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

2014 Notes from the Marking Centre – Italian Continuers

Introduction

This document has been produced for the teachers and candidates of the Stage 6 Italian Continuers 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 Continuers Stage 6 Syllabus
• the 2014 Higher School Certificate Italian 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 Italian in Stage 6.

Oral examination

Characteristics of better responses:

• candidates communicated fluently and authentically with in-depth responses to a range of questions
• there was effective engagement with the examiner across a range of syllabus topics
• ideas were expressed clearly and opinions justified consistently when unexpected questions were asked
• tenses were manipulated effectively
• a broad range of sophisticated vocabulary and a variety of complex structures were used
• authentic vocabulary and expressions were used
• candidates used authentic pronunciation and intonation.

Characteristics of weaker responses:

• candidates communicated using simple structures and vocabulary
• candidates responded minimally to a limited range of syllabus topics
• language was manipulated using a small range of expressions, often with frequent pauses and errors
• grammatical mistakes included incorrect use of tenses, poor use of pronouns, incorrect agreements, misuse of articles, superlative errors, ending a sentence with a preposition, confusing  provare and cercare, confusing imparare and insegnare, misuse of the verbs realizzare, mancare and piacere.
• misunderstanding structures such as ‘Da quanto tempo…’
• using ‘L’anno scorso’  to say ‘next year’  
• reliance on English syntax and anglicisms
• pronunciation of basic words, for example ‘morto’ instead of  ‘molto’ .

Written examination

Section I – Listening and Responding

Characteristics of better responses:

• all the key elements were identified
• tone was understood
• the multiple-choice question (Q.5) was understood and well answered
• main points and detail were provided where required
• full comparisons were provided succinctly and accurately when required.

Characteristics of weaker responses:

• the key elements were missed
• candidates confused the speakers
• limited evidence was provided to support answers
• terms like renuncio, integrare and scambaire oggetti usati were misunderstood
• information that was irrelevant to the question was provided.

Section II Reading and Responding

Part A

Characteristics of the better responses:

• the correct terminology was used in the correct context
• questions were answered in a perceptive and global manner where required
• candidates elaborated on the ideas.

Characteristics of the weaker responses:

• candidates relied on prior knowledge to interpret rather than demonstrating a full comprehension of the text
• candidates misunderstood and misinterpreted key words
• candidates focused on one point and often repeated the one point rather than addressing all ideas
• terms like autoscatti, la privacy and diffusione were misunderstood.

Part B

Characteristics of better responses:

• language was manipulated authentically and creatively
• hypothetical phrases and idiomatic expressions were used competently and effectively
• language was controlled, with grammatical structures and vocabulary appropriate to the syllabus
• ideas were structured and linked effectively with all the cues responded to.

Characteristics of weaker responses:

• scripts were short and underdeveloped and lacked both creativity and understanding of the text as a whole
• candidates focused on a limited number of cues, responding only to questions or isolated elements of the text
• candidates used prepared material which did not relate to the text or context
• there were frequent errors in grammar, such as noun agreements, possessive adjectives, subject/verb agreements, use of ne, vocabulary (riunione) and spelling.

Section III – Writing in Italian

Question 12

Characteristics of better responses:

• the conventions of the text type were used
• candidates addressed the audience, purpose and context appropriately
• a range of authentic expressions was used, demonstrating knowledge of a wider range of tenses.

Characteristics of weaker responses:

• there was inconsistent choice of register, moving from voi to tu
• candidates had difficulty communicating the idea that they were looking for a flatmate
• candidates did not use dictionaries effectively
• spelling and agreements were inconsistent
• the conventions of the text type were not followed.
• Common problems were:
• using the verb noleggiare rather than affittare
• redundant and incorrect use of prepositions
• cercare per instead of cercare        
• la fine dell’anno was frequently used incorrectly.

Question 13

Characteristics of better responses:

• candidates wrote within the word limit
• candidates adhered to context, text type, audience and purpose as required by the question
• a wide variety of structures was used, including persuasive language
• language was manipulated authentically.

Characteristics of weaker responses:

• candidates did not use persuasive language, but recounted their experiences instead
• there was poor use of pronouns, agreements, tenses, register (tu & voi confusion) and spelling.