IO Format & Timing Structure
The IO gives you 10 minutes to prepare and exactly 10 minutes to present two extracts linked by a global issue — knowing the timed structure cold is the first step to a controlled, well-paced oral.
The Individual Oral (IO) is a tightly timed task, and much of your Criterion D (Presentation) score depends simply on using the format correctly. You have 10 minutes of preparation time in an exam room to select or confirm your two extracts, annotate them, and sketch an outline. You then have exactly 10 minutes to present — no more, no less — before the teacher opens up follow-up questions. Examiners are trained to notice when a candidate runs out of time mid-conclusion or pads an introduction to fill space, so internalising the timed structure is a non-negotiable first skill.
| Segment | Time | What Must Happen |
|---|---|---|
| Introduction | 2 min | Name both texts, introduce Extract 1 and Extract 2, state the global issue, present a clear thesis |
| Extract 1 Analysis | 3 min | Claim + technique + effect, explicitly linked to the global issue |
| Extract 2 Analysis | 3 min | Same analytical pattern, but also linked back to Extract 1 (compare/contrast) |
| Conclusion | 2 min | Synthesise insights from both extracts; restate the global issue's broader significance |
The 10 minutes of prep time should not be spent writing full sentences. A workable split is: 0–4′ read and annotate both extracts (mark techniques, quotes, global issue evidence); 4–7′ draft your thesis and a bullet-point outline; 7–10′ refine transitions between sections and strengthen the links to your global issue. Walking in with a rehearsed structure — even if the extracts are new — means you're only adapting content, not inventing form under pressure.
A common mistake is treating Extract 2 as a stand-alone repeat of Extract 1's analysis. The 3 minutes on Extract 2 must actively compare or contrast with Extract 1 — echoing a technique, reversing an effect, or extending the global issue — otherwise the two halves feel like separate mini-orals rather than one coherent argument (this costs marks in Criterion C, conceptual development).
- I. Introduction (2 min): A. Name Text A and introduce Extract 1's context; B. Name Text B and introduce Extract 2's context; C. State the global issue and thesis
- II. Extract 1 Analysis (3 min): A. Identify a technique; B. Explain its effect; C. Link explicitly to the global issue
- III. Extract 2 Analysis (3 min): A. Identify a technique; B. Explain its effect; C. Draw a comparative link back to Extract 1
- IV. Conclusion (2 min): A. Synthesise insights from both extracts; B. Restate the relevance and broader significance of the global issue
- 10 minutes prep, then exactly 10 minutes presentation — no extensions.
- Timed breakdown: 2 min intro, 3 min Extract 1, 3 min Extract 2, 2 min conclusion.
- The introduction must name both texts/extracts, state the global issue, and give a thesis.
- Extract 2's analysis must link back to Extract 1, not repeat the same points in isolation.
- Prep time split: ~4 min annotate, ~3 min draft thesis/outline, ~3 min polish transitions and issue links.
- The conclusion must synthesise both extracts and reassert the global issue's significance — not just summarise.