IB English B Subject Report May 2021

English B HL/SL
© International Baccalaureate Organization 2021

International Baccalaureate® | Baccalauréat International® | Bachillerato Internacional®
May 2021 subject report English B HL/SL
Contents
Grade boundaries 3
Internal assessment (standard and higher level) 4
Higher level paper one 14
Standard level paper one 16
Higher level paper two 19
Standard level paper two 22
Page 2 / 23
Grade boundaries
This DP/CP M21 subject report contains overall subject boundaries only, unlike previous reports where
component boundaries were also published, component boundaries for this session are available in IBIS.
The IB advises schools not to use component boundaries for this session as direct indicators of academic
standards for future exam preparation because they have been set in response to the particular needs of
the M21 cohort. Two significant conditions which do not normally feature in grade boundary
setting have had to be satisfied during the boundary setting for the M21 session; the need to apply
reasonable standards to adjusted assessment models for students who have restricted access to learning
during the COVID pandemic and the need to maintain parity with students who undertook the non-
examination route.
Los informes generales de las asignaturas del PD y el POP de mayo de 2021 contienen solo los límites de
calificación de las asignaturas en sí, a diferencia de los informes de otros años, que también incluían los
límites de calificación de los componentes. Estos últimos se publicarán en IBIS para esta convocatoria. El
IB aconseja a los colegios no usar los límites de calificación de los componentes de esta convocatoria como
indicadores de estándares académicos para la preparación de exámenes en el futuro, ya que se han
establecido como respuesta a las necesidades particulares de la promoción de mayo de 2021. Durante el
establecimiento de los límites de calificación para la convocatoria de mayo de 2021 se tuvieron que acatar
dos condiciones importantes que normalmente no están presentes en este proceso: la necesidad de
aplicar estándares razonables a los modelos ajustados de evaluación para los alumnos con acceso
restringido al aprendizaje durante la pandemia de la COVID y la necesidad de mantener la paridad con
aquellos alumnos que tomaron la opción sin exámenes.
Ce rapport pédagogique de la session de mai 2021 pour le Programme du diplôme et le POP ne fait état
s pour la matière, contrairement aux rapports précédents dans
lesquels les seuils des composantes étaient également publiés. Pour cette session, vous pourrez consulter
les seuils des composantes sur pas utiliser les seuils des
composantes de cette session comme indicateurs des normes pédagogiques à suivre pour la préparation
aux prochains examens. Ces seuils ont été établis pour couvrir les besoins particuliers de la cohorte de
mai 2021. En effet, nous avons dû prendre en compte deux nouveaux éléments importants pour les seuils
age a été freiné

pendant la pandémie. Puis, nous avons dû assurer une parité avec les élèves qui ont suivi le modèle
Higher level overall

Grade: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Mark range: 0 - 12 13 - 26 27 - 39 40 - 54 55 - 68 69 - 82 83 - 100
Standard level overall

Grade: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Mark range: 0 9 10 - 20 21 - 34 35 - 50 51 68 69 - 84 85 - 100
Page 3 / 23
Internal assessment (standard and higher level)

Teachers must not underestimate the importance of their own preparation. It is essential to know the
strengths and weaknesses of each candidate in order to maximise the former and not to expose the latter.
Throughout the oral, teachers must work hard to make candidates feel less anxious, and to listen to what
they say in order to support the candidate in developing their ideas. Teachers should always keep in mind
that the IB wants to ascertain what candidates can express rather than what they cannot.
Teachers should familiarise themselves with the relevant sections of the guide (pp. 40-56).
Range and suitability of submissions

Schools generally handle the individual oral appropriately. However, attention should be paid
to the following points:
Literary Extracts (higher level)

• Literary extracts should stimulate thoughtful and lively interactions and must be of an adequate
length (around 300 words). Very simple passages or those lacking in detail make it difficult for
candidates to give presentations which demonstrate their engagement with the extract. They also tend
not to generate lively interactions. On the other hand, longer texts do not allow for thorough or effective
analysis as candidates may not be able to cover the meaningful parts of the extract in the required time.
• Extracts from graphic novels should not exceed 3 to 4 pages and must provide enough details for the
candidate to explore.
• Extracts must be based on works originally written in the target language. Teachers must prepare
enough extracts to ensure that the choice remains unknown to all candidates, regardless of the timing
of their individual oral examinations.
• Extracts must be labelled with the name of the work from which they have been selected. Teachers
must ensure the quality of the copy of the literary extract is appropriate.
Visual stimuli (standard level)
• Visual stimuli must stimulate thoughtful and lively interactions. Very simple pictures or those
lacking in detail make it difficult for candidates to give interesting presentations. They also tend not to
generate lively interactions. Images must clearly introduce the topic for the presentation and must
represent a situation from the prescribed themes and be related to the target culture, even when the
topic chosen is not specific to the culture or cultures of the target language. It is essential that a
relationship to the target culture can be established. For the purposes of the SL individual oral
assessment, a visual stimulus may be a photo, a poster, an illustration or an advertisement (p. 43
Language B guide).
• Candidates must explicitly link their presentation (part 1) to the target culture(s). This must be
done during the presentation itself, and cannot be left solely to the follow-up discussion (part 2).
• Teachers must prepare enough visual stimuli to ensure that the choice remains unknown to all
candidates, regardless of the timing of their individual oral examinations.
General
• The quality of the recordings is very important. It is essential to ensure that the sound quality of both
teacher and candidate is clear and that the venue for the assessment is free from disturbances.
Background noise should be minimised as far as possible to prevent interference
oral performance and to avoid causing them undue stress.
Page 4 / 23
• Candidates must NOT be identified in any way on the audio recording: either by name, by school,
the extract itself. F

