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

2014 Notes from the Marking Centre – Japanese Continuers

Introduction

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

Oral examination

Characteristics of better responses:

• language was manipulated effectively
• questions were responded to with relevant information and in some depth
• candidates responded from a range of perspectives
• a wide range of vocabulary and sentence structures was used
• ideas and information were communicated with a high level of accuracy
• candidates spoke confidently and fluently with excellent pronunciation and appropriate intonation
• authentic expressions such as sou desu ne, zannen desu ga, jitsu wa were used.

Characteristics of weaker responses:

• pre-prepared answers that did not address the question were often used
• responses were often repetitive
• aizuchi was overused
• sentences were often incomplete
• there was an inconsistent use of tense and register
• goro/gurai, nihongo/nihon, tsukurimasu/tsukaimasu, koto/mono, yasashii/yasui, chuugaku/chuugoku, arimasu/imasu, ikimasu/kimasu, eiga/eigo, itta koto ga arimasu/ikimashita were confused
• common errors included:
  • incorrect use of particles
  • incorrect formation of te and tari forms
  • incorrect use of plain form before to omoimasu and kara
  • incorrect conjugation of i and na adjectives
  • use of particle ni after a general time word
  • omission of kara when using nazenara
  • omission of negative ending when using Amari.

Written examination

Section I – Listening and Responding

Characteristics of better responses:

• evidence of analysis, synthesis and evaluation was provided where required
• responses were concise and not repetitive
• all relevant details were provided, including specific examples of language use and tone where required
• where applicable, audience, purpose and context were identified.

Characteristics of weaker responses:

• responses were often simply a translation of the text
• common errors included:
  • confusing nekureesu/neko, 30th/31st/30 days/30 hours (Q.7) and bangou/bangohan
  • teinei (Q.3), sekaijuu, keisatsu (Q.4), shiawase (Q.5), gaman, tsumetasa, kazoku no sewa, mamoritakatta (Q.6) and mada (Q.8) were not understood
  • jinja was mistranslated as temple or ginger
  • candidates did not identify the audience as high school students in Q.8 and the relationships to the speaker in Q.7
  • information that was not in the text was included
  • opinions were not supported by evidence from the text
  • examples of language use were not provided.

Section II – Reading and Responding

Characteristics of better responses:

• relevant details from the text were included to support opinions, including specific examples of language use where required
• vocabulary, grammatical structures and kanji in the passages were understood
• answers were concise and not repetitive
• there was a perceptive understanding of the text that went beyond translation
• candidates drew on the whole text to answer (Q.9 (d)).

Characteristics of weaker responses:

• the meaning of tanoshimi ni and the implication of mochiron (Q.9) were not understood
• examples of mistranslation included:
  • muikakan as six months or years
  • jishin as earthquake instead of confidence (Q.9)
  • confusion of shoujiki with joushiki
  • omoiyari
  • robii as robe instead of lobby (Q.10)
• candidates did not make inferences about Midori’s personality (Q.9 (d)).

Section III – Writing in Japanese

Characteristics of better responses:

• a wide range of vocabulary, language structures and kanji was used
• relevant and original ideas that fully addressed the question were included
• ideas and information were communicated with a high degree of accuracy and were structured and sequenced logically and fluently
• vocabulary and structures were used to express advice (Q.11), to show gratitude (Q.12) and to persuade (Q.13)
• appropriate text-type conventions were used.

Characteristics of weaker responses:

• there was an inconsistent and/or incorrect use of tense, register and text-type conventions
• lexical items from the dictionary were used in the wrong context
• vocabulary and structures were used repetitively
• common errors included:
  • particle errors
  • misspelling of isshoni, ryokou, yuume
  • confusion of kenkou/kankou
  • incorrect use of mawari, nakereba narimasen, noni, te kureru/tetsudau, ichigatsukan instead of ikkagetsu, transitive/intransitive verbs mitsukeru/mitsukaru, tasukeru/tasukaru
• there was limited use of prescribed kanji
• Chinese simplified characters were used.