1. Home
2. HSC
3. HSC Exams
4. 2011 HSC Exam papers
5. 2011 HSC Notes from the Marking Centre — Aboriginal Studies

2011 HSC Notes from the Marking Centre – Aboriginal Studies

Contents

• Introduction
• Section I
• Section II
• Section III

Introduction

This document has been produced for the teachers and candidates of the Stage 6 Aboriginal Studies course. It contains comments on candidate responses to the 2011 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 2011 Higher School Certificate examination, the marking guidelines and other support documents developed by the Board of Studies to assist in the teaching and learning of Aboriginal Studies in Stage 6.

General comments

Teachers and candidates should be aware that examiners may ask questions that address the syllabus outcomes in a manner that requires candidates to respond by integrating their knowledge, understanding and skills developed through studying the course. It is important to understand that the Preliminary course is assumed knowledge for the HSC course.

Candidates need to be aware that the mark 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 far beyond the indicated space 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 that are not included in the glossary, such as ‘design’, ‘translate’ or ‘list’.

Candidates are reminded to:

• follow the instructions on the examination paper regarding answering in separate writing booklets
  
• read the examination instructions closely
  
• identify clearly the Aboriginal and/or international communities discussed where questions ask candidates to refer to them. Within the context of the Aboriginal Studies syllabus, a school is not a community. Candidates are reminded that, rather than referring to a community only as ‘Indigenous Australians’ or ‘Aboriginal Australians’, they should name the specific community discussed.

Candidates are reminded that in 2012, the revised Aboriginal Studies syllabus with new examination specifications will be examined for the first time. The 2012 Aboriginal Studies Specimen Paper is available on the Board’s website.

Section I

Part A

Question 1 – Social Justice and Human Rights Issues – A Global Perspective

1. Most candidates referred to the visual Source A and limited their answer to listing two ways that Aboriginal people have struggled for their rights. The Tent Embassy was an easily recognisable source.
   
   
2. In better responses, candidates identified a number of ways Aboriginal people have struggled for their rights. Responses displayed detailed knowledge of the political struggle and were well written, demonstrating understanding of the issue.
   
   In weaker responses, candidates did not identify a clear connection between the National Congress and possible improvements in political status. Many candidates simply copied from the source and displayed little evidence of their own knowledge.
   
   
3. In better responses, candidates focused on Aboriginal people and their political status. These candidates gave a good description rather than simply identifying what governments have done. They outlined some of the ‘practical steps’ Elders have suggested should be followed. Many responses used dot points to clarify their answers and gave a broader description. Custodianship of land, voting rights and the 1967 referendum were common points of reference in responses.
   
   Weaker responses looked generally at features rather than forging links to political status. They also did not refer, or made little reference, to the source.
   
   
4. In most responses, candidates referred to at least one source and confidently discussed issues such as current mining trends and land and water rights. Candidates also displayed a good understanding of the concept of recognition.
   
   Candidates noted the value of the marks for each component of the whole question and their responses were generally within the space offered. This allowed them to access the full range of available marks for the whole question.
   
   Better responses focused on issues such as language, cultural initiatives and NAIDOC Week initiatives, highlighting the depth of the candidate’s knowledge. These responses also included the Rudd Apology and acknowledgement of the Stolen Generation as part of the process. With the Northern Territory Intervention, there was also focus on the less positive aspects that may have impeded the achievement of recognition.

Part B

Comments on questions in Part B are restricted to Questions 2, 3 and 6, which were the options most candidates attempted.

Question 2 – Health

1. In better responses, candidates identified indicators of Aboriginal health standards and provided relevant descriptive detail. While the responses were concise, the health standards were clearly described. Weaker responses only identified, in a single word or acronym, a program. There was a need for the health standards to be separated from the program, and for an indicator to be shown. There also needed to be a distinction between a cause and an indicator.
   
   
2. In better responses, candidates clearly focused on the importance of culture and how this interacted with Aboriginal health. A good knowledge of cultural initiatives and strategies within Aboriginal health was also displayed.
   
   In weaker responses, candidates did not clearly understand the link, and made little or no attempt to give an explanation. These responses usually made a number of generalised statements about the health of Aboriginal people.
   
   
3. In better responses, candidates took community-based initiatives, separated them from government initiatives, and then reflected upon what affects the everyday lives of Indigenous peoples. They also referred to Australian and international Indigenous communities and gave credible examples to support their ideas. Positive and negative impacts were clearly evident in responses.
   
   In weaker responses, candidates lacked focus on the community-based initiatives and focused too much on health issues in general.

Question 3 – Education

1. In better responses, candidates linked education to other social justice issues.
   
   In weaker responses, candidates made very generalised comments about colonisation and did not provide an impact.
   
   
2. In better responses, candidates explained what socioeconomic status is and supported their statements with examples. Examples such as AEP and languages, as well as In Class Tutors (Norta Norta Program) and mentors, were widely referred to.
   
   Very few candidates made the connection to educational outcomes. They knew the programs and the social justice issues. Mention was also made of NAIDOC Week.
   
