BA Language Exam

BA Language Exam

Information on the BA Language Exam

This exam is designed to test candidates’ command of English at B2+ level, as defined in the Council of Europe’s “Common European Framework of Reference” standards. The exam consists of two parts: a written Use of English paper, and an Oral part in which candidates are tested in groups of three. The Use of English paper focuses mainly on grammatical, lexical and discoursal accuracy, and contains questions based on short continuous texts (several questions in each text) or single sentences (one or two questions in each sentence). The oral test requires candidates to speak fluently and accurately, first on their own and then in conversation with other candidates. Details of the content and procedures of each part are given below.

In terms of the ELTE Hallgatói Követelményrendszer, ANG-001/ANG-002 is an “A típusú nyelvi alapvizsga”. This means that the two parts are marked separately; in order to pass the whole exam, candidates need to reach the pass-mark in both parts, and the final grade is based on the aggregate of both marks. Passing the exam is an essential prerequisite for starting courses which belong to the second year of the BA programme. The exam can be taken only once in each exam period.

Warning for English minor students:

Please note that it takes at least two weeks to process the Language Proficiency exam scores and enter grades in Neptun. If you put the exam off until your last semester your grade may appear in Neptun too late for you to obtain the abszolutórium and take the záróvizsga during that exam period. In this case (and also if you fail the exam) you will not be able to complete your studies until the end of the following exam period, at the earliest. Therefore you are strongly advised to take the exam as early as possible; i.e. as soon as you have completed the prerequisite courses ANG-106 Language Practice (Nyelvgyakorlat) 2. and ANG11-108 Academic Skills (Tudományos íráskészség) 2.

Overview of the BA Language Exam structure

The table below describes the tasks that are likely to appear in the BA Language Proficiency Exam.

  • Requirements are based on the Common European Framework of Reference (CEFR).
  • The list of use of English task types includes all the possible items: not all of them will be used in one particular exam.
Skills Input Possible task types Discourse produced At the B2+ level candidates minimally can (based on CEFR)
Use of English Mainly short passages (100-200 words) of continuous text. Some discrete-sentence items. Typically neutral/semi-formal style (e.g., newspaper articles).

1 multiple- choice, continuous text cloze test
2 open continuous cloze test
3 error-spotting in continuous text (extra or wrong-form-word)
4 word formation (filling blanks in continuous text - base form given)
5 sentence transformation (given key word)
6 sentence transformation (given beginning)
7 sentence insertion into continuous text
8 word or phrase insertion into discrete gapped sentences (no cue)

not relevant

1 identify appropriate vocabulary, though some items also have grammatical constraints. Questions test collocation, fixed phrases, phrasal verbs, idioms and linkers
2 use knowledge of, for example, verb tenses and forms, modals, auxiliaries, quantifiers, pronouns, prepositions, conjunctions, relative pronouns and adverbials.
3 identify and correct errors (spelling, syntax, discourse)
4 use knowledge of the various ways in which words can be formed in English
5 produce alternative formulations of given propositions, using specific appropriate lexical grammar
6 produce alternative formulations of given propositions, using specific appropriate structures
7 recognise and apply discoursal/cohesive structures (linking, reference etc)
8 use idioms, fixed phrases accurately and appropriately

Speaking

Written prompt (task) with framing questions for phase 1,examiner mediated task for phase 2.

If needed, rescue question addressed individually by the examiner

Group oral test with 3 candidates.

(Chiefly) monologic phase 1, followed by dialogic phase 2. 

Planned discourse in phase 1, followed by unplanned discourse in phase 2.

1 give clear, systematically developed descriptions and presentations, with appropriate highlighting of significant points, and relevant supporting detail
2 use the language fluently, accurately and effectively on a wide range of general, academic, vocational or leisure topics, marking clearly the relationships between ideas
3 communicate spontaneously with good grammatical control without much sign of having to restrict what he/she wants to say, adopting a level of formality appropriate to the circumstances

Exam rules and regulations (ENG)

This document pertains to the language proficiency exams at the BA and MA programs. 

BA codes: BBN-ANG-001; BBI-ANG11-001E; BBN-ANG11-002; OT-ANG-001  

MA codes: OT-ANG(17)-391; BMA-ANOD-104, BMI-ANOD-104; OT-ANG-301; OT-ANG22-391 

 

Examination procedure and examination rules  

This document provides information concerning the English language proficiency examinations at the BA and MA programmes. 

