# data[].attributes.body
Good morning, your OI is very good and the rethorical devices are clear. You mencioned clearly the conflicts and the characters. Your answers were good, with a coherent message, although they didnt include quoting, the conclusion was great and concise. Some things to improve are the pronunciation and entonation. Good job!😄

# data[].attributes.body
Pablo, I admire you because you tried improve your pronounce. Honestly I didn't understand some parts of your analysis and explanation. However according to that I understood, I can tell you that it's necessary and important improve your communication skills. In the other hand, about the content of your analysis... you have to learn the structure of an Individual Oral, because in your audio there aren't any characters, any evidence of analysis and thinking skills. Nonetheless, I considered that you can express more, if you audio continue... Because, I only listen 3 minutes, but the real Individual Oral have to span 10 minutes. In other point, I listened some rhetorical devices like symbolism, but just that, so it's too simple. But, you respond some question and I appreciate that. In summary, your score about the principal part of the IO is 4/10, and the second part of Questions is 6/10...

So, you have 10/20. :)

# data[].attributes.body
In this audio I can analice a good pronunciation, he have a good language it's no limited for a words, but when you take a mistake you continius, although in a 90% of the audio the language are right, in the 10% are 3 mistakes a distint form to say begining and other 3 words, these do not match the British or American ways of saying these phrases and when you say but you repeat this a 2 or 3 times, this is not a realy bad, but it take a time, prectice the pronunciation and stay calm in your next test.

SCORE: 18

# data[].attributes.body
One of the strongest aspects of Sanz’s oral is the way she expressed herself with confidence and fluency, which helped to keep the audience engaged. Her pronunciation and intonation were clear, and she used a wide range of vocabulary that made her ideas more precise and interesting.

Another positive point is that she organized her ideas in a clear and logical way, which made the presentation easy to follow. She also connected her answers with real-life situations, which made the presentation more meaningful. In addition, she referred to some IB global themes.

If there is one small point to improve, it could be the inclusion of a quotation, as that would have added more depth to her analysis. However, this does not reduce the overall quality of her presentation.

“She has great potential to keep improving.”

Score: 19

# data[].attributes.body
Mazziel: My dear partner, you covered the required parts well, especially linking symbols and themes, which shows good understanding, and the answers were well-founded. However, sometimes your analysis is a bit repetitive and not very clear.

Score: 17

# data[].attributes.body
Naomi your grade is 16. You did very well in identifying the central message of the story, connecting the extract with the IB theme of Social Organization, and answering all the questions with justification and real-world examples. However, you need to improve the clarity and grammar of your speech, provide more accurate analysis of rhetorical devices, include proper character classification (static/dynamic, flat/round) and both internal and external conflicts, and organize your ideas more precisely to avoid repetition and strengthen your argumentation.

# data[].attributes.body
Dear Poma Meldy, we believe your individual oral presentation has some very positive points. For example, your vocabulary is extensive and you express yourself optimally. You clearly mentioned the author, characters, and conflict, and used metaphors for rhetorical devices, which is excellent. However, we would recommend improving the order in which you present your ideas and points. Regarding the questions, we believe you answered them correctly and addressed the IB topics very well. Therefore, we give you a score of 17/20

# data[].attributes.body
SÁNCHEZ: You did it amazing! The IO presents a critical analysis of the extract and you are in control of the vocabulary and pronunciation. Also, you mention clearly the conflict and the analysis of the rethorical devices. However, remember to mention the author and the novel, the settings, and most importantly, the IB theme. In addition, you should respond with a more in-depth analysis and not just describe.

SCORE: 16

# data[].attributes.body
The assessment we conducted with Fabiola, a Curasma student, shows that she has a good command of vocabulary and performs an adequate analysis, mentioning the author, the novel, its plot, and some themes, mentioning where and when the events occurred, and optimally identifying conflicts, whether internal or external. We also emphasized that the use of rhetorical devices is appropriate, as mentioned: repetition and contrast. However, we recommend a thorough discussion of character development. Moving now to the questions, the first two questions clearly reference and address the extract with great justification and good vocabulary, demonstrating an optimal understanding of it. The last two questions well address how technology influences our lives, providing a solid argument and also mentioning some points that should be taken into account for the appropriate use of technology. Therefore, her score is 18/20.

# data[].attributes.body
VARGAS:

Score: 17/20

On the positive side, he comments on the background of the book, such as the author, and provides a brief and clear context for the novel. In terms of analysis, it mentions the rhetorical devices with explanation and analysis, the setting, the characters, and the theme of the excerpt selected. Similarly, in the questions, it uses quotes clearly and justifiably.

On the negative side, it should remember to mention the internal and external conflict on other occasions, and most importantly, a conclusion to the analysis. As for the questions, you should control the time of your answers, since in question number 1, the time is short.

In general, I recommend using more fluid and argumentative language.

Aguirre:

Score: 18

On the positive side, you mention all the parts of a good analysis of the excerpt, similar to the question, you use your time in the best way, and your language is more fluid and sequential.

On the negative side, we recommend ending the analysis with a conclusion and using quotes in the questions section.

