1. Home
2. HSC
3. HSC Exams
4. 2014 HSC Exam papers
5. 2014 HSC Notes from the Marking Centre — Italian Beginners

2014 Notes from the Marking Centre – Italian Beginners

Introduction

This document has been produced for the teachers and candidates of the Stage 6 Italian Beginners course. It contains comments on candidate responses to the 2014 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 Italian Beginners Stage 6 Syllabus
• the 2014 Higher School Certificate Italian Beginners 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 Italian in Stage 6.

Oral examination

Characteristics of better responses:

• a variety of tenses was used consistently and correctly (present, past, imperfect, conditional/future/gerund/reflexives)
• a variety of vocabulary and language structures was used
• adjective agreements were used consistently and correctly
• candidates elaborated with depth in responses
• candidates spoke fluently and confidently
• pronunciation and intonation were consistently accurate.

Characteristics of weaker responses:

• there was poor manipulation of tenses, or in some case, the use of some tenses was avoided
• responses lacked depth and variety of vocabulary
• common vocabulary was frequently mispronounced (un, cultura, città, chitarra, università)
• there were long pauses, incomplete sentences and English syntax
• questions were frequently misunderstood or asked to be repeated
• common grammatical mistakes were made with choice of verbs, conjugating, agreements and misuse of pronouns; for example, è 17 anni, mi preferito/preferisco, ho studiare, io visitare, sono studio, mi piace gioco, la mia padre, ti piace instead of mi piace; in Roma instead of a Roma; mi piace le materie instead of mi piacciono
• many candidates mimicked the question asked
• there was confusion with using words such as prossimo (l’anno prossimo sono andato / l’anno scorso vado), oggi/ieri; and by the words mai, già.

Written examination

Section 1 – Listening

Characteristics of better responses:

• all key details were identified and justified
• candidates explained the ‘mixed feelings’ of happy and bored (Q.4)
• candidates recognised that ‘summarise’ means that detailed information is not required (Q.6)
• both sides of an argument were presented where appropriate
• relevant information in the Candidate’s column was transferred to the lined section of the paper.

Characteristics of weaker responses:

• there was evidence of poor vocabulary knowledge; for example, binario, vagone ristorante, scambio; caffè  was misunderstood as being a café; annoiata was also misinterpreted as ‘annoyed’; scrivania was misunderstood as ‘to write’ instead of desk
• candidates struggled with understanding a dilemma/concerns
• there was some confusion with the concept of bringing the dessert/cake and paying extra per head for it
• candidates struggled with past tenses, especially the imperfect tense
• some vocabulary was not recognised: accontentare, nemmeno and persino.

Section II – Reading

Characteristics of better responses:

• responses were not merely a translation of the text
• all the correct details required for a full response were identified
• the question being asked was answered
• responses were succinct
• the gist of the texts was understood.

Characteristics of weaker responses:

• candidates did not identify the past tense
• not all relevant information from the text was chosen
• dictionaries were not used effectively, frequently translating words literally (ortaggio for hostage) and misunderstanding conviene
• candidates had difficulty in reading the diagram
• candidates confused the pronouns for he and she or misidentified gender
• candidates resorted to prior knowledge rather than using the text

Section III Writing in Italian

Part A

Question 16

Characteristics of better responses:

• candidates wrote using informal register
• modal verbs were used correctly  – non posso venire/ devo andare / devo fare
• the auxillary ho/sono was used correctly
• more detail was provided and an excuse was offered
• some candidates used the sudden change in plans ho dimenticato to make a new plan/schedule
• the direct/indirect object pronoun was linked to the appropriate verb.

Characteristics of weaker responses:

• infinitives were used in place of complex tenses
• candidates had difficulty with past participles and future tenses of irregular verbs
• some candidates had difficulty with prepositions
• candidates had difficulty with adjectival agreements with subject
• the word length was not met.

Question 17

Characteristics of better responses:

• candidates wrote coherent texts, applied a variety of complex grammatical structures and displayed an excellent control of vocabulary
• candidates responded to all elements of ‘a typical day in your family’s life’
• candidates addressed i nonni using the correct adjectival and verb agreements, for example Cari nonni, come state? Mi mancate consistently throughout text
• reflexive verbs were used with fluency and accuracy in multiple forms when describing daily routines.

Characteristics of weaker responses:

• many candidates gave a recount of one particular day with their family; many others recounted their individual daily routine without referring to their family in the answer
• candidates often substituted oggi tipico for un giorno tipico
• candidates often confused words such as guidare and guardare.

Part B

Characteristics of better responses:

• candidates addressed all the elements of the question
• excellent vocabulary was used, including colloquial expressions
• candidates differentiated and correctly applied è (is) and e (and) (Q.18)
• the difference in meaning between parlare (to speak) and dire (to say) was understood
• candidates knew the past participle of dire is detto (Q.18)
• the verb piacere across the present and past tenses was correctly conjugated (Q.18)
• the verb suonare was used to describe music being played at a party or concert (Q.19)
• the past tense was conjugated accurately using the correct auxiliary.

Characteristics of weaker responses:

• some candidates were challenged when elaborating on what makes a person ‘interesting’ beyond a basic description of appearance (Q.18)
• some candidates had difficulty with adjectival agreement
• some candidates resorted to repetitive listing in order to reach word limit, for example Ho mangiato tanti cibi – pizza, pasta, gelato, ravioli, tortellini, pollo ecc (Q.19)
• text was borrowed from the reading passages.

Common errors were:

• using the verb ‘giocare’ to describe music being played at a party or concert (Q.18)
• selecting an inappropriate definite or indefinite article and often combining both, for example alla un café or oggi a il un concerto (Q.18)
• selecting the incorrect verb when saying someone’s age: è diciotto anni instead of ha diciotto anni (Q.19)
• literally translating Anglicisms, such as ‘I went to his 18th [party]’ which became sono andato/a al suo diciottesimo and‘I had a good time’ became ho avuto un buon tempo (Q.19)
• substituting personal pronouns for possessive adjectives, for example sono andata a lei casa rather than a casa sua (Q.19)
• writing contrare in place of incontrare when talking about meeting someone (Q.19)
• confusing piace me for come me when saying ‘like me’ (Q.19).