1. Signing up for the exam  

The exam process begins with registering for the language proficiency exam course in Neptun at the beginning of the semester in which you wish to take it. The exam application in Neptun (taking the exam course) is not enough in itself, because you must also register for the exam at the end of the semester. Additionally, you must also sign up for the exam at the department. The department application (on the noticeboard or via a form) supplements and not replaces the application in Neptun. The two applications are only valid together.  

The sign-up procedure at the department plays an important role in setting up groups of three for the oral exam and designing the schedule. Signing up is possible using the form sent in the Neptun notification or the QR code published on the department noticeboard on the 4th floor  "lobby" of building R. The form will be published by the department with the registration guide no later than one month before the exam. This sign-up procedure is also important, because this is when candidates formally accept the exam rules and regulations. Only those students who have fulfilled the prerequisites according to the list of units of study for the given exam can submit their final application (registration) for the exam and sign up for the oral exam at the department. Through this procedure, the coordinators obtain information about which candidate forms a group with which other candidates in the oral exam. A few days before the exam, after the deadline specified in the exam procedures, the coordinator closes the application and starts the procession of the applications and the preparation of the preliminary schedule. The preliminary exam schedule can be viewed by students online.  

The coordinator assigns code numbers to candidates during the processing of registrations. The code number is given so that the name cannot be inferred from the codes. Candidates are responsible for remembering their own code number. Candidates will receive their code number at the first part of the exam (at the latest). The results are published based on the exam codes, so the codes must be kept until the end of the exam process. 

2. The timing of the exam  

The two parts of the exam, oral and written, are held on two separate days for BA students and usually (but not always) on the same day for MA students. Due to the special character of language proficiency, no part of this exam can be repeated in the same exam period (HKR 73/7). The exam should be held at the beginning of the exam period, if circumstances allow. The results must be communicated no later than three weeks after the date of the exam.  

 

3. Exam procedures  

a. Written  

The written series of tasks is designed and selected in such a way that the student repeating the exam always receives a new series of tasks. The written exam is supervised by departmental instructors. Candidates will be seated according to a seating plan.  

b. Oral  

The oral exam tasks are selected from an oral item bank according to the decision of the responsible coordinators. The coordinator ensures that in case of a repeated exam, the candidate is always given a different task here as well.  

4. Assessment of the exam  

The written exam scoring is done using the code numbers (no name on the worksheet), so it is confidential. The names associated with the list of code numbers is known only to the lead coordinator organizing the written exam, not to the instructors who do the scoring. After collecting the papers, the coordinator holds a standardization meeting, where some papers are jointly evaluated, and the key is validated based on a sample. After that, each evaluator evaluates a certain number of exam papers individually. After the evaluation, the coordinator convenes a meeting again to discuss unexpected answers, decide on their acceptability and change the key accordingly if necessary. The assessment is done by adding (or not adding) points since it is considered poor methodology to deduct points. The evaluation is recorded by the evaluators on the task sheets, and then according to the rules given in a document (data file), each correcting instructor records the results of each student (the response data). The data series recorded in the data file are read together by the instructors at the end of the evaluation. The audit is followed by a computerized statistical analysis of the data.  

The assessment of the oral exam is a double assessment. The two assessors evaluate independently of each other, according to the same evaluation criteria. They need to discuss their assessment, but they do not have to agree or agree on the scores. The assessment is recorded on the assessment sheet (marksheet), each group and each assessor is recorded on a separate sheet, that is, there are 2 assessment sheets for each group of examinees. Comments can also be recorded on the evaluation sheet. The coordinator collects the evaluation forms from the exam packages, checks the completion, the presence of signatures, and then transfers the answer data to a computer under the supervision of a colleague.  

5. After the exam  

After transferring the evaluation data to the computer, the software analysis of the points and other data is followed by the score calculation and the finalization of the results.  

