2015 Notes from the Marking Centre – Indonesian Beginners
Introduction
This document has been produced for the teachers and candidates of the Stage 6 Indonesian Beginners course. It contains comments on candidate responses to the 2015 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 Indonesian Beginners Stage 6 Syllabus
- the 2015 Higher School Certificate Indonesian 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 Indonesian Beginners in Stage 6.
Oral examination
Section I – Listening
Characteristics of better responses:
- responses were well structured and succinct
- the requirements of the questions were addressed
- the context of the items was correctly identified
- global comprehension of the text was demonstrated
- the candidate’s notes section was used extensively to record details of the texts
- attention was paid to the mark allocations and the appropriate amount of detail was provided
- incorrect multiple-choice options were eliminated, often using a cross to delete an option (Q2 and Q3)
- ideas were synthesised with justification from the text (Q9 and Q10).
Characteristics of weaker responses:
- responses were not adequately supported with relevant information when required
- candidates did not ascribe information or attributes to the correct person where texts involved a third person
- candidates had difficulty with texts containing significant amounts of information
- the requirements of the questions were not directly addressed.
Section II – Reading
Characteristics of better responses:
- common vocabulary from a wide range of topics was recognised
- a global understanding of the texts was demonstrated
- the advantages and disadvantages
- in the text were succinctly summarised (Q15b)
- responses were supported with relevant details when required
- the dictionary was used judiciously and in combination with knowledge of Indonesian affixation to correctly identify unfamiliar words
- the requirements of the questions were addressed.
Characteristics of weaker responses:
- limited knowledge of common vocabulary was demonstrated
- the dictionary was not used or was incorrectly used
- Indonesian affixation and grammar was incorrectly used
- responses were insufficiently supported when required
- irrelevant or incorrect information was included
- candidates did not identify the purposes of the texts.
Section III – Writing in Indonesian
Characteristics of better responses:
- register was correctly used (Q17)
- candidates wrote sustained texts with logically developed creative ideas which adhered to the text type
- the language used was more authentic and contained Indonesian syntax
- responses were cohesive and logical
- the suggested word count was met
- connectives and more sophisticated structures were used.
Characteristics of weaker responses:
- candidates did not follow the conventions of the text type specified
- vocabulary was limited and predictable
- sentence structure was repetitive
- responses were poorly edited, particularly in relation to syntax, spelling and Indonesian word order for descriptions and possessives
- common errors included incorrect use of ke followed by a verb
- candidates did not provide a detailed description of the gift desired from their parents (Q16)
- incorrect register (kamu to a teacher instead of Anda) was used (Q17)
- candidates wrote a narrative rather than structuring their work like an article for a school magazine
- the dictionary was incorrectly used and literal translation from English was evident
- ideas were not sequenced logically and the suggested length was not met (Q18 and Q19).
NSW Government