form.
• Teachers must ensure that they are familiar with the marking criteria. Inconsistent or incorrect (too
harsh / too generous) application of the criteria can result in the revision of all candidate marks.
• At Higher Level, the follow-
of the literary extract, and the general discussion (part 3) must be based on the course themes.
The theme in Part 3 must be c
should clearly signal the change from part 2 to part 3.
• At Standard Level, the follow-up discussion (part 2) and the general discussion (part 3) must be
based on different course themes.
the same theme. Part 3 must be on one of the other themes of the course and be chosen by the teacher
m part 2 to part
3.
• The discussion in parts 2 and 3 works best when teacher questions are supportive and
stimulating.
in their own way, or ask questions which follow up and explore statements that candidates have made.
ensure that the questions asked clearly relate to what the candidate has said and that they offer an
adequate level of challenge.
• Questions should be specific to each candidate. Questions posed to candidates using the same
literary extract (HL) or visual stimulus (SL) should vary from candidate to candidate as teachers will be
reacting to what the candidate has said rather than asking questions from a list. At both levels, in part
3, questions to candidates in the same school should also vary from candidate to candidate. Teachers
should also be ready to address any spontaneous question that arises from the presentation or any
important point that the student fails to comment on during their presentation.
• The order of the oral examination should be respected. Teachers must keep in mind that topics
discussed in part 3 should be different from those related to the visual stimulus (standard level only).
• Timing must be observed: Examiners are instructed to stop listening after the maximum time allowed
(15 minutes). Incorrect timings occur most often when candidates give presentations that are too long
in part 1. Teachers should politely stop the presentations if candidates go over the time allocated for
part 1 (4 minutes). Similarly, for parts 2 and 3, teachers must make sure they prepare for and ask enough
questions to fill the time allocated for these parts. Teachers should note that they do not need to force
(12 minutes is the minimum)

In some cases, it is observed that the candidate seems to have over-prepared the presentation or over-
rehearsed the discussion. Teachers should guide students to avoid these types of performances as they
(a maximum of 10 bullet points) are permitted as an aide-memoire (Guide p. 43, 50), the candidate should
not read aloud a prepared script.
Higher Level: Candidate performance against each criterion

Criterion A: Language
This criterion applies to all parts of the oral.
Criterion A assesses how successfully and effectively the candidate uses spoken language. At Language B
higher level, candidates need to have sufficient command of the spoken language to be able to
Page 5 / 23
communicate and express their ideas using appropriate and varied vocabulary and grammatical
structures. In addition to being able to engage in effective communication with accurate language,
candidates need to employ pronunciation and intonation that do not impede communication.
Orals with higher marks were characterized by:
• skilful and imaginative use of a wide and expressive range of vocabulary and structures, and
authentic phrasing, demonstrating awareness of the subtleties of language
• language which is natural and authentic, and effectively demonstrates fluency, with very few
language errors. Authentic and idiomatic language does not necessarily include the use of
idioms
• expressive intonation, and generally clear pronunciation to enhance communication
• solid linguistic competence and a sense of cultural competence
• awareness of their own mistakes and readiness to attempt to correct them.
Orals with lower marks were characterized by:

• marked language inaccuracies, which interfered with communication
•
communicate fully
• inappropriate use of colloquial or idiomatic expressions
• hesitancy, and language delivered with difficulty, or in fragmented ways
• marked intonation issues, and/or unclear and confusing pronunciation, which hampered
communication
• heavy reliance on notes during presentation which undermined fluency and naturalness.
Criterion B1: Message literary extract
This criterion applies to part 1 (presentation) only.
Criterion B1 assesses how well the candidate engages with the literary extract in the presentation, and
how relevant the ideas are to the selected extract. At Language B level, candidates are generally able to
present their ideas and opinions in a clear and coherent way, but it should be remembered that the
presentation must focus on the extract and not on the overall literary work from which the extract has
been taken.
Presentations with higher marks tended to:
• be well-focused and well-organised, for example with a brief introduction and outline to guide
cohesive devices
• be consistently relevant to the chosen literary extract
• present ideas and opinions on the extract in a clear and coherent way
• use direct quotations from the extract to derive relevant, sound, and convincing observations
about events, characters, plot, themes, message, etc.
• offer interesting observations, opinions and/or conclusions that are meaningfully and clearly
focused on the extract
• demonstrate ability to link the literary extract to the options studied, and to the target culture.
Presentations with lower marks tended to:
• be poorly organised and offer simply a superficial summary of the extract
• communicate simple ideas with difficulty
Page 6 / 23
• deviate by giving information about the work and/or the author that is irrelevant to the content
of the extract, or devote too much time to discussing the literary extract, leaving aside other
more complex issues
• make superficial use of the extract, with observations and opinions that were generalized,
simplistic, and mostly unsupported; or present confused or unclear ideas that were mostly
irrelevant to the literary extract
• refer to parts of the work that were not included in the extract
• omit personal observations and/or opinions
The presentation must relate specifically to the content of the extract provided. Pre-rehearsed
presentations on generic aspects of a literary work or pres
not directly focus on the content of the extract provided are not the objective of this exercise.
Criterion B2: Message conversation

This criterion applies to parts 2 and 3 of the oral.
Criterion B2 asses
appropriately and thoroughly the candidate responds to questions. At Language B level, candidates are
generally able to present their ideas and opinions in a clear and coherent way, and understand the
Candidates gaining higher marks tended to:

• show good understanding of both simple and complex questions
• respond promptly, with consistently relevant and developed answers which broaden the
discussion
• provide a good number of examples to justify their opinions and personal interpretations both
in the answers to the questions related to the extract (part 2) and in the second topic of
discussion (part 3)
• demonstrate effective handling of a good range of ideas and in-depth analysis
•
interesting and inviting in the conversation, with clear awareness of how to present them
interestingly
Candidates gaining lower marks tended to:

