2013 Notes from the Marking Centre – German Continuers
Introduction
This document has been produced for the teachers and candidates of the Stage 6 German 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 German Continuers Stage 6 Syllabus
- the 2013 Higher School Certificate German 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 German in Stage 6.
Oral examination
Characteristics of better responses:
- fluent and authentic communication with in-depth responses to a range of questions
- effective engagement with the examiner across a range of syllabus topics
- relevant ideas and information demonstrating an excellent knowledge of vocabulary with a range of grammatical structures
- authentic pronunciation.
Characteristics of weaker responses:
- a basic level of communication using simple structures and vocabulary
- minimal responses to a limited range of syllabus topics
- limited ability to manipulate language, often with frequent pauses and errors
- reliance on English syntax and anglicisms.
Written examination
Section I – Listening
Characteristics of better responses:
- included all or most of the relevant details, based on the text, not generalisations
- key words written in the ‘Candidate’s Notes’ and then formulated into a more complete response
- gave clear reasons why, not just repeating the text
- interpreted the information heard, particularly in the later questions.
Characteristics of weaker responses:
- understood a few words and then made up an irrelevant response based on those words
- difficulty with vocabulary (numbers, Geschwister, Karten, Ort, unordentlich, Chaos, Putzfrau, klasse, jenseits, die erste Szene – interpreted by many as the first 10 minutes)
- many candidates thought that Sabine was practising her English with a friend in Australia, or was writing in English, not that she would be speaking to Markus’ penfriend at the theatre (Q.6).
Section II – Reading and Responding, Part A
Question 10
Characteristics of better responses:
- showed understanding of the audience – students/young people (part a)
- translated Freude as joy or pleasure (part b)
- included content and not simply style or language features (part c)
- showed analysis and comprehensive understanding and did not simply translate (part d).
Characteristics of weaker responses:
- lack of detail in all answers
- misunderstood peinlich (not painful)
- misunderstood the clothes Sophie wore (her old ones, not second hand) (part b)
- translated the story instead of addressing the question (part d).
Question 11
Characteristics of better responses:
- understood that Wiedervereinigung meant Reunification of Germany (part a)
- realised that it was Barbara’s viewpoint as a child that was significant and which made her account different from what was readily available in books (part b)
- listed the impressions for all three senses, as well as at least one comparison with the West (part c)
- discussed all of Barbara’s feelings with detail and how they changed after meeting her family (part d).
Characteristics of weaker responses:
- misunderstood vocabulary items: Kohle, Familienkreis, lieb haben
- thought that Barbara was meeting her biological parents, rather than a branch of her family, her East German relatives
- answered from general knowledge of history, rather than from the text
- mentioned only a few of Barbara’s feelings (part d).
Section II – Reading and Responding, Part B
Characteristics of better responses:
- addressed the four focus areas of the stimulus text: (1) formal, (2) travel abroad, (3) concept of charity work and (4) linked charity work with the brother
- reflected a good understanding of the whole passage, through elaboration, creativity and depth in relation to each focus area
- consistent ‘relevance’ throughout the response, reflecting the ‘tone’ of the stimulus passage
- justified stance on response to each focus area
- used language that reflects some degree of authenticity in the sense that it reflected an understanding of linguistic structures and grammatical functions.
Characteristics of weaker responses:
- irrelevance, ‘padded out’ with pre-learnt material, which did not really address the focus area
- addressed too few of the focus areas
- used language that was too problematic or full of errors to satisfy the requirements of the task
- lacked depth, creativity, elaboration or engagement in relation to the focus areas
- used incorrect language and grammar
- response did not meet the required length.
Section III – Writing in German
Question 13
Characteristics of better responses:
- addressed the correct audience – a friend
- described the gift that had been bought
- clearly stated why the gift had been chosen
- wrote in the correct text type – email
- realistic – asking the friend what they thought, could they buy the card?
Characteristics of weaker responses:
- addressed the email to the teacher
- made suggestions about gifts that could be bought (when in fact it already had been)
- did not give a reason for choice of gift
- included irrelevant material/ideas
- relied on dictionary resulting in incorrect meaning being conveyed.
Question 14
Characteristics of better responses:
- evaluated or reflected as the task required
- had an awareness of audience and text type
- covered all aspects of the question with a variety of structures and vocabulary
- engaged the audience with devices such as rhetorical questions, imperatives
- provided a well-sequenced and coherent response.
Characteristics of weaker responses:
- used descriptive/narrative text type
- included irrelevant rote-learnt material
- relied overly on dictionary use resulting in unintelligible sentences
- focused on a narrow aspect of the question (writing about a holiday/exchange or the negatives of technology)
- had little awareness of the text type or audience (use of du, Sie and ihr interchangeably).
NSW Government