Question 1
During the IO, a student spends the entire 3 minutes on Extract 2 repeating the exact same analytical claims made about Extract 1 without referencing Extract 1 again. Which criterion is most directly weakened by this approach?No clue? Show me the answer
Correct answerCorrect!
IncorrectStep-by-step walkthrough
Choose a solution method
Method #1Direct reasoningStep 1: Locate the failure
The student never draws a comparative link between Extract 2 and Extract 1, treating the second extract as an isolated repeat of the first.
Step 2: Recall what Extract 2's job is
The teaching content states Extract 2 analysis carries the extra job of comparing or contrasting with Extract 1, and this comparative work is where conceptual development marks live.
Step 3: Map the failure to a criterion
Without that comparative thread, the presentation lacks the unifying conceptual thread across both extracts, which is exactly what Criterion C rewards.
Step 4: Confirm the answer
The weakness is conceptual disunity, not timing, technique-naming, or contextual knowledge, so Criterion C is the correct answer.
Method #2Process of eliminationStep 1: Rule out Criterion A
Knowledge of context is about accurate reference to each extract's situation, which the scenario does not say is missing.
Step 2: Rule out Criterion D
Nothing in the scenario indicates the presentation ran over or under time, so delivery and pacing are not the issue described.
Step 3: Rule out Criterion B
Repeating claims does not mean techniques were never identified; the problem is the lack of connection, not absent technique analysis.
Step 4: Confirm Criterion C
The described mistake matches the common mistake of treating Extract 2 as a stand-alone repeat, which specifically costs conceptual development marks.
Question 2
A student's Individual Oral introduction takes 4 minutes because they give an extended plot summary of both source texts before mentioning the global issue at minute 3. Applying the standard IO timing structure, what is the most significant consequence of this choice?No clue? Show me the answer
Correct answerCorrect!IncorrectStep-by-step walkthrough
Choose a solution method
Method #1Direct reasoningStep 1: Note the timing overrun
The model breakdown allocates 2 minutes to the introduction, but this student uses 4, doubling the intended length.
Step 2: Trace the knock-on effect
Since the total is fixed at 10 minutes, the extra 2 minutes must be taken from Extract 1, Extract 2, or the conclusion.
Step 3: Connect to criteria
Losing time from the extract analyses or conclusion weakens depth of analysis and synthesis, and poor time management directly harms Criterion D.
Step 4: Confirm the answer
The consequence is a squeeze on later segments and weakened structure/delivery, matching the correct option exactly.
Method #2Process of eliminationStep 1: Rule out automatic high marks
Plot summary alone is not equivalent to the claim-technique-effect analysis that earns Criterion A and B credit.
Step 2: Rule out 'no consequence'
The content stresses that each segment has a job to do within a fixed total time, so overrunning one segment does affect the rest.
Step 3: Rule out invented disqualification rule
No such strict per-segment time limit or disqualification rule is described in the teaching content.
Step 4: Confirm the consequence option
The only defensible outcome is that other segments get shortchanged, harming organisation and time management.