International A Level In German (WGN04) Unit 1 - Commentary 1

Oct 20, 2026

Uploaded by awa

Summer 2024 International A Level German (WGN04) Unit 1 commentary provides marking guidance and feedback for student responses. It evaluates essays on a chosen German-speaking region’s capital and its significance to inhabitants, assessing content and communication, quality of language, and critical analysis, organisation and development. Multiple commentaries cover different question parts, including detailed strengths and specific limitations such as insufficient evidence, weak structure, and register issues.

LanguageEnglish

CategoryExam

FormatDOCX

Pages1

Reading Time3 min

AccessFree to download

Commentaries - Summer 2024

International A Level In German (WGN04) Unit 1

Commentary 1 – Awarded 14 marks

Commentary 2 – Awarded 26 marks

Commentary 3 – Awarded 32 marks

ask LEVEL "WHAT LEVEL?" ask SUBJECT "WHAT SUBJECT?" Comparison of key skills specifications 2000/2002 with 2004 standardsask CODE "WHAT CODE?" X015461ask DATE "WHAT DATE?" July 2004ask ISSUE "WHAT ISSUE?" Issue 1 Commentaries Summer 2024 International A Level In German (WGN04) Unit 1 Commentary 1 – Awarded 14 marks Question 9(a) Beschreiben Sie die Hauptstadt oder den Hauptort der von Ihnen gewählten deutschsprachigen Region. Analysieren Sie die Bedeutung dieses Ortes für die Bewohner der Region. Content and Communication (5 marks) The student has shown some basic, generic factual knowledge about the village of Langnau, including details of its size, the geographical location and the weather conditions. The second part of the question is addressed with reference to the local passion for ice hockey. Supporting evidence is limited: mention of the Bernerdialekt could have been supported with some concrete examples. However, the essay is mostly characterised by limited depth. General statements such as Sie sind sehr freundlich und reden sehr gerne add very little of significance to the content of the essay. Nevertheless, the student still manages to give some insight into why Langnau can be described as a Heiliger Ort due to the passion of ice hockey. The best fit for Content and communication is in the middle of the 4-6 band. Quality of Language (4 marks) Communication is achieved throughout albeit with occasional errors, eg von Grossstädte. Despite some fluency in the language, there is an overreliance on es ist and not enough evidence of the language of analysis. The register tends to be more chatty than appropriate to essay writing. For these reasons, the mark of 4 is the best fit. Critical Analysis, Organisation and Development (5 marks) The main issue with this essay is that there is no overall structure with an introduction and no clear paragraphs which lead to a strong concluding paragraph. What he student has written seems more like a random list of unrelated thoughts without purpose. This is clearly seen in the use of wie vorhin(g) geschrieben. A mark in the 1-4 band might be considered since this is a superficial response. However, there is some attempt to analyse towards the end with the details about sporting interests. For this reason, the essay can just be awarded a mark at the lower end of the 5-8 band. Commentary 2 – Awarded 26 marks Question 9(a) Beschreiben Sie die Hauptstadt oder den Hauptort der von Ihnen gewählten deutschsprachigen Region. Analysieren Sie die Bedeutung dieses Ortes für die Bewohner der Region. Content and Communication (9 marks) The student has shown acceptable factual knowledge of Vienna and chooses to focus on the positive aspects of museums, public transport, the environment and traditions. There is some variety of supporting evidence. The details about the Opernball are good, but more detail could be given for example about the museums: the reasons for a specific museum, eg the Leopold Museum, being important would support the argument more appropriately. The second part of this question asks about the relevance of the place to its inhabitants. The student only occasionally touches on this important aspect of the question, particularly with reference to the rich variety of cultural events. Otherwise, the focus is on what the city offers tourists – which is a different question. The best fit for Communication and Content is at the top of the 7-9 band. Quality of Language (5 marks) Communication is fluent and varied throughout and the register appropriate. Grammatical structures are varied with evidence of correct use of the genitive, subordination and infinitive clause and a good range of relevant vocabulary. This gains a mark in the top band. Critical Analysis, Organisation and Development (12 marks) This is a full explanation in response to the question, although to achieve variety and to strengthen the response overall, the positiv

FAQs

What criteria are used to award marks in these commentaries?

Marks are assessed across Content and Communication, Quality of Language, and Critical Analysis, Organisation and Development, with each criterion assigned a specific band range.

What feedback is given for the essay marked 14 points?

The response shows basic factual knowledge but limited depth, relies on general statements, and lacks a clear introduction, paragraphs, and a strong concluding structure.

Why does the essay marked 26 points score highly?

It demonstrates fluent and varied language with appropriate register, provides acceptable supporting evidence, and includes a strong structure, though the second part of the question is not fully developed and focuses partly on tourism rather than inhabitants.

Oct 20, 2026

Uploaded by awa