IB1 - May 7th, Sample IO Grading

"We the People" + "Home"

Keep in mind the rubric - we will be grading this at the end

There is good knowledge of the contexts of both of the extracts, but there is little to no reference to the literary work (Shire) or body of work (Fairey) from which the extracts were taken. This is a problem. References to the Brexit vote and Trump vote help give the texts meaning. While, interpretations are not consistently relevant to the global issue of ‘immigration’, they are insightful and effective. There are frequent and appropriate references to the extracts throughout the oral. There should be equal reference to the work and body of work.

The oral clearly focuses on how meaning is constructed through the language of this poster and poem. The student’s analysis of the texts is stronger than the student’s evaluation of the texts. How effective are the texts as political pieces? Comments on layout, structure and colour, in relation to the poster, are especially insightful. But here, too, the student does not analyse or evaluate the entire body of work or literary work. Where else does Warsan Shire comment on the refugee experience?

There is a clear thesis statement and sense of organisation. At times the oral seems to wander off topic, such as the example about the Obama poster. Nevertheless, it regains focus quickly. The analysis of the poem is not as thorough as the analysis of the poem. It feels rushed when the candidate explores a list of quotations and stylistic devices.

The language is fluent, proficient, appropriate and accurate. At times, simplistic language slips into the oral, such as “It’s kind of sad that Muslims are perceived as terrorists.” This happens more in the dialogue than the presentation part of the oral. For the most part, however, the use of language is very effective in delivering the candidate’s message.