1. Home

2013 Notes from the Marking Centre – French Continuers

Introduction

This document has been produced for the teachers and candidates of the Stage 6 French Continuers course. It contains comments on candidate responses to the 2013 Higher School Certificate examination, indicating the quality of the responses and highlighting their relative strengths and weaknesses.

This document should be read along with:

• the French Continuers Stage 6 Syllabus
• the 2013 Higher School Certificate French Continuers examination
• the marking guidelines
• Advice for students attempting HSC languages examinations, and HSC Languages oral examinations – advice to students
• Advice for HSC students about examinations
• other support documents developed by the Board of Studies, Teaching and Educational Standards NSW to assist in the teaching and learning of French in Stage 6.

Oral examination

Characteristics of better responses:

• tenses were manipulated effectively
• a broad range of vocabulary and structures was used
• opinions and justifications were consistently expressed.

Characteristics of weaker responses:

• candidates did not listen to the specifics of the question
• there was inconsistency between responses to expected and unexpected questions
• grammatical mistakes included incorrect use of tenses, poor use of pronouns, incorrect agreements, misuse of articles, superlative errors, and contractions and prepositions misused
• there was mispronunciation of basic words and final consonants.

Written examination

Section I – Listening

Characteristics of better responses:

• candidates answered in full sentences, including verbs where required
• candidates made full use of the Candidates’ Notes column
• the question was addressed rather than a simple translation
• in more complex questions, responses included details as well as an overall answer to the question and made explicit links between the two (Q.5)
• the qualifier, such as being encouraging or empathetic, was provided to explain why Alex would be good to confide in, not just the things he said (Q.8).

Characteristics of weaker responses

• quotes were often written in French rather than translated into English
• adjectives were translated incorrectly (eg beau ≠ new)
• ideas were repeated
• vocabulary was confused at times, for example des cousins with la cuisine, la campagne with la montagne or le camping
• the meanings of offrir, il y a des examens à passer d’abord, égoïsme and 23 heures were often misunderstood.

Section II – Reading and Responding

Part A

Characteristics of better responses:

• answers were concise and coherent with clear expression in English
• quotes were paraphrased or translated into English to back up the ideas expressed
• candidates ensured there was a balance of language and content points for Question 10c and that language points were clearly supported with evidence from the text
• candidates went beyond simply comparing and contrasting translated material from the text and interpreted the views (Q.10d).

Characteristics of weaker responses:

• parts of the text were poorly translated/paraphrased or only written in French
• generalisations were made, referring indirectly or imprecisely to the text as a whole
• there was repetition at times
• many candidates did not translate contribuables correctly and thought that impôts meant imports (Q.10)
• many candidates only included 2–3 points and lots of language devices were mentioned with no evidence to back this up (Q.10c).

Part B

Characteristics of better responses:

• candidates clearly showed they had understood Olivier’s blog by writing about their own experience with subject choices in troisième and writing from their current viewpoint as a student about to sit their final exams
• they linked their experience and advice to Olivier by referring to Olivier’s blog
• ideas and advice were relevant, logical and well organised
• vocabulary, tenses and structures were carefully chosen to express empathy and understanding of Olivier’s dilemma
• writing displayed a high level of accuracy, language was manipulated authentically, genders, spelling, verb stems and conjugations were correct.

Characteristics of weaker responses:

• candidates did not understand that Olivier was asking advice from students in their final year of school
• ideas and advice were general in nature, not clearly linked to the stimulus, lacked development beyond cursory treatment, and were not well structured or organised
• vocabulary was poorly chosen, not cross-referenced in the dictionary, and basic words were misspelt
• writing lacked accuracy, tu and vous were mixed, meaning was marred by poor conjugation of verbs, especially choisir, and there was poor manipulation of tenses, especially when attempting to use si clauses
• common errors included poor adjectival agreements and the misuse of possessive pronouns, relative pronouns, especially ce qui/ce que, comparatives and object pronouns.

Section III – Writing in French

Question 12

Characteristics of better responses:

• there was authentic and appropriate manipulation of a wide variety of tenses and structures
• there was creative development of ideas which were relevant to the context of a bus tour around France
• candidates used informal register and tone appropriately (responding to a friend’s message)
• candidates acknowledged and thanked the friend for their message before recounting their experiences of the bus tour
• responses were written with a high degree of grammatical accuracy.

Characteristics of weaker responses:

• phrases or sentences were inserted which were prepared or taken straight from the dictionary, but were inappropriate to the topic or context
• candidates relied on anglicised structures or literal translations based on English syntax
• frequent errors of spelling, gender and number agreement were made
• there were frequent mistranslations of le tour de France en car (the tour of France by bus).

Question 13

Characteristics of better responses:

• candidates stayed in touch with the key words from the questions and expressed their feelings appropriately
• candidates demonstrated a wide range of structures, using accurate and authentic French
• ideas were sequenced coherently and effectively
• candidates understood that part (a) was about a serious argument, not a discussion on a serious topic.

Characteristics of weaker responses:

• misuse of the dictionary was obvious in many responses. Many candidates did not distinguish between a noun, adjective or verb category. The spelling of key words was often incorrect, for example famille d’accueil, échange, conseil
• candidates did not understand the context or use the appropriate language register
• in part (b), responses were often quite informal towards their teacher, using tu and addressing him/her as they would have addressed a best friend
• candidates attempted to manipulate the question to fit a prepared but unsuitable answer, or added chunks of irrelevant, rote-learned material which did not address the topic
• candidates used too many idiomatic expressions which lacked authenticity and did not suit the context.