2010 HSC Notes from the Marking Centre – Vietnamese Continuers
Contents
Introduction
This document has been produced for the teachers and candidates of the Stage 6 course in Vietnamese Continuers. It contains comments on candidates’ responses to the 2010 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 relevant syllabus, the 2010 Higher School Certificate examination, the marking guidelines and other support documents which have been developed by the Board of Studies to assist in the teaching and learning of Vietnamese Continuers.
General comments
Candidates need to be aware that the marks allocated to the question and the answer space (where this is provided on the examination paper) are guides to the length of the required response. A longer response will not in itself lead to higher marks. Writing in excess of the space allocated may reduce the time available for answering other questions.
Candidates need to be familiar with the Board’s Glossary of Key Words which contains some terms commonly used in examination questions. However, candidates should also be aware that not all questions will start with or contain one of the key words from the glossary. Questions such as ‘how?’, ‘why?’ or ‘to what extent?’ may be asked, or verbs may be used which are not included in the glossary, such as ‘design’, ‘translate’ or ‘list’.
Oral examination
Section I – Conversation
Strengths
In better responses, candidates:
- delivered their responses in a natural and conversational tone
- were confident and responded with initiative, spontaneity and originality
- gave direct answers to the points raised and tried to expand as well as justify their responses
- presented their views frankly and directly to questions that asked for a personal opinion about an issue beyond the personal world such as environment, science and technology…and justified their viewpoints with logical and well-founded arguments
- interacted confidently with examiners and covered a range of topics relating to their personal world
Weaknesses
In weaker responses, candidates:
- presented prepared responses without tailoring them to the question
- provided a long introduction before addressing the main point of the question, which resulted in unnecessarily lengthy and poorly structured responses
- answered in monosyllables or used very short sentences
- responded in general terms to questions that required personal responses
- tried to steer the conversation to topics of their choice, by excessively expanding their responses without thinking about the relevance of the information
- used Anglicisms
Section II – Discussion
General comments
Candidates chose a wide range of topics including science and technology, environment, Vietnamese culture, some controversial issues, song, book and film reviews.
Strengths
In better responses, candidates:
- had selected a topic that enabled a discussion to occur
- responded to questions in a well-structured and logical manner with relevant supporting arguments
- stated their point of view and supported it with a variety of relevant examples
- had researched their topic well and used information drawn from a variety of valuable resources such as the internet, magazines, newspapers
- included a literary text among the texts studied
- responded fluently with confidence, enthusiasm and originality
Weaknesses
In weaker responses, candidates:
- had difficulty sustaining a discussion
- expected to deliver a pre-learned presentation
- recited reference texts rather than presenting personal views or feelings
- gave long introductions before addressing the main point of the question asked or responded in monosyllables or very short sentences
- chose topics or issues that were expository/explanatory rather than discursive in nature, which limited the opportunity for candidates to express their personal views or participate in a discussion
- used information gained in class debates or lessons without thoughtful selection or critical judgements. Information and ideas presented were often contradictory and, at times, incoherent
- expressed views that lacked any depth of understanding of the issue under discussion
- lacked in-depth study on the chosen topic
- provided simplistic arguments
Recommendations
Conversation
In preparation for the conversation section of the oral examination, candidates should:
- thoroughly prepare all syllabus topics from all three themes as these relate to their personal world
- answer the questions directly and focus on the main points - unnecessarily lengthy introductions should be avoided. Responses and elaborations should be concise and relevant to the questions asked
- try to avoid answering in a general way; candidates need to be specific in their responses and clear in their views
- aim to go beyond a simple ‘yes/no’ response, regardless of the question being asked
- avoid using English words when they are unsure of the Vietnamese vocabulary. It is better to re-phrase
- ask the examiner to repeat or rephrase a question if they do not understand something; seeking such assistance does not penalise a candidate in any way
- bear in mind that they are not being judged according to the point of view they express but by the way in which they present and substantiate their views
- not try to steer the conversation in a certain way
Candidates are reminded that they are assessed on their ability to communicate in Vietnamese and to present and support an opinion, not on their ability to recite pre-learned responses.
Discussion
The aim of the discussion is to demonstrate the candidate's ability to explore with the examiner the topic of the in-depth study the candidate has selected. During the discussion the candidate could be asked, for example, to identify issues, express ideas and justify opinions related to the chosen topic. In addition, the candidate will be expected to make reference to the texts read and resources studied.
When deciding on the subject of the in-depth study, candidates should carefully consider the topic to ensure that it meets the requirements of the syllabus and also provides an opportunity for the candidate to:
- study at least three texts, from a range of sources and must include a literary text
- present a point of view
- engage with the examiner in a discussion of the issues raised.
