Oral Tradition Variant in a Literature Answer
A candidate answers a 25-mark literature question on the prescribed collection of Rumanyo folktales. The question asks: 'Discuss how the trickster hare is characterised in the set text.' The candidate retells an ending in which the hare is killed by the hyena, and argues this shows that tricksters are eventually punished. In the prescribed version, the hare escapes and the hyena is mocked. The candidate's grandmother told the killing ending, and the candidate cites it as 'the version I know'. The teacher gives 9/25 and writes 'wrong plot'. The candidate appeals, arguing that Rumanyo oral tradition is fluid and that the exam should not privilege one written version. The department has one week to decide the appeal. The syllabus says candidates must study the prescribed texts, and the literature section also rewards knowledge of oral tradition and performance context.
1. Decide the appeal. Should the candidate's marks be raised, kept, or adjusted? Distinguish between plot accuracy and literary argument.
Read the worked answer
Keep the appeal but adjust upwards, not to full marks. The question asks about the set text, so the candidate cannot earn full plot accuracy for an ending that is not in the prescribed version. The 9/25 is too low because the answer is not empty: it has a coherent argument about trickster punishment and uses oral-tradition knowledge. A fair breakdown: knowledge of set text 4/10; argument and relevance 5/8; expression 4/7 = 13/25. Raise to 13. The variant is relevant context, not a substitute for the set text. The teacher's note 'wrong plot' is accurate but incomplete; it should say 'plot from a non-prescribed variant; argument credited where it addresses the question'.
2. Rewrite the question so that it can reward both set-text knowledge and awareness of oral variants without becoming vague. Provide the new wording and explain the change.
Read the worked answer
New wording: 'Discuss how the hare is characterised in the prescribed version of the tale. Then explain how one variant you know changes the lesson or the characterisation.' Mark scheme: set-text evidence and accuracy 10; comparison with variant 8; coherence and expression 7. This wording makes the set text compulsory but gives credit for oral-tradition knowledge. It avoids the trap of asking for 'the set text' while silently rewarding outside versions, and it avoids the vagueness of 'discuss oral tradition' without a text anchor.
3. What feedback should the candidate receive, and what should the department record for future moderation?
Read the worked answer
Feedback: 'Your argument about tricksters being punished is clear and well expressed. The question, however, asked about the prescribed version, where the hare escapes. Use your grandmother's ending as a comparison: it shows how the same tale can carry a different lesson. Next time, anchor the set-text detail first, then introduce the variant.' Record for moderation: the item wording invited a set-text-only answer but the syllabus also rewards oral-tradition knowledge; future questions should explicitly require both. Do not record the candidate as having 'wrong knowledge'; record the mismatch between question and answer.