6. Calculation and communication of results  

The results are adopted by the standardization meeting in the light of the analyses and decisions on the operational passmark, always considering the magnitude of the possible measurement error. The magnitude of the measurement error is 2 points for the oral exam and 1 point for written exam. The candidate's success or failure is not determined by the total score calculated from the results of the two parts of the exam. The candidate must meet the minimum requirements in both the oral and written parts of the exams to pass the exam. (That is, the score limits of the oral and written exam are called non-compensatory score limits.) The score limits are not fixed by university rules, their establishment is a departmental competence. The score limits of the two exam sections are criterion-dependent and the results of the evaluative work. (The criterion-dependent evaluative point limits were determined (re-standardized) in 2014. Further information, information on the methodology of determining the score limits may be requested from Dr. Gergely Dávid.) Based on the requirement that a single final grade must be recorded in Neptun, a total score is calculated from the results of the two exams, which are divided into four successive grade bands (2-5). Scores for failures in any part of the exam will not be added up. These exam results will be placed in the insufficient/fail (1) category. The final results developed according to the above procedures are checked again by the responsible instructors, and then published online, in advance, according to the assigned exam codes, within 3 weeks of the last exam event.  

7. Viewing of the papers 

Simultaneously with the publication of the result, the instructors announce a consultation appointment (viewing), where the candidate can view his/her exam paper and ask questions about the oral result sheets and the results, to which the instructors provide clarification. During the consultation, the candidate may not take any notes, photographs, copies, etc., because the exam tasks are the intellectual property of the author and the university and because the rights of other candidates to their personal data may be violated, and the repeated inclusion of specific tasks also plays an important role in the quality assurance of the exam. Friends, relatives, etc. accompanying the candidate for the inspection are not allowed to participate in the inspection. They can wait in the hallway, but their behaviour should not interfere with the viewing and consultation procedures and the work done in the consultation room. Instructors' responses are explanations agreed on by the exam committee. The purpose of the viewing is not to dispute the results or to set some kind of extra quality assurance, and the instructor cannot be expected to "look for" points for the candidate by changing roles. It is possible to complain about the arithmetic of the points, but not about the evaluation itself (Nftv. 57. /3.). If the instructor present at the inspection determines that an evaluation error, such as the correction of an item, has not been made according to the key, he/she will correct it. If the student disputes the solution(s) in the key, he/she can appeal.  

8. The possibility of appeal is described in the Standard Appeals Procedure on the website.  

9. The exam process ends with the entry of the grades into Neptun. 

10. Students may indicate problems concerning the grades registered in Neptun until the end of the exam period in which the given exam was taken.  


Vizsgaeljárás és vizsgaszabályzat (HUN)

E dokumentum a BA és MA képzést érintő nyelvi alapvizsgákra vonatkozik.

BA kódok: BBN-ANG-001; BBI-ANG11-001E; BBN-ANG11-002; OT-ANG-001 

MA kódok: OT-ANG(17)-391; BMA-ANOD-104, BMI-ANOD-104; OT-ANG-301; OT-ANG22-391 

1. Jelentkezés  

A vizsgafolyamat a Neptunban való tárgyfelvétellel kezdődik a félév elején. A Neptunban való jelentkezés (tárgyfelvétel) önmagában nem elegendő, mert a félév végén is kell a jelentkezni a vizsgára. A jelentkezés kiegészül továbbá a diákok szóbelire való jelentkezésével a tanszéken. Fontos, hogy a tanszéki jelentkezés nem váltja ki a Neptunban történő jelentkezést. A kettő együtt érvényes.  

A tanszéki jelentkezésnek a szóbeli vizsga hármas csoportjainak felállításában van fontos szerepe és erre a Neptun-os értesítésben küldött űrlapon vagy az R épület IV. em. „zsibongójában” közzétett QR-kód segítségével van lehetőség. Az űrlap közzététele a feliratkozásra vonatkozó tanszéki útmutatóval legkésőbb a vizsga előtt egy hónappal történik meg. A személyes jelentkezés azért fontos, mert a jelentkezéssel egy időben fogadják el a vizsgázók a vizsgára vonatkozó szabályokat. A vizsgára az a hallgató jelentkezhet, aki teljesítette az adott vizsgára vonatkozó tanegység lista szerinti előfeltételeket.  

A jelentkezés továbbá azért is fontos, mert megmutatja a felelős oktatónak, melyik vizsgázó mely más vizsgázókkal alkot csoportot (group exam) a szóbeli vizsgán. A vizsga előtt néhány nappal, az útmutatóban megadott határidő letelte után, a felelős oktató lezárja a jelentkezést és megkezdi a jelentkezések feldolgozását, az ideiglenes vizsgamenetrend (preliminary schedule) kialakítását. Az ideiglenes vizsgamenetrendet a hallgatók a Neptunban elküldött linken keresztül tekinthetik meg.  

