1. Home
2. HSC
3. HSC Exams
4. 2015 HSC Exam papers
5. 2015 HSC Notes from the Marking Centre — Indonesian Extension

2015 Notes from the Marking Centre – Indonesian Extension

Introduction

This document has been produced for the teachers and candidates of the Stage 6 Indonesian Extension 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 Extension Stage 6 Syllabus
• the 2015 Higher School Certificate Indonesian Extension 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 in Stage 6.

Oral examination

Characteristics of better responses:

• the ability to develop a clear, coherent and logical argument supported by relevant examples was evident
• opinions were clearly stated, supported with evidence and drawn together with a succinct conclusion
• excellent pronunciation, a range of sophisticated vocabulary and a consistently high level of grammatical accuracy were demonstrated
• addressing how identity was shaped by challenges (Q1).

Characteristics of weaker responses:

• the link between the argument and the supporting examples was not always clearly articulated, or the argument was lacking depth
• pronunciation of longer compound nouns, eg keanekaragama, and affixation with ke-an and pe-an were problematic.

Written examination

Section I – Response to Prescribed Text

Part A

Characteristics of better responses:

• more than one factor contributing to Bu Mus's decision to return to the school was identified (Q1a)
• aspects of Lintang's character and how these were revealed in the scene were identified with specific supporting examples given (Q1b)
• the statement was correctly translated and its significance was explained (Q1c)
• the metaphysical obstacles represented by the jail were identified and linked to the children's circumstances and to how both Sukarno and the children continued to learn despite these obstacles (Q1d)
• a range of relevant film techniques were identified and how these were linked to the concept of suka and miskin was explained (Q1e).

Characteristics of weaker responses:

• only one factor which contributed to Bu Mus's decision to return to the school was identified (Q1a)
• aspects of Lintang's character were identified, but not how these were revealed in the scene (Q1b)
• the statement was not translated and/or the focus was on the recurring theme and symbolism of the rainbow throughout the film rather than relating it to this specific scene (Q1c)
• the physical comparison between the jail and classroom was the focus (Q1d)
• film techniques were named without supporting examples from this scene. Some responses demonstrated a misunderstanding of the meaning of suka and/or miskin (Q1e).

Part B

Characteristics of better responses:

• both parts of the task were addressed
• the events of the scene were not merely recounted but were linked to the themes and issues of the film
•  language and phrasing was authentic, in the correct register.

Characteristics of weaker responses:

• the day’s events at the school were recounted without reflection on Bu Mus’s feelings, views or opinions, nor her hopes for the future of the school
• vague, general references were often made rather than referring specifically to other incidents or characters in the film
• incorrectly, other events or characters from the film, for example ‘Ikal, anak pesisir itu’, were referred to
• confusion over the correct register to use and/or inconsistencies in the use of the correct register was demonstrated
• literal translations of some phrases, for example ‘menunggu untuk waktu panjang’, were provided.

Section II – Writing in Indonesian

Characteristics of better responses:

• a thorough understanding of the question was demonstrated. For example, education as an essential element in building a just and fair society was explained, rather than simply discussing education and why it is important to people (Q4)
• repetition of ideas and statements was avoided
• the requirements of an essay was understood
• a consistently correct formal register was used and supporting evidence such as quotes and references to statistics and current world events were provided
• a range of vocabulary and literary functions, such as the use of rhetorical questions, was used to engage and reach out to the audience
• a thorough understanding of the object-focus construction in all its forms was demonstrated.

Characteristics of weaker responses:

• only one part or key word of the question was addressed
• irrelevant points were included and ideas were repeated
• ideas were not supported by examples
• colloquial language and phrases were mixed with more formal vocabulary, resulting in an inconsistent register throughout the essay
• frequent errors with the object-focus construction and me-kan adjectives were present, as well as obvious confusion with the difference between pe-an and ke-an nouns.