Which of the following best describes one way an oral response to literature differs from an oral book summary? A. Oral book summaries always include a thesis statement.
B. Oral responses to literature analyze the setting and tone.
C. Oral book summaries are always fictional.
D. Oral responses to literature demonstrate a comprehensive understanding of the work.

D.

Explanation:

An oral response would be a reflection, where you tell something about the book and make something out of it. For instance, if the book has symbolism, you would point that out. On the other hand, if it's a summary, its is just a short re-telling of the book, kind of like a blurb, but with spoilers. It doesn't matter if the response is oral or written.

xd

explanation: