ISE II (2h) week 2

8. ISE II SPEAKING & LISTENING TASK 2 COLLABORATIVE (4mins)

The examiner reads a prompt. This may express a dilemma, situation or opinion. The
candidate has to ask the examiner questions and make comments to find out more
information about the examiner´s circumstances or opinion. The examiner does not
give away too much information in one turn.

It is essential for the candidate to initiate, collaborate and maintain the interaction.
Failing to take the initiative or talking in a monologue will result in a low score.

The candidate should start by listening very carefully not only to the content of the
prompt, that is the dilemma or situation, but also to the wording. The candidate
should try to infer and identify the examiner´s point of view. Is there a more positive
or negative orientation? How strong does the examiner feel about the situation?

Compare

“ I chose a degree I enjoyed. Young people seem to choose a degree to get a job.”

“ Young people seem to choose a degree to get a job. I didn´t .”

And “ Young people seem to choose a degree to get a job. I didn´t .”

“ Young people seem to choose a degree to get a job. I know I didn´t .”

The Tag The Tag –or ending of the prompt- often provides a clearer indication
of the examiner´s point of view or attitude so candidates should listen carefully for
this.

Compare “My neighbours have asked me to take part in an environmental project at the
beach. “

And “My neighbours have asked me to take part in an environmental project at the
beach. I´m not sure I want to.”
The Intonation This provides an even clearer indication of the examiner´s point of
view so again candidates should listen out for this. Can they identify a negative or
enthusiastic tone? Is there a suggestion of criticism? Sometimes a helpful examiner
stresses a key word or phrase which indicates his/her attitude. ( Practise this with the
above sequences).

Facial gestures and expressions can also reveal attitude. Candidates should also pay
attention to this, particularly eyebrows and frowning.

Initiating the conversation

Once the prompt has been read the candidate should quickly respond. A good way to
start would be to comment on the examiner´s attitude:

“ Oh dear... you don´t sound very happy...”

“ It seems you have some doubts...”

“ I take it you don´t fully agree...”

And then try to find out the specific reasons why the examiner thinks the way s/he
does.

Find out the background

The main difference between the Collaborative Task and the Conversation Task is that
in the Collaborative Task the candidate has to find out about the examiner´s
experience and background. It´s a good idea to ask about the examiner´s experience
with regard to the situation. It´s much more conversational to use closed question
structures at first:

“ Do you live all the time at the beach?” “Haven´t you done this before?” What do
your neighbours think?”

“ Did you go to university?” “Don´t you think your experience was useful?” “How was it
useful?”
“Don´t you think it´s a good idea?” “ Do you think something else
should be done?”

“ So would you say that there is too much ...?”

“ Could you tell me what you studied?” “ I´m interested to know what you studied?”

The task provides the opportunity for the candidate to demonstrate his or her ability
to take control through the use of questioning techniques ( See above) and language
functions such as requesting information and clarification.

“ I see. And what type of project are we talking about?”

“ Could you tell me a more about what type of project?”

“ So when you say.... do you mean.....are you referring to...?”

The candidate should avoid the easy option of talking about him/herself regarding
experiences (easily lead to monologue!!). Instead the candidate should freely express
and justify his/her own opinions with regard to what the examiner says. This obviously
involves language of agreement and disagreement.

“ Yes ,,I think that´s right.” “Yes, I would agree with you there.”

“ Well,.. I´m not sure I ´d agree .”

It also allows the candidate to make judgements and evaluate options

“ I´m not sure many people would go along with that.”

“ Hmm...I don´t think that would be very popular.”

“ Yes... I could see some people would like that.”

It also allows the candidate to give advice about the dilemma

“If I were you, I would.....”

“ Well perhaps you could try asking more people to participate.”

“ How about getting up a petition?”

Establish common ground

Candidates should try to reach some sort of understanding but without compromising
what they have already said.

“ Well I think we can both say that it is an interesting situation.”

“ Can we at least agree that it depends on many aspects.”

“ Well... perhaps we could both say that there is no easy solution to this.”

Candidates should also try to speculate or hypothesise. This could be about the
possible causes of the situation

“ Do you think that maybe he wasn´t very happy at school?”

“I wonder if there had been enough warning/ training/ information”

“Perhaps there could have been more help/ training/ information”

...or the possible consequences

“ Well I think that if you/ people/ he/she do/does that, then it might be easier to ...”

“ As a result people might be more satisfied.”