'Behind the Scores' w/ a Cambridge Examiner
I had the chance to ask Anna, an expert Cambridge examiner with over 14 years of experience, how examiners think and what goes into scoring on test day. Hope this is helpful for those you gearing up for the CAE/CPE.
When a candidate's nerves are clearly getting the better of them during the speaking test, what's going through your head?
Anna: Feeling a bit anxious during the exam sessions is quite common. Even the most experienced candidates might struggle with a long day of tests and the pressure to have high marks. So, the first thing I think of is adapting the tone of voice, in order to make prompts clear for the candidates. I also try my best to make sure that I’m extra kind when talking to them, providing sort of a “linguistic hug.” Feeling welcome even in such adverse situations is key for confidence.
Another relevant aspect is making sure that the candidates breathe properly. While under exam conditions, we tend to avoid mistakes, but any mispronunciation or small confusion regarding grammar/vocabulary is overthought by our minds, which can lead to a “fight-or-flight” mode. That worsens the feeling of failure, which is so untrue, and breathing is an essential tool to reorganize the thoughts and get back on track.
It’s important to bear in mind that the examiners are not looking for errors to reduce the marks, but rather the use of language by the candidate, what they can do in English. This said, I try to remind students that, if mistakes come up, but candidates can either correct them right away or keep on with the conversation despite of them, that’s a clear sign that they can engage effectively in communication. This is the most significant aspect we assess.
Do you notice when someone has memorized a phrase or used a certain preparation technique? How does that factor into scoring?
Anna: Candidates often take the test with a friend or someone they have been studying with, so we look for signs of memorization in their speech. If a person has some trouble making up sentences in questions which assess their views on familiar and unfamiliar topics, but correctly uses the structures expected for that component in the long-turn task, that is an indicator of well-rehearsed context. Although it may show a range of vocabulary and grammatical forms, that definitely drops their mark a bit, since one of the elements for fluency is being able to convey meaning spontaneously, not through applied techniques.
For instance, a C1 candidate that has practiced intensely with another needs to show ability to link the other’s ideas to theirs, either to accept them or refuse them. In well-rehearsed contexts, they tend to paraphrase what the previous candidate said instead of using synonyms. Advanced-test takes are also required to develop the interaction towards a negotiation, which is understood as a dispute between the candidates – although this can lead to great discourse management features and good interactive communication, many people want to “win” the competition. But the truth is… if one of the candidates is always the one who’s suggesting alternatives and, the other, refuting them or finally accepting the previous ideas by using “I agree with you, we should stick to…”, it’s another red flag that the conversation has been practiced over and over. Last, but not least: the tone of voice also plays an essential role here. Rehearsed dialogues tend to be monotones, sometimes extremely fast, so we can get rid of the task and run away from the exam centre the fastest we can. The result: the conversation doesn’t sound natural. C1 students who have been in the comfort zone may get a pass mark, but definitely not the highest score, whilst their colleague (usually a stronger candidate) would benefit from taking risks and assisting their friend.
My suggestion to reduce the impression of a ready-made dialogue is: act normally. If you’re taking the exam with a friend, try to think of this moment as a normal interaction between both of you. How would you react to that question or idea that they shared? What emotions arise: surprise, disgust, anger..? Forget about the examiner in front of you and reply to your friend only – if possible, looking at them in the eye. Add your feelings to your speech, make jokes (if you feel comfortable with it), apply the lexicon you’ve studied – even talking about situations that you’ve both been through which are related to the topic you’re discussing would do a great job here.
How do you manage different speaking styles or personalities (really confident v. timid, heavy accents, etc.)?
Anna: That’s a tricky question, since it englobes different aspects to be considered. So I’ll try to give my thoughts on each of them separately.
From my experience, I can tell that pairs/groups often include a really confident student and a shy person, who’s not so confident, although they are just as qualified to get a pass mark or even better grades. If timid candidates are taking the exam with friends they trust, they sometimes rely on each other when seeking for help regarding vocabulary, proper grammar structures, meaning of words… but students aren’t fully aware that they can help out their mates over the exam. Once again, the trick to overcome this is to think of the speaking exam as a daily conversation with a friend**.** Never mind the teacher in front of you. Examiners are only supporting this chat with some guided questions. Go through each task as if your friend had asked those questions, and everything shall be fine.