• show failure to understand questions asked by the teacher and/or lack of linguistic tools needed
to ask for clarification
• engage in fragmented conversations, in which responses were short, undeveloped, delayed,
confused or unclear
• respond with laboured, disorganized or incoherent answers
• express only very simple ideas with some clarity
• produce responses which were limited in scope and depth and only offered simple opinions or
sweeping generalisations without further explanations or justifications.
• rely heavily on rehearsed responses
Criterion C: Interactive Skills communication

the discussion, including their capacity to show independence beyond a reliance on a simple question
Page 7 / 23
sufficiently for the conversation to flow, although levels of independence in their contributions vary.
• converse naturally and authentically with consistent comprehension and interaction
• produce responses that were consistently in the target language and which demonstrated
comprehension
• show a great ability to be involved, interested and even enthusiastic about the topics discussed
• introduce new ideas in the form of critical thinking
• demonstrate an ability to make personal contributions naturally and effortlessly, using
appropriate conversational phrases
• demonstrate an ability to interact with ease and express themselves spontaneously
demonstrating understanding and confidence
• giv
skills which allow them to move the conversation forward.
• produce limited responses in the target language
• have a limited participation or interaction in the conversation, and require frequent repetition
or restructuring of questions
• provide monosyllabic answers or give very short responses
• engage in limited interaction, finding it challenging to express their views in both parts 2 and 3
• demonstrate limited engagement or enthusiasm for maintaining the conversation or
broadening the discussion
• rely on the teacher to move the conversation forward, rather than contributing to an organic
development of the discussion
Standard Level: Candidate performance against each criterion

Criterion A: Language
This criterion applies to all parts of the oral.
Criterion A assesses how successfully and effectively the candidate uses spoken language. At Language B
level, candidates generally have sufficient command of the spoken language to be able to communicate
their ideas effectively.
Orals with higher marks were characterized by:
• solid linguistic competence and fluency, with few errors
• a wide range of basic and topic-specific vocabulary in all themes discussed
• use of varied structures, without resorting to pre-learnt complex patterns, and the ability to
manipulate complex structures
• use of language which is natural and authentic. Authentic and idiomatic language does not
necessarily include the use of idioms
• expressive intonation, and clear pronunciation
Orals with lower marks were characterized by:
• marked language inaccuracies, which interfered with communication
Page 8 / 23
• gaps in common vocabulary and use of basic structures, sometimes incorrectly, which limited
the ability to communicate fully
• inappropriate use of colloquial or idiomatic expressions
• hesitation, delivering language with difficulty, or in fragmented ways
• vocabulary and structures clearly influenced by the native language
• marked intonation issues, and/or unclear and confusing pronunciation, which hampered
communication
Criterion B1: Message visual stimulus
This criterion applies to part 1 (presentation) only.
Criterion B1 assesses how well the candidate engages with the stimulus in the presentation, how relevant
the ideas are to the selected stimulus, and how well the ideas are linked to the target culture(s). At
Language B level, candidates are generally able to present their ideas and opinions in a clear and coherent
way, but it should be remembered that the link to the target culture is an essential element of this
assessment criterion.
Presentations with higher marks tended to:
• be clearly structured and well-focused
• be consistently relevant to the visual stimulus
• effectively present both simple and complex ideas
• include brief descriptions, drawing on explicit and implicit details of the visual stimulus, and
focus predominantly on showcasing cultural knowledge and giving interpretations/opinions
• establish and develop clear links to the target culture throughout the presentation
• demonstrate the ability to link the visual stimulus to the relevant Language B theme
• provide personal interpretations related to the stimulus, which were supported by justifications
and/or evidence.
Presentations with lower marks tended to:
• be poorly structured with poorly organized ideas
• present simple ideas with difficulty, in some cases not meeting the minimum time requirements
(3 minutes)
• devote too much time to describing the visual stimulus and concentrate on explicit or basic
details, leaving too little time to explore more complex issues
• describe the stimulus without offering any personal interpretation
• fail to establish clear links to the target culture or omit to develop even a brief link to the target
culture(s)
• fail to link the image clearly to the given course theme.
Criterion B2: Message conversation
appropriately and thoroughly the candidate responds to the questions. At Language B level, candidates
are generally able to present ideas and opinions clearly and coherently and engage in a conversation
which for the most part flows.
Page 9 / 23
• provide n direct
responses to broaden the discussion
• demonstrate a broad scope in the response particularly across two different themes
• communicate relevant ideas effectively and clearly
• consistently develop ideas and opinions with clarifications, examples and reasons
• show an ability to draw comparisons and evaluate different points of view
• demonstrate a good range of ideas and in-depth analysis, including personal interpretations
and/or attempts to engage the teacher in the conversation through use of phrases such as

