IB DP Language A: Language and Literature – The Individual Oral and Global Issues Revision Notes

These revision notes cover the individual oral in IB Diploma Programme Language A: Language and Literature: choosing a global issue, pairing a literary and a non-literary extract, structuring the oral and preparing with your learner portfolio. They draw on the areas of exploration Readers, writers and texts and Intertextuality: connecting texts, at both SL and HL. They follow the current IB subject brief (first assessments for SL and HL 2021).

For full explanations and a worked example, read the study guide. Then try the practice questions. Course links: Language and Literature hub · printable checklist.

The oral in one table

These facts come from the subject brief.

Feature	What the brief says
Type	Internal assessment
Format	Prepared oral response
Texts	One literary work and one non-literary body of work, both studied in class
Focus	The way both have approached a common global issue
Weighting	30% of the final grade at SL; 20% at HL
Levels	Taken at both SL and HL

Not in the brief – confirm with your teacher: the timing, the extract length, whether you may use notes, any follow-up questions, and the assessment criteria.

Key terms

Term	Meaning for the oral
Global issue	A problem or tension that matters widely, crosses borders and shows up in local life
Topic	A subject area (“technology”, “family”). Too wide to argue on its own
Angle	The specific question or claim you trace through both texts
Literary work	A studied novel, play, poem collection or other literary text
Non-literary body of work	A group of related non-literary texts, e.g. several adverts from one campaign; your teacher confirms what counts
Extract	The short passage from each text that anchors your analysis
Whole work	Everything beyond the extract that you refer to briefly for support
Thesis	One sentence that answers how both texts approach the issue
Learner portfolio	Your own collection of notes, reflections and responses built during the course

Method in steps

Choosing the issue

1. List the texts you have studied.
2. For each, note two or three global issues it touches (from your portfolio issue log).
3. Find issues that appear in one literary and one non-literary text.
4. Narrow each shared issue: topic → issue → angle.
5. Test the angle: can you quote at least three specific choices from each extract that bear on it?
6. Keep the angle that gives the sharpest contrast in method.

Analysing an extract

1. State what the extract shows about the issue.
2. Pick two or three choices (word, image, sentence form, structure, layout, typography).
3. For each: quote → name the choice → explain the effect → tie it to the issue.
4. Add one precise link to the whole work or body of work.

Building the oral

1. Introduction: issue as an angle, both texts, thesis, route.
2. Literary extract: focused points with quotations and effects.
3. Link to the whole literary work.
4. Non-literary extract: focused points.
5. Link to the whole body of work.
6. Comparison and conclusion that answers the thesis.

Weaving comparison through each section also works. Balance is what matters.

Pairing checklist

A strong pair of extracts:

• shows the global issue clearly in a short passage;
• is dense with choices you can name and explain;
• connects to the rest of its work or body of work;
• differs in method from the other extract, so the comparison says something.

Learner portfolio: four entries

Entry	What goes in it
Issue log	Two or three global issues per studied text, with page or post references
Technique bank	Short quotations, the choice named, the effect in one line
Pairing trials	Two or three possible pairs, each with a draft thesis
Rehearsal reflections	After each spoken run-through: what ran long, what was vague, what to cut

Start the issue log when you start each text, not when the oral is announced.

Worked reminders

Narrowing ladder

Level	Example
Topic	Technology
Issue	Digital surveillance
Angle	How constant monitoring is presented as care rather than control

The angle names a mechanism (“presented as care”) that you can find in language: soft verbs, reassuring second-person address, images of family.

Thesis template

“Both [literary work] and [body of work] present [angle], but where the first uses [method] to [effect], the second uses [method] to [effect].”

Point template

Claim about the issue → “quotation” → name the choice → effect on the reader → link back to the issue.

Linking phrases

• Comparing: “Where the poem slows time down, the advert speeds it up.”
• Moving to the whole work: “This pattern recurs later, when…”
• Signposting: “My second point about the campaign…”

Must-know distinctions

This	Not this
Global issue as an arguable angle	A broad topic label
Analysing how texts present the issue	Giving a speech about the issue
Literary work and non-literary body of work	Two literary texts, or two non-literary texts
Extract as the anchor	Summarising the whole plot
Effect of a choice	Naming a technique only
Balanced time on both texts	One text treated in full, the other rushed
Non-literary form (layout, image, typography)	Treating adverts as words only
Spoken signposts	A script read aloud

Technique bank

Literary texts	Non-literary texts
Imagery, simile, metaphor	Imperatives and direct address (“you”)
Narrative voice and point of view	Headline and slogan structure
Pace, sentence length, repetition	Statistics and numbers as persuasion
Symbol and motif	Image, colour, layout and white space
Dialogue and silence	Passive and agentless phrasing
Structure and turning points	Typography and font size

The same choice can appear in both columns. Numbers, for example, can build persuasion in an advert and build tension in a story. Shared features give you the strongest comparisons.

Quick self-test

1. What percentage of the final grade is the individual oral worth at SL?
2. What percentage is it worth at HL?
3. Is the individual oral internally or externally assessed?
4. Which two kinds of text must the oral connect?
5. Is “family” a topic or a global issue?
6. Narrow “the environment” into an angle suitable for an oral.
7. Original text written for Marlbridge: “Your data keeps your family safe.” Name one language choice and its effect in relation to surveillance.
8. Original text written for Marlbridge: “The clock in the ward ticked louder than the nurses spoke.” Name the technique and its effect.
9. Give one reason to link an extract to the whole work.
10. What is the difference between block comparison and woven comparison?
11. Name two entries you could keep in your learner portfolio to prepare for the oral.

Answers

1. 30%.
2. 20%.
3. Internally assessed.
4. One literary work and one non-literary body of work, both studied.
5. A topic. It needs a problem or tension to become an issue, e.g. how caring for relatives falls unequally on daughters.
6. Any angle that names a mechanism, e.g. how products are marketed as “green” to reduce buyers’ guilt about waste.
7. Second-person address (“Your”) makes the reader personally responsible; “keeps … safe” presents monitoring as protection, so control is framed as care. (Either choice with its effect.)
8. Auditory imagery built on a comparison (“ticked louder than the nurses spoke”): the clock dominates the human voices, suggesting neglect and a system that runs on time rather than care.
9. It shows the extract is typical of the whole text, not an isolated moment, so your argument about the issue holds for the work as a whole.
10. Block treats one text fully, then the other, and compares at the end. Woven compares the two texts point by point throughout.
11. Any two of: issue log, technique bank, pairing trials with draft theses, rehearsal reflections.

Where marks are usually lost

• Choosing a topic (“work”, “identity”) instead of an arguable angle, so the oral drifts into description.
• Talking about the real-world issue with facts and opinions that are not tied to any choice in the texts.
• Summarising the plot of the literary work instead of analysing the extract closely.
• Naming techniques (“there is a metaphor”) without explaining the effect on the reader.
• Treating the non-literary texts as words only and ignoring layout, image and typography.
• Giving far more time to one text than the other.
• Linking to the whole work with vague claims (“this happens a lot”) instead of one named moment.
• Saving all comparison for the last few sentences, so the two texts never really meet.
• Reading from a full script, which makes the delivery flat and hard to follow.
• Leaving the choice of pairing to the last minute, with no portfolio evidence to test it against.

Related resources

• Readers, writers and texts and its revision notes
• Time and space and its revision notes
• Assessment revision notes
• Exam preparation guide

Official syllabus

International Baccalaureate Organization, Diploma Programme Subject Brief, Language A: language and literature, first assessments for SL and HL 2021 (2019).