Different personalities are great to show off candidates’ skills in communication, not only if you’re taking the exam with a friend. With a stranger, that allows for making new friends. Some of the questions during the test focus on social abilities, such as finding shared interests and striking a deal in contentious subjects, so why not take the chance to see them as different kind of small talk? Deciding on the best course of action when talking to someone you’re not acquainted with can feel challenging, so aim at a natural conversation here. Take the lead if you’re more confident or be kind to let the other candidate start answering the questions if you need more substantial thoughts before making up your own response.
On the other hand, speaking styles threat natural conversations. Some people are innate communicators while others prefer objectiveness over content. There’s a strict timing to each task of the exam, so even if candidates finish their dialogue and provide the examiners with every requested aspect, they are expected to keep talking until that minimum time is reached. So, if you like to give short, objective answers, make use of linguistics markers to show that you’re thinking about your answers (“You know”, “Allow me some time to organise my thoughts here”, “I see your point, it’s [add your consideration], but I’m not sure if I agree with it because [add your explanation]”). They will help you keep the ball rolling while your brain finds the best answer to give. Also, those markers will show the examiners you can produce extended stretches of language, giving you better chances of getting that highest mark. If you’re the heart of the party when it comes to giving speeches, make sure that you support the other candidate whenever needed and try to reduce the pace of speaking or the amount of information you share, so you can both produce enough contributions. The R.E.E. method for answers is useful for both cases: first, you respond, then explain your response and, finally, give examples to support your decision. More objective speakers benefit from this technique by producing longer stretches of speech, while natural communicators reduce the content they share. It’s a win-win trick.
As of accents, well, there’s something to be considered here. The physiological articulators of sounds in humans differ across languages. We grow up learning how to communicate within our own community, where to place the tongue in order to differentiate one sound from the other, and many languages which have had close contact during the centuries have shared articulatory mechanisms. That explains why a native Portuguese speaker finds learning Spanish easy, but this doesn’t mean learning German or a clicking language such as Zulu would follow this pattern. Many people even experience physical pain in their muscles when trying to master sounds which only occur in one language or dialect they’re learning. Definitely, learning how to speak is difficult.
Let’s start with the idea that foreign accents can be perceived, regardless of how well you communicate. And that’s OK, as long as no changes in meaning happen due to mispronunciation (for instance, “York” and “jerk” for native Spanish speakers - the sound of “Y” in Spanish and “J” in English are the same, so the inappropriate articulation of the first sound may offend someone in certain contexts). That is why there is a specific scale to assess pronunciation in proficiency exams. You can reduce this by selecting pieces of speech (not too long: phrases, simple sentences, or even words you struggle with the most) from native speakers, recording yourself saying them, and repeating the recordings until your production is exactly the same as in the original audio. For example: you could select part of your favorite song or a specific line from a film you enjoy, and keep recording yourself repeating that single piece to perfection. Now, I’m not an advocate for perfection, I don’t believe there’s such thing as being flawless, but after more than a decade teaching students how to overcome their difficulties I’ve come to notice that this is a great technique to master some of the most challenging phonetic patterns.
Are there any common misunderstandings about examiners or the test process?
Examiners follow strict best practices and our adherence to them are constantly assessed, which limits what we can or should do under exam conditions, thought to make room for fair conditions for all test takers. This way, we make sure everyone is treated equally. This said, no, we don’t have common misunderstandings.
What immediately signals "high quality" or "fluent" to you when assessing writing or speaking candidates?
Anna: Definitely their ability to use a wide range of vocabulary and grammar structures considering the CEFR level they’re in. If a candidate doesn’t attempt to produce grammar inversions, they are most likely not getting a pass mark in the CPE exam, for example. The pace of speech is also an important feature: too much hesitation may be a signal of anxiety, but body language, some prompting from our side or their friends supporting them will give us evidence to what the root cause may be, or if the candidate is struggling with how to translate their ideas into English.
You can connect with Anna here to get extra guidance with your exam prep.