2015 Notes from the Marking Centre – Korean Background Speakers
Introduction
This document has been produced for the teachers and candidates of the Stage 6 Korean Background Speakers 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 Korean Background Speakers Stage 6 Syllabus
- the 2015 Higher School Certificate Korean Background Speakers 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 Korean in Stage 6.
Section I – Listening and Responding
Question 1
Characteristics of better responses:
- a perceptive understanding of the text was demonstrated
- a range of relevant, detailed examples from the text was provided
- the presenter’s emotion was clearly explained and linked to the language features.
Characteristics of weaker responses:
- the presenter’s emotion was mentioned but not linked to the language features
- candidates focused on the content of the text without analysing the language features
- insufficient textual references were made
- vocabulary and grammatical structures were inappropriately used.
Question 2
Characteristics of better responses:
- a comprehensive understanding of the issues raised from both texts was demonstrated
- excellent control of vocabulary and language structure was shown.
Characteristics of weaker responses:
- some opinions, ideas and information from the texts were mentioned
- a limited ability to sequence information and ideas was demonstrated
- language structures and vocabulary were used inappropriately.
Section II – Reading and Responding
Question 3
Characteristics of better responses:
- a good understanding of the meaning of the lyrics was demonstrated
- candidates identified the song’s message and supported their response with reference to the song’s content, structure and musical elements
- a perceptive understanding of the musical elements was demonstrated
- candidates made use of textual references and showed an excellent control of vocabulary and language structures.
Characteristics of weaker responses:
- the lyrics of the song were repeated.
Question 4
Characteristics of better responses:
- a clear and detailed understanding of both texts was evident
- a thorough understanding of how the texts explore the features of people’s lives in contemporary society was demonstrated
- reference was made to content and language features of both texts.
Characteristics of weaker responses:
- reference was made to only one of the texts
- limited reference to the language features of the text was made.
Question 5
Characteristics of better responses:
- a clear and detailed understanding of the text was demonstrated
- the script of the interview demonstrated an understanding of the requirements of the text type and a good analysis of the information in the text
- the interview was well structured.
Characteristics of weaker responses:
- a limited understanding of the issues raised in the text was shown
- questions in the interview used vocabulary and terminology from the text rather than creating an authentic text
- responses were too short and did not adhere to the word limit.
Section III – Writing in Korean
Questions 6 and 7
Characteristics of better responses:
- a range of vocabulary and language structures was included
- ideas were expressed effectively according to context, purpose, audience and text type
- an introduction, a body with in-depth analysis of the issues, and an appropriate conclusion were included in the speech
- a variety of information and ideas was presented logically
- responses were the appropriate length of 350 words.
Characteristics of weaker responses:
- responses included inaccuracies in written expression, poor sequencing, a lack of cohesiveness, and irrelevant ideas
- language was manipulated poorly
- ideas were not structured or sequenced correctly
- the correct text type was not used
- responses were not the appropriate length of 350 words.
NSW Government