• rely too often on short answers to teacher questions and thus offer simple answers without
development and which are limited in both scope and depth
• require basic or simple questions with little or no development or further discussion
• not cover two distinct topics
• fail to go beyond the realms of simple personal experience to include exploration of the wider
aspects of a topic
• give only simple opinions and sweeping generalisations, without any explanation or
justification
• rely on over-rehearsed monologue responses to questions, rather than engaging in a natural
and authentic conversation.
Criterion C: Interactive skills communication
the discussion, including their capacity to show independence beyond a reliance on a simple question
sufficiently for the conversation to flow, although levels of independence in their contributions vary.
• maintain a conversation which flows coherently at a natural pace
• demonstrate an excellent comprehension of questions that are both simple and complex
• demonstrate the ability to respond readily and appropriately to questions in the target
language
• demonstrate a consistent willingness to participate in a spontaneous exchange of views
• demonstrate the ability to move the conversation forward independently of any teacher
prompts
• demonstrate an ability to sustain the conversation and make some independent personal
contributions.
• fail to understand questions, or rely on simple questions asked by the teacher, and/or lack of
the linguistic tools needed to ask for clarification
• engage in fragmented conversation, with responses that were limited, brief, undeveloped,
delayed, confused or unclear
• rely heavily on rehearsed responses, to the detriment of the flow of the conversation
• frequently need questions to be repeated, rephrased or clarified
Page 10 / 23
• demonstrate a struggle to maintain or participate in the conversation and rely on the teacher
to carry the conversation forward
• demonstrate a tendency to give up too quickly when stuck for the right words.
Recommendations and guidance for the teaching of future candidates

During the course, teachers should:
• strive to ensure that their students have as much practice as possible in lively, genuine and
engaged conversations in the classroom.
•
without being prompted, participating actively to keep the conversation going and taking the
initiative to move the conversation forward.
• encourage students to practise showing enthusiasm to demonstrate they have understood
their interlocutor and offer ideas related to the conversation.
• give students practice in using questions as starting points for a conversation, and not treating
them as items on a short-answer test. Teach students to take the initiative and steer the
conversation where appropriate.
• teach students to respond when asked for clarification or examples, or when challenged to
defend their opinions or points of view. In class, such questioning and challenging does not
always have to come from the teacher, but can be practised very well in student pairs or small
groups.
• at HL, practise with different text types (plays, short stories, poetry, graphic novels, novels) in
order to help students develop critical thinking and analytical skills. Teachers should avoid texts
which are mostly narrative in nature, or classic plays, as they may be too obscure, intricate or
sophisticated or have a level of complexity that demands too much from Language B
candidates.
• at SL, regularly practis
critical thinking by encouraging them to compare their cultures to the target culture.
• at SL, encourage students to develop ideas beyond a simple description of the visual stimulus,
to see the image as a prompt for a more analytical approach to the related Language B theme.
• focus on correcting flaws in expression and encourage the use of an ever-wider range of
vocabulary and phrasing. Making students aware of their common slips in language use should
lead to the development of self-correction.
• help students practise organising their ideas, especially for part 1, with continuous reference to
the extract (HL) or linking the visual stimulus to the target culture (SL). Practice in using notes
to organise presentations during the course should naturally lead to a more organised pattern
of ideas in spontaneous conversation. Teach students how to use their preparation time
effectively to plan their presentations.
• provide students with good knowledge of the different cultures of the target language.
• teach students to contextualize the course themes within life or society in general in parts 2 and
3. If candidates do not treat ideas deeply or meaningfully, they run the risk of repeating
themselves, and thus may fail to demonstrate they can handle a wider range of ideas.
, teachers should:
• interrupt candidates if their presentation (part 1) goes beyond 4 minutes so that the oral can be
moved on to part 2.
Page 11 / 23
• strive to make their questions clear and precise, aiming to encourage candidates to speak as
much and as easily as possible and to ask questions that stimulate discussion.
• avoid asking very basic questions about details of the extract (HL) or visual stimulus (SL) or about
trivial factual background, which do not help candidates to achieve high marks.
• avoid asking too many questions related to personal experience, as these often result in
simplistic responses.
• avoid asking too many fact-based questions or questions which rely on the recall of factual
course content.
• challenge candidates by asking questions which prompt them to explain or justify statements
in more depth. Teachers should also include questions with varied grammatical structures to
allow candidates to use and demonstrate their command of both basic and complex
grammatical structures.
• ask questions which require candidates to discuss the target culture. The Language B guide
states that in parts 2 and 3, candidates should demonstrate that they are able to express their
-53).
•
them every opportunity to show the full extent of their language skills.
• rephrase questions when necessary to reduce the stress for candidates who fail to understand.
Teachers may also slow down the pace of their speech or ask more basic questions if candidates
are struggling, but should take this help into account when awarding marks for criterion C.
•
53).
• allow candidates adequate time to respond to the questions without being interrupted in parts
2 and 3. Teachers should expect and encourage candidates to develop their answers. However,
they should take care not to allow candidates to make speeches or presentations in parts 2 and
3. These parts must be a conversation, with interaction between the teacher and the candidate.
• respond
should challenge candidates within the limit of their ability by asking questions which prompt
them to explain or justify statements in more depth.
•
at ease in an otherwise stressful situation.
• avoid unnecessary and long interventions, explanations or repetition of information. These
reduce the time candidates have to demonstrate their knowledge.
• not pass personal judgement on candidate comments.
• ensure that the transitions between parts 1, 2 and 3 are clear, as specified in the Language B
guide.
• ensure that the IAs they submit comply with the guidance provided in the Range and Suitability
of Submissions section, above.
It is also important that teachers are relaxed, as this is likely to make the students feel more at ease.
After the examination, teachers should:
• ensure that the correct extract (HL) or visual stimulus (SL) is uploaded along with the
corresponding candidate audio file, so that criterion B1 can be assessed; please upload only the
extract or visual stimulus discussed by the candidate. Do not upload the other text or image
that was not chosen.
• ensure that any additional documentation and comments are anonymous: they should not
include the name of the school, candidate or teacher, or the
(not even the alphanumeric number) or any other way of identifying the candidates.
Page 12 / 23
Session-specific Information
Higher Lever
It appeared that more

