The Recited Commentary: Oral Exam in Latin
The Latin oral examination lasts 20 minutes. The candidate has prepared a dossier on Virgil, Aeneid 4, and is invited to speak for six minutes on Dido's first speech. She delivers a polished, memorised analysis: she identifies the rhetorical questions, the imagery of fire, and the allusion to Medea. The first examiner then asks, 'Why does Virgil use improbe rather than infelix here?' The candidate pauses, then repeats the last two minutes of her presentation. The second examiner asks a simpler question: 'Which word does Virgil put at the end of the line, and why?' She answers correctly and adds a sensible comment on emphasis. The mark scheme has three criteria, each out of 10: knowledge of the text, literary analysis, and response to questions. The examiners must agree a mark before the candidate leaves.
1. The first examiner proposes 8/10 for response to questions because the presentation was strong; the second proposes 4/10. Resolve the disagreement using the mark scheme. What mark out of 30 do you award, and why?
Read the worked answer
Response to questions must be scored on the answers the candidate actually gives, not on the prepared talk. Repeating two minutes of the presentation is not an answer; the first question received no response, so the candidate cannot score highly on this criterion. But the second question was answered well, with a comment on emphasis, which shows some flexibility. A mark of 5/10 is defensible: it acknowledges the successful second answer and the candidate's evident knowledge, while reflecting the failure to engage with the first follow-up.
Knowledge of the text is 9/10: the dossier is accurate and detailed. Literary analysis is 8/10: the prepared analysis is strong but not independently deployed. Response is 5/10. Total: 22/30. The first examiner's 8/10 would reward preparation twice, since knowledge and analysis already score it, and would be unfair to candidates who answer follow-ups. The second examiner's 4/10 is too harsh given the successful second answer.
2. What should the examiners do differently in the conduct of the oral to make the judgement fairer, and how should the mark be recorded?
Read the worked answer
Use a planned sequence of questions from comprehension to interpretation: first 'What is Dido accusing Aeneas of?', then 'Which word carries the accusation?', then 'Why improbe rather than infelix?'. Give the candidate a short unseen extract as well as the prepared dossier, so response to questions is tested on material she has not rehearsed. Ask the interpretive question after a comprehension check, and allow a short thinking pause. The second examiner should not rescue the candidate with an easier question until the first line of questioning has been exhausted; if it is used, record it as a separate prompt. Record the exact questions, a two-line note on each answer, the agreed mark, and any dissent. This protects moderation and appeals. Do not change the mark after the candidate leaves.