Modern Languages
French – Assessment of
Speaking
Higher
6164
Autumn 1999
HIGHER STILL
Modern
Languages
French – Assessment of
Speaking
Higher
Support Materials
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
This video has been produced for the Higher Still Development Programme by North
Ayrshire Council Department of Education.
Thanks are expressed to the teachers and students in the schools for their kind cooperation in this initiative, and to the following:
Mr Colin Laird, Adviser in Modern Languages
Mrs Anne-Marie Hiddleston, Adviser in Modern Languages
Mr Brian Green, Senior Video Technician
INTRODUCTION
These notes accompany the video French: Speaking Performances (Higher) which is
being distributed at the same time.
The video cassette shows eight examples of S5 students in schools in North Ayrshire
undergoing Speaking assessments on the format required at Higher under the Higher
Still Arrangements.
The teachers conducting these tests were doing so for the first time to the
requirements of the Higher Still Arrangements, and the students themselves had not
been prepared specifically for the Higher Still format of the Speaking test. Instead, all
were being presented for Revised Higher Grade.
Purpose of the video
The purpose of the video is to provide an opportunity for teachers in Modern
Languages departments in schools and colleges to consider and discuss techniques for
the successful conduct of the Higher Speaking test. The video could also be used in
the context of local in-service activities.
Although an indication is provided of the award which each performance might
attract, the main purpose of the video is not to assess the students’ performance but
rather to consider more closely the role of the teacher / lecturer in ensuring that the
student performs to the highest level of which he or she is capable.
The guidance provided in the notes therefore should be treated as provisional
meantime. More formal exemplification of Speaking performance will be issued
by the Scottish Qualifications Authority in due course.
Aspects for consideration
When watching the video, you might find it useful to consider aspects such as the
following:
 the nature and use of the five headings. These should not be the ‘script’ for the
presentation, and should not be written in a form which allows them to be more
than prompts for the student.
 the preparation required by the teacher. This will cover such matters as the variety
of question types to be asked; the appropriate mixture of open and closed
questions; the desirability of beginning with one or two easy questions.
 another planning aspect relates to the need to cover two themes. The video
demonstrates how this can be achieved ‘seamlessly’ in the course of the discussion.
 planning in opportunities for the student to express his / her own opinion (this is
important, because the ability to express one’s own opinion is one of the award
criteria).
 pace - and when to offer support if the student gets stuck.
 use of learned material. There has to be evidence that the student can speak
‘autonomously’, and can cope with the unexpected. In other words, it will not be
acceptable for the entire performance of either the presentation or the discussion to
be no more than a recitation of learned material, however good the material may
be. There is evidence in the video of a student being unable to handle a reasonable
question to which no answer has been learned.
Modern Languages: French – Assessment of Speaking (H)
1
 length of the presentation. It is important to bear in mind that a presentation which
fails to reach the minimum time prescribed, even if of high quality, will attract only
a ‘Near Miss’ award. (see also Section 4 Training Issues below).
 length of discussion. The video contains examples of discussions which go beyond
the maximum prescribed time. There is no benefit even to able students in
prolonging the discussion beyond the specified time limit. Indeed, the danger is
that to do so would risk compromising the quality of the performance due to
student fatigue.
Training issues
A number of training issues emerges from the performances on the video. Among
them are the following:
 how to reduce notes to five headings, each of no more than eight words
 use of the headings. All the students shown on the video have prepared some form
of stimulus notes. Very few make any use of them, a fact which suggests that they
had been encouraged to learn as much as possible of what they would say. The
dangers of such an approach are clear: forgetting part of the learned material in the
heat of the moment could throw the student off course completely. Using headings
as a stimulus for sustained speech is a sophisticated but valuable skill, and teachers
are urged not to encourage students to learn everything off by heart.
 be prepared for the unexpected question
 length of presentation: speed of delivery. The importance of speaking for at least
the minimum specified time is referred to in Section 3 above. It is recognised that
the presentation is a stressful experience for certain students. Very often the nerves
which it generates cause students to speak faster than normal. It will be desirable
for students to have opportunities in the course of the normal class work to be
made aware of the speed of delivery which ensures adherence to at least the
minimum time requirement for the test. The video contains examples of students
whose presentations are too short but are otherwise of an acceptable standard.
 how to ask for help if needed. This will not necessarily detract from the quality of
the performance; indeed, it may enhance it by proving that the student can use
foreign language strategies for achieving clarification of something which has been
forgotten or not understood.
 training the candidate to take the initiative in the discussion. The interlocutor will
need to allow time for this to happen. It is important that it should, since the ability
to take the initiative is one of the award criteria against which the performance will
be judged.
 telling the students what the award criteria are. These may be found in the
National Assessment Bank documentation.