A felelős oktató a jelentkezések feldolgozása során kódszámokat rendel a vizsgázókhoz. A kódszám kiosztása, meghatározása olyan, hogy a kódok alapján a névre nem lehet következtetni. Egyedül az együtt szóbeliző vizsgázók ismerhetik meg egymás kódját közvetlenül a szóbeli előtt. A vizsgázóknak saját kódszámuk megjegyzése (feljegyzése) a feladatuk. A vizsgázók a kódszámukat legkésőbb az első vizsgarész alkalmával kapják meg. Az eredmények közzététele a vizsgakódok alapján történik, ezért a kódokat a vizsgafolyamat végéig meg kell őrizni. 

2. A vizsga időzítése  

A vizsga két részére, a szóbelire és az írásbelire a BA hallgatók esetén két külön napon, az MA hallgatók esetén általában egy napon kerül sor. A nyelvtudás sajátosságai miatt e vizsga egyik része sem ismételhető azonos vizsgaidőszakban. (HKR 73.§ 7. pont). A vizsgát a lehetőségek figyelembevételével a vizsgaidőszak elején kell megtartani. Az eredmények közlését a vizsga időpontja után legkésőbb három héttel kell megvalósítani.  

3. A vizsga szerkesztése és lebonyolítása  

a. Az írásbeli  

Az írásbeli feladatsor kialakítása és kiválasztása úgy történik, hogy a vizsgát ismétlő hallgató mindig új feladatsort kapjon. Az írásbeli vizsgán tanszéki oktatók felügyelnek. A vizsgázókat ültetési terv szerint ültetik helyükre.  

b. A szóbeli  

A szóbeli feladatok a szóbeli item-bankból kerülnek ki a felelős, szervezést végző oktató tervei szerint. A szervezést végző oktató biztosítja, hogy ismételt vizsga esetén a vizsgázó itt is mindig új feladatot kapjon.  

4. A vizsga értékelése  

Az írásbeli értékelése a kódszámok segítségével történik (név nem kerül a feladatlapra), tehát titkos. A kódszámok feloldását tartalmazó listát csak a megíratást szervező vezető oktató ismeri, az értékelést (javítást) végző oktatók nem. A vezető oktató a dolgozatok összegyűjtését követően standardizáló értekezletet tart, melyen minta alapján néhány dolgozatot közösen értékelnek és a kulcsot validálják. Ez után az egyes értékelők meghatározott számú dolgozatot egyénileg értékelnek. Az értékelést követően a vezető oktató ismét értekezletet hív össze, melyen a nem várt válaszokat megbeszélik, azokról döntést hoznak és kulcsot is ennek megfelelően módosítják, ha szükséges. Az értékelés pontok megadásával (vagy meg nem adásával) történik. Pontok levonása nem engedélyezett. Az értékelést az értékelők a feladatlapokon rögzítik, majd egy dokumentumban (adatfájlban) adott szabályok szerint minden javító oktató rögzíti az egyes hallgatók eredményeit. Az adatfájlban rögzített adatsorokat az értékelés végeztével az oktatók összeolvassák. Az ellenőrzést az adatok számítógépes statisztikai elemzése követi.  

A szóbeli értékelése kettős értékelés. A két értékelő egymástól függetlenül értékel, azonos értékelési szempontok szerint. Értékelésüket meg kell beszéljék, de nem kell egyetérteniük és közös pontokban sem kell megállapodniuk. Az értékelést az értékelőlapon (marksheet) rögzítik, minden csoportét és minden értékelőjét külön lapon, vagyis minden csoportos vizsgához 2 értékelő lap tartozik. Az értékelő lapon megjegyzések is rögzíthetők. A felelős vizsgáztató kigyűjti a vizsgacsomagokból az értékelőlapokat, ellenőrzi a kitöltöttséget, az aláírások meglétét, majd a válaszadatokat ellenőrzés mellett számítógépre viszi.  