candidates than in previous sessions had been instructed to focus closely on the extract in Part 1,
although a few still gave rambling explanations of the work as a whole. Most teachers followed the
instructions well, although a small minority allowed Part 1 presentations that were too long, or let the
whole interview extend beyond 15 minutes. Questioning and interaction were usually quite skillful and
effective - although a significant minority of teachers still appear to ask questions mechanically, with no
follow-up discussion of what the candidate actually says, thus affecting the quality of the interaction.
There were a few cases of interruptions in the recordings but mainly because some exams were held
online due to the Covid-19 school closures. The quality of those recordings was, in a few cases,
considerably poorer than those done at school.
Standard Level
Overwhelmingly, the most common and costly error was the failure of a large proportion of candidates to
link their presentation to the target culture of an English-speaking country or countries. Many candidates
is photo was
-
used it as a significant element of their presentation. In many cases, unfortunately, the images provided
by the teacher did not relate easily to the target culture, and some clearly encouraged candidates to
discuss other cultures instead.
Quite a large number of schools failed to label the stimulus with the prescribed theme, while some
incorrectly added a title and
interpretation.
Many candidates had difficulty extending their answers with scope and depth or taking the initiative at
times to advance the conversation. Some schools seemed to have taught their candidates to ask the
teacher series of
misinterpretation of this requirement and a waste of time. Another problem was that, for Part 3, some
teachers seemingly allowed the candidates themselves to choose a theme and to proceed to make a
presentation on it. This is not the intention of the examination and makes it more difficult for candidates
to show their ability to interact in a genuine discussion. It also runs the risk of academic misconduct if a
candidate pre-rehearses this part.
Page 13 / 23
Higher level paper one

General comments
In this paper, the majority of candidates performed at least competently, and many very well. Command
of language was usually very sound; most scripts were clear and easily comprehensible, and the best
displayed some sophisticated range of vocabulary, complex grammar, and idiomatic phrasing. Message
was handled quite methodically in most cases; the required elements of the task were usually at least
covered, but sometimes insufficiently developed in middling to weak scripts. Candidates also displayed
good conceptual understanding: a la
comments under - , below).
The tasks seemed accessible to candidates, both in terms of the basic subject matter, and of what they
were required to do; and no flaws were detected in the wording or formulation of the tasks.
Feedback from teachers indicated that around 80% felt that the level of difficulty was appropriate.
was a little, or
significantly, more difficult when compared with the equivalent paper. It may be that this perceived
difficulty has to do with the new Criterion C, involving a choice of text type. However, there is no
evidence on the basis of marks actually awarded that candidates experienced difficulties (see comments
under - , below).
The areas of the programme and examination which appeared difficult for the
candidates
Control of message: Most responses tended to follow the overall sequence of the action verbs required
by the wording of the task, which was sensible enough. However, detailed explanation within that
overall structure was often rambling and confused, and sometimes there was a failure to link the various
steps of explanation together into a coherent argument.
Recurrent grammar errors: A small number of weaker candidates displayed marked and repeated
errors in grammar (e.g. construction of tenses, agreement, etc). There were also some strong candidates
who presented repeated errors (often in basic areas of grammar, such as use of certain pronouns), while
at the same time handling the language with skill and confidence in all other respects. It is important to
f the
language.
: This text type appeared in Q1 and in Q2. Most responses handled the text type
competently, but with noticeable weaknesses. There was a lack of concise explanation, and a use of long
rambling paragraphs, with a weak structure of argument. Such responses tended to read like general
background articles, rather than methodically informative reports.
The areas of the programme and examination in which candidates appeared well
prepared
Command of language: Most candidates displayed a good or very good command of the language.
Generally speaking, they wrote fluently and clearly, with much grammatical accuracy and with effective
use of vocabulary and authentic phrasing. Despite minor slips of grammar and mis-usage of vocabulary,
most candidates communicated fairly effectively.
Coverage of task: It seems that most candidates had been well-prepared to handle the exam
methodically, by analysing the task carefully.
Page 14 / 23
requirements was sometimes combined with a failure to develop their ideas fully and present details
clearly.
Creative thinking: Many candidates showed imaginative intelligence in creating their message. This
was true of thinking through the causes of language disappearance (Q1), of different groups affected by
tourism (Q2), and of what it might be like to experience a volunteer programme in another country (Q3).
Such imaginative raw material was, however, sometimes wasted by lack of methodical, detailed
development, precisely relevant to the task.
The strengths and weaknesses of the candidates in the treatment of individual

questions
By far the most popular task was Q3, with Q1 and Q2 markedly less popular. The popularity of Q3 is likely
to have been because (i) it required recounting personal experience, which could be imagined even if
fellow students seemed an obvious choice and easy to handle.

Across all three questions, most candidates chose the text type considered the most for the
task. This might indicate that candidates had been well-taught in the conceptual understandings. Very
be in Q1 or Q2.
Question 1
At first sight, one might think that
recondite for the candidates. However, the majority of responses were quite competently handled,
explaining the disappearance by the effects of globalization and social change, and arguing that language
diversity is important for cultural, historical and social reasons. Measures that world leaders should adopt
were less convincing, consisting mainly of better education.
The choice of text type proved a little challenging: there was a balance between those who chose the
letter to the e news report. The key
are best expressed in a letter to the editor, and are not expected in a (properly objective) news report.
Question 2
Fewer candidates than expected chose this task, possibly because they did not have much knowledge or
experience of the impact of mass tourism. Those who attempted the task usually handled it quite
competently, developing their ideas fully by describing the situation clearly and including a range of
different points of view, -
developed. A few apparently did not notice the implication that mass tourism was to be considered a bad
thing and were generally enthusiastic about the benefits of lots of tourists. Since the wording of the task
was not explicit about mass tourism being a problem, such responses were not penalized directly,
othing to address.
news report reasonably well, but many were more like
extensive feature articles, or even opinion columns. Few presented ideas concisely in short paragraphs.
speech handled register and tone and address competently
Page 15 / 23
Question 3
As already noted, this task probably attracted candidates because it may have appeared stimulating to
imagine personal experience in the context required. However, as a consequence, many candidates failed
to focus properly on the task, and so lost marks under Criterion B. Typically, there was too much on
anecdotes about travelling to the overseas programme, or uncomfortable living conditions, or missing
their family,
required elements were usually covered, but often thinly, with little development.
ext type was a speech, and obviously most candidates chose this as a familiar and easy
option. Generally speaking, the speech text type was quite well handled, with appropriate register and
tone, and effective address to the audience.

