The memorised oral that collapses in discussion
Oral exam in Language 2 German, 10 minutes: a 5-minute presentation on a chosen topic, then a 5-minute discussion. The candidate has prepared 'Why cities should build more cycle lanes'. The presentation lasts 4 minutes 30 seconds and is delivered from memorised chunks at a steady pace; pronunciation is clear and grammar is mostly accurate. In the discussion, the examiner asks: 'A bakery owner says a new cycle lane will remove the parking spaces her customers need. How would you answer her?' The candidate is silent for 12 seconds, says 'Das ist schwer', switches to English for two sentences, then gives one German sentence: 'Maybe the city can build parking places behind the shop.' The examiner must score interaction, fluency, accuracy, and task fulfilment. The candidate's teacher has told them that memorised material guarantees a good grade. The examiner must also decide whether to prompt and how much support to give.
1. Distinguish what the memorised presentation can and cannot demonstrate. Which criteria should it count toward?
Read the worked answer
The memorised presentation can demonstrate pronunciation, some lexical range, and rehearsed fluency. It cannot demonstrate interaction, spontaneous repair, or the ability to negotiate meaning, because the candidate is reproducing chunks. Under an oral grid these are separate criteria. If the presentation carries part of the oral mark, it can earn solid marks there; but the discussion must be scored on what happens when the script runs out. The teacher's claim that memorisation guarantees a good grade is false: it protects delivery, not communicative competence. The examiner should reward the clear pronunciation and accurate chunks, then test the same candidate with an unscripted follow-up so that the interaction criterion is based on evidence.
2. How should the examiner handle the 12-second pause and the switch to English? What is a defensible scoring approach?
Read the worked answer
A 12-second pause is within normal planning time; do not immediately fill it. The switch to English is a communication strategy, but it does not show German interaction. The examiner should note it, then rephrase in simpler German: 'Die Bäckerei verliert Parkplätze. Was sagen Sie der Besitzerin?' If the candidate produces one German sentence with support, award partial interaction and repair marks. Do not ignore the switch, but do not treat it as a fatal error; the criteria should reward recovery. If the candidate cannot recover even with support, interaction stays low. The defensible principle is to score the candidate's ability to repair and continue in German, not to penalise nerves alone or to accept English as equivalent performance.
3. What follow-up question would you ask to test whether the candidate can actually discuss the bakery scenario, and why?
Read the worked answer
Ask: 'Die Bäckerei braucht Parkplätze für Kunden. Die Radfahrer brauchen Sicherheit. Wie können beide etwas bekommen?' This tests concession and problem-solving rather than recall. A second question: 'Was würden Sie der Bäckereibesitzerin sagen, wenn sie sagt, sie verliert 30% Umsatz?' This tests hypothetical language and negotiation. Both questions are concrete, stay inside the scenario, and require the candidate to adapt rather than recite. They also give the examiner evidence for interaction, range, and task fulfilment. If the candidate answers only with memorised phrases, the examiner can ask a third question that changes one constraint: 'Und wenn die Straße zu schmal für beide ist?' That reveals whether the candidate can think in German under pressure.