2013 Notes from the Marking Centre – Japanese Background Speakers
Introduction
This document has been produced for the teachers and candidates of the Stage 6 Japanese Background Speakers 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 Japanese Background Speakers Stage 6 Syllabus
- the 2013 Higher School Certificate Japanese Background Speakers examination
- the marking guidelines
- Advice for students attempting HSC languages examinations
- 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 Japanese in Stage 6.
Section I – Listening and Responding
Characteristics of better responses:
- relevant details from the text were included
- language techniques used for convincing were identified (Q.1c)
- both texts were effectively summarised and compared (Q.2)
- use of a range of appropriate vocabulary and structures (Q.2)
- logical and coherent structure and sequencing (Q.2).
Characteristics of weaker responses:
- opinions were not justified with reference to the texts
- references to the text were not given in English (Q.1)
- summary of the two speeches was unbalanced (Q.2)
- personal opinions were given about taking a gap year rather than presenting the perspectives in the texts (Q.2).
Section II – Reading and Responding
Characteristics of better responses:
- relevant details from the text were included to support ideas and opinions
- language techniques were extensively used and evaluated (Q.3, Q.4)
- there was reflection on gender roles in Japanese and Australian society and personal examples were given (Q.4)
- an effective argument was formulated in reference to issues raised in the text (Q.5)
- ideas and information were communicated accurately and sequenced coherently (Q.4, Q.5).
Characteristics of weaker responses:
- there was limited or no analysis of the language features and format of the text (Q.3c, Q.3e)
- there was limited or no analysis of techniques used by the author for convincing (Q.4)
- the impact of the author’s point of view was not identified (Q.4).
- there was limited reference to the main points raised in the text (Q.5)
- the response did not address the specified audience (Q.5).
Section III – Writing in Japanese
Characteristics of better responses:
- a comprehensive understanding of the prescribed contemporary issues was demonstrated
- highly relevant ideas and information were presented
- opinions were supported by examples
- the argument was structured and sequenced logically and coherently, with an effective introduction and conclusion
- there was sophisticated use of vocabulary and sentence structures.
Characteristics of weaker responses:
- there was limited understanding of the prescribed issues
- irrelevant ideas were presented
- candidates did not refer to ‘within the next 50 years’ (Q.7).
NSW Government