Teachers should pay particular attention to the following aspects of Paper 1, and teach students the skills
necessary to handle the paper successfully:
• Instruct students how to read questions carefully, and to identify all required elements
• Help students to choose the most appropriate text type by teaching that the appropriacy of a
text type is defined by the context, audience and purpose of the communication
• Make sure that students have practised writing all required text types (refer to the document
This particularly applies to less
common text types such as the news report or the set of guidelines
• Ensure that students practice the skills of planning and organising their writing effectively
• Identify repeated language weaknesses of each student, and help them to correct these.
Standard level paper one

General comments
85% of the teachers who completed the G2 (Teacher Feedback) form considered the difficulty level of the
paper appropriate. Clarity of wording and the presentation of the paper were considered good to very
good by the majority of respondents. Many thanks to the teachers who took the time to provide their
comments on questions which worked successfully and those which caused difficulty.
Overall, questions seemed accessible in a way that most candidates were able to relate to the topics
presented. As usual, there were some focused and creative responses that presented ideas methodically
with very few significant errors. At the bottom end, there were some responses that demonstrated lack of
coherence and/or understanding of the task along with several basic errors in simple and complex
structures that hampered communication at times.
candidates
Many candidates failed to use effective paragraphing or support the coherence of their argument with
appropriate cohesive devices, which prevented the top of the range marks in Criterion B. Even in some of
the cases where candidates provided lucid explanations and effective examples, poor paragraphing did
not contribute to the clarity and coherence of their argument.
Page 16 / 23
Handwriting was another issue as some scripts were extremely difficult to read. Clear writing and
presentation are fundamental when papers are electronically marked.
All aspects of a question need to be addressed lucidly and effectively for the award of high marks in
Criterion B. Unfortunately, many candidates failed to meet the required parameters of the three tasks, even
if they displayed very good command of language and effective use of text-type conventions.
Text types seemed a challenge to some candidates. It would appear likely that the proposal (Q1) and the
, without revealing understanding of

audience, purpose and context, or clearly address the intended target audience. In a few cases, the text
type produced was not one of the three options provided for the task.
prepared
A good number of candidates dealt with the requirements of their chosen question quite thoroughly,
suggesting that they had been well-prepared to handle the exam methodically, by analyzing the task
carefully.
Many students revealed very good awareness of context, audience and purpose, which was reflected in
their choice of an appropriate text type and the use of register and tone. Even in Q1, some of the students
ged to successfully set a context
reflecting the purpose of recommending/proposing ideas to the local government, which was
permissible.

questions
Question 1
This task was the second most popular and was handled well by the majority of students. The best
responses focused on how the game will introduce players to the culture or landmarks of a country or
region, with lucid explanations provided and concrete examples drawn from real-life experiences. In some
scripts, a lower mark was awarded for message, either because candidates failed to link the game and the
success part to the landmarks and culture, or because they did not address both aspects effectively.
A good number of candidates produced an effective proposal, the appropriate text type to be read by a
specific person or entity (in this case a representative of a big producing company). In other responses,
however, the brochure was chosen as the text type and well-executed in terms of conventions; this was
deemed appropriate if the candidate clearly indicated that the text
targets a company with the purpose of proposing the game and if the brochure adopted a persuasive
tone.
Question 2
This task proved to be the most popular by far. It was clear that students felt at ease with his question,
probably due to the online experience they have been through, which enabled them to support ideas and
arguments using their personal experience.
In many scripts, candidates failed to focus their ideas on
students access and thus ended up explaining advantages and disadvantages of online
Page 17 / 23
learning in general, which was not relevant. This resulted in lower marks for message, even though the
candidates may have produced excellent language and used appropriate text type conventions.
Many letters to the editor were well produced with the purpose of voicing personal opinion to a mass
audience and provoking thought and action. What was missing in a good number of these responses,
though, was the reference to the original article or issue raised, which is an essential component of this
text type. In some other scripts, a proposal (the generally appropriate text type) was chosen; this was
accepted if it was made clear that the text is to be read by the local government. In both text types, a
serious and persuasive tone was expected to be adopted with a generally formal register.
Question 3
This question was attempted by a good number of candidates but comes third in terms of popularity. The
majority of candidates produced effective articles suitable for informing a large specified audience
(students in this case) about the museum. In those scripts, what the museum is about and its most special
features were addressed well with examples and explanations provided coherently.
What marked some scripts down was either failing to address one of the aspects in the question or lacking
the effective development of ideas. In addition, many scripts failed to reveal understanding of the
audience, and thus no clear mention of students being the target audience was provided in either the
article or the brochure produced.