5. A vizsga lebonyolítása után  

A válaszadatok számítógépre vitele után következik a pontok és más adatok komplex számítógépes, szoftveres elemzése, majd a pontszámítás és az eredmények kialakítása.  

6. Az eredmények számítása és közlése  

Az eredményeket a standardizáló értekezlet fogadja el az elemzések fényében, valamint dönt az operatív ponthatárokról, melyek mindig figyelembe veszik a lehetséges mérési hiba nagyságát. A mérési hiba nagysága 2 pont a szóbeli és 1 pont az írásbeli esetében. A vizsgázó sikerességét vagy sikertelenségét nem a vizsgarészek eredményeiből számított összpontszám határozza meg. A vizsgázónak mind a szóbeli, mind az írásbeli vizsgán eleget tenni a minimum-követelményeknek, ahhoz, hogy a vizsga egésze sikeres legyen. (Vagyis a szóbeli és írásbeli vizsga ponthatárai un. non-compensatory ponthatárok.) A ponthatárokat nem rögzítik egyetemi szabályok, azok megállapítása tanszéki kompetencia. A két vizsgarész ponthatárai kritériumfüggők és itészi munka eredményei. (A kritériumfüggő itészi ponthatárok meghatározása (újrastandardizálás) 2014-ben történt meg. További felvilágosítás, tájékoztatás a ponthatárok meghatározásának módszertanáról Dr. Dávid Gergelytől kérhető.) Abból a követelményből kiindulva, hogy a Neptunban egyetlen végső érdemjegyet kell rögzíteni, a két vizsgarészen külön-külön megfeleltek eredményeiből összpontszámot számolunk, melyeket négy sikeres érdemjegy-kategóriába (2-5) sorolunk. A bármelyeik vizsgarészen sikertelenek pontjait nem adjuk össze. Ezek a vizsgaeredmények az elégtelen (1) kategóriába kerülnek. A fenti módon kialakított végeredményeket a felelős oktatók ismét ellenőrzik, majd  előzetesen, a kiosztott vizsgakódok szerint elektronikus formában (Neptunon keresztül linket küldve), az utolsó vizsgaeseménytől számított 3 héten belül közzéteszik.  

7. A betekintés  

Az eredmény közlésével egy időben a vezető oktatók konzultációs időpontot (betekintés) hirdetnek meg, ahol a vizsgázó megtekintheti dolgozatát és a szóbeli eredménylapokat és az eredményekkel kapcsolatban kérdéseket tehet fel, amelyekre az oktatók szakszerű választ adnak. A betekintés során a vizsgázó sem jegyzetet, sem fényképfelvételt, másolatot, stb. nem készíthet, mert a vizsgafeladatok a szerző és az egyetem szellemi tulajdonát képezik és mert más vizsgázók személyes adataikhoz való joga sérülhet, valamint a vizsga minőségbiztosítása tekintetében fontos szerepet játszik egyes feladatok ismételt szerepeltetése is. A vizsgázót a betekintésre elkísérő ismerősök, hozzátartozók, stb. nem vehetnek részt a betekintésen. Ők a folyosón a „zsibongóban” várakozhatnak, de viselkedésükkel nem zavarhatják a betekintés menetét és az ott végzett munkát. Az oktatók válaszai testületileg kialakított magyarázatok. A betekintés célja nem az eredmények vitatása, vagy valamiféle minőségbiztosítási pótlék beállítása, továbbá nem várható el az oktatótól, hogy szerepet váltva a vizsgázónak pontokat „szerezzen”. Reklamációra, panasztételre a pontok aritmetikájával kapcsolatban van lehetőség, magával az értékeléssel kapcsolatban nincs (Nftv. 57. § 3. pont). Ha a betekintésnél jelenlévő vezető oktató megállapítja, hogy olyan értékelési hiba történt, mint pl. egy item javítása nem a kulcs szerint történt meg, akkor azt orvosolja. Ha a hallgató a kulcsban szereplő megoldást/megoldásokat vitatja, akkor fellebbezéssel élhet.  

8. A fellebbezés lehetőségét a honlapon található általános fellebbezési eljárás (Standard Appeals Procedure) pontjai írják le.  