# data[].attributes.body
A positive aspect of Lertora’s oral is that he included a quotation from the U.S. saying, “If you don’t use it, you’ll lose it.” He not only mentioned it but also analyzed its meaning, which shows critical thinking. Another strength is that he connected different aspects of the question with real-life situations, and he used appropriate vocabulary and intonation. In addition, he related his ideas to IB global themes such as Identity and Social Organization.

However, there are also some points to improve. For example, it would be better if he described the characters in the scene in more detail, as this would make the analysis richer.

“With practice, he can achieve even more.”

Score: 18

# data[].attributes.body
“Chate, Your oral presentation presents a so good solid analysis of background, plot, and characters. Despite developing vocabulary and a few missing quotes, your arguments are completely clear, well justified. Grade: 18/20.”

# data[].attributes.headline
To Abigail: Dear, your oral presentation is so good. I can hear how you cover almost all the points, you just need explain more about the characters, but outside of that, your explanation about the IB themes within the extract is clear. The use of words is good as the pronutiaton. With all this points you did a good job. SCORE : 18   

# data[].attributes.subject
To Abigail: Dear, your oral presentation is so good. I can hear how you cover almost all the points, you just need explain more about the characters, but outside of that, your explanation about the IB themes within the extract is clear. The use of words is good as the pronutiaton. With all this points you did a good job. SCORE : 18   

# data[].attributes.body
Dear Leandro Solier,

First of all, I consider the presentation to be pertinent, since it adequately mentions the characters, rhetorical devices such as simile or metaphor, as well as the internal or external conflict. Something I highlight is the correct use of the terms specific to the extract and, as a consequence, the story "The Velt" itself. Now, with respect to the answers to the first questions focused on the content of the extract, I noticed a great effort. However, I don't think it was very argumentative in the sense that it made any reference to the story. Although on some occasions events from the story were mentioned, they were not related or linked as such. With respect to the last two questions highlighted by the IB itself, the answers were pertinent, and something I highlight is the relationship or link that the student imposed when answering their questions. Although I think that to a certain extent there was not much fluency and in some cases the sentences were poorly spoken. Aside from that, overall both the presentation and the responses were relatively good and compelling.

SCORE: 16

# data[].attributes.body
OMAR: You did a really good job. You explained the characters clearly and also the rhetorical devices, which shows a solid understanding of the text. The only thing you could improve is making some of your answers a little longer to give them more depth. Other than that, everything was really good.

Score: 18

# data[].attributes.body
In this audio, my colleague reflects on the role of technology in everyday life. The speech highlights the dual nature of technology, emphasising both its advantages and disadvantages. On the one hand, technology improves communication, access to information and problem solving, which is related to the global issue of scientific and technological innovation. On the other hand, my colleague warns of risks such as dependence, loss of privacy and the weakening of human interaction, which is linked to issues of identity and relationships in a digital world. However, one weakness in the audio is the limited vocabulary. Words such as “important”, “help” or “problem” are correct, but too simple for an academic context such as the IB individual oral examination. To strengthen the analysis, the speaker could replace them with more precise and formal expressions. That's all, and everything else is fine, mate. Keep improving your English. You're one of the most bilingual people I know. You can do anything, mate. Very good audio and analysis.

Score: 18

# data[].attributes.body
Dear Alonso Ayala,

I hope you're well. I found your IO very good and with a lot of potential, there is a lot of context and information in the background.

However, it is necessary to improve the answers to the questions so that they are not too descriptive.

Your score is: 16

Best regards,

Leonardo

# data[].attributes.body
XANDER: The oral presentation covers all the components of the presentation in an almost satisfactory manner. The rhetorical devices are not explained critically, and the answers are well justified. I recommend practicing pronunciation. Good job! Score: 16

# data[].attributes.body
Josema Sanchez

# data[].attributes.body
MathIAs Meza

# data[].attributes.body
In the first part, We congratulations you because your explanetion of the conflict and setting is very clear and interesting, but one point of improve is the characters and the IB theme because you didn't mention those. And about the second part, you achieved answer correctly the question, but a point of improve is the vocabulary. Very good job!!

Score: 17

# data[].attributes.body
Leonardo Favian Torres Albino OI

# data[].attributes.body
Ramirez Caldas Xander Gadiel OI

# data[].attributes.body
Castillo Lagos Linner Wallace OI

# data[].attributes.body
Linner:The presentation is so good.The conflict is not clear.I recommend practicing more vocabulary. Don't give up trying! Score:15

# data[].attributes.body
Score: 18/20

Your audio is clear. In the first moment you have mentioned all the relevant elements of the Individual Oral. But, you could to improve in the part of "characters" because it is a little understandable when you mention the characteristics of the characters. In the second moment you answer and an analysis is evident, you could to improve in the pronuntiation of some words. It´s mention the IB theme "Human Ingenuity" and it is explained, connecting it with short store.

# data[].attributes.body
Camila, your presentation is excellent. You present good arguments and a good analysis. I recommend that you conduct a more in-depth analysis and work on your articulation and vocabulary. Good job 👍👍👍

Grade: 17/20