Modern Languages: French – Assessment of Speaking (H)
2
CAND
1
PRESENTATION
DISCUSSION
Topic: Le monde extérieur - mes vacances idéales
Themes: The Wider World and Lifestyles
Time: 1 minute 45 seconds
Time: 4 minutes 25 seconds
Content: Appropriate to Higher. Her presentation has a clear structure, but
she should have made greater use of the headings to keep her on track. She
hardly referred to her notes at all.
Content: Advantages / disadvantages of holidays with parents / friends
Pronunciation: Makes an attempt at French accent, but with some mistakes,
e.g. semaine
Language: Some very good, accurate and fluent parts (j’aurais économisé)
and some muddled parts (story with boys). Has a lot of good learned material,
but its use is sometimes confused: il y a beaucoup de faire à choses. Gives the
impression of struggling when she forgets a learned answer.
Language: Good range of vocabulary and tenses. Uses very good structures;
verb tenses are accurate, in particular the conditional: ce qui me plairait /
profiter de
Interaction: Problems with comprehension of one question.
General Comment: Possibly more Good than Very Good. Clearly capable of achieving Very Good, if less nervous. This would be assisted by training to
make better use of the headings which she had prepared.
Overall impression: Good to Very Good
Modern Languages: French – Assessment of Speaking (H)
3
CAND
2
PRESENTATION
DISCUSSION
Topic: La mode de vie - disputes avec parents
Themes: Lifestyles (both topics) and Education and Work
Time: 2 minutes 40 seconds (too long).
Time: 2 minutes 20 seconds
Content: Appropriate to Higher. Presentation has a clear structure and is well
prepared. Tries to give examples to back up statements and tries to draw
together points made. Little use of headings.
Content: Very good level of discussion throughout.
Pronunciation: Very deliberate, but mainly accurate.
Language: Very deliberate, thoughtful and mainly accurate use of an
impressive range of language structures, e.g. ce qui gâche la soirée, je finis
par. Despite one or two errors in language and pronunciation, this is a very
impressive performance.
Language: Good range of vocabulary and tenses. Uses very good structures;
verb tenses are accurate, e.g. à faire ce que voulait ma mère / la façon dont je
m’habille. Good range of phrases for organising ideas: il m’arrive, en ce qui
concerne.
Interaction: No problems here.
Extended Reading / Viewing : Le Silence de la Mer
Extended Reading / Viewing : Le Silence de la Mer
It is clear that the candidate knows the story very well. The language used is
again very good, but it is hard to understand in parts due to weaknesses of
intonation. For this reason, this performance might be Good rather than Very
Good.
Carefully prepared (excessively so?). Candidate responds quickly and in depth
to all the questions. Able to express opinion satisfactorily.
General Comment: Language Unit: The presentation is a good example of hard work being rewarded: content, structure, language and length all very good.
In the discussion, the interlocutor might usefully have expanded on the aspect of moving to study in Aberdeen.
General Comment: Extended Reading/Viewing Unit: The approach adopted by the teacher will help candidates to cope with this part of the Speaking test. It
also highlights the advantages of conducting the test as two separate sections, so that candidates can come fresh to the second presentation and discussion.
Overall impression: Very Good
Modern Languages: French – Assessment of Speaking (H)
4
CAND
3
PRESENTATION
DISCUSSION
Topic: Travailler à l’étranger
Themes: Education and Work, The Wider World and Lifestyles
Time: 1 minute 15 seconds (a bit short)
Time: 7 minutes 45 seconds (far too long).
Content: Very good content, clearly appropriate to Higher. Makes use of
headings. Presentation has a clear structure and is well prepared. Tries to
include back-up statements and to draw points together (en résumé).
Content: Very Good level of discussion throughout. Covers a range of topics
in considerable depth and is still going strong at the end!