   
3. In better responses, candidates separately analysed community-based initiatives and the education issues. They stated the issues and then compared in detail the programs and policies linked to the issues selected.
   
   Most candidates focused more on the programs and policies that had been put into place, rather than the initiatives from communities. There was some analysis of the social and political changes. Some candidates referred to the revival of languages, as well as cultural programs promoting education initiated by groups such as the Land Council. Specific Indigenous communities were identified, with equal evidence drawn from both Australian and international examples. The discussion of these communities was clearly connected to the question.
   
   In weaker responses, candidates gave generalised accounts about Aboriginal education, with mentions of AEOs and programs. These candidates provided limited detail and no real analysis or reference to community initiatives. They did not explore the concept of education and its role in a community.

Question 6 – Criminal Justice

1. Most candidates provided three indicators of over-representation. They clearly knew what the term referred to.
   
   
2. In better responses, candidates deconstructed the question and considered law enforcement changes, then changes to the judicial agencies, before analysing the impact. Responses also referred to the historical role of police in welfare and the taking of children (Stolen Generations) and linked this to the community. Reference was made to social justice issues of low income, unemployment and health.
   
   In weaker responses, candidates referred to circle sentencing but did not connect it to the concept of law enforcement. They did not differentiate between British law applications and the role of Indigenous law. Their main focus was on the impact of illicit substances on youth crime.
   
   
3. In better responses, candidates made points for and against strategies, gave the historical background, and paid particular attention to social issues such as poverty and unemployment and their impacts on health. This was then linked to criminal justice. These responses provided a balanced discussion of key points of the question in relation to both the Australian and the international Indigenous communities, with candidates using their knowledge of these communities to give detailed comparisons.
   
   In mid-range responses, candidates were more generalised in their understanding of what social justice and human rights are and had limited specific examples from the communities. Some similarities and differences were offered.
   
   In weaker responses, candidates made limited or no reference to social justice and human rights issues. Some brief mention was made of the police and policing, but no specific examples were offered. While the Australian Indigenous community was referenced, consideration of the international Indigenous community was limited.

Section II

Question 8 – Aboriginality and the Land

1. In better responses, candidates used both information from the source and their own knowledge in their answers. Responses to government decisions and their impact on traditional owners were examined in detail. Candidates had a good understanding of Aboriginal land and water rights.
   
   In mid-range responses, candidates struggled to identify what responses to government decisions were. They displayed little or no knowledge of the Land Rights Act, but showed a working knowledge of Native Title, or they mentioned the Land Rights Act, but gave few details on Native Title. There was limited referral to the responses to land and water rights legislation.
   
   In weaker responses, candidates did not use the information in Source D. Some simply re-stated the question or copied text from the source.
   
   
2. In better responses, candidates discussed the impact of Aboriginal land and water rights. These responses were specific and detailed. Most responses revealed extensive knowledge and understanding of land and/or water rights and integrated the course concepts. Reference to the Local Aboriginal Case Study in some otherwise good responses was limited.
   
   In weaker responses, candidates failed to focus on land and water rights, made little if any reference to responses, and had limited or no reference at all to their Local Aboriginal Case Study.

Question 9 – Heritage and Identity

1. In better responses, candidates used the source and their own knowledge to outline in some detail various stereotype and discrimination issues. Focus was often placed on stereotypes and marginalisation. Some candidates also went beyond the Source E article and discussed Aboriginality. They linked the ways stereotypes contribute to discrimination in a logical and cohesive response.
   
   In mid-range responses, candidates focused on stereotypes and the link to discrimination. They kept the focus more on the sources rather than on their own knowledge. An attempt was made to discuss the issue of Aboriginality and reference was made to the value and contribution of culture.
   
   In weaker responses, candidates focused on the word ‘stereotype’. There was little evidence of them using their own knowledge. Rather, these candidates discussed the focus that the forms of discrimination may take.
   
   
2. In better responses, candidates focused on Aboriginal culture and identity. They evaluated the responses to this by non-Aboriginals and strongly referenced the Local Aboriginal Case Study. Responses were cohesive, well structured and sustained. The concept of reconciliation was well placed, with candidates also discussing how other social justice issues have been addressed.
   
   In mid-range responses, candidates had some knowledge of what non-Aboriginal responses are. There was a very generalised approach to the idea of expression of Aboriginality and some attempt to link culture to it. There was limited reference, sometimes virtually none, to the local community.
   
   In weaker responses, candidates showed little or no analysis or understanding of the question. Local Aboriginal communities were not mentioned and very generalised comments were made, with limited reference to the question asked. Candidates tended to write in general terms about Aboriginal peoples rather than Aboriginality.

Section III

Question 10 – Research and Inquiry Methods – Major Project

1. In better responses, candidates focused on accuracy in the development of the project. The topics were varied and displayed substantive preparation and the use of a log book.
   
   
2. In better responses, candidates focused on the nature of the sources they used, and how the protocols involved contributed to the overall perspective.
   
   In weaker responses, candidates referred either to their approaches used in developing the project topic, or to the project itself. They needed to link how they researched and how they used sources. The focus tended to be on the many personalities they had met.