Self-scoring
Criterion A: Knowledge and understanding of the text or extract: Score of 8 awarded. I think that I had good knowledge of the text and pulled some important evidence from the passage to support my points, but my understanding could have been better supported by a more thorough analysis.
Criterion B: Understanding of the use and effects of literary features: Score of 7 awarded. While I did focus on the effect and implications of the author's language, I do not think I had enough emphasized focus on the actual literary features. Essentially, I believe that the understanding was present but the awareness was lacking.
Criterion C: Organization: Score of 5 awarded. This would actually probably be more like a 4.5. I definitely started and ended the commentary with a statement of my three main points, but within the body of the analysis my organization was not always the best.
Criterion D: Language: Score of 3 awarded. The register and style of my commentary were mostly appropriate, but I found myself repeating, stuttering, and following the same sentence structures. I'm not completely sure if my conversational style approach is what the IBO is expecting, or if I should be more formal with how I speak.
Zack-
ReplyDeleteI actually agree with most of your self-assessment-
A- great knowledge and understanding (make sure you don't move too far away from the passage or overly summarize)
B- love what you picked out to discuss here- spot on
C- 4: make sure that you keep looping back to your thesis; it's tricky for a listener to remember it compared to a reader; remember that you don't need to go line by line
D- watch your tone; sometimes you are a bit casual or conversational