Back To English Literature

IO Playbook

English Literature IO Criteria Guide

Deliver a controlled, insight-rich oral analysis with clear structure under time pressure.

Use this rehearsal-first framework to prepare your extracts, manage pacing, and keep interpretation precise during delivery.

English Literature IO

Assessment criteria

See what each criterion measures, how many marks it carries, and what stronger evidence usually looks like.

This is Marksy's independently written criteria explanation, not an official IB publication.

Criterion A: Knowledge, understanding and interpretation (10 marks)

How accurately and insightfully the oral interprets the extracts, wider works, and chosen global issue.

Stronger evidence

The response addresses the criterion consistently and precisely. Evidence is well selected, reasoning is sustained, and important choices or limitations are handled convincingly.

Early-stage evidence

Only fragments of relevant evidence are visible. The response begins to address knowledge, understanding and interpretation, but important parts remain missing, unclear, or unsupported.

Criterion B: Analysis and evaluation (10 marks)

How effectively the oral analyzes the choices that create meaning and evaluates their relationship to the global issue.

Stronger evidence

The response addresses the criterion consistently and precisely. Evidence is well selected, reasoning is sustained, and important choices or limitations are handled convincingly.

Early-stage evidence

Only fragments of relevant evidence are visible. The response begins to address analysis and evaluation, but important parts remain missing, unclear, or unsupported.

Criterion C: Focus and organization (10 marks)

How clearly the oral maintains its task, balances its parts, and develops a coherent line of thought.

Stronger evidence

The response addresses the criterion consistently and precisely. Evidence is well selected, reasoning is sustained, and important choices or limitations are handled convincingly.

Early-stage evidence

Only fragments of relevant evidence are visible. The response begins to address focus and organization, but important parts remain missing, unclear, or unsupported.

Criterion D: Language (10 marks)

How clear, accurate, varied, and appropriate the spoken language is for sustained literary or textual analysis.

Stronger evidence

The response addresses the criterion consistently and precisely. Evidence is well selected, reasoning is sustained, and important choices or limitations are handled convincingly.

Early-stage evidence

Only fragments of relevant evidence are visible. The response begins to address language, but important parts remain missing, unclear, or unsupported.

Markband guide

Criterion A: Knowledge, understanding and interpretation (10 marks)

MarksWhat the draft currently shows
0The submitted material does not provide assessable evidence for knowledge, understanding and interpretation.
1-3Only fragments of relevant evidence are visible. The response begins to address knowledge, understanding and interpretation, but important parts remain missing, unclear, or unsupported.
4-5Some relevant evidence is developed, although the response is inconsistent or leaves important connections unexplained.
6-8The response addresses the criterion securely in most places, using relevant evidence and generally clear reasoning, with limited gaps.
9-10The response addresses the criterion consistently and precisely. Evidence is well selected, reasoning is sustained, and important choices or limitations are handled convincingly.

Criterion B: Analysis and evaluation (10 marks)

MarksWhat the draft currently shows
0The submitted material does not provide assessable evidence for analysis and evaluation.
1-3Only fragments of relevant evidence are visible. The response begins to address analysis and evaluation, but important parts remain missing, unclear, or unsupported.
4-5Some relevant evidence is developed, although the response is inconsistent or leaves important connections unexplained.
6-8The response addresses the criterion securely in most places, using relevant evidence and generally clear reasoning, with limited gaps.
9-10The response addresses the criterion consistently and precisely. Evidence is well selected, reasoning is sustained, and important choices or limitations are handled convincingly.

Criterion C: Focus and organization (10 marks)

MarksWhat the draft currently shows
0The submitted material does not provide assessable evidence for focus and organization.
1-3Only fragments of relevant evidence are visible. The response begins to address focus and organization, but important parts remain missing, unclear, or unsupported.
4-5Some relevant evidence is developed, although the response is inconsistent or leaves important connections unexplained.
6-8The response addresses the criterion securely in most places, using relevant evidence and generally clear reasoning, with limited gaps.
9-10The response addresses the criterion consistently and precisely. Evidence is well selected, reasoning is sustained, and important choices or limitations are handled convincingly.

Criterion D: Language (10 marks)

MarksWhat the draft currently shows
0The submitted material does not provide assessable evidence for language.
1-3Only fragments of relevant evidence are visible. The response begins to address language, but important parts remain missing, unclear, or unsupported.
4-5Some relevant evidence is developed, although the response is inconsistent or leaves important connections unexplained.
6-8The response addresses the criterion securely in most places, using relevant evidence and generally clear reasoning, with limited gaps.
9-10The response addresses the criterion consistently and precisely. Evidence is well selected, reasoning is sustained, and important choices or limitations are handled convincingly.

Build Sequence

Did You Know? Most weak drafts fail from sequence chaos, not lack of ideas.

Step 1

Define one global issue lens

Pick a lens narrow enough to compare both works with precision in under 10 minutes.

Step 2

Script a signposted backbone

Prepare opening, two analytical movements, and closing synthesis with timing checkpoints.

Step 3

Rehearse with a timer

Practice cutting low-value lines so you stay coherent without rushing.

Step 4

Train for follow-up questions

Prepare two deeper interpretations per extract that you can deploy in discussion.

Submission Checklist

  • Global issue is explicit in the first 30 seconds.
  • Both works get balanced analytical depth.
  • Transitions are spoken and audible to the listener.
  • Ending synthesizes significance beyond the extracts.

Quick Wins

  • Record one rehearsal and mark every filler word to reduce verbal clutter.
  • Keep one note card with only transitions and thesis reminders.
  • Pause for one beat before key analytical claims to improve clarity.

Did You Know?

Practice Your IO Like The Real Exam

Marksy runs a timed oral simulation with follow-up questions and independently written feedback so you can plan revisions before your final IO. Every criterion mark is an estimate, not an official result. The result includes an estimated mark for every criterion, evidence from your draft, and the changes to make first. Your final mark may differ after teacher assessment or external moderation.

1. Start the timed oral simulation in Marksy.
2. Get estimated marks and feedback for each oral criterion.
3. Rehearse again with targeted fixes before the final IO.

Oral Result Snapshot

Completion + Time + Speaking Length

Practice

Complete

Time

09:42

Responses

18

Criteria Snapshot

Estimated Marks And Feedback

Interpretation

Strong

Develop the implications

Evidence

Review

Add precise textual support

Organization

Strong

Keep the through-line visible

Delivery

Review

Slow down at key claims

Focus First

Priority Improvement Targets

Evidence and analysis

Tighten micro-analysis after each quote.

Organization

Improve transition signposting for clearer flow.

Speaking Flow

Next Steps (TODO)

Action Plan Before Final IO

State the global issue in the first 30 seconds.
Shorten quotation setup to protect analysis time.
Close with comparative synthesis across both works.
Start IO SimulationSee PricingWhat Is Marksy?
OverviewCriteriaBuildDid You Know?More Guides
Start IO Simulation