1. Home
  2. HSC
  3. HSC Exams
  4. 2011 HSC Exam papers
  5. 2011 HSC Notes from the Marking Centre — Classical Hebrew
Print this page Reduce font size Increase font size

2011 HSC Notes from the Marking Centre – Classical Hebrew

Contents

Introduction

This document has been produced for the teachers and candidates of the Stage 6 course in Classical Hebrew. It contains comments on candidate responses to the 2011 Higher School Certificate examinations, indicating the quality of the responses and highlighting their relative strengths and weaknesses.

This document should be read along with the relevant syllabuses, the 2011 Higher School Certificate examinations, the marking guidelines and other support documents developed by the Board of Studies to assist in the teaching and learning of Classical Hebrew.

Continuers

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.

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 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’.

Most candidates were well prepared for this examination and their responses reflected a sound understanding of the material covered. However, it was evident in responses to the grammar questions that some candidates did not approach the examination as the study of an ancient language. Some candidates misread the more detailed questions and provided irrelevant responses.

Section I – Prescribed text – Tanakh

Part A – Torah

Question 1

  1. i. and ii.
    In better responses, candidates correctly parsed, giving meaning, root, binyan and tense/aspect. The better responses used the full terminology, not abbreviations.

  2. In better responses, candidates made an accurate comparison, demonstrating a thorough knowledge of the commentary.

  3. In better responses, candidates demonstrated their understanding of what was meant by the terms ‘subject’ and ‘object’ and correctly identified them in relation to the verbs.

  4. In better responses, candidates quoted the Hebrew verbs before expanding their responses. They referred to the text and noted the verbs of movement which led them to relate the story more fully.

Question 2

  1. In better responses, candidates demonstrated a good knowledge of the commentary.

  2. In the best responses, candidates provided relevant information to the question being asked. The question referred only to Joseph’s time in prison. In weaker responses, candidates wrote at length about Joseph’s character and personality at all stages of his life. These responses also focused on his fellow prisoners, which was the background to the extract.

Question 4

  1. In better responses, candidates provided detail about the size of Gideon’s army.

Question 5

In better responses, candidates demonstrated a thorough understanding of the commentary and responded with details. In the best responses, candidates described both the origin and use of Gideon’s ephod. In weaker responses, candidates described either the origin or the use of Gideon’s ephod.

Question 6

  1. In better responses, candidates correctly identified the shoresh, binyan and tense/aspect and also provided the meaning of the verb.

Part B

Question 9

In better responses, candidates demonstrated a thorough knowledge of the prescribed texts by extending their response beyond the extracts as the question required. In this question the verb ‘analyse’ was a guide that candidates needed to follow to make an assessment of the relationships, rather than simply repeat the stories in the extracts. In the best responses, candidates explained the reasons for the presence and absence of tension in each relationship.

Section II – Prescribed text – Mishna

Question 11

  1. In the best responses, candidates analysed the quotes in depth and explained their relevance.

Question 12

  1. In better responses, candidates demonstrated a thorough understanding of the Hebrew statement.

  2. In better responses, candidates quoted from the Kehati commentary and did not just rely on general knowledge.

Section III – Unseen text – Tanakh

In this section, candidates are reminded that they should refer only to the content of the text provided and not rely on previous or general knowledge.

Candidates are also reminded to answer questions in English in the Unseen section and to translate all names into English.

When parsing, all required aspects, except the root should be written in English, ie the tense/aspect and the binyan.

Question 14

  1. In the best responses, candidates were able to demonstrate understanding of ‘syntactical’.
  1. In better responses, candidates made reference to the Hebrew phrase provided.

  2. In better responses, candidates referred to the Hebrew. Candidates are reminded that any reference to the vocabulary must be referred in to Hebrew.

Extension

Question 1

    1. In better responses, candidates correctly parsed, giving meaning, root, binyan and tense/aspect.
  2. In better responses, candidates provided a thorough explanation of why women are mentioned in this extract.

    In better responses, candidates demonstrated a thorough understanding of the literary devices used in the extract to describe Egypt’s defeat. They also provided examples from the extract of these devices.

Question 2

  1. In better responses, candidates thoroughly explained why the psalms were selected, using both the text and commentary. In weaker responses, candidates failed to refer to the Art Scroll as mentioned in the prescribed commentary.

Question 3

In better responses, candidates provided a sophisticated description of the nature of prophecy, demonstrating a thorough understanding of the life of Jeremiah as a prophet. In weaker responses, candidates provided detail on the nature of Jeremiah’s prophecies rather than the ‘nature of prophecy’ as stated in the question. Candidates are reminded to respond with relevant information only. Marks are not awarded for pre-prepared material that does not relate to the set question.

Question 5

  1. In the best responses, candidates demonstrated a clear and thorough understanding of how the author’s emotions and beliefs are reflected in the psalm.

Question 6

  1. In better responses, candidates provided a full explanation of why a literary translation of the words is not used.

  2. In better responses, candidates demonstrated a good understanding of parsing.
Print this page Reduce font size Increase font size