Pronunciation: Fluent and mainly accurate, but with errors of pronunciation
and intonation, e.g. English interference in ouverture d’esprit. (Intonation
improves later in the discussion section).
Language: Answers confidently. Some good idiom and sound, extensive
answers, going well beyond the minimum. Excellent range of tenses (future /
conditional), structures and vocabulary. Able to form long sentences
accurately, e.g. je vais économiser l’argent que je gagne en travaillant.
Language: Good range of structures and tenses. Speaks very quickly and
confidently.
Interaction: Very good, responds promptly to all questions, as in a real
discussion.
General Comment: Presentation is short and could technically attract no more than a Near Miss award. This will solve itself with training and practice. Level
of operation is clearly Very Good. A better balance between presentation and discussion would be desirable. Presentation needs to be a little longer and
discussion could be much shorter without detriment to the performance. Demonstrates a good command of language.
Overall impression: Very Good
Modern Languages: French – Assessment of Speaking (H)
5
CAND
PRESENTATION
DISCUSSION
Topic: Mes passetemps
Themes: Lifestyles and The Wider World
Time: 1 minute 00 seconds (check time)
Time: 6 minutes 40 seconds
Content: Appropriate to Higher. Moves on to health aspects. Very fast
delivery makes it seem short and lacking in substance. Very close to notes /
headings - due to nerves? At one point he seems to be reading from a script. If
so, this is unacceptable.
Content: Very Good level of discussion throughout. This is a difficult topic
to sustain at a ‘Higher’ level of discussion. Candidate does so by giving
reasons, talking about types of programmes, health aspects to leisure, reasons
for disputes and advantages/disadvantages.
4
Pronunciation: Fluent and mainly accurate, but little attempt at French
accent.
Language: Very Good structures and accuracy of tenses. Some good idiom,
e.g. ce que j’aime, ne détache les yeux de l’écran. Good range of phrases for
organising and introducing ideas.
Language: Some lengthy answers, some inaccuracies. particularly towards
the end. Some good idiom, e.g. j’ai le droit mais je n’ai pas le moyen, en ce
qui concerne ce qu’ils veulent regarder.
Interaction: Very quick response to most questions.
General Comment: Short presentation would reduce an otherwise clear 10 to a Near Miss 4. Needs training and practice in slowing it down. There could have
been a better balance between presentation and discussion - discussion is on the long side.
Overall impression: Very Good (language) / Good (performance)
Modern Languages: French – Assessment of Speaking (H)
6
CAND
PRESENTATION
Topic: L’argent de poche
Themes: Lifestyles and The Wider World
Time: 1 minute 20 seconds
Time: 6 minutes 15 seconds
Content: Appropriate to Higher, and with some sense of structure. Good use
of headings.
Content: Advantages / disadvantages of holidays with parents / friends.
Content and questions tend to be more factual - she copes best with this type of
question. Struggles more when trying to express ideas.
Pronunciation: Some weaknesses, but clearly comprehensible throughout.
Errors in pronunciation of verb ending -ent (sounds as -ons).
5
DISCUSSION
Language: Language and structures simpler than previous candidates, but still
well prepared, with good phrases incorporated well, e.g. use of present
participle and relative pronouns. Probably Good rather than Satisfactory.
Language: Some good learned material, which she uses effectively, e.g. ça ne
m’attire pas, pourvu qu’on puisse organiser. Correct use of depuis + present
tense. Verbs generally hold up and communication is always achieved in spite
of errors, which sometimes affect the verb endings, e.g. pour s’amuse, a
change
Interaction: Comprehension generally good. Responds better to more factual
questions.
General Comment: Presentation possibly nearer Good than Satisfactory. Discussion possibly nearer upper Satisfactory than Good. Tends to pick up when she
moves to a new topic, then fades as the discussion goes into greater depth.
Overall impression: Good to Upper Satisfactory
Modern Languages: French – Assessment of Speaking (H)
7
CAND
6
PRESENTATION
DISCUSSION
Topic: Habiter dans une station balnéaire
Themes: The Wider World and Lifestyles
Time: 1 minute 30 seconds
Time: 4 minutes 40 seconds
Content: Appropriate to Higher, but needs training in how to structure the
presentation of advantages / disadvantages. Very ‘learned’. Hesitations, but
does not use headings!