9. A vizsgafolyamat az érdemjegyeknek a Neptunba való bevitelével ér véget. 

10. A Neptunba bejegyezett jegyekkel kapcsolatban a hallgatók a vizsgaidőszak végéig jelezhetik észrevételeiket. 


Specifications for the Use of English Test

General Description

This test is designed to assess candidates' practical command of English lexical, syntactic and discoursal structures. While the main focus is on structural accuracy as such, many items involve a semantic dimension, in the sense that correct answers depend on context. Candidates are expected to demonstrate their ability to recognise contextually accurate and appropriate language, to recognise and correct contextually inaccurate or inappropriate language, and to produce contextually accurate and appropriate language of their own. The test is targeted at a range of abilities from CEFR B2 to CEFR C1, with items at levels B2, B2+ and C1. In order to ensure sufficiently broad coverage, item-writers use a target-structure matrix largely based on the contents of Michael Vince's Advanced Language Practice, Macmillan 2003.

The tests are scored on the basis of 75 items, with a maximum score of 100, since some constructed response items (task types 5 and 6 in the sample test below) require the production of short chunks of language or complex sentences and carry a possible score of 2 each. The candidate’s Use of English score is given the same weight as their oral score.

Each test includes 5 or 6 subtests, each subtest consisting of one of the eight item-types listed in the table below. This means that not all the possible item-types in the list below will appear in any given test, but candidates can expect any of the item-types and should prepare for all of them.  Example items are provided at the beginning of each subtest. 

Overall time: 90 minutes.

Input texts

Item-types

Candidates are expected to:

Score

Short passages (100-200 words) of continuous descriptive, narrative or expository authentic text, with concrete and abstract content, culled mainly from internet and/or media sources. .

Typically neutral or semiformal style.

Extended vocabulary and complex sentences.

 

At least 10 words (which may include example items) before marked items; at least ten words between blanks. 

1 multiple-choice continuous text cloze test. Modified deletion with three options: two correct, one wrong. Candidates must select and indicate the latter.

 

1 identify appropriate vocabulary, though some items also have grammatical constraints. Questions test collocation, fixed phrases, phrasal verbs, idioms and linkers.

Each item: 0 or 1 point

2  open continuous cloze test; modified deletion.

2 use knowledge of, for example, verb tenses and forms, modals, auxiliaries, quantifiers, pronouns, prepositions, conjunctions, relative pronouns and adverbials.

Each item: 0 or 1 point

 

3 error-spotting in continuous text (extra or wrong-form word)

3 identify and correct errors (spelling, syntax, discourse)

Each item: 0 or 1 point

4 word formation (filling blanks in continuous text - base form given)

4 use knowledge of the various ways in which words can be formed in English.

Each item: 0 or 1 point

5 sentence insertion into continuous text

5 recognise and apply discoursal/cohesive structures (linking, reference etc)

 

Each item: 0 or 1 point

Discrete sentences:

non-authentic (adapted or scripted).

Typically neutral/semi-formal style, but may include brief conversational turns.

6 sentence transformation (given key word)

 

6 produce alternative formulations of given propositions, using specific appropriate lexical grammar

Each item: 0, 1 or 2 points

7 sentence transformation (given beginning)

produce alternative formulations of given propositions, using specific appropriate structures

Each item: 0, 1 or 2 points

8 word or phrase insertion into gapped sentences (no cue).

use idioms, fixed phrases

 

Each item: 0 or 1 point

Sample tasks are available here.

 


Specifications for the Oral Exam

General Description

The structure of the exam:

1 Preparation (5 minutes)
Candidates receive a scripted task from one of the assessors. Candidates read and think about what they will be saying. No output (speaking) expected. In fact, candidates should not speak to each other or agree on various test-taking strategies (who should speak first, who is going to take a leading role, who should sit where). The preparation phase is not rated; it takes 5 minutes.
2 Phase 1 (7-9 minutes)
See the table below.
3 Phase 2 (5-8 minutes)
See the table below.

Overall time: 25 minutes

Phase 

Task description

 Procedure  

Task or task features

Scoring or rating method

Phase 1

To test the skill of speaking in the context of a small group

(3 candidates)

Task text. A scripted task comprising a brief exposure of the task with questions that help the candidate get into (or frame) the task. These questions focus on a possible set of personal experiences that candidates can use as a starting point.

The candidates’ chairs form a semicircle, facing the assessors.

This phase is designed to elicit extended (long) turns: a planned kind of discourse.