Teachers are strongly advised to:
• Identify key language weaknesses and work on them in class
• Encourage students to carefully read all parts of the task and underline the essential key words. When
two aspects are mentioned in the question, BOTH have to be addressed
• Expose students to a wide range of texts in the target language, and include a discussion of the text
type, the target audience and purpose of each text
• Ensure that students understand that the appropriacy of a text type is defined by the context, audience
and purpose of the communication
• Practise with students how to develop ideas coherently and effectively
• Practise with students ALL text types for Paper 1 task options (refer to the document
• Remind students of the importance of maintaining legible handwriting. This needs practice well before
the examination, and candidates need to form the habit of proofreading their final drafts
• Ensure that students use paragraphing and cohesive devices effectively and appropriately to support
the coherent development of their argument/ideas
• Remind students of the word-count requirements. Whilst there is no penalty for work that does not
meet the minimum requirement, such responses are unlikely to address all the relevant aspects
required of the task. Similarly, writing significantly more than the upper limit is likely to result in
unfocused repetitive answers, which will not score highly.
Page 18 / 23
Higher level paper two

candidates
Many candidates had problems with the sentence completion exercise in Text A. These problems
included: paraphrasing answers rather than quoting verbatim; using more words from the text than
required; missing articles; and repeating words from the stem. Candidate must copy answers verbatim
from the text, ensuring that the whole sentence stem and answer is grammatically correct. It is also
important for candidates to avoid writing too many words to complete the sentence. Items in this question
type can usually be answered with a short phrase.
A similar comment applies to short answer questions. Although the rubric does not require verbatim
quoting from the text, each item can normally be answered with a brief direct quote. If the candidate elects
to paraphrase rather than quote, the emphasis must again be on brevity: anything longer than a few words
will almost always mean that the response contains irrelevant information or is totally incorrect. In either
case, the mark will be lost.
prepared
Most examiners noted that the examination paper did not appear to present major problems. The paper
seemed to be well designed. The average candidate was generally successful in selecting and handling
the information needed across the full range of question types in the three texts. In addition, candidates
generally understood references and correctly identified which statements were true and which false.

questions
Text A
In general, the better candidates found Text A straightforward, often scoring full marks. Where such
candidates dropped a mark or two on Text A, it was often because of Q11, where a good number of
rred to in the stem, rather than
Q12, where statement A proved to be a tempting distractor.
Performance in individual questions:
• Question 1-4: These questions were accessible to most candidates. None of the questions seems to
have been particularly difficult or inaccessible.
• Questions 5 & 6: Both questions were generally handled well. A few candidates provided B instead of
C as the response to Q6.
• Questions 7-11: The set is of medium difficulty. Candidates generally lost marks because they either
paraphrased the answer or omitted/added words to the target answer. The most difficult in the set was
Q critical thinking, learning to collaborate, and
effe
• Question 12: Generally handled well by many candidates. A number gave A instead of B as the
response.
Page 19 / 23
Text B
Text B presented greater challenges, with Q14 generally presenting the most difficulties for the better-
performing candidates.
• Questions 13-17: Some candidates lost the marks for Qs13 and 14 because they added words to the
correct answer, e.g.
answer to Q14.
• Questions 18-21: Generally handled well by many candidates. The most common reason for losing the
mark in Q21 was .
• Questions 22-25: A somewhat easy set, with most candidates attempting the set successfully. Some
candidates lost the mark for Q25 because they provided C instead of B as the response.
Text C
This text was the most challenging part of the examination paper. A number of stronger candidates had
difficulties with Qs 32, 36 and 37. The True/False with justification questions (Qs 31 to 34) posed some
challenges, as usual, with even better-performing candidates encountering problems. Such candidates
typically had little difficulty in identifying whether a statement was true or false, but lost marks because of
the need for precision in the wording of the justifications.
Performance in individual questions:
• Question 26: Of medium difficulty. A good number of candidates provided at least 3 correct
statements. The most elusive seems to have been A.
• Questions 27-30: A generally accessible set. The most common reason for losing the mark in Q27 was
giving on its own as the answer.
• Questions 31-34: The set was somewhat challenging. The easiest in the set was Q34. The most
challenging question in the set was Q32. but
-life
• Questions 35-37: A somewhat challenging set. Q35 was attempted successfully by a number of
candidates. Many provided E and either C or F consecutively as the responses to Qs36 and 37. It is worth
noting that the set was not attempted by many candidates, perhaps because they missed page 8 of the
exam.

Among the four linguistic skills, reading comprehension is perhaps the one that can be practised and
improved most successfully by self-study. However, there are certain important caveats:
Reading itself: it is vital for candidates to keep pushing themselves to read frequently and widely. The
more that this can be encouraged and monitored by teachers, the better. Reading widely requires
candidates not only to familiarise themselves with the range of text types but also to ensure that they dip
into texts from a range of cultural backgrounds, so that they are exposed to linguistic variation.
Exam techniques: it is equally vital for candidates to be as well prepared as possible in the techniques
required to handle different question types. As noted above, there are always candidates who lose marks
unnecessarily because of flaws in their exam technique. Some of these tips and techniques should be
obvious, for example:
Page 20 / 23
• Time management: it is good practice to allocate a certain amount of time to each text, making sure to
allocate more time to Text B than Text A, and more time to Text C than to Text B, so that the time
available reflects the increasing difficulty of the texts.
• Attempt all questions: never leave a question unanswered since marks are not deducted for incorrect
answers.
• Read instructions very carefully: it is essential that candidates follow the instructions given. If the rubric
or the question asks candidates to use words exactly as they appear in an assigned part of the text, that
is what must be done to gain the mark.
To guide students, teachers should:
• advise students on how to answer different question types. This is especially the case with the
True/False with justification question type, where the justification for each True/False response requires
great care. The justification must cover all parts of the statement, must be a direct quotation, must
include all the key words that justify the evaluation of the statement, and must avoid the addition of
any irrelevant words.
• emphasise the importance of considering carefully the requirements of each question to determine
when a problem could result from providing either too many words or too few as an answer. Where
k of losing the mark: even if one
• not encourage candidates to provide

