Feedback – Level 8 Group 46 /47/48/49
Friday 26th October, 10am GMT
Students have been assessed on four separate criteria: grammar, fluency, pronunciation and vocabulary.
1. Behzad Fallah
Behzad managed to retain his calm despite the multiple disruptions during his interview. He spoke fluently and showed a good knowledge of vocabulary. He failed to mention any supplies in answer to Question 2, but otherwise, he was able to answer questions with a good degree of accuracy. Behzad tends to speak in long, rambling sentences, so he should focus on answering questions more concisely and pay extra attention to his grammar. He showed the ability to correct himself when he noticed a mistake, which is good.
2. Maziar Mohammadi
Maziar answered questions accurately and fluently, and gave very full answers. He was able to provide a lot of additional information without being prompted, displaying confidence and good knowledge of vocabulary. To improve, Maziar should take care with his pronunciation of the words ‘suit’ (which he pronounced ‘sweet’) and ‘sunbathe’ (not ‘sun-bath’). Also take note that “I haven’t enough time” is structurally correct, but sounds a little too formal and old-fashioned for a young person. “I don’t have enough time” is probably more appropriate for him.
3. Ehsan Usefi
Ehsan made a very good attempt. He spoke with confidence and showed a good knowledge of vocabulary, especially in Questions 2 and 6. His grammar and word order varied from question to question – perhaps depending on how comfortable he was with his answer. His answer to Question 9 was a little disjointed – it’s ok to take a moment to think through what you’re going to say before you begin!
4. Fariba Bahme
Fariba showed strength in her vocabulary, but she should take a little more care to listen to questions. For example, in Question 2, she told me in great detail about an earthquake that occurred in 1990. The answer was well-structured and fluent, but did not actually answer the question. Some of her answers lacked a little detail. However, her answer to Question 9 was excellent - it was well-thought out and intelligently put.
5. Bahar Karimi
Bahar did incredibly well. She answered questions fluently and intelligently, although she could sometimes be a little repetitive (“ they can hurt people, they can destroy buildings, they can…). He was able to provide many good examples to support her answers, thereby showing a good understanding of relevant vocabulary. Her answers to Questions 8 and 12 were particularly well-thought out and showed good insight: “I can’t imagine life without technology, but technology can sometimes create distance between people” – she did very well to succinctly outline both positive and negative impacts technology has on people today.
6. Mohammadtaghi Sharifi
Mohammadtaghi’s performance varied a little between subject areas. For example, he was stronger when talking about technology than when talking about literature. He showed a good knowledge of vocabulary throughout, however, and was able to give some good examples of emergency supplies and genres of books to enhance his answers. It may be interesting to talk about negative – as well as positive – outcomes of technology to add an extra dimension to his answers.
7. Abas Saghir
Abas made a good attempt and was able to give good answers to many questions. However, his vocabulary was a little weak at times, which in turn impeded his fluency. There were also a couple of questions he was unable to answer, though I don’t know if this was because he didn’t understand the question, or because he lacked the vocabulary to answer. He spoke quite well when answering questions about natural disasters, but he should revise his vocabulary a little more in order to be able to give fuller answers and answer questions more confidently.