It is misleading to label long turns as monologues because candidates should, where necessary and appropriate, ask the speaker helpful questions, invite the speaker to say more about the topic or an aspect of it and make helpful comments. This phase of the test is not meant to consist of completely discrete monologues. Indeed it is a sign of good interaction skills if the candidates appropriately assist each other in taking and maintaining the floor.

Students keep eye contact with each other, not the assessors.

Phases 1 and 2 are rated together.

Independent rating by two assessors, on the basis of 5 assessment points of view (criteria), each covering a six point scale with score points 0-5.

Phase 2

To test conversational skills in the context of a small group

(3 candidates)

Scripted task, to be found only in the assessors’ copy of the task sheet, which the candidates have not seen.

The task is typically an agreement getting or consensus seeking task, to ensure that communication does take place and to prevent it from “going flat”.

No thinking time provided.

Assessor mediates task, by using their own words or reading it out from the task sheet.

This phase is designed to elicit conversational language, with typically shorter turns, i.e. to elicit an unplanned kind of discourse. Candidates demonstrate their ability to respond to a task for which they do not plan in advance.

Round the group turns are expected to be broken by (interspersed with) conversational bias sequences that temporarily include only two of the speakers.

Candidates are expected to demonstrate an ability manage the conversation (to turn-take appropriately, step in and sensitively allow/ invite the third speaker to contribute)

Asking the rescue question

Optional phase, used only as a last resort if one or more of the candidates do not provide enough evidence for rating.

A scripted question labelled as “rescue question” in the task sheet.

One-to one (assessor to candidate) interaction.

In this phase candidate keeps exe-contact with the assessor.

Concluded as soon as assessors are satisfied

2 assessors mark

To allow assessors to reflect on the performances and fill in the score sheets accurately. Assessors double check first names, Ids, scores entered, etc.

Candidates leave the room when interaction is over and assessors are satisfied that the speech sample is rateable.

Assessors use the criteria with descriptors in a tabled format to award scores.

Assessors negotiate only if the scores differ greatly (a limit is to be specified later).

 

Overall

 

 

 

Raw scores 0-50

Sample tasks are available here.

 

 


BA Oral Proficiency Criteria

Important information

  • The criteria below were developed by DELP on the basis of the Common European Framework of Reference for Languages (CEFR).
  • They are used to mark the oral component of test ANG 001.
  • The columns are the assessment points of view from which the markers evaluate students’ language proficiency in spoken production and interaction.
  • The horizontal rows or bands indicate the level of skill, each of which is linked to a score point value (e.g., 0, 1 or 2 points).
  • These scales are criterion-referenced. The bands were designed to include descriptions of language proficiency at particular CEFR levels. For example, the 0 point score band indicates level A2+ or lower. The 3 score band indicates the required minimum level (B2+) at this exam. In this way, the range of ability covered by the criteria is very wide, stretching from A1 to C1+. 

Criteria:

Downloadable from here: BA rating scales

BA

FLUENCY

CONTENT

RANGE

ACCURACY

INTERACTION

5 points (C1+)

Can express themselves naturally and spontaneously.

Pauses and intonation support the expression of meaning.

Only conceptually difficult subjects can hinder the natural flow of the language.

Can elaborate a complex subject, with subsidiary points, reasons and relevant examples.

Can develop an argument systematically, taking into account multiple perspectives, and highlighting significant points.

Shows highly controlled use of organisational patterns and cohesive devices.

Has a good command of a broad range of language structures allowing them to select a formulation to express themselves clearly, in an appropriate style on a wide range of general, academic, professional, or abstract topics with ease.

Demonstrates an awareness of connotative and idiomatic meanings.

Consistently maintains a high degree of grammatical accuracy with minor imperfections or slips, which are corrected when they do occur.

Intonation and sentence stress support the expression of finer shades of meaning.

Facilitates and participates in complex conversations with ease. Invites contributions skilfully from other speakers. Can select a suitable phrase from a readily available set of discourse functions effectively, such as turn-taking devices to get or to keep the floor. Can develop a topic/point in detail and round off naturally and appropriately.

4 points (C1)

Can produce extended stretches of speech with ease and natural rhythm with even pacing and minimal hesitation.

Backtracks when encountering difficulty but rephrasing or pauses do not interrupt the smoothness of delivery.

