplified.
As a result, they may be unable to respond.
The candidate struggles to maintain the flow of discussion and communication is stilted with numerous hesitations.
The interlocutor may occasionally struggle to understand the candidate’s arguments/answers.
Insecure delivery
Engagement with the interlocutor is insecure
(e.g. over-reliance on notes; pre-prepared verbatim delivery).
The candidate has difficulty in expressing themselves (e.g. frequent hesitation).
Frequent errors in pronunciation and intonation occur that reveal gaps in knowledge of the rules.
52 (10.
5)
High 3rd A poor performance
Poor command of the language.
Poor in terms of grammatical and lexical accuracy.
Limited range of vocabulary.
Mother tongue often interferes with performance.
Frequent minor and major grammatical and/or lexical errors.
 
48 (19) A poor performance
Unconvincing approach to the task(s).
The candidate struggles to present, analyse and develop ideas in a coherent way.
Ideas are underdeveloped.
Register often inappropriate to the context and task.
The candidate regularly has difficulty in understanding questions, even when they have been rephrased/simplified.
As a result, they may be unable to respond.
The candidate struggles to maintain the flow of discussion and communication is laborious.
The interlocutor struggles to understand the candidate’s arguments/answers.
Poor delivery
Engagement with the interlocutor is poor
(e.g. over-reliance on notes; pre-prepared verbatim delivery).
The candidate has a lot of difficulty in expressing themselves (e.g. persistent hesitation).
Persistent errors in pronunciation and intonation occur that reveal gaps in knowledge of the rules and may impede comprehension.
48 (10)
Mid 3rd A very poor performance
Very poor command of the language.
Very poor in terms of grammatical and lexical accuracy.
Very limited range of vocabulary.
Mother tongue regularly interferes with performance.
Frequent minor and major grammatical and/or lexical errors, which may result in incoherent syntax and may obscure meaning.
 
45 (18) A very poor performance
Very unconvincing approach to the task(s).
The candidate is more often than not unable to present and analyse ideas in a coherent way.
Ideas are not developed and are simplistic.
Register often inappropriate to the context and task.
The candidate persistently has difficulty in understanding questions, even when they have been rephrased/simplified.
The candidate really struggles to maintain the flow of discussion and communication is particularly laborious.
The interlocutor struggles to understand the candidate’s arguments/answers
Very poor delivery
Engagement with the interlocutor is very poor
(e.g. over-reliance on notes; pre-prepared verbatim delivery).
The candidate has considerable difficulty in expressing themselves (e.g. persistent hesitation).
Persistent errors in pronunciation and intonation occur that reveal very poor knowledge of the rules and may impede comprehension.
45 (9)
Low 3rd An extremely poor performance
Extremely poor command of the language.
Extremely poor in terms of grammatical and lexical accuracy.
Severely limited range of vocabulary.
Candidate may have no choice but to use their mother tongue on occasion to maintain communication.
Frequent minor and major grammatical and/or lexical errors, which result in incoherent syntax and often obscure meaning.
42 (17) An extremely poor performance
Task(s) largely unfulfilled and unconvincing.
The candidate displays a clear inability to present and analyse ideas in a coherent way.
Ideas are not developed and are simplistic and even irrelevant.
Register often inappropriate to the context and task.
The candidate often fails to understand questions, even when they have been rephrased/simplified.
As a result, they may be unable to respond.
The candidate is unable to maintain the flow of discussion and communication is pared down to simple laborious utterances.
The interlocutor struggles to understand the candidate’s arguments/answers.
Extremely poor delivery
Engagement with the interlocutor is extremely poor
(e.g. over-reliance on notes; pre-prepared verbatim delivery).
The candidate has extreme difficulty in expressing themselves (e.g. persistent hesitation).
Persistent errors in pronunciation and intonation occur that reveal very poor knowledge of the rules and impede comprehension.
42 (8)
High Fail (sub honours) An unsatisfactory performance
Unsatisfactory command of the language.
Unsatisfactory in terms of grammatical and lexical accuracy.
Severely limited range of vocabulary, which frequently obscures meaning and prevents communication.
Candidate may have no choice but to use their mother tongue to maintain communication.
Preponderance of minor and major grammatical and/or lexical errors, which result in incoherent syntax and obscure meaning.
38 (15)  An unsatisfactory performance
Task(s) unfulfilled and unconvincing.
The candidate struggles to present simple ideas and completely fails to analyse and develop them.
A lot of irrelevant material.
Register inappropriate to the context and task.
The candidate generally fails to understand questions, even when they have been rephrased/simplified.
As a result, they may be unable to respond.
The candidate is unable to take part in the discussion and communication is pared down to simple
Unsatisfactory delivery
Engagement with the interlocutor is unsatisfactory
(e.g. the candidate is unable to detach themselves from their notes, pre-prepared verbatim delivery)Endemic errors in pronunciation and intonation occur that reveal extremely poor knowledge of the rules and impede comprehension.
38 (7) 
Fail A very unsatisfactory performance
Very unsatisfactory command of the language.
Very unsatisfactory in terms of grammatical and lexical accuracy.
Severely limited range of vocabulary, which obscures meaning and prevents communication.
Candidate may have no choice but to use their mother tongue to maintain communication.
Grammatical and lexical errors are omnipresent, which results in incoherence and obscured meaning.
32 (13) A very unsatisfactory performance
Task(s) is unfulfilled and unconvincing.
The candidate is barely able to present simple ideas and completely fails to analyse and develop them.
An excess of irrelevant material.
Register inappropriate to the context and task.
The candidate fails to understand questions, even when they have been rephrased/simplified.
As a result, they are frequently unable to respond.
The candidate is unable to take part in the discussion and communication is pared down to simple laborious/irrelevant utterances.
The interlocutor really struggles to understand the candidate’s arguments/answers.
A very unsatisfactory delivery
Engagement with the interlocutor is very unsatisfactory
(e.g. the candidate is unable to detach themselves from their notes, pre-prepared verbatim delivery)Endemic errors in pronunciation and intonation occur that reveal extremely poor knowledge of the rules and impede comprehension.
32 (6)
A wholly inadequate performance
Wholly inadequate command of the language
Little evidence of grammatical / lexical competence.
Comprehension is near impossible.
Or, not enough language to assess.
25 (10) An wholly inadequate performance
Wholly inadequate grasp of the subject matter.
A total inability to adhere to the conventions of the task set.
The examiner cannot understand the candidate’s arguments/answers
Wholly inadequate delivery
The candidate is wholly unable to engage with the interlocutor.
Endemic errors in pronunciation and intonation occur that reveal inadequate knowledge of the rules and impede comprehension.
25 (5)
Low Fail 12 (5) 12 (2)
Zero   0 Work of no merit OR Absent OR Work not submitted OR Penalty in some misconduct cases   0