Content: Advantages / disadvantages of town / country, link with Healthy
Living, touches on Disputes with Parents.
Pronunciation: Talks fairly fluently, but with errors of pronunciation and
intonation. Communicates throughout.
Language: Has enough control of language (helped by use of some good
learned material) to ensure communication in spite of errors. Struggles in
places to use her learned material. Errors in language and pronunciation
increase as the discussion goes on.
Language: Some good learned phrases (ce qui m’attire), but also some errors
of accuracy (les actives, un belle piscine). Some range of tense and
vocabulary, but not always accurate.
Interaction: Satisfactory, but beginning to require help by the end.
General Comment: Presentation Satisfactory. Discussion at best Lower Satisfactory.
Overall impression: Satisfactory
Modern Languages: French – Assessment of Speaking (H)
8
CAND
7
PRESENTATION
DISCUSSION
Topic: Disputes avec parents
Themes: Lifestyles, The Wider World (Tourism), Education and Work
Time: 0 minute 40 seconds (far too short).
Time: 4 minutes 00 seconds (a bit short).
Content: Appropriate to Higher, but needs training in how to speak for at
least the minimum time: slow down speed of delivery, pay attention to
structure, and make use of headings.
Content: Gives advantages / disadvantages, but struggles to express ideas.
Performs better at start of new topic and on more factual areas such as TV
programmes / description of home town.
Pronunciation: Errors in pronunciation (due to speed of delivery?) make it
difficult to pick up on first hearing.
Language: Speaks fast. Answers seem ‘learned’, but some of the learned
material is used well. Verbs are generally sound, and therefore communication
is achieved despite errors in other language areas.
Language: Some good phrases. Verbs hold up, e.g. ils m’empêchent de
sortir.
Interaction: Some problems at the start, not helped by the questions asked
(age for leaving home).
General Comment: Presentation probably a Fail, in view of its shortness and the candidate’s weaknesses in pronunciation. With training, the level of language
at which candidate is operating suggests Good, if pronunciation could be improved. Discussion Satisfactory (upper?). This performance illustrates well the need
to conform to time specifications in both the presentation and the discussion.
Overall impression: Satisfactory (upper?)
Modern Languages: French – Assessment of Speaking (H)
9
CAND
8
PRESENTATION
DISCUSSION
Topic: Disputes avec parents.
Themes: Lifestyles, The Wider World and Education and Work
Time: 1 minute 00 seconds (too short)
Time: 4 minutes 05 seconds (short)
Content: Appropriate to Higher. Too short, but otherwise good. Clear
structure and good level of language.
Content: Advantages / disadvantages of sport and part-time job. Might have
expanded on most areas touched upon.
Pronunciation: Generally good, with some lapses of accent.
Language: Some good use of learned material, verbs are generally sound,
therefore communicates in spite of errors in other language areas. He sticks at
two questions which seem not to have been prepared. Can he cope only with
predicted questions / answers? Fades towards the end, when answers become
fairly minimal.
Language: Good and probably Very Good if he had gone on to sustain the
presentation for the required time. Some very good structures, e.g. ils
voudraient que je sois plus travailleur, ils m’empêchent de sortir.
Interaction: Some problems with the initial questions, e.g. age for leaving
home. Some responses are fairly fluent and prompt, others are minimal.
General Comment: Presentation would score only Near Miss due to lack of length, but quality of language used is Good to Very Good. Discussion shows a
mixed performance of variable quality, with some doubt as to his ability to handle unpredictable situations. If trained to take the initiative and expand on some
of the areas tackled, could be Good.
Overall impression: Satisfactory, tending towards Good
Modern Languages: French – Assessment of Speaking (H)
10
Suggested checklist for reference when listening to the performances on the video
Presentation
 level of content
 time/speed of delivery
 nature and use of the five headings
 accent/pronunciation/fluency/intonation
 appropriate integration of learned material.
Discussion
 link with Presentation
 development into second theme
 easier questions to start with, becoming more demanding later
 variety of question types - not too many open ones
 opportunity for student to express opinion
 encouragement of student to take the initiative.
Modern Languages: French – Assessment of Speaking (H)
11