Can provide content that is fully relevant to the discussion.

Can develop and discuss a topic in depth, from multiple perspectives on both general and abstract topics.

Shows highly controlled use of organisational patterns and cohesive devices.

Uses a broad range of language allowing them to select a formulation to express themselves clearly in an appropriate style on a wide range of general, academic, professional, or abstract topics without having to restrict what they want to say.

Consistently maintains a high degree of grammatical accuracy and control with occasional imperfections or slips, which are mostly corrected when they occur. Articulation is clear and comprehensible. Intonation and sentence stress support the expression of meaning.

Can initiate, maintain, and close complex conversation. Listens sensitively and facilitates others in expressing themselves.

Can select a suitable phrase from a good range of discourse functions effectively.

Can develop a topic/point in detail and round off appropriately.

3 points (B2+)

Can produce longer stretches of language with an even tempo.

Can be hesitant when searching for patterns and expressions, but there are few noticeable pauses.

Intonation and stress are appropriate.

The content provided by the candidate is relevant and adds new perspectives to the discussion on general and some abstract topics.

Can produce well-structured speech showing a good use of organisation patterns and cohesive devices.

Has a good range of lexical and grammatical structures to use the language appropriately and effectively on a wide range of personal, general and some academic topics, and efficiently overcomes limitations. Adopts a level of formality appropriate to the circumstances.

Shows a high degree of grammatical control. Occasional slips, non-systematic errors and minor flaws in sentence structure may occur, but they are rare and often corrected in retrospect. Has a good control of sentence stress, intonation and rhythm.

Can initiate, maintain, and close conversation. Can link a series of ideas and arguments into a connected sequence using a good range of discourse functions.

Relates to others' ideas in the discussion and makes efforts to invite contributions from other speakers.

2 points (B1+, B2)

Can produce stretches of language with evident pauses, which do not impede communication.

Can express their ideas with a degree of flexibility to keep the conversation flowing.

The content provided by the candidate is relevant to the discussion.

Can use a limited number of cohesive devices to link their utterances.

Can highlight the personal significance of events and express some more general ideas, providing brief explanations and arguments.

Can use a range of lexical and grammatical structures that make interactions with other speakers quite possible on personal and some general issues.

The range of language used is insufficient to provide clear descriptions using complex sentence forms or without noticeable searching for words.

Good grammatical control in simple structures. Errors are frequent, but do not cause misunderstanding, and some of them are corrected in retrospect.

Generally intelligible, although errors in pronunciation or intonation may cause misunderstanding.

Can participate in simple conversation on general or familiar topics. Contributes few original ideas to the discussion, often reiterating others' ideas.

The use of discourse functions is limited. Does not actively contribute to furthering the discussion, either by showing little interest in others’ ideas or solely concentrating on expressing their own.

1 point (B1)

Repair is evident, especially in attempts at longer stretches of free production.

Can express themselves understandably, but with noticeable pauses for grammatical or lexical planning.

The content provided by the candidate is limited, just enough to rate.

Can link a series of shorter, simple elements into a connected, linear sequence of points.

Provides ideas on the topic briefly, without detailed descriptions and relying largely on personal experience(s).

The candidate can express their ideas with some hesitation and circumlocutions on topics of personal interest, such as family, hobbies, work, travel, and current events.

Hindered in discussing complex topics by their limited range of language.

Accuracy is restricted to a limited repertoire of frequently used phrases in patterns associated with more predictable situations. Meaning is comprehensible despite frequent errors.

Can participate in simple conversations on topics that are familiar or of personal interest.

Relies on others’ contributions when expressing ideas.

OR: Limits others’ contributions by dominating the discussion.

0 points (A2 or lower)

Can make themselves understood in very short utterances.

Pauses, false starts, and reformulation are very evident.

Contribution is not sufficient to be rated, or it is off task.

Communicates information using a limited range of lexical items, basic sentence patterns with memorised – often inappropriately used – phrases on topics pertinent to simple everyday situations.

Shows only limited control of a few simple grammatical structures and sentence patterns. Frequent errors and mistakes impede comprehensibility.

Can only answer questions and respond to simple statements. Can mostly follow the conversation but is rarely able to understand enough to keep the conversation going of their own accord.

OR: Prevents others’ contributions through overwhelming dominance.


2024.08.08.