Written examination
Section I – Listening and responding
General comments
Most candidates made good use of the Notes column and selected appropriate relevant information.
In the best responses, candidates not only conveyed the gist of texts and identified specific information through summarising the main ideas, but also demonstrated a deep understanding of all aspects of the text and conveyed the information accurately and appropriately.
Candidates are reminded that simple translation of segments of texts that may appear to be relating to the question without responding specifically to the requirements of the question is inadequate to access the high mark ranges.Part A
Question 1
In better responses, candidates identified the main points of the conversation between Trang and Bang.
In weaker responses, candidates translated the conversation into English or identified some isolated information.
Question 5
- In better responses, candidates identified the speaker's point of view and provided all the relevant information and identified the strategies used to persuade the audience to be involved in welfare activities. In weaker responses, candidates did not identify the speaker's purpose. This limited their ability to answer the question.
Part B
Candidates are reminded that responses must be written in Vietnamese.
Question 6
In better responses, candidates identified the main reasons why the disaster caused so much damage.
In weaker responses, candidates omitted the serious mistake made by the authority.
Question 7
In better responses, candidates wrote an email demonstrating an excellent understanding of the conversation, including an expression of sympathy towards Lan and Van and providing reasonable advice or solution.
In weaker responses, candidates did not demonstrate an understanding of the whole text.
Section II – Reading and responding
General comments
In weaker responses, candidates did not refer to the texts and often included a great deal of irrelevant information and repetition.
Part A
Question 8
- In better responses, candidates identified the change in the writer’s attitude towards his family and friends before and after his stay in Vietnam. They analysed the writer’s attitude and supported their answer with relevant information.
Question 9
- In better responses, candidates referred to both reviews and provided relevant information to contrast the views of the two reviewers about Frank.
- In better responses, candidates identified Tom Ly’s negative attitude towards the film and provided relevant information from the text to support their answers.
Part B
Question 10
In better responses, candidates wrote a well -tructured email with a friendly tone, including reference to how the siblings got on during the rest of the trip, some information about Australia relating to whether the information was or was not made up.
In weaker responses, candidates demonstrated a limited understanding of the text and responded with insufficient or irrelevant information.
Recommendations for Sections I and II
Candidates should:
- read questions and instructions carefully, and highlight or underline the key words if necessary
- in the ‘Listening and Responding’ section, read questions and take down relevant information first, and then compose their responses, especially in relation to the longer items
- rephrase information from the text rather than copying down or translating the information word for word. In a number of responses, it was clear that the dictionary had been used to look up every single word, resulting in incomprehensible language.
- be aware of a range of adjectives to describe personality, ‘points of view, attitudes or emotions’ (outcome 3.6)
For questions requiring analysis of a language feature, candidates should identify the language technique used, quote a relevant example in the text, and analyse the effects of the technique on the audience or reader. Candidates should select only the relevant language techniques or quote relevant examples rather than reciting a list of language techniques studied without considering their relevance or appropriateness.
In Part B of Section II responses must be in Vietnamese. Candidates are reminded they should adhere to the word limit of 200 words. It is more important to use well-selected information relevant to the question than to provide lengthy responses that include irrelevant information.
Section III – Writing in Vietnamese
In better responses, candidates:
- used the correct text type and conformed to the requirements of the topic and genre, both in terms of content and language features
- expressed their thoughts and feelings with supporting statements from personal experiences
- demonstrated initiative and independence in their thinking, as well as the ability to manipulate language authentically
In weaker responses, candidates:
- misinterpreted the task
- did not demonstrate a good understanding of the convention of text types
- repeated their ideas or structured them poorly
- did not include relevant ideas and information
- focused too much on one idea or, on the other hand, mentioned superficially many ideas without sufficient analysis, expansion or elaboration
- relied on rote-learned material rather than giving their own opinion or point of view.
Question 11
- In better responses, candidates wrote a well-structured letter with relevant information and personal views, including how they coped with the situation and their reflection on this experience.
Weaker responses were a recount of a holiday including irrelevant pre-learnt material. - In better responses, candidates wrote a formal letter with well structured and coherent ideas and information, including their positive feedback for the event, analysing problems and providing feasible recommendations for a more successful event in the future.
Weaker responses were a list of recommendations.
Recommendations
Candidates should:
- read the requirements of the task carefully and plan their responses so that they write within the word limit of 250 words - remember that quality, not quantity, is important
- organise their ideas logically to avoid repetition or poor sequencing of ideas
- use a variety of vocabulary and sentence structures, with more focus on conjunctions
NSW Government