between parentheses. Equally, teachers should not encourage students to write out the full sentence
then underline the relevant words. Examiners are instructed to mark the whole answer, disregarding
brackets and underlining, and candidates are not given the benefit of the doubt.
• counsel students to pay extra attention to the legibility of their responses in general, and to write their
answers clearly in questions where a letter is required, for unclear answers will NOT be awarded the
mark. Among ambiguous answers are C/G, E/F, E/L, I/J, and B/D.
• advise students to write their answers in the provided answer boxes. If students do not want an answer
to be marked, they should clearly cross it out. When an answer is written outside the provided box, the
candidate should .
Page 21 / 23
Standard level paper two

candidates
Completing the sentences with the words as they appear in the text (Qs 1-4) was challenging for a good
number of candidates. It is important to remember that answers for these questions must be copied from
the text and no paraphrases are accepted. It is advisable to reread the questions once they have been
answered to double check that no word is missing or left out.
As in previous sessions, True/False with justification questions (Qs 19-23) proved quite demanding. Q23
was one of the most difficult questions in the paper. A good number of candidates provided extra details
in the justification. It is important to remember that both the correct tick and a brief and precise quotation
must be provided to get the mark and no paraphrasing is accepted.
prepared
In this session, candidates seemed to have been well prepared for answering vocabulary questions (Qs 9-
11 and Q30), which were quite accessible to a good number of students, as well as completing the text
with the missing words (Qs 12-14).
The reference questions (Qs 24-27) also proved to be quite accessible to a considerable number of
candidates this session.

questions
Text A
• Question 1:
sentence must be grammatically correct to be awarded the mark.
• Question 2: D
wrong.
• Question 3: Accessible. A f
• Question 4: Medium difficulty .
• Question 5-8: An easy set of questions.
• Question 9-11: Quite an easy set. Q10 was the most difficult. S
answer, which was not accepted
• Question 12-14: An accessible set. Q14 was the most difficult, many giving .
Text B
• Question 15-18: Quite an easy set. A good number of students got these questions right.
• Question 19-23: A challenging set. For Q20, a good number of candidates provided the whole sentence
as an answer. Q23 was the most demanding, and most of the candidates got this question wrong. The
• Question 24-27: Q
which were not awarded the mark.
Page 22 / 23
Text C
• Question 28-31: Medium difficulty
accepted.
• Question 32-36: Medium difficulty.
• Question 37: Medium difficulty.

During the course, teachers are encouraged to:
• familiarise candidates with all types of questions and with appropriate strategies to answer each of
them. It is a good idea to practise with past papers.
• guide students on how to identify words or phrases precisely. Where one word is required, a candidate
who gives more than one word runs the risk of losing the mark. Where one phrase is required,
candidates should not provide the whole sentence as it is usually not accepted.
• guide students to answer questions using the exact wording of the text as much as possible.
•
reference is
• train candidates to provide suitable justifications in the True / False with justification questions. The
justification must be a direct quote from the text, and all parts of the statement must be justified no
more and no less. Paraphrasing is not accepted.
• train candidates to reread their answers, to avoid losing marks unnecessarily because of slips in copying
out.
When preparing candidates for the examinations, teachers are encouraged to:
• warn students against offering multiple responses, unless the question asks specifically for two or more
answers.
• instruct candidates to use exact words used in the text when responding to the
araphrasing is not
accepted in either of these questions.
• advise students not : if the
crucial parts are omitted, then they will not receive the mark.
• discourage students from underlining part of the answers. The whole answer will be considered, not
what is underlined.
• remind students to write their answers clearly, even if the answer is just one letter. If an answer cannot
be clearly read, it cannot be awarded the mark.
• advise candidates to write their answers inside the boxes provided. If they do not want an answer to be
marked, they must cross it out clearly.
Page 23 / 23

IB English B Subject Report May 2021

Cargado por

Copyright:

Formatos disponibles

IB English B Subject Report May 2021

Cargado por

Información del documento

Título original

Derechos de autor

Formatos disponibles

Compartir este documento

Compartir o incrustar documentos

Opciones para compartir

¿Le pareció útil este documento?

¿Este contenido es inapropiado?

Copyright:

Formatos disponibles

IB English B Subject Report May 2021

Cargado por

Copyright:

Formatos disponibles

English B HL/SL

© International Baccalaureate Organization 2021

age a été freiné

Higher level overall

Mark range: 0 - 12 13 - 26 27 - 39 40 - 54 55 - 68 69 - 82 83 - 100

Standard level overall

Mark range: 0 9 10 - 20 21 - 34 35 - 50 51 68 69 - 84 85 - 100

Internal assessment (standard and higher level)

Range and suitability of submissions

Literary Extracts (higher level)

the extract itself. F

(12 minutes is the minimum)

Higher Level: Candidate performance against each criterion

Orals with lower marks were characterized by:

Criterion B2: Message conversation

Candidates gaining higher marks tended to:

Candidates gaining lower marks tended to:

Criterion C: Interactive Skills communication

Standard Level: Candidate performance against each criterion

Candidates gaining lower marks tended to:

Recommendations and guidance for the teaching of future candidates

It appeared that more

Higher level paper one

The strengths and weaknesses of the candidates in the treatment of individual

fellow students seemed an obvious choice and easy to handle.

Recommendations and guidance for the teaching of future candidates

Standard level paper one

, without revealing understanding of

The strengths and weaknesses of the candidates in the treatment of individual

Recommendations and guidance for the teaching of future candidates

Higher level paper two

The strengths and weaknesses of the candidates in the treatment of individual

Recommendations and guidance for the teaching of future candidates

• not encourage candidates to provide

Standard level paper two

The strengths and weaknesses of the candidates in the treatment of individual

Recommendations and guidance for the teaching of future candidates

También podría gustarte