1. Home
  2. HSC
  3. HSC Exams
  4. 2014 HSC Exam papers
  5. Feedback on performance of NSW students in CCAFL oral exams
Print this page Reduce font size Increase font size

Feedback on the performance of NSW students in 2014 HSC CCAFL oral examinations

(Hindi Continuers, Hungarian Continuers, Khmer Continuers, Macedonian Continuers, Maltese Continuers, Polish Continuers, Portuguese Continuers, Tamil Continuers and Turkish Continuers)

Oral examination

Section I – Conversation

Characteristics of better responses:

  • candidates spoke fluently, confidently and spontaneously
  • correct grammar, tenses and a variety of complex sentence structures were used
  • language was manipulated to address the questions asked
  • a range of vocabulary appropriate to the topic was used
  • candidates spoke in the correct register
  • candidates expressed an opinion and/or justified a point of view
  • authentic intonation and pronunciation was used
  • standard language of study was used.

Characteristics of weaker responses:

  • simple, short sentences or single words were used
  • repetition and/or extended pauses were a feature
  • grammatical errors were included
  • candidates could not express an opinion or justify a point of view
  • candidates included English words and expressions
  • language was not manipulated to address the question.

Section II – Discussion

Characteristics of better responses:

  • candidates had chosen a topic which allowed in-depth research and scope to propose and articulate a point of view
  • the texts chosen to support the topic of discussion were appropriate and these were used consistently to support their point of view
  • processes involved in obtaining information were discussed
  • a thorough understanding of the topic and the researched information was demonstrated
  • at least three texts, one of which was a literary text, were included
  • sophisticated language was used.

Characteristics of weaker responses:

  • the choice of topic did not allow for in-depth discussion
  • appropriate reference to texts was not made
  • candidates relied on general knowledge, personal experience and/or superficial information
  • an opinion or point of view was not expressed
  • texts and research were not linked to the topic
  • there was a lack of evidence of research.
Print this page Reduce font size Increase font size